One Of Them Days

Perhaps unconventional for my regular interests but the trailer got my interest.

Needless to say I was thoroughly entertained throughout and while not bust a gut hilarious certainly had humor that hit for me. This is the city, Los Angeles California, where we meet two friends Dreux and Alyssa (who my little white boy heart was crushing on something fierce) rooming together who when oopsie daisy the guy Alyssa was dating turns out to be a bastard and robs them blind on the very day they need to get rent paid leading them on a comedy of errors to get the dough and keep on livin'. And I haven't heard that term 'comedy of errors' in quite some time but it's the perfect way to describe the plot, cause these poor girls cannot catch a got damn break around here with several ideas both good and bad to garner some monies. Now the only thing I felt iffy on was there were 3 instances where the comedy got outlandish, girl runs mach 3 into a car door and brushes it off, guy nearly gets busted through a wall due to steam, electrocution at one point but the rest of the movie is pretty grounded, and you either commit or you're wishy-washy. Beyond that though, I had a lot of fun! I really love our two leads, Keke and SZA effortlessly slip into the roles as best friends and their dynamic ans character identities are a great mix, with Dreux being planning, career driven, and practical whereas Alyssa is more aloof, cosmically inclined, with a firm belief that all will naturally resolve in the favor of a happy ending. And because of that they bicker and headbut like rams but their's is a bond tempered like steel, and you easily want them to succeed! Dreux is trying to get a much better paying nicer job in the midst of all of this and I was rooting for her since minute 1, and who the hell would want to see people get thrown out on their asses to the curb anyway? Yet I feel the way the plot progresses skirts the situational comedy label some might deem it to be, the girls go to a blood bank for some cash let's see how it gets wacky, no it just so happens to blow up in their faces with a little help from the supporting cast. And I'll give props, each side character is easily understandable with defined traits that adds to the world the movie creates which takes a bit of inventive writing to make happen. Whether it be Keshawn the dumbass boyfriend, Mama Ruth one of the neighbors with a snack hustle (mad respect to you), Berniece who's kind of always off her rocker and ready to beat the hell out of someone, or Lucky the resident street walker everywhere but nowhere trying to keep people out of trouble but never listened to, easily memorable characters. And the humor is not joke a minute or complex, often times it kinda hits you like a sucker punch to the nose outta nowhere which I like cause it keeps you on your toes. It's a fun if slightly ridiculous movie that probably will slowly but surely garner more fans in the future, and I'm one of them! Real plot, fun characters, good humor, it didn't take long for me to get into it. 3 stars, 7.5/10, go to the movies today for some discount popcorn and everyone have a great day!

Wolf Man

Okay, decent start to the year!

Now am I just a little tiny bit of a Universal Monsters fan? Well I'm the only critic who actually liked Sofia Boutella's The Mummy so you could say mayyyyybe, but fanboy or not this was an interesting movie. I'm sure people will do what they do best on the internet, bitching and moaning, about how fundamentally different this iteration is but I got news for you nightshade if you want a classic werewolf movie I recommend gazing at the last 90 years of cinema! It's 2025 mothertruckers they gotta do something original, and original is what we got! Set in a remote area of Oregon a father, mother, and daughter traverse to a very isolated farm to gather and sort the effects of a dead relative, but on the way get thrashed by a rabid animal that stands on two legs and pretty soon poppa ain't looking so good. Now the crux of this movie believe it or not is a drama with horror elements, and if you can stretch your disbelief more it...actually kinda works. We spend enough time with this family unit to get to know them, their dynamic, and and their feelings before we even get to the mist filled forests of Oregon and the slow transformation of our main character takes the tragic lens of werewolves to a whole other level and area. And some would argue it takes away all the mysticism of werewolves, equating it more to a disease akin to zombies but I don't hold any grievances with that! There's no shot of the full moon, there's no full on transformation sequence, there is barely a body count, and yet! Despite it all is an enjoyable film. Now I had a smidge of faith due to the director Leigh Whannell who also helmed The Invisible Man which I loved to the moon and back, and that fluid tilting camera style mixed with some pretty slick cinematography especially when we get more or less "wolf vision" carries over. It's a very good looking yet seemingly low budget film, hell the vast majority of the movie takes place between three locations that are throwing distance from each other and a very minimal cast, so I feel it could potentially make some profit. Christopher Abbott and the relationship with the daughter played by Matilda Firth singlehandedly made me want to see everyone make it out, and God bless him for going through the painstaking process of prosthetics! Julia Gardner also nails the emotional state from grief stricken to survive no matter what, and you could make an argumemt the movie is more about her than Chris but I'll leave that for you to decide. The actors didn't slack, they commit and wanted to give some dimension to a monster movie and coupled with the script and direction, I feel they succeeded! It's a modern reimagining that doesn't look down on the original or try to surpass it, but take it down a different avenue with a unique story. I respect that, I can recommend it too. 3 stars, 7/10, thumbs up from me!

