Category Archives: Horror

They Live Is Overrated

.

They Live (1988) was the 11th feature film from celebrated writer/director John Carpenter, and, in my contested opinion, halfway through the movie it becomes evident that Carpenter’s talent had fled, never to return. (Do NOT try to argue that In the Mouth of Madness is a great or even good film. A story where a shotgun-armed angry mob of men are chased off by mere dogs is stupid and expects its audience to be stupid.) I will be spoiling an already spoiled story.

Universal Pictures

A conspiratorial mess, the story follows Nada (Roddy Piper), an unnamed and unhoused itinerant worker who has come to Los Angeles and is drawn into a vast alien plot to subjugate humanity and transform the planet to an environment more suitable to their lifeforms. Nada and another displaced worker, Frank (Keith David), join up with a resistance group and eventually destroy the single satellite transmitter that has hypnotized humanity in a walking sleep that has prevented anyone from perceiving the aliens or their subliminal manipulation.

The first half or so of They Live is actually quite good, subtle, with a growing unease that creates an uncanny valley as the audience remains as ignorant of the reality of the story as the protagonist. However, once the vast conspiracy is revealed, all semblance of intelligence flees the pages of the script, replaced with overly extended fight sequences and action movie tropes that, even by 1988, had become tired, worn out, and cliché. The descent into formula is further degraded by the ham-handed nature of Carpenter’s political preaching. Meant as a commentary on Conservatism as Reagan’s second term drew to a close, They Live delivers its message with all of the subtlety of a cocaine-addled bull elephant. Compounding this clumsy critique is a level of world building that cannot stand even a moment’s analysis and consideration.

The unnamed alien race has come to Earth to extract wealth and convert the planet’s climate to their own by way of industrial pollution. Okay, a metaphor for capitalism: it’s not particularly original, but it’s serviceable enough that Carpenter is not the only storyteller to have stumbled upon it. I will even accept the hand-waving over exactly how that wealth is being extracted, as, one, a film has no time to delve into interstellar economics and, two, we have no clue how such an economy would function anyway. The idea that aliens are covertly manipulating humanity is hardly original; too many people already accept it as a true thing, but it can be made to work.

But not in this movie.

The aliens have covered incomprehensible distances to come to Earth, but after that terrible expenditure of resources, what do they do? They become beat cops in Los Angeles. Oh, sure, they are presented at the very top of society and government, with one shot meant to imply that Reagan is one of them, but so, so many are walking about as working-class and lower-upper-class individuals. This is patently ridiculous. Yes, you might make the argument that this echoes humanity’s own action as European nations colonized much of the world, but colonization is not Carpenter’s metaphor. He is explicitly playing on the secret forces that really control society, using aliens as a metaphor for capitalism, but that idea doesn’t work if the secret masters of the economy are also the ones driving the patrol cars. This is the reason that, while he had aimed his satire at capitalism, the metaphor was handled so clumsily that Nazis took the aliens as a stand-in for Jews. Carpenter warred with them online about this reading, but he left that door open with his slipshod world building. Of course, if Carpenter had reserved his aliens for the ones pulling the strings from secret positions high above the common rabble, then he couldn’t have had his glorious scenes of Nada gunning down aliens in public, scenes that have become only more and more disquieting as America experiences an endless horrid parade of mass shooter events.

Even if you accept the concept that aliens have come across light-years to hold down street-level jobs, They Live is still a deeply flawed mess of a story.

Nada, shortly after learning the truth and going on his spree of murdering aliens that to everyone around him look as human as anyone else, takes a hostage, Holly (Meg Foster), to escape downtown Los Angeles. In her expensive hillside home, Holly puts Nada at ease and then, shattering a champagne bottle across his skull, ejects him from the structure and down the steep embankment.

Later, when Nada and Frank attend their first resistance meeting, Holly is there, presumably because she has had her eyes literally opened by the magic sunglasses left behind after Nada was thrown from her home. She is all doe-eyed and sympathetic to Nada, despite her only interaction with the man having been as his hostage at gunpoint.

