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 

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

The Ritual (2017)

You might have read other reviews where I've mentioned Odeon Screen Unseen, but let me remind you. Once every month or two Odeon previews a film at a discounted rate. For the second time this year they had Scream Unseen, a preview of a horror movie. That is how I saw The Ritual, completely blind, no trailer, no idea.

I think that made it better, watching the trailers now it feels a little try hard. So the story follows 4 friends camping in Sweden as a send off to the 5th friend who was killed before the trip was booked. British lads, British film, European location, our man Andy Serkis producing this adapted novel by Adam Nevill.

If you can, go in without seeing anything. The murder of one of the friends happens almost immediately and is just the crutch to start the journey. That scene was jarring, maybe more so to me because the trailers hadn't ruined the visuals for me. But it was abrupt in a normal everyday setting and I think the contrast is a bit shocking. Soon after we're thrust into the woods. And it's the best part of the film. The first and second act are captivating. Then like many horrors, especially ones with a hidden monster when the monster is revealed it goes downhill a little. 

Cinematography was what it needed to be. The shots made me nervous. The gorgeous woods with long thin trees covering darkness. It slowly zooms as if to direct your eyes to something hidden, you find that you brace yourself, getting tense about something you may or may not even see. The aesthetic is somewhat interesting with the heavy use of wood and folklore. The main character Luke, has dreams mixing the woods with his memory of his deceased friend. We get some great images of a convenience store dripping into the woods, fluorescent lights against the natural woods, the tiled floors with the dirt on the ground. Quite interesting to see, great symbolism for Lukes growing guilt with his increasing fear. 

The cast is great, natural as mates, Luke played by Rafe Spall, is the protagonist. I feel he has a good balance of showing his guilt and not wanting to admit there's a reason to be guilty in the first place. He remains somewhat level headed as things get stressful. There's a creepy scene in which each of the characters wake up all of which in peculiar ways and they each deal with it differently. Poses the question of, how would you deal with this, how would I deal with this situation? Good British ensemble, can't say how it relates to the book, whether the characters are brought out well enough, whether they match how they're written. 

The tag line 'they should have gone to Vegas' seems an odd tone to me, the film is funny, but not overtly. It's an odd angle to sell as it's definitely not prominent in the story. It does have it's scares, it does get uneasy. The sound helps this, as you can imagine in a forest lush with trees and a possible monster the silence was imposing. Nothing but cracked sticks under feet and grown men chatting. Both the shots and the sound leave empty space and let you build your own expectations as to what may fill it. 

As I mentioned before the first two acts are very good, the final act is kinda whatever. Once the mystery is gone it's kinda meh. The risk is a little less though a they try to have little moments of what's next but it doesn't have the same oomph. And the end is also rather lackluster, though I will say it's a beautiful shot though abrupt. 

Good film, worth a watch but it feels as if the small marketing matches the quality, can't decide how funny to be but the cast are natural together 6/10

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

It Comes at Night (2017)

I heard about this film a little while back, we were given a poster (which I adore) and one trailer and that was it. I'm a fan of A24 and the story seemed right up my street so I was on board. If you were anticipating a strange monster in the woods, a scary climax and some potentially disturbing visuals, this is not it. I will tell you now the marketing is in some places incorrect. After watching the trailer back, it comes across as a slightly different film, different genre almost too.

So, we have Joel Edgerton as Paul, the father and husband in a desolate world when an intruder breaks into his home. After restraining Will, said intruder, we discover that he too has a wife and son and is looking for refuge. I mentioned before that I loved the poster and I do. The simple contrast and empty space alone is pleasing. It so effortlessly implied danger whilst showing none. Like a famous piece of art called Deimos by Dragan Bibin. A dog, in It Comes at Night's case his name is Stanley, standing alert and uneasy staring at something we can't see. I was intrigued and impressed that we did not have the big reveal up front. Though after watching it's kind of because there isn't one. This is a character piece, this is a drama. It would barely scrape horror, thriller is a closer fit.