The Wolfman

We're really keeping it in the family this week.

I've been aware of this version for some time perhaps even since it's release back in 2010, and by all accounts it seems a miracle I was able to watch it at all. It's very worthy to note this was a tumultous project to even get off the ground beginning in 2006, filming completed in 2008, but the film didn't get released until two years later with a constant search for a director and yet through it all come hell or high water Benicio Del Toro was going to be in this movie. That's some commendable ass behavior that seems rarer than a blue moon these days, he even had a producing credit, with great affinity for the 1941 original so a passion project this absolutely was for him. Taking place in 1891 England actor Lawrence Talbot returns to his home in light of his brother being murdered, and upon investigation is marked by the very creature that eviscerated his relative, leading a great many to hunt him down. This is undoubtedly a movie on it's own, yes it has sprinklings of references to The Wolf Man but ultimately does it's own original story throughout which is commendable. Being a period piece it's staggeringly accurate to the time and every penny can be seen on screen, with multiple effectively atmospheric shots in the forest that look beautiful at times, almost creating a canvas of gothic horror in a landscape where such a thing was as antiquated as the time period itself. The acting is decent, they are commited to the roles and while nothing big or bombastic is presented I appreciate the efforts all the same. Benicio is a solid leading man and big time props for him going through the special effects makeup which reportedly took 4 hours to complete, which also means brownie points for not going full CG all the time and only is used when necessary. This is one of Anthony Hopkins' more subdued performances yet even then it's easy to get involved with his character. I do believe this is the earliest film I've seen of Emily Blunt probably before she became famous and indeed it took me a hot second to recognize that was her, and she probably has the most pathos of all the characters. Again took me a brief second to recognize Hugo Weaving as an inspector who already has Lawrence pinned for the murders, and while he isn't in the movie much he does solid work and is a good opponent for Benicio to play against. I will say straight up hands down, easily the most gory and bloody werewolf movie I've ever seen and that's to be expected with special effects master Rick Baker on the production, and coincidence if ever there friggin' was one Rick won an Academy Award for best makeup for two damn werewolf movies, this one and An American Werewolf In London. Do not ask me how that works, the universe is a funny thing. Yet with all the positives present there's always gotta be one negative that keeps rearing it's ugly head, and I fully blame this on when the movie was made. God...damn it this movie is packed to the ever loving gills with jumpscares, predictable as shit, and drags the rating down because of it! I hate it with a passion. And from what I've seen the reception couldn't be more down on the movie, and while I'll say it's just okay maybe others can get more out of it than me. Clearly there are positives to be seen, but the scare factor is tired and the story and script probably needed just a tiny bit more polish to be really good if not great, but I can still say I'm happy I saw it. 2 stars, 6.5/10, let's hope for better tomorrow!

Werewolf Of London

Welcome to the world's first werewolf movie.