The evil controlling forces show up, some deus ex machina shit goes down, transporting Nada and Frank to the local cable station that manages the vast interstellar conspiracy. They regroup with Holly, last seen at the resistance meeting in a bad section of town and now present without explanation, and hustle to the roof where the final plot coupon, the transmitter, waits. In the stairwell Holly wordlessly murders Frank, but on the roof she, with more doe eyes, pleads with Nada, while holding him at gunpoint, not to destroy the transmitter. Apparently, in addition to selling out humanity, she has a very specific kink about being kidnapped and held at gunpoint. Nada destroys the transmitter and dies, but exposes the entire global plot because aliens smart enough to not only traverse light-years but manage a decades-long cultural conspiracy are too stupid to avoid a single-point-of-failure system.

I cannot for the life of me understand why this film is held in such high regard. I found it trite, preachy, and stupid when I first saw it in ’88, and that opinion has only grown with the decades.

Share

“Why Didn’t You Take the Train?”

Last Friday I made the drive from San Diego to Los Angeles to visit the Academy Museum of Motion Pictures. The trip up took about two hours and a little change, frankly faster than I had expected, and was well worth it.

The exhibit The Horror Show is broken up into sub-genres that each have their own room: Religious, Scientific, Gothic, Psychological, Ghost, and Slasher horrors. As you wander from room to room, you are presented with artifacts and history of some of the principal films from that category. (Though I found it a miss in the Slasher section that there was no mention of Italian giallo, which clearly was a predecessor to the slashers of the ’80s and onward.)

Some of the exhibits are quite old, such as the cape worn by Bela Lugosi in Dracula (1931) or the original mask from Creature from the Black Lagoon, while others come from very recent horror films such as the lovely flower gown from Midsommar.

Chatting with a couple of ladies who were also visiting, I mentioned that I had driven two hours to see this little preview (the exhibit officially opened the next day), and one asked, “Why didn’t you take the train?”

I have to confess that it simply had not occurred to me, and perhaps it would have been better if it had. True, I would have had to pay for all-day parking at the station, but even with public transit at the L.A. end, it may very well have saved me time. The drive home proved to be much more of an endurance test than the drive up, as it took me about four hours to make the return trip.

Still, it was a fun day: I have a couple of new tee shirts that I got from the museum store, and it was good to get away and be pretty much in my head for a day.

 Here is a model fo the creaure from the film The Host.

Share

“It’s Not a Romance; It’s a Love Story.”

.

Nikki says this to Bear in the short window during the film Obsession when we, the audience, get to meet Nikki before she is replaced by the power of the wish by Freaky Nikki. Bear responds that he is unable to discern the difference between the genres.

This is an interesting observation with some commenting that the film from which the quote originates is itself a love story and not a romance. I think a strong argument both for and against that thesis is possible, but for me the deciding factor that this is not a love story is Bear’s utterly selfish disregard for the torment Nikki suffers as he continues to pursue his own base desires. With that said, I think it is interesting to investigate further the dichotomy between a romance and a love story.

The romance genre in both film and in print is a vast engine producing seemingly endless content that on the surface appears to adhere to a simplistic formula. So much so that one doesn’t need to specify the rules of the genre in order to satirize them. All you need to know is that you have a high-powered businesswoman, a trip to a small town, and a ruggedly handsome man in flannel, and you just know how the plot is going to work out. To be fair, there is a lot more to the romance genre than that oversimplification. Romance stretches from those Hallmark holiday movies to quite inventive fantasy fiction that sells quite well and pushes the boundaries beyond the heteronormative definitions most people expect. What is expected and violated only most rarely is that a romance story ends with some variation of ‘happily ever after’ while a love story is not so constrained.

I can think of two films, which as love stories, defy the happy ending trope of romance tales to quite powerful ends.

1970’s Love Story is an example that is burned into the minds of Baby Boomers with its box office success spurring imitators and satirization. With its dramatic, tragic ending eliminating the possibility of a happy ending the film is practically the platonic ideal of the concept that a love story is distinct from a romance.

