HAPPY DEATH DAY

Happy Death Day 

HAPPY DEATH DAY: B+

Had GROUNDHOG DAY been a horror this would be it. A mystery thriller with a clever plot, driven by strong performances and edge of your seat suspense that keeps you hooked to the screen.

The film's greatest strength was also its greatest weakness. Like all film's of such nature, the make it or break it pivotal moment comes in its revelation. To answer with a yes or a no, as to whether the revealing scene worked or it didn't, is tricky. To think of the film on the surface, in its literal state, the revelation of who is killing Tree, is weak, yet clever.

Clever in that there are enough signs to figure it out, without being overly obvious. I'll commend the film for its unlikely, yet plausible scenario. Yet, the motive seemed weak and a more realistic ending was sacrificed for a wanna be yet not so shocking reveal.

Twists weakening what would have otherwise been a very strong ending? Well, when will that not be the case with modern film?

The real revelation came in the character Tree, played brilliantly by Jessica Rothe. And while I suppose in a thriller, an audience expects....rather DEMANDS a revelation to be who the killer is and why he/she is doing it....the self awareness and change that Tree goes through was enough for me. I genuinely bought that Tree was a selfish, shallow, superficial and egocentric person. A narcissist with little regard for anyone other than herself. The revelation she made that she wasn't that great of a person, and that she had the opportunity to become a better person each day, was very sincere and genuine. By the end of the film, I bought that she had changed. A once rotten human being, now a caring, uplifting and sensitive soul. It seemed a difficult role to play and again Rothe did very well with it.

It is tongue in cheek, as have other critics claimed it to be. And it could have been a bit more realistic in the direction that it ended up going. Yet it wasn't completely implausible. Unlikely yes, but still plausible.

I did enjoy this film.

THE INVASION

THE INVASION 

THE INVASION: B+

A modern day INVASION OF THE BODY SNATCHERS with a hint of A NIGHTMARE ON ELM STREET, THE INVASION is suspenseful thriller that keeps you on your toes throughout its entirety.

Well written in a sense of give and take, as questions are asked, then answered, asked, then answered at a comfortable pace. Enough time is given to create a sense of urgency, yet answers come quick enough to avoid both boredom and frustration.

The only flaw in the characters as they are written and directed, is that they make poor decisions throughout the film, even after certain discoveries that would benefit them. For example, Carol discovers that the infected can be killed, or at least hurt and slowed down. Yet she continuously gives up weapons and advantages throughout the film, putting herself in a more vulnerable position. The film obviously wanted its audience to never have a sense of security, to watch in constant fear; yet when you hit home how successful and educated your main character is, you sort of expect them to act in an intelligent manner. This is the only real flaw I saw in an otherwise strong script.

As to the directing, I thought it was an interesting as well as unique choice to include flashbacks of future events in order to move the story forward. This helped in getting answers to the many questions that were asked in a timely manner.

As to the acting, Nicole Kidman as she does usually gave a solid performance. Nothing worth raving about and little to complain about. Yet I do wonder if she stole a chapter out of Kevin Costner's ROBIN HOOD: PRINCE OF THIEVES book. She went in and out of accent throughout the whole film. Either speak with an American accent or speak with an Australian accent. The in and out of it was quite annoying. Daniel Craig didn't even bother, he just spoke as he speaks. I would have appreciated that had Kidman as well.

CULT OF CHUCKY

CULT OF CHUCKY

CULT OF CHUCKY: B+

I'm not sure how to feel about this film. I'm not sure how to rate it. I'm not even 100% positive of what I just watched. This had to be one of the most enjoyable yet disagreeable films I've ever seen. A part of me liked it. Hell, LOVED it. Yet another part of me was, "What in the Hell did I just watch?"

The plot twist although not shocking and rather predictable, was still very clever and it worked well to enhance the story.

I was skeptic whether it'd be possible to put the separate world's of CHILD'S PLAY 1-3, BRIDE OF CHUCKY and CURSE OF CHUCKY together in one film where it all worked. I shouldn't have been, because Don Mancini knows full good and well what he is doing.

