Hereditary (2018)

I love horrors and I love A24. Hearing that they were releasing a new film called Hereditary piqued my interest by the title alone. After a family loses its matriarch they touch on various levels of grief. Soon after, there's an accident losing another member of the family and it spirals down from there.

Though A24 obviously use a wide range of case and crew but their films often have quite similar lighting and presence. This was the same again plus a little some some. There's a lot of natural lighting with soft edges. Even with the darkness the shadows are natural and soft, they're not afraid to show you things but doesn't shy away from have one sole focus in a somewhat blank canvas. As you can guess from the marketing 'this generations exorcist' there's some sort of spirit in this movie. Out of body it's portrayal is with moving light, subtle and only just out of the ordinary. There's a great shot with Alexx Wolff's character when he's alone in bed looking outside and we can see the heaters from the tree house reflected in his eyes. The glowing red reflecting from his dark eyes in his dark room may be a little on the house but looked great. There were some great silhouettes in the dark, wonderfully framed to heighten the horror element. They were bold and uncomfortable but almost out of focus, alarming but somehow not sudden.

The sound was fantastic, the daughter has a trademark sound, a clicking of her tongue, a 'cock' noise. Which as the film goes on it becomes more ominous. I'm a big fan of the slow quiet build ups for the score. Some horrors have got this down and Hereditary is one of them. You don't need a Jaws (1975) theme to alert you to the next attack. You want something that grows with your anxiety, something that finds its way with you instead of leading you there. The editing was also great. There were a few cuts that moved between identical shots in different locations and unique moments that utilises every angle. The mixture between abrupt cut and lingering on an image was perfect. Cuts were alarming but never whisked away before you had a complete look. But at 2hr7mins you there's time to see everything. 

Now the cast, here we go. Amazing. Fascinating to watch. Milly Shapiro plays Charlie the daughter and she's good, she's interesting to watch and I'm curious to see what her next move will be. Gabriel Byrne is great as Steve, almost separates Steve the dad and Steve the husband and it works well, it's exactly what the story needs. Toni Collette is wonderful as always playing the mum, Annie. She gives away nothing as well as a lot. She's vulnerable but determined. The main point is we believe her. We believe she had a strained relationship with her mother though we never see it. As you would have seen from the trailer Annie creates miniature art pieces based on her home life. We see crude near accurate images of memories and moments she's trying to see from another angle. She uses it to grieve and in anger. It's her outlet and it's isolated from the rest of the family, hell from the outside of that one room. Some pieces she had even turned away to face the other direction. Even if we didn't believe she existed before the film we're given a little visual key anyway.

Now Alex Wolff. I could talk about him for a good while and not just because I think he's cute (cos man do I). If you haven't yet seen My Friend Dahmer (2017) go watch it and check out our review here. I thought Wolff was good in that but he excels in hereditary. He's genuine. His stages of grief are genuine and real. They're deep and dark. When someone experiences something as horrific as he has there's no comparable feeling. He has a weighted numbness that, again, is believable. His commitment to the role is commendable and clear. His reactions are fantastic and he holds his own against Oscar nommed Toni Collette. AND AGAIN is someone to look out for. 

It's a slow burner but a well written script. Takes a little while to digest and rightly so. Even spoiler free there's so much to be said about this film I feel I've missed so many points to analyse. It's a very well written script that ties so much together. I almost hope I missed something so I've got another stone to unturn. 8/10

CINEMATES - A

My Friend Dahmer (2017)

Completely intrigued by this because of course I am. It's about one of the most famous serial killers in the last 40 years. My Friend Dahmer is based on a graphic novel (by the same name) by artist John 'Derf' Backderf. It follows Backderfs relationship with Dahmer through high school until graduation and his first murder.

If you've not heard of him (how?) his first of many murders was committed in the late 70's. Ever notice that films set in the 60's and 70's are always muted? The colours are full. As if they've aged even when they haven't yet. The decor of course look dated to us though the high school, minus the clothes and prom, still look relatively recent. Costume was great, hair and make up must have had a field day with his glorious yet terrible hair. Same goes for the roadkill and acid filled jars. The sound was subtle, the score was gentle and rare. When it made an appearance if highlighted the potential severity of the scene. It elicited the same feeling as a good horror score would fear. There were a few uncomfortable scenes, not due to gore but social anxiety preemptive disgust, A few occasions you get second hand embarrassment. In a way to get attention Dahmer parodied a gentleman with cerebral palsy and pretends to have fits on the floor. It would be uncomfortable then but due to us as a society moving away from humour in mimicking disabled people it's even more awkward to see. 