The second example in both print and film is The Remains of the Day. Both the novel by British writer and knighthood recipient Sir Kazuo Ishiguro and the Merchant/Ivory film explore more than the romantic relationship of their lead characters with meditations on service and to whom we give, often unquestioningly, that service.

Both the novel and the film are presented from the point of view of Mr. Stevens, the butler and head of the household staff to a British lord in the period leading up to World War II. While Lord Darlington, seeking to avoid another disastrous war, flirts with fascism, Stevens manages the large manor while suppressing his deep emotional feelings for the newly hired housekeeper Miss Kenton, second only to Stevens himself in the hierarchy of servants. Stevens’s devotion to his duty to his lord, even as the poisonous nature of Darlington’s politics becomes evident, causes the man to miss the love life he might have shared with Miss Kenton. The story is deeply romantic but is very much not a romance.

I think one of the vectors on which we can determine the difference between a romance and a love story is that a romance is inherently optimistic while love stories may be optimistic, but often have a darker streak running through them.

While Obsession, which ends as far from ‘happily ever after’ as seemingly possible, is appropriately dark for a horror film, it is not a love story because unlike poor, self-deluded Mr. Stevens, Bear’s interests end at his own desires.

Share

Road Trip Tomorrow

.

Tomorrow, September 25, 2026, I will take the day off from my full-time job, bundle myself into my Kia Soul in the morning, and embark on the two-to-three-hour drive from home to the dream place, Hollywood, California. There I will visit the Academy Museum of Motion Pictures to get a sneak preview of the exhibit The Horror Show, a history of horror cinema, before returning to my car for the lengthy and undoubtedly traffic-congested drive back home.

It has been nearly two years since I last made a foray to the heart of cinema, Hollywood, when I drove to see Quatermass and the Pit at the New Beverly Cinema, but this exhibit at the museum feels worth the drive.

I visited the Academy Museum once before, and I learned quite a bit, such as how African American cinema invented the music video well before the advent of cable television, and I got to see many fine items and memorabilia from over a century of filmmaking. The Horror Show, in addition to having items such as the original cape worn by Bela Lugosi in Dracula and the production mask from Creature from the Black Lagoon (one of my favorite movies of the original Universal horror cycle), will also explore the impact of horror films on culture and on the culture that these movies comment upon.

I will have lunch in Hollywood, probably not at the museum’s cafe, since my meal there last time was less than satisfying, and then return home, hopefully before dinnertime, to spend the evening with my sweetie-wife. It will be a long day of driving, but one that I hope will be worth the investment of time.

Share

Secret Morgue 7

.

It is September and therefore time for another horror movie marathon hosted by Film Geeks San Diego with their annual Secret Morgue.  I have attended all of the Secret Morgues except for 2023, when they hosted two, one themed on witches and witchcraft, which I attended, and the September edition focused on animal attacks, which I did not.

I knew going into the event this year that I faced the highest likelihood that more than not several if not most of the films playing would not really work for me as the theme was my least-liked sub-genre of horror, slashers and serial killers. Of the six films of the marathon, two I had not seen but thoroughly enjoyed; one was another unseen one but fell into the trappings of routine slashers that left me unimpressed; another I had seen and detested; one more I had previously watched and found mildly interesting and the final film of the evening; which I missed due to a growing migraine attack, I could tell from a trailer I would not have liked at all.

Peeping Tom from the UK kicked off the event. Released in 1960, the same year as Psycho, this film was savaged by critics and the public upon its release and fell into obscurity only to be later recognized as a work of superb filmmaking.  The film’s focus is Mark Lewis (Carl Boehm), a shy, quiet young man who records the women he murders with a motion picture camera. Peeping Tom explores the damaged and lethal psyche created by years of childhood abuse, placing it far ahead of any film of its period in actually trying to understand the psychology of serial murder. This was quite good and I am happy it has been restored not only physically but in terms of its filmmaking as well.