Not a bad way to kick off the new year at all! Released in 1935 during Universal's first horror cycle Werewolf Of London centers on a botanist professor who uncovers an extremely rare plant in Tibet before being attacked by someone or more something, and upon returning to London he soon finds he has a strange reaction to moonlight. Now obviously the legend of lycanthropy has been around for some time before this movie and indeed it is a more humble telling than the infinitely more popular Wolf Man film from 1941, but it's still pretty good. Henry Hull as Wilfred has a smidge of the tragic curse that later would be given a much wider breadth with Lon Chaney Jr., but the performance is almost more akin to a Jekyll and Hyde situation where he's a very high class well dressed and spoken man, but when the wolf form takes shape and actually looks pretty awesome I'll say he wears more simple shabby clothes wandering the dark streets of London with a desire to kill yet still walks and acts like a human. It's interesting to see how it began before the trope evolved. Another excellent example of the movie is Warner Oland probably best known to film buffs as Charlie Chan in the early 1930s who plays almost a Van Helsing type character who is familiar with the legend of werewolves and seeks to help the afflicted professor rather than destroy him, he has such a great presence and I find it a crying shame he passed away in 1938 because from what I saw he was a very good actor. Valerie Hobson was a pleasant familiar face to see as Wilfred's wife Lisa, and I gotta say for a 1930s movie she is not at all a damsel or weak willed woman she says what she wants, does what she wants, and is taking no nonsense from man or woman which was great! The look of the film is simple but effective, there's no sprawling sets but each is distinctive and fits that grimy seedy London atmosphere which contradicts nicely with the more swanky socialite gathering homes of the high and mighty. Though mind you it does not take a positive light to any single one of the sharp dressed rich, really painting them as vacuous and idiotic for some light humor. In fact the only real criticism I can give the movie is we spend just a little too long focusing on these ancillary characters instead of say Wilfred or Lisa, the film has brief tangents so I think they were still ironing out their scripts. I mean hell at this point the vast majority of Universal Monster movies were based on literary previously established works that they didn't need to tinker with much, so it's a small complaint. Definitely a minor classic in this catalogue but for lovers of monster movies it's another fine addition to the collection. I give it 2.5 stars, 7/10, and we're jumping 75 years in the future tomorrow so stay tuned.

Top 10 Films Of 2024

New year, same old controversial top 10.

10. Dune Part Two — Ohhh I did it again! I do promise we'll do an In Retrospect later this year on the whole damn thing. Solid first entry for the list regardless.

9. The Fall Guy — Nothing but fun and entertaining. Ryan you got me again buddy!

8. Wicked — Despite the minor grumbles I had this easily was the big event movie of the year that not only dipped below my radar but crept up on me in no time. Ace!

7. Godzilla × Kong — Of course I gotta put this on here, kaiju lover that I am. Outrageous, silly, but undeniably up my alley.

6. Alien Romulus — Ooh hoo we're getting good now! A much much needed breath of fresh air in the space terror franchise. Fingers crossed for some continuation.

5. Nosferatu — Horny my ass! Dark, gothic, even slightly romantic certainly fits the bill more here. Seems to be a home run for most people anyway

4. Monkey Man — The most unexpectedly grand action movie I've ever seen in my life, and would easily love to see again. Nobody talks about it but everyone should see it. Solid gold.

3. Lisa Frankenstein — If this movie was further up my alley it would be inside of me. Lavish, hilarious, and a grand slam directorial debut in my opinion. Call me a fan.

2. Heretic — Wasn't even slightly aware of where this was going but I could not have been happier seeing it. This is one of those movies people will discuss for years.

1. Rite Here Rite Now — Yeah, I knowww! Concert movie, nichè, totally biased. Welcome to the show everybody! Don't care at all, absolutely loved it, super proud to own it, take me to church Papa!

So hail Satan (or Santa if you're dyslexic), and I'll see you soon for some unexpected horror goodies to kick off the new year.

Nosferatu (2024)

I'm quite happy with it.

