The Queen

It’s a confused mess of a movie.  I have a fondness for ghost stories, and when I saw Haunting of the Queen Mary on a streaming service I use, I figured why not.  I wish I’d figured differently.  The film does have its charms, but the story is confusing and the confusion gets in the way of any enjoyment of the plot.  What’s more, it isn’t resolved even at the end.  You can tell something’s wrong when a Google search autofills “explained” as a suggestion after typing in the movie title.  Other people have the same issue.  I get that two timelines are slipping into each other, one contemporary and the other from 1938.  I’m not going to worry about spoilers, by the way, since I’m simply trying to figure out how this is supposed to fit together.

The problem seems to have started with a foundation sacrifice.  Back when the vessel was built, a man was sealed alive into a chamber over which a pool was constructed.  This person appears in at least three different characters between the thirties and the present.  In 1938 he appears to have gone insane, killing several people with an axe.  Another plot is that the little girl (apparently his daughter) is trying to get an audition to dance with Fred Astaire, who is a passenger.  Then in the present day, a couple seems to want to pitch a program to help revive interest in the now anchored ship to help save the monument.  A security guard (?) styling himself as the captain, seems to be the foundation sacrifice man, but he also knows that some sort of time slip has occurred.  The modern day people seem to end up in the thirties or the thirties characters show up in the present day.

The lack of clarity seriously detracts from any promise the film may have.  I know when I start looking at my watch during a movie that it has problems.  Added to this, the run time is two hours.  That much time spent only to be confused about everything begins to feel like a real waste.  It did make me interested in the history of the real life RMS Queen Mary.  Some of its history is presented in the movie.  In real life it holds the record for the most people aboard a single vessel at the same time.  Ships make good settings for ghost stories.  If they aren’t too convoluted, they can be quite enjoyable to watch.  In this case, Haunting of Queen Mary is on my not recommended list.


Seasonal Horror

It was a rare combination: Friday the 13th, Saturday Valentine’s Day, and Monday some federal holiday.  One of our first friends as a couple called unexpectedly on Friday to say she was in the area and that led to an impromptu meeting for a late supper at a diner.  Still, being Friday the 13th a horror movie was prescribed.  So I picked My Bloody Valentine.  I’ve seen it before, of course.  (I had a whole life before this blog, as witness this friend.)  But the confluence of Friday the 13th and Valentine’s Day forced me to realize that I’d never posted about it.  And the fact that Monday is Presidents Day made a horror movie mandatory, given the current denizen of the White House.  Back to My Bloody Valentine.  First of all, there was the question of which to watch.  The original from 1981?  Kids in high school were talking about this, but I didn’t watch it until several years later.  Then there was a reboot, My Bloody Valentine 3D, which wasn’t as highly rated, in 2009.  It nevertheless was well made and, it was streaming for free.  Spoilers follow.

I’d forgotten whodunit, so the movie kept me guessing.  Here’s how the story goes: a coal mine cave-in led Harry Warden to kill his fellow miners to preserve the air to survive.  He went into a coma, but after a year he awoke and massacred the hospital staff and kids partying at the mine on Valentines Day.  He was shot dead.  Ten years later, Tom, the son of the former mine owner, one of the kids at the fateful party, returns to town to sell the mine.  Instead, he becomes Harry Warden in his mind and begins killing again.  Viewers don’t know that it’s him since he wears a miner’s mask.  Suspicion is thrown on the sheriff, Axel, who was also one of the kids at the party.   And Tom and Axel are feuding over Sarah, now Axel’s wife, but formerly Tom’s girlfriend.  The movie effectively keeps you guessing whether Axel (who’s a philanderer) or Tom (who has mental problems) is the killer.

The movie has a Pennsylvania feel to it, having been filmed in my home state.  This is more in the industrial part where I grew up, rather than the Bucks County that features in M. Night Shyamalan movies.  The only thing they got wrong is that it doesn’t seem very cold for February.  (February can be a trickster in this state, with temperatures anywhere from the seventies to zero or below.)  It isn’t a bad horror offering.  The 3D effects are campy, but that only adds to the fun.  It was the right choice, given the confluence of red letter days.