He was able to take the dramatic, scary, uncomfortable and eerie atmosphere that made the first three films as well as CURSE work and combine that with the raunchy, perverted, sexual, gruesome and grotesque world that was BRIDE OF CHUCKY.

All I can say is that if you are a fan of horror, regardless of what type of horror you like, be it thriller, mystery/suspense, classic horror, modern horror, or even gore, you'll find something about this film that you like.

There was so much story, it is hard to believe that it was packed in 90 minutes. Even harder to believe that as much potential as it had not to, it worked.

For those anxious of Andy Barclay's return, let's just say that again the film doesn't disappoint. It weirds the Hell out of you, but in the end it works.

I've spent so much time on the film's story that I feel compelled to talk about other elements of the film, but I must say one more thing.

For those confident that this will be the last Chucky film, let it be known that it will not. It can't be. The film ended abruptly in the middle of an action scene. Chucky thought he had fooled Andy, only find out that no, he hadn't. Andy had fooled him. Not to give away too much more, but right as the plot thickened and you were left on the edge of your seat wondering what will happen next, the credits rolled. We're not talking ambiguity here either, we're talking that there is clearly more to the story and the film more than suggest, it begs for another sequel.

As for the acting, it goes without saying that Brad Dourif was on top of his game. His daughter Fiona got to show off her ability to be versatile. I'd explain more, but again don't want to give away too much. I can't help but wonder though as a father, what it must be like to to watch your kid in a sex scene and a lesbian scene. The characters in this film were so weird, but all did a pretty good job.

Jennifer Tilly was fun once again, and gave a similar performance to how she did the other three films she was in.

The performance to talk about most though was that of Alex Vincent. At first it seemed he was rusty and too reserved, fearful of looking stupid. Yet as the film progressed, he let loose and showed the world what a great actor it has been missing out on all of these years. He really stole the show in a few of his scenes, especially those towards the end.

The special effects were there and they were good. I think gore fans will be happy, but don't worry. They don't take up much of the movie and most of them happen in a short sequence towards the end.

This film had Don Mancini written all over it. From strange transitions to odd scenes, it was clear that he directed, as well as wrote this film. Yet, there was also a hint of Tom Holland in this film as well, even if it was subconscious on Mancini's part.

A STONING IN FULHAM COUNTY

A STONING IN FULHAM COUNTY

A STONING IN FULHAM COUNTY - B 

This based on a true story film was pretty good but like many films of the era painted a prettier picture through reenactment than what was the actuality. While the real life case did lead to positive changes in Lancaster County, where the story actually did take place, the reasons as to why contrast more than they compare to the film.

Historically speaking, in terms of accuracy this film falls rather short.

Yet there is a lot more to a film than whether it's historically accurate or not.

The the strength of this film was in the performances. Led by veteran television actor Ken Olin, who gave a very convincing presentation, Ron Perlman was quite good as well. I've never thought of Perlman a versatile actor as most of what I've seen him in is reflective of his other work, but it is obvious that he is. A young Brad Pitt is also in this film, but his part is so small that an honest reflection of his performance cannot be given.

The late Noble Willingham, a name you wouldn't know but a face you would recognize also had a minor but significant role in this film. It was a reminder of how many great actors we've had over the years that before the social media age stood in the shadows of the stars.

Not much to say as far as other elements of the film. The writing was straight text book, as it followed the rules of what you'd learn in screenplay writing 101 at any college. The directing felt much the same way. Stick to the basics, formulate as you are taught. The reason being? It works and it did here too.

THE ROAD

THE ROAD

THE ROAD: B- 

A visually appealing film, THE ROAD kept my interest throughout with an exceptionally strong performance out of Vigo Mortensen as the man. However if what keeps me glued to the screen is a series of questions, I eventually expect those questions to be answered. To do anything less is to cheat your audience, and as a viewer I felt very cheated at the end. 

Ambiguity is an art that has to be mastered and while it was used here, it was not used well. The point of ambiguity is to leave your audience with a sense of wonder. To care about and ponder the possibilities. The film didn't do that. It instead begged why, and lured in with tease after tease, setting up a revelation that was never given. 