Some of the shots were quite interesting. A few of the opening shots were notable shot well. I recently read the graphic novel out of interest and some of the frames were taken shot for shot, as were parts of the dialogue. Which would make sense as a lot of the conversations actually happened. Some of the shots were a little distant, the film isn't to change your opinion on Dahmer it's to give you more information. So a lot of the shots are for observation and to put space in between him and everyone around him. Wasn't incredible but did what it should have. 

So Dahmer himself is played by Ross Lynch. Recognise the name? Me neither, he's a Disney boy and I'm just too old for when he was in power. Yep star of Austin & Ally is now a serial killer. Props to him. I thoroughly enjoy actors choosing more unique and out there roles, especially when they're young. Same goes for Alex Wolff who plays Backderf. Previous Disney lad now in this and upcoming Hereditary (2018). Doing very different roles, moving away from Disney strongly. Either way I was impressed. Lynch was creepy and yet still had an air of adolescence about him. He had a moments of experienced faux confidence mixed with genuine confusion and loss. The key in the character, and the person, before the crimes was his loneliness. And that's captured well. 

Granted it does feel a little serial killer 101, playing with dead animals and being that weird kid that people laughed at or avoided at school. But that's how it was. If you have the opportunity to read the graphic novel I'd recommend it, it's online. It's a unique perspective that doesn't have a great deal of narrative. That is the purpose of it, that its a lead up to a notorious killers first murder. Without that it would be a semi artsy film of a troubled young man with no help or direction that just made people uncomfortable. Without the biopic qualities it's a somewhat average film. The reason it's so interesting to watch is due to the reality of it. 

Keep in mind it's not a traditional horror, drama biopic is more accurate. 6/10 for the film 8/10 for the total experience. Definitely worth reading more into if you're interested in character over story. 

CINEMATES - A

The Strangers: Prey at Night (2018)

Yet another preview screening from Odeon here in the UK. This Scream Unseen was The Strangers: Prey at Night. I was not impressed with this being the surprise film as I was not looking forward to it. I thought this seemed like an unnecessary sequel to what was the somewhat well received 2008 film The Strangers. It's the same story, this time it's a family of four in a trailer park that get attack in the same knifey way.

The appeal of the first film, which this one followed to begin with, was how real it could be. That it's literally just people, strangers, that pick on other strangers to kill. There was the odd highly strung moment. Many moments where it made you think, what would I do, where would I go. The characters of course made the wrong decisions but at least it becomes engaging. 

The film takes place pretty much in real time in one night in this deserted trailer park so it's dark and just surrounded by darkness. And the cinematography is dark for the most part. There was a particular scene and shot in particular that was quite interesting in a swimming pool. I won't spoil it but it's well lit and colourful and unlike the beginning of the film. It was immersive in the midst of the action regardless whether the action is satisfying or not, that's up to you. This scene also has music blaring from speakers, 80's music, which we hear multiple times straight from the film as the killers enjoy it. some of which was fun, was unsettling, music to violence can make you feel some kind of way and it did. Until it was a hugely popular track which just takes you out of the film and the moment. 

The cast were alright. I'm a fan of Christina Hendricks, she was fine. Dad played by Martin Henderson was also fine. Brother and sister Lewis Pullman and Bailee Madison were okay. They has some awkward sibling back and forth which wasn't so much them as it was the script. Some of the dialogue was weak. They had set up a backstory for the daughter that seemed pointless. Didn't give quite enough to warrant it connecting to her character or make any part of her behaviour justifiable. Followed by no explanation it was honestly unnecessary, didn't add as they didn't commit to it. 

I touched on scenes leading you to different directions and characters choosing the wrong way. Now I'm fine with some silliness, I am happy to indulge that. But this film didn't want to be silly until it was too late. By then we've already been lulled into a horror that's attempting to be taken seriously. The less than subtle dive into unbelievable nonsense is a joke. It felt like something I'd watch age 12 at a sleepover. Which I would have been more open to it they had committed to that from the start. Doing this they managed to miss out on a chilling horror and a guilty pleasure by awkwardly dipping their toes in each instead of jumping into one. 