Spells

I suspect the reason Incantation was recommended to me is that it is an intimate blend of religion and horror.  A Taiwanese horror film, the highest grossing ever for that country, Incantation is in found-footage format.  Fortunately the camera motion isn’t excessive, so I was able to watch it all.  The story involves a woman ghost hunter who accompanies her boyfriend and his cousin to a site with a reputedly haunted tunnel that they plan to film.  The tunnel is on the property of the boyfriend’s great uncle.  The movie, by the way, isn’t presented in chronological order, so piecing it together may take some afterthought.  In any case, the woman is pregnant when she visits the shrine and the family, who perform strange rituals, do not welcome her.  Nevertheless, the young men persist in exploring the tunnel and discover a curse at the end of it that leads those who see it to die by suicide.  There will be spoilers to come.

The movie begins with the woman reclaiming her six-year-old daughter from foster care.  After the event at the shrine, she had herself committed to a psychiatric hospital, but now that she’s recovered, she wants to raise her daughter.  Unfortunately, the curse remains.  The girl sees bad entities and can’t make friends.  The mother grows increasingly distressed and kidnaps her daughter when she is hospitalized.  She then takes her to a different shrine but the religious master is killed by unseen forces.  She then returns her daughter to the hospital and takes the camera back with her to the original shrine.  The idea, like Ringu, is that if you see the video you will be cursed.  The important difference, however, is that if the curse is widely dispersed it will be weakened.  The viewer is, in the diegesis of the movie, cursed.

This film is of interest for a number of reasons.  One is that the deity is malevolent and only by worshipping it and obeying strict rules can anyone who encounters it be safe.  In the western world there are no malevolent deities beyond Satan, and he’s not really a deity.  The family that worships this god want to be freed of it, but the god is in a tunnel on their land.  They inherited it.  There’s an element of possession at play as well.  Those who watch the video kill themselves because the deity possesses them.  There is also no way to completely destroy the curse—it can only be passed on and diluted.  The movie is quite well done although some aspects of it are familiar from other horror offerings.  Its relationship with religions of east Asia make it a particularly intriguing example of T-horror.


Retro Fear

Maybe I shouldn’t have started.  This was, however, a recommendation from a friend, so I watched Fear Street 1994.  I say maybe I shouldn’t have watched it because I then learned that it’s a trilogy and I’m not sure that I want to watch the other two parts.  Not because the movie was poor, but because of time.  That, and I’m not a slasher fan.  At the same time, this movie does address the issue of class disparity.  The story begins in 1666 (the satanic number is intentional, of course) when a minister became a mass murderer.  This was because he was possessed by a witch and that witch comes back every few years in a new possessed person who kills several people.  In 1994 she possesses a mall worker who kills his friend and several others before being shot dead by the local police.  Class enters into it because the bad stuff takes place in Shadyside, a town right next to Sunnyvale, which is affluent and crime free.  Shadyside is where the poor live, work, and go to school.

A set of five friends band together to try to figure out what’s happening after the dead murderer starts pursuing them.  It turns out that two of the past murders, also undead, have converged on Shadyside to kill a girl who disturbed the witch’s grave, accidentally.  It’s also a love story but it leaves the situation unresolved because, well, part 2.  The problem with this kind of movie is that you don’t know if the unanswered questions you have will be addressed in the other two parts or not without watching them.  Since I’m not really fond of slashers and I’ve got other things to see and do, I’m not sure that I’ll get the answers.  And I don’t want to cheat by reading up on it.

Was Fear Street worth watching?  I’d say yes.  Despite the gaps, perhaps holes, it was nevertheless not a bad film.  It is very full of action and twists.  Some of the tropes are well-trod territory—adults never listen to teens, the killer can’t be stopped, an ancient crime keeps recurring—but there is enough new here to keep a viewer interested, at least through the first installment.  It is a little distressing to see the nineties being referred to as “retro,” but then again, 1994 was over thirty years ago.  And something about watching young people so alive (until they end up dead) does have a way of providing a bit of a thrill to even a guy my age.  But I’m not sure I should’ve started something I may not finish.


Don’t Tank It

The Tank is a reasonably well done monster movie.  It isn’t great, but monsters are monsters and they can be appreciated in their own right.  The main problem of the movie is that it’s not terribly well written.  The premise is scary enough.  A family of three goea to inspect a property they inherited but which nobody in the previous generation had ever mentioned.  The house is in a remote cove on the Pacific, in rural Oregon.  They arrive to find it boarded up and in poor repair.  Ben, the father, begins making basic repairs while his wife Jules and daughter Reia try not to become too creeped out.  The water supply comes from an underground, eponymous tank that brings spring water into a reservoir.  There’s no electricity.  That night something tries to get into the house.  Ben assures his family it’s only a raccoon or some other woodland animal.