Memories of Murder by Oscar winner Bong Joon-Ho is a police procedural following two mis-matched cops as they attempt to identify and capture a serial rapist and murderer in a rural Korean district. Where most ‘mis-matched cops’ movies are conceived as ‘buddy cop’ stories, this one is not.Memories of Murder carries Bong Joon-Ho’s biting commentary on Korean culture, inspired by and loosely based on a series of actual murders. This film sidesteps easy answers or even an illusion of closure.

The third film, which I have already reviewed here on my site and sent me out of the Comicon museum where the Secret Morgue is hosted to walk around Balboa Park for the next 87 minutes because I have no need at all to ever see again Strange Darling.

Kolobos kicked off the swing into the evening programming. A first feature from a pair of film school graduates, Kolobos does not follow in the meta commentary of the Scream clones of the late ’90s but rather is supposed to take more of its inspiration from the Italian giallo genre of the early ’70s. That said, Kolobos I found lacked the character and writing that exemplifies the best of the giallo genre. The characters were flat stock stereotypes with trite and too on-the-nose dialog. By the end of the film’s short running time I had already begun to have the stirring of a migraine attack.

Wes Craven’s New Nightmare started as the fifth film of the evening, but the twin facts that I had already seen the film and the growing migraine prompted me to abandon the rest of the marathon and return home early. New Nightmare is a much more interesting meta commentary on horror film than Scream or any of its imitators. (And yes, I am aware that Craven directed both.)

I later learned that the final film, again from the UK, was Stitches, a slasher featuring a clown, that from the trailer, I am sure would have tested my patience.

Even with the headache and being haunted by Strange Darling dogging my steps, I am glad I attended and look forward to next year’s marathon.

Share

Universal Horror Nights and Nikki Freeman

.

Halloween Horror Nights, for those unaware, is a seasonal event where Universal Studios Hollywood, and the other parks around the world I assume, redecorate their parks with horror themed attractions, mazes, and wandering characters for the entertainment of guests during special evening hours. It is wildly successful, with packed attendance, and greatly anticipated by members of the horror community. I have attended twice, once paying for the more expensive admission that allowed you to skip the usual lines as without that the wait for the mazes stretched more than an hour each. I thoroughly enjoyed each visit but find that the two-and-a-half-hour drive to get there a little much for the event.

Blumhouse

Nikki Freeman is a character portrayed by Oscar-nominated actor Inde Navarette in 2026’s breakout horror hit Obsession. In the film Nikki is enslaved by a magically empowered wish, becoming obsessed with Baron ‘Bear’ Bailey (Michael Johnson), eventually leading to multiple deaths by the story’s end. Produced for less than a million dollars and grossing at the global box offer over half a billion dollars Obsession is a certified blockbuster.

With a film that successful and one that was distributed by Universal, there could be no doubt that Obsession would play a part in 2026 Halloween Horror Nights, but it is not a film that lends itself to easy adaptation to the park’s event. Bear’s home, where much of the film’s unsettling events transpire, is not something that would make a suitable horror maze, and the film release in May of 2026 would give the park little time to design and construct the maze, something the designers of Halloween Horror Nights typically spend more than a year on. To capitalize on the film’s fantastic success the quickest and most identifiable way would be an additional wandering character added to the event.

The wandering characters found at Halloween Horror Nights are most often to the point of exclusively the monstrous villains of the horror movies that birthed them. The performers portraying these characters are there to create unsettling sights and ‘jump scares’ for the attendees. They are also visually distinctive, think Freddy Krueger, Jason, Michael Myers, or Art the Clown, who have such unique appearances that even from many, many yards away there is no mistaking them for anything but who they are.

It is uncontested, except by the most brain dead, that Obsession’s true villain is Bear, who enslaved, and kept enslaved even after the torment he was causing became evident, the woman that he desired, Nikki Freeman. However, Bear makes a very poor wandering character for Halloween Horror Nights. A shaggy, shy and slightly stuttering young man in ill-fitting clothes? That is not the sort of image that grabs the attention from a dozen or more yards away. What would be his signature jump scare? Sneaking up behind you and sobbing loudly? Hardly the stuff that would make your blood run cold and your heart race.