The best way to describe the film is disposable. It's a one view only type of thing that you will forget about. In the first film when asked why they were doing this they replied, 'Because you were home. ' THAT was what this film needed. More chilling, less nonsense, not as powerful as it should have been. 5/10


CINEMATES - A 

A Quiet Place (2018)

I was intrigued on the trailer, those few minutes made me quiet and hesitant and the whole film is exactly the same. John Krasinski stars in his directorial debut with his wife Emily Blunt in arguably the best horror of the year, and it's only just April. Set in a post apocalyptic world where blind monsters hunt by sound alone and very few have survived. Krasinski, Blunt and their children live on a farm communicating via sign language. Their daughter, Regan, is deaf and confident, their son, Marcus, less so. We learn the family has grieved early on and that they are expecting a new baby soon. 

Right let's talk about sound cos hot damn. Adored the sound, as soon as it finished I thought this could be it this could be the first horror to get an Oscar nom for sound mixing and or editing. With Regan being deaf we alternate to be given her perspective. The sound goes from suspenseful, quiet footsteps or breathing to absolute silence. It's odd how you almost feel like you can relax your breath in complete absence of sound, you almost feel safer not hearing the creatures creeping about or the potentially too loud stumble. It becomes understandable as to why she has more confidence than her brother. 

The score was perfect, gentle yet pulsating, the monsters were raw as was the rest of the sound used. With the farm location there's a lot of open space for sounds to sit, as with the forest and river scenes. The cinematography was good, the same, natural and unclean as the world is now. We get a lot of intimate shots to emphasise the expressions on our ensembles faces, Krasinski's Lee is sternly animated, think sexy Wreck It Ralph. Great wide shots to contrast, stationary shots to ground the scene with more movements to show haste. 

One of the things I thoroughly enjoyed was the visual storytelling. There's no flash backs, there's no, hey remember what happened that time, no vocal spoon feeding. We get a great deal of newspaper clippings to show a how time has passed. 'YOU'RE ON YOUR OWN' titles a front page to show just how far things have gone. We don't have another family to compared to so the old news is new to us, it gives us scale. The basement in the framehouse has Krasinski's work, off limit to the kids. This again gives us an idea of time frame, the amount of research he has put into hearing aids and radio signals. The collection of materials and resourcing weighs the room down without telling us directly. Same with the baby proofing or hinting at later scenes, they place them in the frame and let you take it in. 

Another thing worth noting is the monster. We see it! We see the monsters a lot. And clearly and well. It's not a big secret with a huge reveal at the end that becomes disappointing. They're gradually shown and introduced more each time, I respect them so much more for giving us that. They're interesting to watch, fascinating to see gravitate towards sound and actually kinda scary. I think they were perfectly designed for the story.

The cast was spectacular, I walked out of the screening just thinking about what a great father Krasinski is and learning after that he felt this was an ode to his children is it becomes obvious. Blunt again was fantastic, both natural parents and great actors so I would have believed they were married on film even if they weren't in real life. The kids were also great, Millicent Simmonds is a great sister and teenage girl, she handles herself well. Noah Jupe was sweet and terrified, you see him give in a little and trust his parents even though he's frightened of just being alive at this point. 

The only flaw for me, no spoilers, is the conclusion. Not because I didn't like it, I did. But because it wasn't sooner. Not in the film but within the world they've created. I struggle to believe with how much work they put into surviving and learning about the creatures that they wouldn't have come to this conclusion earlier. Other than that great pacing for a horror, maintained itself well.

I adored this, I'm completely ready to watch this in complete silence in my own home on blu ray later this year. Refreshing storytelling, must watch for horror fans, good amount of heart in there. 8/10

CINEMATES - A 

Ghost Stories (2017)

First Scream Unseen of the year goes to British horror Ghost Stories. What appeared to be an anthology is our protagonist, skeptic Professor Phillip Goodman, trying to understand three unexplained supernatural incidents. 


I will preface this with the fact I'm a fan of horror movies, all styles or various qualities. At the bottom of my list however finds British horrors and ghosts. With that in mind I was still interested in this film. This in part due to the narrative structure and part due to the cast. With the format having 3 unrelated stories it felt like a few short films. The separation meant the didn't have to rely on each other for momentum. Didn't have to have suspense hold for that long, just 20 minutes or so. Having multiple crescendos is kinda of boring, something has to follow it, it's not the end, even the end of the third story, isn't the end. It's hard to managed to pacing on something like that. 

