Category Archives: Movies

Movie Review: Beware Boiúna

.

Friday night, with a hankering to see something in the theaters to kick off this year’s spooky season, I did something I have not done in a very long time: I saw a movie knowing so little about it I had not even watched a trailer. Scanning through the AMC app on my phone, I read the bare details about Beware Boiúna: “deep in the Amazon, a medical mission spirals into a fight for survival when Boiúna, a colossal ancient predator, awakens to reclaim her domain in the jungle were nature holds absolute power, she decides who lives and who dies.”

Lionsgate Films

Okay, so Beware Boiúna was a creature feature, a monster movie, and frankly that was just the sort of shallow horror film that suited my mood. I clicked on a show time, confirmed it as one of the subscription screenings, which came at no additional cost, and after my sweetie-wife had retired for the evening, drove to Fashion Valley mall for the film. I seated myself in the nearly empty theater with quite low expectations. Monster movies along with slashers are not known for deep and engaging stories, often populated by caricatures of people rather than characters, and ones that make the most idiotic of decisions. This sub-genre can be fun in a silly, campy sort of way. (Though it is possible to be just bad enough that the movie is painful to watch without any redeeming camp value.)

Beware Boiúna surprised me.

While it clearly does not carry the heft of more celebrated recent horror films such as Obsession, Backrooms, Midsommar, or Nosferatu, this movie is smart enough and entertaining enough to be counted among the rare category of good monster movies. It possesses just enough story within its plot to have something to say about the human condition but without becoming a meditation on grief, or loss, or identity.

The plot of the film is straightforward: a team of doctors and medical students travel by chartered boat deep along the Amazon River in Colombia, delivering medical supplies and care to impoverished villages. The team comes into conflict with a commercial survey/prospecting team which rapidly spirals into violence. When both groups find themselves on an isolated tributary, they are forced to reckon with a serpent of gigantic stature, Boiúna, and it is unclear who, if anyone, will survive.

In my opinion, Beware Boiúna, while not reaching the heights of these films, carries the genetic heritage of three great films of the horror canon: Jaws, Alien, and Aliens.

Like that Spielberg classic Jaws, this film doesn’t overexpose the audience to the monster at the center of the story. Boiúna makes her appearances in the first half of the movie without fully exposing her horrific nature. Like ‘Bruce’ the shark, her presence is represented by the things she affects instead of blatant CGI. It isn’t until the final act of the film that the creature is fully seen and even then, the director, Mike P. Nelson, and the VFX teams wisely restrict these scenes to the forgiving nature of well-shot night sequences.

Alien is famous for hiding just which character is the actual protagonist of the tale. It isn’t until Dallas’ foray into the airshafts that it becomes clear that Ripley is the story’s main character. Beware Boiúna performs a similar sleight of hand, revealing its protagonist at the film’s midpoint.

The connection to Cameron’s Aliens is more tenuous but struck me as plain when our surviving protagonist battles the enormous creature with massive claw-equipped machinery, echoing Ripley’s power-loader battle with the alien queen.

Well-directed by Mike P. Nelson and well-scripted by writer Alan B. McElroy, Beware Boiúna is a rare thing, a rather decent creature feature that doesn’t try for too much or overstay its welcome with a slim 104-minute running time. Cinematographer Nick Junkersfeld shot the film well; there are no overly showy flourishes of photography but rather a simple and direct style that helps ground the fantastic premise.

Overall, I found this film worth my time, and while it is not getting as wide a release as it deserves and will be overshadowed by films such as Obsession, Beware Boiúna is a film that horror fans should see, and if possible, in a theater.

Share

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

End of Summer Movie Tally

.

September is drawing to a close with October coming later this week, bringing with it spooky season and the busiest period for the next several months at my day job, a perfect time to reflect on my summer movies.

In April, I posted about some of the movies coming out this summer that I planned to see in their theatrical release.

  • Over Your Dead Body
  • Hokum
  • The Sheep Detectives
  • In the Grey
  • Obsession
  • Star Wars: The Mandalorian and Grogu
  • Backrooms
  • Pressure
  • Disclosure Day
  • Hungry
  • The Odyssey
  • Spider-Man: Brand New Day
  • Coyote vs. Acme

For various reasons, running time vs. showtimes, brief or non-existent theatrical releases in my area, or other factors, I missed Disclosure Day, Pressure, and Hungry in theaters, but I made all the rest. I must say that with the except of the Star Wars entry on the list, not one of these films felt like a waste of my time and energy. Most proved quite the opposite, well worth the voyage out to the local multiplex, with Obsession being the standout feature. I have given that horror film more thought, consideration, and public writing than any other this summer and possibly this year.