Nikki is the only possible wandering character, with her blood-stained face sporting an incongruous smile, her distinctive little black dress and hand-drawn tattoos, are all visually distinctive. There is a reason it is by far that image is the most common thumbnail for people on YouTube reacting to the film. Already reports are coming in of people startled by the wandering Nikki stealthily coming up unseen and suddenly screaming, “WHY DON’T YOU LOVE ME?”

But it is also uncontested that Nikki is the most victimized character in Obsession, suffering extra-dimensional torment and sexual assault. Her pain and anguish, disregarded by the man-baby that supposedly loves her, all combine to make her experience the true horror of the film. (The fact that this needs to be explained to some is the real-life horror that Obsession has revealed.) It is understandable and reasonable that some have found using a character who suffered sexual assault as a mode to frighten people as quite objectionable. Their viewpoint is not without merit.

It is unrealistic to expect a global monster of a corporation like Universal Studios to ignore one of its most successful properties, and given the unique nature of Obsession and its characters, ‘Freaky Nikki’ is the only option to expect them to utilize. Given that reality, what we can do is make sure that in addition to the fun and thrill of Halloween Horror Nights we can use the text of the film to talk about the entitled ‘nice guy’ that is the real monster of the film and look to life for those that walk among us.

Share

Movie Review Strange Darling

.

A one-night-stand in a motel leads to a prolonged chase between predator and victim culminating with numerous deaths of both the guilty and the innocent in 2023’s Strange Darling.

JT Mollner’s script and film received much praise when it hit theaters in 2023. But before I managed to find a time slot that worked with my schedule it had completed its run and no longer played in any local auditorium forcing me to wait until it appeared on one of my streaming services which it did this month with Shudder.

Miramax

Strange Darling, billed as a thriller in 6 non-sequential acts, is quite competently crafted; it is vibrantly colorful with production designed by Pricilla Elliot that is wonderfully photographed by cinematographer Giovanni Ribisi. The two principal characters remain mostly unnamed in the script, credited only as ‘The Lady’ (Willa Fitzgerald) and ‘The Demon’ (Kyle Gallner). Both performers provide good solid acting as they reveal the nature of their characters. With a brief 97-minute runtime Strange Darling is not a movie that requires a large commitment from its audience and there is more than enough chase, capture, and escape reversals to keep it from becoming overly dull. And yet, with all the praise that this movie earned from the horror film community I cannot endorse it. The more I ponder the movie and its construction the more I find it to be irritating and not entertaining. To discuss why it makes me feel that way requires dancing around the core of the film’s nature that skates right into spoiler territory, so here is your spoiler warning. Proceed no further unless you are prepared to.

ABANDON ALL IGNORANCE YE WHO READ FURTHER

One of the things discussed on the various horror film podcasts I listen to about this movie is that it has a twist. The mere knowledge that a movie has a twist is itself a spoiler, particularly for those of us inclined to work out plots of our own for fun. We will go into the experience looking for the twist, trying to work it out rather than let it reveal itself naturally.

A twist performed properly and fairly can be a great thing to witness; the moment of revelation when everything you have watched before suddenly gets recontextualized and a new paradigm for the story is on display. Strange Darling does not play fair. It cheats its audience to create the moment when everything is supposed to change, presenting moments and sequences entirely out of context, knowing that without the vital context the audience is going to make very erroneous assumptions. This is the reason the six chapters of this thriller are presented in the order of chapters 3, 5, 1, 4, 2, and 6, because to show them in chronological order would render the second half of the film absent of any surprise or unexpected reveal.

Withholding context for a scene is not always a ‘cheat.’ Memento presents each scene in reverse order, depriving the audience of the context for where and how its protagonist came to be in the situation, but because the character is unable to make new memories, he is just as lost as the audience. This puts the audience firmly in the character’s point of view, which is not what is happening with Strange Darling. This movie withholds context in hopes of creating a moment when the floor drops out from under the audience’s feet, but the characters who have lived the story in chronological sequence have no such handicap. This withholding of context is lying to the audience, lying to create in their minds an assumption that is not true so that the ‘truth’ can be revealed.