The tank, where the monster comes from, is certainly creepy in its own regard.  When they become convinced something may indeed be wrong with the property a realtor shows up with a generous offer from a buyer.  She is, unfortunately and predictably killed as she tries to leave and we see the monster for the first time.  This is a dilemma for all monster movie makers—when and how much of the monster to show.  We’ve seen monsters of every description and seeing a new one invites comparison with others.  This monster, a toothed amphibian, troglomorphic from having evolved in a deep cave, has some resemblance to the Demogorgon from Stranger Things.  It attacks by sound (A Quiet Place) and perhaps simply by sensing movement.  There are a lot of “why?” moments in the film; why didn’t they do this or that obvious choice of action.  But still, there’s a new monster.

Eventually Ben is able to contact police but the police officer (why did he not pull his gun when he first saw the monster?) is killed.  All three members of the family are attacked with Jules ultimately getting them to safety.  Part of what makes this a mediocre offering is that there is nothing profound about it.  The monster was released—actually it’s a family of monsters—when the tank cut into its sealed cave.  It attacks people, it’s implied, the way an axolotl defends its territory.  This isn’t explored in any detail.  There’s also the backstory of Ben’s family; his father and older sister were killed by the monsters, but his mother was deemed insane and responsible for the deaths.  So there’s a lot going on in the movie but no real resolution to the many ideas that are started by the story.  It’s a meh horror movie, but it does have a monster.


That House

In this season of deportations, thinking about what it means to be a refugee couldn’t be more important.  The horror film His House makes you do just that.  Bol and Rial are fleeing war-torn South Sudan with their daughter.  After a mishap on the overcrowded boat from France to England, their daughter drowns.  Kept in a refugee camp for months, they are finally allotted a council house in poor repair and a meager income.  If they violate any of the rules, which include living anywhere else or trying to earn their own money, they will be deported.  Bol tries to assimilate quickly while Rial is more tied to her traditional ways.  Then the ghost of their daughter, and other dead from the war and the crossing, begin to haunt them.  All the while they face the threat of deportation.  Some spoilers follow.

Rial recognizes the ghosts come from an apeth, a kind of witch that demands repayment for the crossing.  Bol sees the ghosts too, but denies it.  They will not go back, he insists.  When the social workers come to inspect the house, after Bol asks for a different place, Rial tells them a witch is causing the problems, causing the Englishmen to roll their eyes.  When Rial tries to escape, an alternative reality back in Africa shows that when Bol was denied a place on the overcrowded refugee bus, he grabs a random girl—their “daughter”—to get a place on board as the soldiers begin shooting.  The girl’s mother is left behind, screaming for her child.  The apeth is demanding Bol’s life for that of the girl he used to gain his freedom.  Rial, realizing that Bol will die for trying to make their life better, attacks the apeth and lets go of the image of their daughter.

This is a sad and thoughtful kind of film.  We seldom stop to think that refugees, in culture shock already, are stripped of everything familiar and made to feel as if continuing to live is itself a special favor.  They have their own ghosts too.  The real horror here comes through seeing the world through the eyes of someone who has experienced a high level of trauma.  To do so while Trump’s storm troopers are once again separating families, killing people at will, and deporting refugees, is not an easy thing to do.  Horror can be an instructive genre, and although the threat here is supernatural, as it often is in folk-horror, the real fear is all too human.


Hinge Years

I recently read about “hinge years.”  Some historians use this as a kind of shorthand for a particularly tumultuous year in the history of the world, or of a country.  Curious, a brief search brought up the year 1968 as one of these hinge years for the United States.  No doubt, a lot was taking place at the time.  Since I spent most of that year enjoying my last year before Kindergarten, my political awareness was pretty dim.  I found a website of an historian arguing that this was indeed a foundational period in US culture.  The hallmarks cited were political events (assassinations and their aftermaths, Vietnam, Democratic Convention in Chicago), science (circling the moon in preparation for landing on it), and music (Hair, the Beatle’s White Album).  Now, years are convenient hooks on which to hang events, but many of these events had earlier roots or later consequences.  The Vietnam War began in the fifties, we would actually land on the moon the following year, etc.  But 1968 was a pivotal year for horror movies.