Of the 13 movies listed, three I still have not seen, one bored me so intensely I still harbor ill will towards it, and one assaulted my eardrums with such ferocity I find it difficult to remember anything else about the experience of seeing it. That leaves eight that I enjoyed watching from a rear-row seat at the theater. That’s a final score of 80 percent, discounting the ones I missed, because I may have loved one or more of those, giving this summer’s movies a B.

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

Why “Conservative” Entertainment Fails

.

With the release and scathing reviews of Run Hide Fight: Infidels and the expanding slate of productions from Angel Studios, explicitly conservative entertainment is once again in the air. As with previous attempts at “right-wing” entertainment media, these releases are not finding tremendous commercial or critical success.

Some attribute these failures to the fact that they are conservative, but that is far too simplistic an answer, in my opinion. The Passion of the Christ, which presented the biblical story in a decidedly conservative (some would argue antisemitic) manner as a two-hour subtitled film, took in over half a billion dollars at the box office: hardly a failure. Outspoken and larger-than-life writer and filmmaker John Milius, he of the original Red Dawn, has never shied away from his conservative beliefs, and his notions of honor, masculinity, and living by a code infuse his writings. While Milius never found the outsized success of some of his friends, such as Lucas and Spielberg, he remained an active and vital filmmaker until he was sidelined by health issues.

No, productions like Run Hide Fight: Infidels, its predecessor, Run Hide Fight, or the ill-fated The 1/2 Hour News Hour, a poor attempt to replicate the success of The Daily Show, fail because they prioritize their political hits over any sense of what is actually entertaining.

Some may think that this is an unfair judgment because, after all, The Daily Show is unabashedly liberal, its targets are overwhelmingly conservative, and in the era of MAGA and the Trump personality cult this has only intensified. That judgment is almost correct. The Daily Show is deeply colored by the liberal worldview of its writers and performers just as Red Dawn was deeply influenced by the worldview of its creator. A piece of creative art is stamped, sometimes blatantly, sometimes subtly, by the worldview of its creator. When they sit down to pen something that is funny, thrilling, or just interesting to them, it will reflect, to a greater or lesser degree, the manner in which they see and interpret the world. When the writers of The Daily Show look upon the absurdity of the world, they are by nature predisposed to satirize and ridicule the right, but that is a predisposition and not a commandment from on high.

In 2009, during the first few months of Obama’s first term and nearly eight years after the horrific attacks of 9/11, a low-flying jumbo jet provoked low-grade panic in New York City. The Daily Show performed a bit wondering what sort of brain-damaged nut would do such a thing to the traumatized city, and then revealed, through a doctored image, Vice President Joe Biden at the controls of the aircraft. At the time, the defining image of Biden was one of a person who tended to say and do things that caused the administration public-relations troubles, and so the skit exaggerated this for comedic effect, even though the vice president was on “their side.” The 1/2 Hour News Hour never ever skewered anyone on the right, because its mandate was to deliver conservative talking points. It was never comedy produced by a conservative mind, such as the films of John Hughes; it was a terrible attempt to use comedy to propagandize for conservatism.

The very same things are true of The Daily Wire’s and Angel Studios’ productions and releases. Whether it is George Washington converting Native Americans into joyously celebrating Christ, or a very attractive young woman and her guns emerging victorious over school shooters, or a hardened combat veteran saving a feckless and impotent police force and a university from Islamic terrorists, the ideology comes first rather than emerging organically from a creative who is writing and talking about the world as they see it. That is the very heart of the trouble with most “conservative” entertainment: it is a polemic first and often only.

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

Dolly and Tim

.

For many people, this is a terribly sad week with the passing of Dolly Parton and Tim Curry, a pair of performers who helped define a generation, each in their own unique manner and talent.

As someone who in their childhood and teenage years listened to a lot of country music, Dolly was a fixture in my universe that was always constant. As a man who never fell into the hard rock, acid rock, or other intense musical genres but instead was always drawn to the romantic, Dolly was a natural fit for my inclinations. Here You Come Again is a tune that I shall never not want to hear. (Though I will confess that I prefer Olivia Newton-John’s cover of Jolene to Dolly’s original.)

Tim Curry, I came to through The Rocky Horror Picture Show, a film that I have spoken of many times here on my blog. It was on the sidewalk outside of the Ken Theater that I really learned to socialize with the fans and ‘cast’ waiting for the midnight shows to begin. Of course, Curry’s career is so much more than just Rocky and that man worked with some of the best filmmakers of our generation.

I am not to one to become maudlin over the death of celebrities. Everyone dies, the great and not great, the famous and the forgotten, the just and the unjust, that final end is waiting for all of us and my early experience with it has hammered into my personality an acceptance of that which cannot be avoided. But I want to recognize them and honor the gift that they left this poor world with their charm, their love of life, and their acceptance of everyone is soemthing we might learn from.

Share