The movie’s lying begins right at the start with the first title cards that identify one character as ‘The Demon’ and another as ‘The Lady,’ but ‘The Demon’ has a proper name that is used on screen. However, ‘Demon’ creates a deliberate and false impression in the audience, one that powers the story’s supposed twist.

Strange Darling, despite the raves it has gathered from most of the horror community, is a movie that I cannot recommend and one that with each reconsideration becomes more and more one where the time watching becomes time wasted.

Share

Movie Review: Teenage Sex and Death at Camp Miasma

.

The third feature film from celebrated indie filmmaker Jane Schoenbrun, Teenage Sex and Death at Camp Miasma, (henceforth referred to as At Camp Miasma) is her most mainstream project but even then this is an arthouse feature that is more of a tributary feeding into a mainstream than the usual mass market summer fare.

Reviewing At Camp Miasma is a difficult undertaking both because some of the film’s most interesting and daring takes require ‘spoilers’ for the events of the feature and because the nature of the film is much closer to the dream logic of something like Mulholland Drive than yet another slasher loose in the woods dispatching adult actors attempting to portray teens.

MUBI

On the most surface level the plot is this: indie filmmaker Kris Williams (Hannah Einbinder) is getting the chance to pitch to the mainstream studios about reviving a dormant property, Camp Miasma, a slasher from the 80s with more than a score of sequels but source material that is deeply problematic and transphobic. Kris, a queer filmmaker for whom the original films are a foundational element of her own awakening, is aware that the studio interest in her is to ‘woke-wash’ the property in hopes of avoiding a disastrous online campaign against the movie when they release it. She has traveled deep into snowy mountains to meet with Billie Preston (Gillian Anderson), the star of the original Camp Miasmaand who has become a retired recluse in hopes of bringing her onto the project, but Billie is nothing like what Kris expected and soon over the course of a few days in the isolated and abandoned camp where the first in the franchise had been filmed, reality and fantasy blur for the two women as they untangle what the films mean to them and to each other.

On another level, At Camp Miasma is about the relationship between story and audience: is the audience the master of the story, or does the story in fact create its own audience? When reality blurs for Kris and Billie, that blurring also bleeds into the audience watching the film about the pair of women. The outdoor sets throughout At Camp Miasma have a deeply artificial appearance, one that I found reminiscent of the planet set from the original Star Trek series, something so powerfully artificial, particularly to modern eyes, that the effect in this film must have been intentional.

And on yet another level, At Camp Miasma is about coming into your own sexually, fully accepting yourself, with all of your flaws and limitations, and loving yourself for who you are, and in that process finally being able to accept love from others. In the end, it is a deeply committed love story between Kris and Billie where each woman finally finds the half that they have been desperately missing.

And perhaps the most fun level of At Camp Miasma is the rich and keen-eyed satire of the entire slasher genre. I have said before and will likely say again in the future that slashers are my least loved of all horror films. Far too often I find them dull, repetitive, and populated by bland characterless characters to ever be engaged with the often less than intelligent plots as they unfold. I did not find Scream to be particularly witty, nor did I find X inventive, but even with a limited affection for slashers I found much of the meta-humor in At Camp Miasma quite enjoyable. This would make quite an interesting double feature with The Cabin in the Woods as a pair of films commenting on the genre that their film makers deeply care about.

Is Teenage Sex and Death at Camp Miasma for you? I cannot say; even for people I know well, much less total strangers on the internet, I would have a hard time knowing if this movie will work for them. I can say that I enjoyed it and that I did not consider my time at the theater watching it wasted, but also I know I am unlikely to watch it again. If queerness is something that puts you off, then this film is not for you. If films that blur their own reality is something that you find that breaks your suspension of disbelief, then this is not for you. But if those things do not apply to you and you find yourself engaged with strange and unusual arthouse fare, then give this film a try.