Perfectly balancing the silent classic and Bram Stoker's influential novel, Robert Eggers brings a chilling beauty and ample horror in this modern remake that despite me seeing now 3 iterations of the same story I can safely say each was compelling and unique in their own way. Easily the coup de grace of the whole film is Eggert's directing and the superb cinematography that even makes this born and bred texan feel the chill in the midnight air, some may call it artsy, some may call it over the top, but you cannot deny the vision and mastery of it all. But don't let that statement lead you to believe it's just a visual feast with little else, case in point for the acting side of things Lily-Rose Depp could not have brought it harder to this role and in all the Nosferatu adaptations Ellen is truly the hero and alongside Willem Dafoe's Professor Eberhart are a formidable duo for the Count. Speaking of which Bill Skarsgård as Orlok showcases the true power and terror of the vampyre, and bonus brownie points for actually sticking to the Bram Stoker description of Dracula which only one other adaptation has achieved. Nicholas Hoult as Hutter does fine work and even what many would say are ancillary characters like with his friend Friedrich played by Aaron Taylor-Johnson no one feels unimportant and their stories are strong. Far far from filler in my estimation. They know when to hold onto a shot, how to transition, what the set designers and costumers add to the overall ambience is nothing short of award worthy to me, and the score while not entirely complex certainly adds to the tension wonderfully. With such an ecletic director each project is filled with passion and attention to detail so you're in for a ride no doubt! Though I find it funny that the one term that was intangibly sewn onto the word of mouth I was hearing about this film was "horny", and there isn't much in terms of nudity gratuitous or otherwise and indeed only scarce parts of sexual friction, to where I'm wondering if that's my overall asexual sensibilities rearing it's head or if people got swept away in the romantic overtones common to the vampire story to a high extreme here. I will admit I felt like a burden walking into the cinema on Christmas Day because while my disinterest and bordering disdain for the holiday still persists, the employees had better stuff to do. Yet I walked out pretty happy with the movie, it was easily the most packed screening room I've been in since Joker honestly, and what a fantastic way to end the whole year. I'll give it a solid 3 stars, 8.5/10, and I wish to thank all of you for another year of hearing my rambling and average at best reviews and come what may next year I'll see you later.

Nosferatu The Vampyre

Slightly redundant title but that's about as bad as it gets here.

I'm about to say some controversial shit. I like this better than the original, now that's coming from someone who loves the original Nosferatu and has great respect along with vast appreciation for silent cinema, and indeed it's easy with more modern film techniques and different actors for something to be improved upon. But even I was kinda shocked how much I loved this movie! Obviously it takes after the silent film more than the novel Dracula so the plot differs little while still doing it's own thing, and I feel Werner Herzog did a resoundingly succesful job directing this movie! Taking a very naturalist approach with tons of location shooting, handheld camera sequences, and doing everything in camera with little to no post production trickery. The crown jewel of this movie for me is Jonathan's trek to the Carpathian mountains, the music, the so good I'm honestly pissed scenery, the atmosphere and buildup getting to Dracula's castle is nothing but 10/10 for my money's worth! And that is already on top of a stellar film, it never got dull for a second and I was quickly engrossed, Robert you got a high bar to surpass come tomorrow my friend. The cast fully sealed the deal for me on this one, I haven't seen that many Werner Herzog films but I've been around the block enough to know his rocky ass relationship with Klaus Kinski who is an effectively creepy and great Dracula, taking a more tragic lens to the character and his mannerisms and voice differentiate him from Max Schreck but also rises to his level of greatness. Isabelle Adjani who plays Lucy instead of Mina, common trend believe it or not in adaptations of the Bram Stoker novel, is hauntingly beautiful I mean if she isn't some kind of inspiration for goth girls globally what even in the hell?? She has such a look that does nothing but compliment the slightly gothic aesthetic and I greatly appreciate the fact she does not bullshit about and gets stuff done herself, she tells the Count to remove himself from her presence and that's badassery if I've ever seen it! Bruno Ganz is a solid Jonathan Harker and has a pretty interesting role near the end to say the least which I did not see coming, and the fear and hysteria he conveys is very believable. The look of the film alone is a character in and of itself, maybe it's the 70s film stock, maybe it's just how the set designers and costume department did their fine work, but something about this movie is vastly appealing to me and I feel like a complete jackass not watching this sooner in my life. This would have been an excellent introductory horror film for me between the ages of 10 to 13 that would have gotten me so into the genre. It's kinda hard to articulate why I love it as much as I do, I just know that I adore the movie and couldn't recommend it higher to be perfectly clear. Solid story no doubt but all the details of the production beyond that are phenomenal. It most definitely isn't gonna be everyone's cup of tea, but hot damn am I gonna have to watch this again in the future. 4 stars across the board, 8.5/10, and for once in what feels like an eternity I am excited for Christmas Day.