Some of the score has a sci-fi feel, like warped sirens, the repetition that wouldn't feel out of place on a space vessel. It also relied decently on the absence of sound. Heads up, you can't eat your popcorn during every scene. The silence adds real unease and suspense, the whole film is, visually and audibly, quite natural. Bar the occasional score it was all diegetic sound, very real. And most frames are filled with darkness. The black seeps in from the edges to meet the often-small singular light on screen. We see no electricity in the film, just multiple lamps and the natural lighting. The shadows created against the characters hints at what we don't know. As I said, it's more of a character piece with moral standing being part of the ensemble. 

The cast were great, Edgerton is great, I thoroughly enjoyed him in Warrior and The Midnight Special and it's no different here. One of the biggest flaws I found in the film is that there isn't enough of anything. This goes mainly with the characters. Edgerton's Paul has some difficult scenes, he shows emotion and self-conflict well but somehow has a surprisingly sparse time to show them. Kelvin Harrison Jr plays Travis, Paul's son, who has possibly the best performance of the film. He shows a genuine range of emotions and unlike most other characters he can explore them fully. As an audience we're tied to him, he often day dreams or is deep in thought and we stay with him as other characters continue with scenes. He's in a way our time keeper, he often leads us in and out of days with simple dimming to black as he sleeps and brightening as he wakes, often from nightmares. He has different relationships with every character and, thinking about it, is the only person to have a direct conversation with every other character in the film.

Will, played by Christopher Abbott, came into his own. I personally only knew him from Lena Dunham's Girls, and it was nice to recognise him but not see the character and just see this new person. But again, we don't have the chance to see the full potential and beef the character out a bit more. Same goes for the two women in the film, Travis' mum Sarah is well played by Carmen Ejogo who again doesn't have many solid scenes to show off but still managed to show her character. Will's wife Kim alternatively gets a couple of scenes to give some information about her but ultimately, she's used for other characters to work off. With the film being on 97 mins none of them really got the chance to flesh themselves out that well considering its a character driven film.

Overall it felt like a student film. Low budget but well made. Clearly Trey Edward Schults baby as he wrote, directed and co-edited the film, something I have split minds over. I don't tend to agree on people being involved in that many aspects on one project, mostly a 'Jack of all trades master of none' mentality. Sometimes one person's vision needs another persons contributions. It Comes at Night is likely to divide people’s opinions though the reception has been good. Very similar tones and style to The Witch (2015), which debatably had the same marketing flaw, though was well received. I really wished I enjoyed the ending more. A good ending doesn't have to mean a happy ending so I was open to something awful. It felt abrupt and largely unsatisfying. Though one part may shock some people it doesn't have that much of a crescendo to the basic character development. Third act has an interesting goal but not executed that well.

It's slower and more art-house than advertised. Strong aspects but more forgettable than I would like. 6/10 add on another 2 marks if you're a fan of The Witch.

CINEMATES - A

The Transfiguration (2016)

The Transfiguration movie, oh my goodness. Just wonderful. So interesting. Great storytelling. So first time feature length writer director Michael O'Shea brings us the story of vampire obsessed troubled teen Milo as he befriends alienated young girl Sophie. As their relationship grows his obsession slips further from fantasy into reality. This film created buzz at numerous film festivals and after watching Raw earlier this year I was heavily invested in realistic coming of age stories with a twist and I'm so pleased I am. Which means unfortunately for me I have to add another director to my list of people to keep an eye on.

Milo our protagonist is played by a young Eric Ruffin, who I think was somewhat captivating. Our first interaction with him is as he sucked the blood from a strangers neck, followed by him sat in a school counsellor's office ready to start his summer break. We see how he behaves slightly differently with them as with his brother. And different again with the gang living in the same block of apartments and again with Sophie, played by Chloe Levine. Their relationship is a somewhat beautiful one though different. His character doesn't emote all that much, his independence on vampire lore takes the forefront so he struggles to begin with to relate to her. After finding that they have both lost their parents they spend more time together and a relationship forms. He misses some normal social cues and even walks a little odd, as if he glides and doesn't step, all small things that match both with his lack of social practise and his obsession with creatures that have similar traits. Levine is believable as a teenage girl, clearly having to deal with difficult times way before being old enough to deal and adjust with them. She's taken by Milo and it's very sweet to see her deal with her own feelings separate to his.