Share

An Art Beyond Words

.

Spoilers for Obsession

I recently rewatched the entirety of Obsession, my favorite horror film of the last few years and possibly my favorite film of 2026. Dune part 3 and Avengers: Doomsday will have a very tough time beating it out for that top spot in my heart.

Obsession and its cast, in particular Inde Navarrette, have been getting a ton of praise for their work and this blog post is yet another one to add to that pile but I think this morning I want to dive deep and dissect an element of Navarrette’s performance that I have a difficult time articulating.

Navarrette is not a novice to acting, having been a recurring cast member on Superman & Loisand appeared in the Netflix series 13 Reasons Why, but it is unquestionable that her turn as Nikki Freeman, the doomed and tragic object of a young man’s obsession in this year’s breakout and surprising hit, has catapulted her into a very wide and public recognition.

In Obsession, Navarrette performs effectively as two distinct characters: Nikki Freeman, free of the wish’s curse and the ‘Nikki’ that is cursed to love Baron ‘Bear’ Bailey ‘more than anyone in the fucking world.’ I shall refer to these characters as True Nikki and Freaky Nikki to make it clear which is which.

In terms of screen time, the audience has little exposure to True Nikki; she is a voice on a telephone call, a friend chatting happily and teasing Bear at the bar on trivia night, and exposes herself emotionally for a few moments as Bear drives her home, revealing that she is not happy and emotionally keeps her feelings deeply contained saying that when she has a crush on a guy ‘no one knows.’

In contrast, for the majority of the film, Navarrette performs as Freaky Nikki, who is loud, unsubtle, manipulative, and unable to contain her feelings at all, possessing none of the subtlety of the character we were introduced to. So far this might be considered a rather standard Jekyll and Hyde sort of portrayal that has been a fairly standard performance since the 1930s, but there are layers and levels to Navarrette’s approach that I think belie this simplification.

While True Nikki and Freaky Nikki are poles apart in terms of the nature of their characters this is not usually played to exaggeration in the film. Freaky Nikki is a very different character, one the audience is well aware of and possibly would even be aware if there were not instances of True Nikki momentarily and terrifyingly regaining her body. The voices of the two Nikkis are slightly different, using different tonalities in their normal speech. I do not have a particularly well-trained ear, but it sounds to me that True Nikki’s voice is in a very slightly deeper register than Freaky Nikki’s. True Nikki sounds more composed and restrained while Freaky Nikki sounds more ‘girlish,’ perhaps a performance that might be more attractive to a man who lacks the self-confidence to take the emotional risks that courtship and dating require.

Even this, Navarrette’s performance as two different Nikkis, is not the element that astounds me. That moment from the film’s final scene is something I struggle to adequately describe.

Freaky Nikki, certain that Bear doesn’t love her, turns to the same One Wish Willow device that Bear used to enslave, creating a Pseudo-Bear that is obsessed with her as she is with him. This ‘romance’ is short-lived. Bear, seeking an escape from the horrors he birthed into the world, has taken a lethal overdose of pills. (True to Bear’s nature of being unable to commit and face up to unpleasant truths, he had begun to try and make himself vomit up the overdose, but Freaky Nikki’s wish derailed that.)

For a moment the two are ‘happy,’ but then the overdose works its lethal action and Pseudo-Bear dies in Freaky Nikki’s arms. Freaky Nikki wails and cries at the death of her obsession. She nearly ends her own life, but Bear’s death frees her from the wish’s curse suddenly becoming True Nikki again. There is a moment of silence before she throws Bear’s corpse to the floor and sobs.