It was shot as a horror movie. Lots of shots that linger that second too long. A lot of framing where our character is to one side, leading our eyes to an empty space, encouraging you to brace yourself in anticipation. That sometimes paid off and sometimes didn't. I couldn't count how many jumps there were in this film there were so many. Some people enjoy that, some people think its lazy. I think short films can do that no questions asked, I think feature length films shouldn't rely on it. With this being essentially both, it did feel a little much. Again due to the structure of the film it had some cliches, each story is thematically connected but almost thought of itself as a separate thing so reused old horror tropes. Small girl in a corridor, check, creepy woman running at the camera, check, something coming from a misty forest, open doorways to blackness etc etc check check. Fun, sure but has been done before. The sound was decent, again, done with horror in mind. Same as the locations and behaviours of the characters. 

Some of the cast were forgettable for me. Martin Freeman is charming as ever, I enjoy watching him in whatever he's in and this is no exception. I'm also a huge fan of Alex Lawther. He's in Black Mirror's 'Shut up and Dance' episode, Netflix's 'End of the F***ing World' as well as recent release Freak Show (2017). With such interesting character choices I was completely on board to watch minimum his segment. He seems to do desperation and socially inept quite well? These two were the most fun to watch for me. No one was bad but they were the most captivating to watch. 

There's some subtle notices throughout that lead you subconsciously to the end of the film though it isn't exactly expected. It's again kind of a cliche and kind of disappointing? No spoilers of course but it wasn't all that satisfying. I find a lot of films have this, horrors in particular, where the ending isn't great but you can't think of a better one. So you just have to accept it for what it is. The lead to the final part is good and you do notice the breadcrumbs after the reveal but it kind of says, what's the point. You don't feel like you've achieved anything. 

Haven't seen the play to compare but the feature would probably better if it were just released as 3 separate shorts. I'm not sure the few impacting moments would maintain on a second viewing. Watch for curiosity but don't expect too much of a lasting impression. 5/10 

CINEMATES - A 

Mom and Dad (2018)

America has gone mental, parents are trying to kill their kids. That’s it, that’s what Mom and Dad is about. I think this is a brilliant idea, if you’re into that sort of thing of course.

It’s a normal, quiet day in the setting of a typical horror film - a suburban town in America. We meet our main characters very early on, Mom/Kendall (Selma Blair), Dad/Brent (Nicholas Cage), and our 2 kids/main victims; Carly and Josh (Anne Winters and Zackary Arthur).

The family set out to complete their normal, routine day consisting of Kendall going to classes, Brent clocking in at work, Carly going to school, and Josh staying at home with what seems to be a cleaner, or Nanny… or chef? (this was never really explained, but you get the drift). Suddenly, parents are at the school gate trying to get to their children, but no one knows why. Seconds later, there are news reports of parents trying to kill their kids. Before they know it, Carly and her friend Riley are charging away from the school trying to get to safety. Parents are roaming the streets like hungry zombies, armed with bloody baseball bats, and knives, and soon enough one of the girls ends up being killed by their parent.

That was the final point, in which this film held my attention. Then my attention started to drift, because it all became a bit of something and nothing. The build up was so much, that when it all started to calm down I was constantly on edge expecting something really big to happen. Nothing big happened.

Mom and Dad is described as a dark comedy, and I agree that it fits into that category. Although a little bloody and grim in parts, this is not a classic horror. The way the characters have been written really helps lighten the mood of this film, as much as this can be done. I mean, it wasn’t funny per se, but there are moments that amused me. It didn’t cross the line between being comedic, and being silly. It sat somewhere in the middle. It was utterly ridiculous, as an entire film, but it wasn’t unbearable.

The strongest thing about this film was Nicholas Cage. I can confidently say he was one of the only members of the cast I was interested in watching once the film kicked in. I have never really been over, or underwhelmed by Cage (except for in National Treasure, sick film). Initially I didn’t really care for his character, but he really brought the role to life, and made me wonder whether it was the fact that he had been brainwashed by the media – which is what we were being told was happening during this film, or if he was genuinely a psycho dad, who was in the midst of a midlife crisis that genuinely wanted to kill his kids. Honestly, he freaked me out a bit and I’m glad that this film had something to hold the darkness there.

I didn’t really understand Selma Blair’s character in the same way (not that I relate to a child killer), I just feel like her change was just so random. To be honest, I still don’t fully get why everyone wanted to kill their kids. Kendall for example was strong as anything one minute, and fighting off this urge, then next minute she wants to stab her daughter in the head… but her personality didn’t change, Kendall seemed incredibly monotone throughout.

We didn’t see much of Zachary Arthur (except that he’s cute as a button), and Anne Winters was as good as she could be, it just wasn’t show-stopping. She spent most of it running and surviving.