Two game-changing films were released that year.  The unexpectedly influential Night of the Living Dead, by George Romero, changed the horror genre forever.  Low budget, shot in black-and-white, with no famous actors, that movie not only introduced the modern concept of the zombie, its political and social commentary rang through loud and clear, intentional or not.  Today it is considered essential viewing for anyone who wants to claim street cred as a horror fan.  An early “splatter” film, the use of gore was new (even if they used chocolate syrup for blood), and the action took place in rural America—not terribly far from Pittsburgh, but certainly not suburbia.  These departures showed what could be done.  Its success was record-breaking.

That same year Roman Polanski’s adaptation of Ira Levin’s novel Rosemary’s Baby was also released.  This movie brought religion directly in front of the camera to share space with horror.  To some extent this had been done before, but the seriousness with which satanism was played off against Christianity was unprecedented.   Okay, so The Devil Rides Out also appeared in 1968, but it wasn’t exactly a blockbuster.   Rosemary’s Baby was itself decried as satanic in some circles and it opened the door for The Exorcist some five years later.  Horror cinema would never be the same.  1968 was an eventful year, no doubt.  I’m skeptical that it was any more of a hinge than 1967 or 1969, but it sure did change the horror scene forever.


Uncomfortable Truths

Horror makes us confront uncomfortable truths.  I suspect Birth/Rebirth might be the kind of movie to contain triggers for some folks.  I’ve watched enough body horror to be somewhat desensitized, but I was uncomfortable at a point or two.  The movie follows two female medical professionals—Morales, a maternity nurse, and Dr. Casper, a pathologist.  Overworked, Morales feels she’s not spending adequate time with her five-year-old daughter, Lila.  Then the unthinkable happens; her daughter suddenly dies from meningitis while she’s at work.  Casper, who works in the same hospital, handles the corpse of the young girl, but Morales learns the doctor has taken her home and, more than that, brought her back from the dead.  Horror fans know that reanimation is always problematic.  In order to discuss this, however, I may need to resort to spoilers.

Casper, ever since her own youth, has been working on regeneration.  She’s somewhat emotionally disconnected from others, doing this work for the sake of science.  Morales, however, refuses to leave Casper’s house once she learns her daughter is there and alive.  The two work together to supply the serum needed to maintain Lila.  She begins to speak and walk again, but the serum, derived from stem cells, requires a very specific profile that Casper has.  When an infection prevents Casper from conceiving (and providing the necessary tissue) Morales has to start taking amniotic fluid from another woman with the rare profile that matches Lila.  Until the other woman decides to change hospitals.  The story, which drew inspiration from Frankenstein, is sad, just as that book is.  A woman has to lose the same daughter twice, but that’s not the end of the story.

I think I’ll leave it there.  The tale raises ethical issues and probes the lengths we will reach not to let go of those we love.  The maternal bond may go as far as, if not murder, manslaughter.  The bond is emotional and Casper works it for the science of regeneration.  If life can be introduced to apparently dead tissue, why shouldn’t it be?  But the result is never satisfying.  There is a permanent line between life and death that can’t be crossed, no matter the emotional need or scientific curiosity.  And yet.  And yet.  Birth/Rebirth takes us to this juncture and forces us to look.  And it makes the viewer wonder just how far they might go.  The answer might make a person squeamish.  But then, uncomfortable truths are like that.


Not Again!

The only reason I heard of Repossessed is because my wife read about it in a local newspaper.  This is true although I’d written a book about the Bible in horror movies and a book about possession movies.  This one’s been buried deep.  Although not a straightforward parody of The Exorcist, it travels the same territory with Linda Blair reprising her role as the possessed girl—now a mom with two adolescent kids.  The movie was critically panned, but I have a soft spot for bad movies and it was much better than The Exorcist II.  What saves the film is the acting on the part of Blair and of Leslie Nielsen, as the exorcist.  Nielsen is pretty funny most of the time, but the gags fall short here time and again.  The humor tends toward the sophomoric, but some jokes are good; the Chappaquiddick one was unexpectedly funny.  And having a false Donald Trump show up to try an exorcism was an added bonus.  These horror tropes classify this as a comedy horror, and it has a kind of cuteness to it that make it worth seeing.