I appreciated the poetic sentiment delivered in the monologues of beautiful language, yet the exchange of dialog between father and son was corny. The script was written well for the the man, and poorly for the boy, and it showed in nearly every scene. 

This is the second film I have seen like this in the past year. It is an other wise good film, that I will never return to again because of its weaker ending. And I say weaker, instead of poor for distinct reason.

It's not that the ending sucked. The ending was actually rather up lifting, but it didn't deliver all that it had promised. Too much was left unanswered, too many rabbit trails with no ends.

IT (2017)

IT (2017) 

IT (2017) : A

This is THE BEST remake/reimagining I have ever seen in my life.

I'm not calling it perfect, but I am saying that this film delivered on every level. A or A- in every category.

My main concern in going into this film was that the dramatic elements of the story, the depth of the characters and their relationships would be sacrificed for the horror side of the story. It wasn't.

The characters were strong and well written. And the actors who played them measured up to the challenge. There were a few moments when I felt like I was watching 12, 13, 14, 15 year old kids on the screen, but for the majority of the film, these young actors were so convincing and so good, that I lost sight of the fact that they were so young.

Henry Bowers and his gang were a little weak for me, but that is only in strict comparison to how strong the lucky seven were.

I thought at first that the film was going to lack the heart and spirit of the kid's bond, commitment and friendship to one another but as the film progressed, so did their unity. Subtle scenes that slowly built into what can only be described as epic.

And oh what an Epic scene the confrontation was in the sewer. Not going to spoil it but I will say enough to note that the scene with Richie Toser and Pennywise at the end had me jumping out of my chair, throwing punches at the screen in excitement. It was that good.

Scary? Yes, and truly scary. Were there a few jump scares? Yes, but they weren't thrown at you like a bad case of diarrhea after Long John Silver's on a Thursday night, like so many other modern day horror films. This was true horror. The kind of horror that sets up the scene, and relies on creepiness, uneasiness, and true fear to scare you. The score should be mentioned and praised as it set the tone and flow of each scene.

I also want to condone the film on behalf of its comic relief. I usually either almost pee myself out of fear or pee myself out of laughter during a movie. It's rare that I do both. Matter of fact, this may have been the first time I've ever done both.

Lastly I'll answer the question on everyone's mind. Bill Skarsgard. Does he live up to Tim Curry? No, but who can? I still find Curry's Pennywise to be more frightening than I did Skarsgard's. However, he still did an outstanding job and played the character quite well.

Anxious as Hell for Chapter 2.

HOTEL FOR DOGS

HOTEL FOR DOGS

HOTEL FOR DOGS: B

Films like this you have to watch and review based on the audience they were intended for. Seeing that the demographic is young children and pre-teens, I'd say that the film did a pretty good job.

It was a wholesome, predictable, feel good movie, but I commend the film on not going over the top and being too sappy or fake. It had a few moments of melodrama, but not near as many as I expected.

The story was good, and I appreciated some clever moments throughout the script.

The child actors did pretty well, and it is easy to see the potential talent that Emma Roberts would eventually become in this early role.

Don Cheadle, reminded me a lot of John Stamos, as he was able to take a role that could have easily been cheesy and disingenuous and instead made it sincere and believable.

A few flaws in the script kept this film from getting an A when judging it strictly as a kid's film. No reason was given for why Andi's acquaintances/friends would care one way or the other that she was a foster kid. There was no substance behind that scene, nor was that scene addressed later in the film. It was out of place and unnecessary.

Secondly, the film needed to make a clear decision to either deal with the topic of shelter dogs being put down or to leave it alone. It instead shined a flashlight on the subject for a brief moment and then backed away quickly. I'd have appreciated either leaving this topic alone completely or addressing it as a coming of age transition for both Emma and Bruce.

Overall this is a good film that I would recommend to anyone that has small to pre-teen aged children, or people that let occasionally let their girlfriend's pick out what they watch like me.

And lastly thumbs up to the fact that all of the dogs used in this film were shelter dogs, that were trained and then adopted out to various loving families.