The style of the film is something I picked up on immediately. The entire film is shot handheld. Whether it's the intimate close ups with high depth of field, focusing on one part of Milo's face. Or the wide location shots with Milo and Sophie very very small on the edge of the frame, there's actually a shot so wide that I didn't spot them at first. But the style is purposeful, so it lingers and you don't miss anything. It's rarely from the protagonist's perspective, we watch everything from the outside often with a wide angled distance. All you could say in a predatory manner, we are hunting throughout the film.

Another thing I noticed within a few minutes of the film was the lack of music. Only a handful of moments in the film was any extra sound used. And it was the same high pitched ringing, an uneasy alert that wasn't all that loud, it never stole focus, but it highlighted the action at the time. From not appearing at all they got more and more prominent in Milo's vampire homages as the film went on. Both the sound and the visuals were realistic, something Milo says a few times, is that he only liked realistic vampire movies. The film appears to be shot using almost all natural lighting, it takes place over the summer between the school year. Mostly during the day, in Milo's room or in the city's night. So some shots get quite dark with only the streetlights to spark the dim screen. Some shots have a bit of noise in them because of this but I enjoyed the cinematography greatly.

Horror/drama is accurate, there are some tense scenes that could be regarded as scary, both due to the visceral images and the possible real life repercussions. The normality of the violence is arguably as unsettling as the violence itself. We watch online videos with Milo as well as many clips from vampire movies. Some with uncomfortable potential but none worse than what we see the actual characters do. There is a good balance between Milo's relationships and his own personal gain and his actions. The ending of the film was in my eyes, perfect. I've said it before and I will say it again, it is always great when a film has a purpose. It started knowing where it was going to end. It was well rounded and came full circle with the character development. Could not think of a better way for it to end.

8/10 Unsettling, intriguing and almost delicate. Wonderful independent film. What Milo says about vampires not being able to kill themselves will sit with you for a while.

CINEMATES - A 

The Belko Experiment (2016)

2016 American horror directed by writer director Greg McLean who gave us Wolf Creek, and produced by Guardians of the Galaxy’s own James Gunn. Advertised as ‘Office Space meets Battle Royale’, which is right. If you’ve never seen Battle Royale (2000), you’re doing yourself a disservice, but it’s about a group of people given a time limit and a dangerous ultimatum that puts everyone’s lives at risk. The Belko Experiment is set in an remote office building in Columbia with 80 employees who have been told they have 30 minutes to kill 2 people or 10 people will be killed at random. This sets everyone into a frenzy of murder and survival.

I’m all aboard with all the murder pretence, especially working in an office. I wasn’t expecting an incredible story or spectacular acting but I enjoy not know an exact ending. It was good not great, I like it but didn’t love it, would definitely watch it again. But it also definitely made me want to watch Battle Royale again. Now there’s a lot of people involved, though we one clear protagonist, it is very much an ensemble piece. John Gallagher Jr is our main man Mike Milch, he’s our straight and narrow no to murder guy. When the idea is even lightly suggested that the office sacrifice a few people in order to save a higher number he refuses. He consistently rebuffs the idea, butts heads with others that disagree and tries to think of other solutions, all with their own risks. Opposite him sits Tony Goldwyn playing the COO of Belko, Barry Norris, powerful guy used to being in charge and getting his way. He sits on the complete other side of the spectrum and is the first to be open to killing others to save himself. These two characters have conflicting behaviour, the first time we hear the voice over proposing the murderous deal Mike gets anxious and starts to try and think of a solution whereas Norris calms people and doesn’t believe the situation anywhere near as quickly. Between them we have a range of characters for and against killing and surviving. This is great to watch as you start to side with different aspects of people and struggle to make up your own solution.