The script for this film seemed like a giant mish-mash of events. It’s like they had it all sorted, then it came to editing and with the looming deadline it was going to be easier to randomly plop bits together. It felt messy, come on - it ended half way through a sentence! The script is what really let the film down. If it wasn’t so jumbled, something good could have been produced. 

One thing that was done nicely was the lighting. The mood was very sombre throughout, like something bad was going to happen. I wish I could say the same for the score, the pacing, the rest of the cast, or anything at all, but nothing else was memorable.

This film was absolute chaos, which fizzled into nothing. Such a huge disappointment.

4/10 

CINEMATES - S

Don't Knock Twice (2017)

Hey guys! Before I get started, I just wanted to introduce myself! My name is Isabelle (you can call me Izzie) and I am the fangirl who writes over at Fandom101.com! Today, the lovely ladies here at Cinemates have been kind enough to let me write my very own review in this guest post! So, without further ado, let’s get started!

Warning: There are some minor spoilers ahead. There are some bits of the plot that really need to be addressed when discussing some aspects of the film which I'll be talking about, but I'll try not to give the whole plot away!

Right, so let’s start with a brief synopsis: Jess is an American sculptor (and recovering drug addict), who, after finding success in her career, moves back to the U.K. with her wealthy banker husband to try and reconnect with her estranged teenaged daughter who has unknowingly attracted the attention of a child-eating witch.

It’s set supposedly in London, and at a large estate in the English countryside (which I suspect is in Wales, but I could be wrong, and in any case, is a gorgeous location).

This film is a perfect example of something that could be really good in theory, but goes wrong when executed.

Although based on an interesting horror-mythology premise, and backed up by genuinely scary creature design and spooky imagery, Don’t knock twice is let down by choppy editing and a sketchy storyline.

Going into the movie, I had a slightly higher expectation than I would with other free-to-stream horror flick, partly because of Katee Sackhoff starring and partly because of some comparisons I read that likened it to The Babadook.

Katee didn’t let me down on the acting front, but the film never really seemed to come together.

I have to say, it delivered some lovely atmospheric visuals throughout the 93-minute runtime. The country location was perfect, and the house they chose really gave you a sense of isolation and an underlying insidious, creepy tension, especially in the church-like art studio.

It also didn’t fail in delivering some actual genuine scares. The entire movie had me feeling quite jumpy, and the witch (who actually reminds me of the main antagonist in Lights Out), although possibly a bit clichéd, still absolutely scared me. Honestly, I wish they had featured her more often.

Where the movie falls apart though, is the storyline itself.

It bases its premise off an urban legend, which in and of itself, is quite interesting, but the problem is that it fails to stick to it. The further into the movie I got, the harder the plot became to follow. One minute the creature is from a door forest, another the next she’s actually an old lady getting revenge, then she’s back to being the door witch.

One minute the detective is decent, the next he’s dodgy and staring weirdly at an old house, then he’s back to being decent again, ect. I think you get my point.

The sad thing is that I would be willing to put up with that, if not for badly put together and edited ending. (A couple spoilers coming)

Some things just made absolutely no sense.

Why did the weirdo detective go and stare at the witch’s house for seemingly no reason? How come Jess’s daughter Chloe just magically happened to knock on the door just after Tira starts trying to set Jess up to take on the curse? Did she know that Chloe would do that? Also, why did Tira kill Jess’s husband? Were they having an affair? Oh, and if the Detective Boardman was such a great person, why did Chloe leave him to die? How did Tira get the curse?

(Spoilers over)

The questions go on and on. There was just too much left to the imagination to set up an even remotely satisfying ending.

Oh, and the acting was a bit bland at moments too. If it weren’t for Katee’s convincing performance, I don’t think there would be much to miss on that front.

Overall though, I’m not sad I watched it.

I would still recommend it if you’re looking for a horror film on the weekend and are willing to overlook some obvious inconsistencies for the sake of a decent scare.

Guest Author: Izzie McKenzie

I share thoughts, roundups, reviews, and tutorials for fans like you, based on awesome films/shows, books, and more.

Visit me at fandom101.com or on Twitter @Fandom101Blog

Suburbicon (2017)

I honestly don’t know where this review is going to go, because I am just so confused. You know when you head into a film screening, having read the synopsis beforehand… but come out even more curious and clueless that you were to begin with? Suburbicon is one of those films.

Before going in, I was sure this was a film – BASED ON WHAT THE INTERNET DESCRIPTIONS SAID, about a family who had to deal with a lot, due to difficulties arising in Suburbicon, and Matt Damon played a ‘Liam Neeson in Taken-esque’, super-dad that kicked ass. I HAVE NEVER BEEN MORE WRONG.