So Nancy Aglet (Blair), after being exorcised by a young Father Mayii (Nielsen), settles down with a family until a televangelist pair—a clear send-up of Jim and Tammy Faye Bakker—actually cause a demon to come through the television.  It  possesses, or repossesses, Nancy.  Since the original movie spends a lot of time in the hospital, she goes to the doctors who can’t figure out what’s wrong.  Nancy knows she’s possessed, however, and tries to find a priest to help, Father Mayii having retired.  The world’s religious leaders gather as the televangelists fail to cast the demon out on national television, but it’s only when Mayii joins the crew that the Devil is driven out.  Not through the rite, but because he can’t stand rock-n-roll, which the religious leaders perform.  It’s rather silly, of course.

There is an aesthetic to bad movies and Repossessed is a good example of that.  Despite its failings, it’s one of those movies that you’re (mostly) glad to have watched.  At least in my experience.  Largely, as I say, because of the performances of the leads.  Although some people today find The Exorcist itself funny, and although some aspects do open themselves to parody, it takes talent to make fun of it.  This film doesn’t do it particularly well.  Ironically, Ted Kennedy couldn’t run for president because of Chappaquiddick but Donald Trump, despite having a much more sordid past, could and did.  Those two moments in this 1990 movie give me pause.  And the fate of the televangelists in it gives me hope.


Hearing White

I really do need to start writing down either the year of movie recommendations or the year of the film.  Many movies share names and I found White Noise on my list and couldn’t remember who or where or when.  I watched the 2005 version knowing in advance that it was panned by critics but it did well at the box office.  Now, I tend to like ghost stories—I’m not much of a slasher fan—but this one was a bit convoluted.  Too much is stuffed in.  So Jon Rivers’ wife dies and he’s contacted by Raymond, who’s been receiving EVP (electronic voice phenomenon) messages from her.  So far, so good.  But then things spiral (including the camera; please, people, hold the camera still!).  Raymond is killed by unseen entities.  Jon finds another client of Raymond and decides to set up his own electronic superstation to hear and see messages from the dead.

A psychic warns him this is dangerous.  He persists, learning that his dead wife is, always cryptically, telling him to go to places where people are about to die.  He’s able to save a baby’s life that way, but he’s getting messages about an abducted woman and wants to save her.  All the while, on the computer monitors three shadowy figures keep appearing—evil spirits, presumably.  Jon discovers that a serial killer has been receiving messages, through a similar tech setup, from these evil spirits and has been torturing and killing people.  The spirits directly attack Jon, killing him, but the police follow the clues Jon has left and catch the killer.  But not, presumably, the three evil spirits responsible for inspiring said killer.  There’s some good ideas here but they aren’t handled very well.  The story is too complicated to really fit into the time allowed.

It is a good example of religion and horror, however.  There are lots of clergy around—there are a few funerals in the movie.  I found a few potential Bible uses, but nothing definitive.  I’m not sure Holy Sequel will ever be written, but the list of potential movies is growing long.  White Noise isn’t a horribly bad movie.  The 2005 version is at least worth watching for the spooky ideas.  The movie’s main claim to fame, at least according to Wikipedia, is that it made studio executives realize that early January was a good release period for horror movies.  If they’d read some history they’d know winter has always been a time for horror films and stories.  As the genre gains some respectability, perhaps those who produce horror will realize that it’s an all season phenomenon.  Even if it tries to base them on electronic voice phenomenon.


Togetherness

Over the holiday break I watched three very good movies and I noticed that Domain Entertainment was one of the production companies for each of them.  The final one I saw (after Sinners and Weapons) was Companion.  I’m going to have to look into Domain a bit more.  In any case, Companion is sci-fi-ish horror with a somewhat comedic twist.  I say sci-fi-ish because we are rapidly approaching the point where this is possible.  What is this?  A sexbot that functions like Siri but who’s better in bed.  Josh and Kat have been planning to murder Kat’s very wealthy boyfriend and to blame it on Josh’s bot Iris.  Iris doesn’t know she’s a robot.  Viewers learn that Josh has tampered with her programing a little, allowing her, for example, to attack a person in self-defense (violating Asimov’s rules for robots).  When Kat’s boyfriend tries to rape Iris, she kills him.

Josh and Kat will blame the robot, with their friends Eli and Patrick as witnesses to corroborate their story.  Since the deceased boyfriend has 12 million dollars in cash lying about his house, it won’t be missed.  But Iris, it turns out, has a conscience.  She escapes.  It turns out that Patrick is Eli’s sex bot, and he is sent to bring back Iris after she kills Eli, also in self-defense.  A police officer who finds Iris is killed by Patrick, complicating matters.  Then, Josh changes Patrick’s programming and he accidentally kills Kat.  Planning to blame all of this on Iris, Josh calls the robot’s maker to have Iris returned.  The technicians see the holes in Josh’s story and one of them restores Iris after Josh shoots her.  Iris then confronts Josh.