It’s a big moral thing isn’t it, many works have discussed this and it’s always fun to think about how people would behave as you just don’t know. People aren’t put in this situation, people aren’t pushed and people don’t have the capacity to deal with this type of power over life and death like this. We find that when all Belko employees started work they were fitted with a tracker in the back of their head with GPS in case they get kidnapped. Turns out they are also fitted with a bomb which can be detonated at any time. So everyone is powerless. One of my favourite scenes is with Norris and his creepy lackey Wendell Dukes, who is wonderfully played by John C McGinley, as they decided to start killing people. We find that they have a history of special ops and are well trained and can separate feelings from logic easier than everyone else. So when the office is told that if 30 people aren’t murdered 60 people will die, Norris and a few others that were convinced by him, round everybody up and make the decision on who that should be. He categorises people, decides what value each person’s life is put them on one side of the room.

It’s a arguably one of the more difficult scenes to watch, not for violence but because you find yourself holding your breath hoping the next person doesn’t get picked, hoping that you would have worked out to be on the surviving side. As he starts to execute people it’s no longer a horror it’s a tragedy, it’s sad, it’s unfair and there’s no hope. And it’s great to watch. Goldwyn does well to stay calculated but show humanity, that he’s not a robot he’s just a selfish man at the end of his tether, he has a family and he’s putting them and himself first. He asks for music to be played as he kills people, not for fun but to drown out the sobbing and pleading. This get towards the peak of the killing in the film.

Now I mentioned the music in the execution scene briefly but I gotta stop on this. The music was great the sound was great. Tyler Bates who did sound, has got a lot of horrors as well as actions under his belt, most recent would be both instalments of Guardians of the Galaxy, both John Wick movies and upcoming Atomic Blonde. I always make a note of how realistic the sound is when it comes to violence, the dull thuds and the cracking breaks, but do I even know what that sounds like? I just believe whatever I’m given because I don’t have a frame of reference for what a wrench meeting a skull actually sounds like. Same really with punching, but they all have a good weight to them, and nothing sounds nice, nothing hangs in the air, everything lands. The soundtrack is also decent, takes from the Columbia location so has Latin American influences including a Spanish cover of Gloria Gaynor’s ‘I Will Survive’.

I’ve always enjoyed art mixed with violence. In cinema that is. Gorgeous locations or cinematography that holds the violence or wonderfully created music over the ugly visuals. There is a scene in which we watch with one of the characters as bloody bodies are dragged from the centre of the reception and as we watch we hear opera. We hear beautiful music in addition to death and I think there’s something captivating about the contrast. Granted on occasion this can appear comical, which isn’t necessarily a bad thing, but I enjoyed this technique in The Belko Experiment. Cinematography was nothing special, nothing overly noteworthy, classic dull office colours splatted with red blood. Very uniform and fitting, could tell the giant building they were in was CGI from the outside but that took nothing away from the story. Few choice close ups of faces were great, showed desperation well as well as a small amount of claustrophobia.

But let’s talk violence in a bit more detail. This is an 18, to give you a reference Deadpool (2016) was a 15. There is frequent violence. As mentioned the tracker explodes heads, so yeah, exploded heads are in there, not just flashes that we see in some of the other attacks but clear close ups of the damage. We view it alongside the other workers as they look in horror and try to understand the situation. There is a security vault which has guns and some ammo, so the easily viewed gunshots happen. Body shots as well as stab wounds. Though this film does have a heavy focus on face and head shots. That’s what I think raised the rating. The prolonged view of a knife handle sticking out of a clothed belly is not the same as an axe sat in the centre of someone’s face. Which yes, we do see. And this was great it was realistic, it was bloody, it rarely shied away from things which is shocking. Though in some cases is more powerful keeping it hidden and letting the spectator imagine the horror themselves. Swearing yes, and if you look into the rating system the BBFC have to also mention that a few characters smoke weed. Which is a comedic moment but hardly the forefront of adult themes in this film.

Overall the pacing was odd, seemed almost slow to begin with but seamlessly moved into the action. Though once it got going it ended quite quickly, with a 89 minute run time the end seemed quite abrupt and to be honest less than satisfying. Gave an interesting final image though and a small amount of food for thought but again I wasn’t really expecting much more than an hour and a half of fun.

Had some moments of somehow relatable horror sprinkled with some humour. 6/10 worth seeing, won’t leave much of a lasting impression but worth a watch.

CINEMATES - A