I honestly can’t say that this was a bad surprise though, because I can’t think of a film that I have experienced, which is anything like this. I’m going to try and keep this review as generic as possible because of the fact that the synopsis seems to do the same (This film can be spoiled in a second, so I am going to attempt to skip detail where I can).

Suburbicon is the story of an all-white American town/community living situation, in which everything is very calm, and running like clockwork. Nothing bad happens in Suburbicon. Everyone lives in perfect little houses, with a white picket fence, a back porch, a decent sized garden - you get the drift. Then suddenly, things begin to go downhill in the town, and the Lodge family are the ones that are suffering because of this.

The thing that I took away from this film was the awfully random, ill-fitting, unexplained part of the story involving a black American family moving into the town. It was a story about a town of racists in parts. I understand that due to the era this film was meant to be set in, and it being an all-white living area, it makes sense that the event of a black family moving in, will cause conflict. Yes, you can assume that the reason the horrific events that occur, supposedly (from the point of view of the citizens) occurs as a direct result of 3 black people suddenly moving in to the area. But this is just such a disjointed part of the plot, and honestly brings nothing to the story whatsoever, and in fact just confused the plot. As well as it confusing the story, it’s just such a bad depiction of such an event. We have tonnes of films incorporated this theme, and doing something creative with it. The creativity that seemed to be attempted was a giant flop.

The story itself, obviously ignoring this part was gripping. I liked the theme that was chosen, I like how dark it was, and I liked the (possibly) unintentional comedy. Matt Damon plays an awkward Psycho, and his performance surprised me, as it was one that I enjoyed. 

The progression of the story was quick, which was both good and bad. It was good, because it meant it was well paced, overall. I didn’t feel like the film was too long, or too short. It certainly lacked detail, but it was still fine to watch. The setting, at the start of the film, reminded me of the beginning of Edward Scissorhands, so at that point made me feel a bit worried, because that setting can be used badly. In this case, I think it was used well, and it complimented the story… Especially as I thought I was going in to see a TOTALLY different film. But it gradually started to impress me.

The greatest fault that this film has, besides the story, is the script. The script in this film was boring. It was not ‘meaty’, for lack of a better word. I would have written this film off had it not been for the cast, who - on the whole, did the job. This was also the case for the score. Although the score is DEFINITELY not noteworthy, there was one, and it worked with what we were seeing on screen.

Suburbicon is a film that starts off incredibly slowly, and then increasingly becomes more tense, more gritty, and more worth the watch.

5.5/10

CINEMATES - S 

mother! (2017)

Right let's get stuck in. Not a horror and not for the majority of the public. Darren Aronofsky is known for being a bit weird and pushing the boat out and that he does. From the trailers it appears almost like a home invasion and gives very little away. Javier Bardem and his wife Jennifer Lawrence live in a large house, he gets serious writers block and is happy to let strangers who are fans of his writing into their home, much to J Law's dismay. 

Not a great of narrative here I'm not gonna lie to you. This takes a lot of text from the bible. And the idea of Earth/Mother(!) Nature. The two guests come in and the wife tempts Bardem like Eve with an apple, their two sons arrive like Cain and Abel and fight and we know how that ends. Lawrence is used pretty much as a vessel for Bardem's baby, who is then treated like Jesus once born. If you've ever been in a church and had to drink some wine and have some bread or a cracker you're gonna know how this guy turns out. Throughout the film Lawrence sees a frog like the plague and water rains in the house like Noah's ark. Alongside the idea that Lawrence is playing Mother Earth. She's redoing the house, wanting to make her own paradise, with us pesky humans coming in and ruining it. Guests literally laugh in her face when she says it's 'her' house even though she's very clearly at one with it. I'm sure there's many other connections that went over my head but none seemed to have a goal. 

This is a no spoilers review, so I'll be pretty general. Though a spoiler suggests there's a twist or plot that I could ruin but there's not really a narrative give a surprise to. As for creepy or uncomfortable, I was expecting more. Just more frequency. There's a single cliche of closing a door and someone being stood behind but other than that, no real jarring scenes until the end. There's a long scene of Jennifer Lawrence in the house trying to find her husband and escape which descends quickly into a riot. Watching a heavily pregnant woman surrounded by madness is uncomfortable to watch but it's only after the birth that things get worse.