This will give you a taste of the story without giving away the ending.  This is a smart, sympathetic treatment of technology, including AI.  From the beginning, before it’s revealed that Iris is a robot, the viewers’ sympathy is with her.  She seems to be the wronged party and Josh is slowly revealed to be pretty much an all-round scumbag.  While not the most profound film of this genre, Companion nevertheless raises many of the issues that merit discussion when technology outraces ethics.  We see this unfolding in real time with artificial intelligence companies deciding on profits over any sense of what is good for society, or people in general.  What makes the movie so interesting is that the robots seem to be far more morally concerned than the humans are.  Although I turn this around the other way, I do wonder if sometimes that may be the case. Especially in the context of a movie that’s barely science fiction.


Being Saved

Historians of media will have much to contend with now that streaming services, such as Hulu, Netflix, and Amazon are producing their own feature-length films.  There are movies I’m still waiting to catch up on, but freebies on services already available are enticing, economically.  So it was that I watched Hulu’s No One Will Save You.  It’s an unusual horror film that has, as many recent ones do, a message.  Personally, I find home invasion films and alien films particularly frightening and this one does scare pretty consistently for the first half or so.  For me, anyway, at that point questions start to arise and curiosity about what’s going on starts to overcome the fright.  The movie is heavy on symbolism, almost to the point of being a parable.  The main character speaks fewer than ten words of dialogue in the film, another unusual feature.  The story, with spoilers, goes like this.

In chronological order (not as presented in the film) Brynn accidentally killed her childhood best friend in an argument.  She has remained in the area, living in an isolated house, and making a living as a seamstress.  Then the aliens come.  Brynn, among those in the rural area, is the only one to have successfully fought them off.  The alien home invasion is about as scary as that in Signs.  As the title already warns viewers, nobody is going to save Brynn.  She manages to kill three of the aliens, but they want to explore her mind.  They do so, finding the isolation and sadness because of killing her best friend.  She forgives herself and the remainder of the townsfolk, controlled by the aliens, welcome her back into society.

One of the features that stood out to me was that when the police chief—his daughter was the girl Brynn killed—refuses to help, Brynn goes to the church.  For all its problems, Christianity is based on the principle of forgiveness.  The problem is that the church is locked and Brynn can find no salvation there.  When forgiveness does come, it is through the manipulations of the aliens.  In the end, the people of the town are the ones who have to change their behavior and accept the one who has learned to forgive herself.  This is why it feels like a parable.  At the same time, it works as a horror movie.  It was better than I had anticipated it might be.  Even though it wasn’t on my list of films I need to watch, I’m glad I did so.


In the Yard

The search for “free” horror has a few more reasonable offerings, it seems, if you follow the reviews.  I try not to read about movies in advance, and I avoid trailers.  The Woman in the Yard had higher scores than several movies streaming on the services I use.  It’s Blumhouse horror, so it has a bit of substance.  Substance but also some confusion.  Trying to make sense of it will involve spoilers.  Here goes: Ramona and David have moved into the country because Ramona found the city suffocating.  Once there, however, she doesn’t take to farm living and becomes depressed.  She tells her husband this and on their way home from a restaurant, he dies in an accident while she’s driving.  Ramona, herself injured, tells Taylor and Annie, her son and daughter, that their father was driving.  She lives with the guilt and is still struggling with depression.

A mysterious woman shows up in the yard.  Draped in black, including her face, she tells Ramona “Today’s the day.”  Feeling threatened, Ramona tells the kids to stay inside, but it becomes clear that this woman is supernatural.  The power is out and no phones work.  The car won’t start and the nearest neighbors are a couple miles away.  The family, alone, grows frightened and the woman’s shadow begins to manipulate items in the house, threatening them all.  Ramona confesses to Taylor that she was responsible for his father’s death.  When the woman’s shadow attacks they have to get into the dark where her shadow is powerless.  Ramona is drawn through a mirror where David is still alive, but frees herself to get back to her children.  The woman tells her that if she kills herself, which she’s been praying for the courage to do, her children will thrive.  Without showing the death, the family is back together and the power comes on, only it is the mirror world.