In a single take, we watch Freaky Nikki transition to True Nikki with both versions warped by the throes of sobbing and wailing, and yet in a manner I cannot quite put my finger on, these are very different wails, very different cries. Freaky Nikki is wailing at the loss of her Bear, and True Nikki is wailing at the horror and torments she has been forced to endure. Both wails are soul-wrenching produced by utter sorrow but are also utterly different, produced by the same actor without a break or a cut to give her time and space to shift emotionally. She wails from two very different reasons, and it is evident in the nature of her cries but in a method so subtle I cannot say precisely why they are different. I can only recognize that they are distinct, that they are two different characters wailing for two different reasons that are easily observed but seemingly impossible to define.

Inde Navarrette has earned every accolade heaped upon her for this performance, and I shall watch her career with great interest.

Share

And After the Credits?

.

Spoilers for Obsession, Longlegs, & Immaculate

When a movie ends, the credits roll, I often find myself wondering about the characters and their lives that follow. For the vast majority of the movies I have watched there is actually little imagining, the story has wrapped up and while life will have its ups and downs, there isn’t a great mystery to what might happen next. But for some, the next phase of the character’s lives seems to hold more trouble than the sequence of events that we had just witnessed.

I recall going to a local art house theater with a friend and watching Blood Simple, a neo-noir from the early Coen brothers’ catalog. It has all the hallmarks of a film noir: love triangle, complicated schemes, betrayals, and of course murder. As we walked out of the theater, we both were amused by the concept of the local sheriff the next day trying to understand and unravel the events from the trail of confusing and inexplicable clues left behind. Beyond the mysteries and noir sub-genres, it is the horror film that more often than not has the most complicated relationship between its resolution and what the characters are likely to face in days following their harrowing experiences.

Neon

Consider Longlegs (2024). At the end of the film, poor FBI Special Agent Lee Harker is at the scene of a mass murder that mimics the scenes blamed on the now deceased serial killer ‘Longlegs’ and with her having been used to murder her superior and her own mother.

 

 

Black Bear Pictures

Another example of the troubles that will follow the survivor of a horror movie is Immaculate(2024) with the physical evidence showing that Sister Cecilia not only murdered at least two of her priests but that she also used a large stone to kill her newborn child, a crime that Italy is unlikely to be compassionate about.

 

 

Focus Features

But it is Obsession’s character of Nikki Freeman that may escape legal jeopardy for the multiple deaths over that terrible night.

After Baron ‘Bear’ Bailey unleashed the enchanted wish-powered date rape magic on poor unsuspecting Nikki Freeman, plummeting the poor woman into unhinged behavior, obsessive need to satisfy Bear’s whims, and a corrosive need for his affection to equal her own towards him, the tale ends with two of their friend group murdered, Bear dead by suicide, and Nikki finally freed of the compulsions but injured, covered in blood, and surrounded by corpses.

What is law enforcement to make of this strange and bewildering scene? A young man, Ian, dead with a gunshot wound to the head, a young woman, Sarah, beaten to death with a brick, and another young man, Bear, dead from a massive overdose of sleeping pills.

The physical evidence will be of actually little help in creating a decent case for the courts. There’s more than enough to put Bear, Sarah, and Nikki together in her car in the park and to establish that the automobile is the place where she was murdered. The blood-splattered trail will clearly show that the pair moved her body but can you build a case that slight, small, Nikki physically overpowered Sarah and pummeled her skull with a brick? A case airtight enough to convince a jury of that?

What of Ian’s murder?

Both Nikki and Bear’s prints are on the pistol that killed him, but only Nikki has the powder residue indicating that she fired the weapon. So, you can establish that she shot the gun, but can you convince a jury of why she murdered her former lover? And why the overdose?

You know what is too terribly common in America today? Murder-suicide.

There’s no need to build a complex and rickety case to try and convict a poor severely mentally disturbed woman like traumatized Nikki if you just put all the blame on the unhinged young man who died by his own hand. Never underestimate the lure of making troublesome issues just go away. The unknown municipality where Obsession takes place is in my opinion far more likely to blame everything on Bear, the ‘quiet’ man who kept to himself, over trying to drag to trial the woman that the physical evidence points to.

It is questions like this that dog me when I finish writing a horror novel or short story. There is rarely a clean answer for how to handle it but I shall never stop trying.

Share