The cast was good because I didn't like any of them. No one should be likeable here. Bardem's character is driven by vanity and fame and ignores everything his wife does for him. Any gratification he gives her is superficial, everything is for him, being able to write and being recognised for that. As the intrusion continues and Bardem becomes less and less caring and more delighted that there's a claustrophobic amount of people despite his wife's distress. He does show some emotion well but rarely inline with Lawrence's character. Performance good, character bad.

Lawrence was okay. She managed to show a slither of a personality from a lack of character. I know she's an Academy Award winner but she sometimes appears as if she hates the fact shes there, like a kid grumpy they're in a lesson they don't like. But this doesn't come through too much here, her character slowly tries to build a backbone and stand up for what she wants instead of waiting for her husband to sort it for her. Though quite pathetic she is the most relatable of the characters. It's as if she's living in a dream world and she's the only one that responses in a realistic way. She's frustrated when the first guest, Ed Harris, stays even with her clear discomfort. Annoyed that he smokes in the house when she specifically said not too, she responds to this by 'accidentally' knocking his lighter out of reach. Follows suit when Michelle Pfeiffer, his wife, arrives. She asks Lawrence personal questions invading her privacy physically and mentally and in turn Lawrence 'loses' some of her clothes when doing laundry. The petty actions are understandable and somewhat ground the bizarre world they're in. 

The cinematography was nice yes but not quite breathtaking. Appeared to be mostly natural lighting, very warm, not dissimilar to this year's It Comes at Night (2017). With the single location things can get close to boring. Themes of fire are laid heavily from the off, and this is continued with the imagery right to the end. The sound though was quite impressive but not the best I've heard this year.

If you're a fan of Aronofsky you're gonna be a slight bit more prepared and open to the film. It makes you never want to host a party and never want to marry Javier Bardem. As clever as it thinks it is it isn't satisfying enough to be that provocative. But hey maybe that's the point. 

It's not a horror its more like an annoyance. It's metaphor over story 5/10 

CINEMATES - A

It (2017)

I don't even know where to begin. Bloody brilliant. It was overwhelming even with the huge reception it was given. For those who don't know much on the story, the quiet town of Derry has a mysterious thing, It, that comes out every 27 years to feed on children. The Stephen King novel takes place both in the 80s and 27 years later so we see the story from the character's perspective as both kids and adults. This film, unlike the 1990's mini series, just covers the children's side over the course of a year. 

So It is a horror movie, now is it scary? Yes, yes it is and I am so happy to say that. The creature takes the form of whatever you fear the most, for the most part it's Pennywise the iconic clown played by Bill Skarsgård. The film plays on so many fears and phobias that no one is safe. It's fun. There's multiple jumps but never cheap ones. You're constantly tense and on edge. The suspense was incredible, every other scene was a build up to something else, there was a constant level of foreboding at every corner. For me that happened almost instantly, if you know anything about the story, little Georgie in his raincoat with his paper boat makes you uneasy to think about. No spoilers but there's a scene where Pennywise chases someone up the stairs and I got that same feeling I did as a kid when I'd run up the stairs in the dark because I thought something was gonna snap at my ankles. The scares you were bracing yourself for were great, the surprise ones were great too. 

Lets talk Pennywise. Skarsgård kills it, young guy with a mixture of things under his belt is definitely gonna be a common name after this. His Pennywise starts childish and inoffensive yet creepy and builds to being completely menacing. His look constantly makes you uneasy, he drools talking to the children he wants to eat. His eyes drift in and out of focus and often in different directions. His movements are fantastically intertwined with visual effects and camera work. He runs with speed and aggression and the camera shudders in response. His body moves unworldly, twists and revolts and transforms at will. Absolutely fascinating to watch. Unless you're scared of clowns you'll find that every second he's on screen you can't help but stare at every inch of him. Incredible. Calling it now, number one Halloween costume 2018.

Let's get it out the way the kids are all adorable. Finn Wolfhard we already know and love from Netflix Stranger Things (2016), huge career ahead of him. Naturally funny as Richie, definitely showed the friendship with the others. Jack Dylan Grazer is cute as a goddamn button as Eddie Kaspbrak, forced hypochondriac by his mother. I noticed him in the trailer as appearing genuinely terrified and that shook me up. He's brilliant. Jaeden Lieberher plays our stuttering main man Bill Denbrough and he hits the balance of fear and sadness and shines bravery through them both. Jeremy Ray Taylor is endearing as ever as new kid Ben, who fits seamlessly into the Losers Club. And Chosen Jacobs does well, he has a brief sentimental moment about his family where he gets to stretch his sad muscles amongst the fear and kills it. Wyatt Oleff is great as Stanley showing his struggles more than the rest of the group, which if you've read the book is heartbreaking to see. And Sophia Lillis, was perfect. I watched her as if I recognised her because she just looked exactly how I imagined her to be. She was gorgeous and cool as the 80's girl next door. Showed genuine fear and independence in turn of that, definitely one to watch.