A few things to note.  There are a few scary moments but the movie as a whole isn’t that frightening.  It is, however, dealing with suicide—it actually has, in the final credits, a note urging anyone contemplating suicide to seek help.  There’s no clear indication of what happens but the ending might be interpreted rather darkly.  Depression is difficult for those of us who struggle with it.  The movie seems to indicate that the woman in the yard is the flip, pro-suicide version of Ramona.  She appears to resist and overcome the depression, but it’s really left open at the end.  Still, this isn’t bad for “free” horror.  It’s thoughtful, if not exactly cheering.  And it gives viewers something to think about.


Weaponry

For all of its problems, 2025 was a great year for horror films.  And they’re beginning to gain the respect they deserve.  I found an affordable copy of Weapons and discovered that it was as good as the hype.  The haunting image of the children running is, in itself, distinctly creepy.  The film does a great job of obscuring what is happening until the right moment, not making it feel over two hours long.  Weapons never really explains what the monster is, but gives hints that allow viewers to draw their own conclusions.  I’ll try to explain a bit more without spoilers, but the intricate plot may mean that some information might inadvertently be revealed.  The movie begins with a mystery.  One night seventeen children—all but one in Justine Gandy’s third-grade class—disappear simultaneously.  Some doorbell cameras catch them leaving their houses and running into the night.

The people of the fictional Maybrook, Pennsylvania, suspect Justine, their teacher.  Some of the parents, especially Archer Graff, are vocal about their suspicions, going as far as to paint the word “witch” across the doors of her car.  Graff decides to confront her during his own investigations—he thinks the police aren’t pursuing this actively enough.  As he accosts her, the principal of her school, running like the children, attacks and tries to kill her.  This convinces Archer that Justine isn’t responsible, and between them they identify the house of the one remaining student to be at the center of the mysterious disappearance.  The story is told from the point of view of six of the characters’ experience, ending with Alex, the one boy remaining.  His house is the focal point.

We learn that his great aunt came to stay shortly before the children disappeared.  I shouldn’t say any more, I suppose, for fear of giving away the ending.  The story is effectively told with memorable images in the service of the story.  Although it has a kind of justice in the end, the resolution is not a cheerful one.  Like some of the other acclaimed horror of 2025, it makes you think.  Interestingly, while not filmed here, this is another horror film set in Pennsylvania.  Having grown up in this state I’ve always known that odd things tend to happen around here.  Maybe word has gotten out.  In any case, Weapons is a haunting film, well worth seeing.  And while some are reluctant to call it horror, the critics agree that this movie is worthy of note.  Perhaps, someday, horror will be treated with a bit more respect and the critical weapons relaxed a little.


Surviving Ones

Slashers aren’t my favorite horror films.  As I’ve suggested in some of my unpublished writing, horror should be dismantled as a “genre” since so many different types of movie are collected together under its rubric.  That having been said, The Only Ones is an amazing low-budget, independent slasher.  For one thing, it references so many other horror movies that it is mind boggling.  Just a few influences: Deliverance, Scream, The Texas Chainsaw Massacre, The Blair Witch Project, and just about every movie that has a bunch of young people going to a remote location by themselves.  It’s complex and thoughtful.  A love story and a reflection on religion and horror (only in a minor way, but still).  And piecing together what led to the eight deaths would require an article all by itself.  And it’s a film with heart as well as gore.  A spoiler follows.

The basic idea is that the six young people are primed for a horror movie outcome by one of their number who’s a true crime podcaster.  They’re going to the remote house of the uncle of one of them since the uncle passed away and they are helping settle the estate.  A couple of campers have innocently trespassed in the house and a violent confrontation with them sets the tone for all of what follows.  The movie is also a reflection on how a weapon in the midst of any group leads to violence.  One of the kids has a gun and the threat of that weapon leads to people killing one another without ever really stopping to figure out what happened.  A final girl survives the two nights, and when the police ask her what happened, so honestly says she has no idea.

The movie has some flaws, and early on I was eager to note them all, but the story sucks you in.  The deaths, in the end, are all pointless.  They begin because of a misunderstanding with a violent threat being used instead of trying to understand what happened.  This brings the movie up to the level of actually having a message.  Many slashers seem to settle on “traditional values”—don’t use drugs, have premarital sex, or in any way offend the world envisioned in the 1950s.  Those who are killed have violated some principle that keeps society the same forever.  The Only Ones has something deeper to say.  The characters are self-described outcasts.  The one who survives is the one who learned to love.  And bringing weapons into any situation leads to a Chekhovian resolution.