The rest of the cast were great. Though there are no real adults. Very few lines of dialogue from authority, parents and otherwise, and they're all a little off. It is very much a film about the kids and they smash it. 

Cinematography is great right off the bat. Also, major points for this, doesn't get too dark. It's in the sewers yet we can see everything! Amazing! No chickening out here, they show you everything, you don't miss a thing unless you close your eyes. Which is great, no cop outs. Editing is great too, there's some great comedic moments which land well because of the editing. For me the stand out performance is the sound. Absolutely incredible. I saw this in Imax and I'm so pleased I did. They use a familiar heavy bass that you feel creeping up and harsh silences that make you hold your breath. I honestly wouldn't be surprised if there's an Oscar nod in that department, or for costume and make up either for that matter. 

Well rounded horror, Mama (2013) director Andy Muschietti proves he knows what he's doing. One of the best films of the year. You're doing yourself a disservice if you don't watch this in the cinema 8.5/10

CINEMATES - A

Wish Upon (2017)

Okay so you're either gonna be in this demographic or you're not. I definitely am. By that I don't mean the probable target for the film, I mean people that enjoy bad horrors. I like a silly horror movie, I like horror cliches, I like American high school cliches, I'll take it all. I don't discriminate, I enjoy horrors of all qualities. Wish Upon hits that up. A teenage girl finds a magical box that grants wishes but everything comes with a price.


Joey King plays protagonist Clare Shannon, who's dumpster diving dad, who I will wholeheartedly discuss in a moment, finds a box covered in ancient Chinese writing. He gifts it to her as an early birthday present to which she says, sure I'll make a wish, what's the worse that can happen? Death is the answer to that. Somewhat interesting concept for a modern horror, which was enough to pique my interest. I figured even if it wasn't very good she's still gotta wish and the box still has to mess things up so even if it's bad, stuff is going on. 

It's pretty funny, the best friend characters almost get a few chuckles in and same with the mean clique but most of the jokes come from the cliches and not from them trying to be funny. Some of the deaths are pretty comical, I won't ruin any but they're all pretty predictable. There's a girl fight in the high school that's also pretty funny. To the point where it almost appears as the cast think it's pretty silly too. The acting wasn't great, it didn't need to be but it wasn't great. I thought King was okay until I saw everything else she's been in and now I think with all that under her belt she should be better. Her friend Ryan Hui is played by 30 year old Ki Hong Lee, who played Dong in Unbreakable Kimmy Schmidt. And her dad is played by Ryan Phillippe. 

Let talk about Phillippe. I forgot how long ago Cruel Intentions was. It's long enough ago that he is old enough to play a dad now. And I'm gonna be straight with you, he's pretty dilfy. So he dumpster dives, for what exactly I don't know, just stuff of value. He wears a big jacket and a beanie and hasn't shaved in a little while. He also has a saxophone for some reason. After seeing him dumpster dive yet again Clare gets annoyed and wishes for her dad to no longer embarrass her. So he shaves. That's legit it, he shaves and plays his sax again and her friends suddenly realise he's hot because they didn't know him in 1997. This is one of the silly wishes. It feels more like there was an idea for a death and so they thought up a mediocre wish to justify it. The box specifies 7 wishes, which let's be real, is about 4 too many. 

It was well rounded enough, hinted at things at the beginning, became full circle. Script was alright but a little messy, writer Barbara Marshall hasn't written many features. The director John R. Leonetti has an odd mix of works behind him, having director, cinematographer and camera department credits. Cinematography was whatever, nothing in particular, had a few classic horror shots, edited in an over zealous manner to some standard horror music. Pretty average as far as that goes.

It's not a great movie, but interesting enough. I had a lot of fun watching this and I know I will watch it again. It's like one of those films you see on Netlflix and say, sure I've got a time to spare, I'll try it. Again, if you're a fan of silly horrors, this will be right up your alley, if not, you probably won't find many merits. 

A high five out of ten if you will. If you're looking for the next classic horror to chill you to the bone, this is not it. But honestly, it's a good laugh with friends, just a reminder that a movie doesn't have to be good to enjoy it. 5/10

CINEMATES  - A