Why Now? Halloween Kills (2021) Review

I saw it when it came out but didn’t get around to reviewing it. The third one’s coming out next month, which just happens to be a very special time of year. So why have I chosen now of all times to finally cover Halloween Kills? Well, I assure you there is a special reason. One that shall be revealed quite soon.

When I first watched Halloween Kills I actually wasn’t really impressed by it. The cultural and political issues I believed it was reflecting felt so out of place in a film of this series. Following my recent viewing however, I was surprised by how much I liked. I may prefer it over the first one (from 2018). The gore’s a little over-the-top and the call backs to the original are a bit ridiculous but all the principle characters are well written, have purpose, something to do and Michael Myers is just as, if not more intimidating than he was in the last one. It’s a decent sequel.

Starting moments after the 2018 film, Michael Myers escapes the trap set up by Laurie Strode (Jaime Lee Curtis). When she, her daughter Karen (Judy Greer) and granddaughter Allyson (Andi Matichak) learn of the Shape’s survival, they resume pursuing their target, only this time they have a townful of survivors on their side.

The Characters

Laurie Strode actually plays a smaller role in the plot than she did in the last one. She spends most of the film in hospital recovering from her wounds. Fortunately this plays to the film’s advantage as it brings Karen and Allyson centre stage.

I didn’t think these two characters were as interesting as Laurie in Halloween 2018, especially Allyson. They spent the majority of that film either avoiding or comforting Laurie. The mother and granddaughter did buck heads a couple of times but here, with Laurie out of the picture, the two are forced to act without their mentor’s guidance. When they fall out or disagree with each other there’s a bit more urgency because they don’t have their safety net in the form of Laurie. I found Karen and Allyson a lot more compelling in Halloween Kills.

I’m aware this element got mixed responses following the film’s release but I enjoyed the mob subplot. On my first watch I thought it was an embarrassing attempt by the film to make a political statement about America’s social landscape i.e., the effects of systemic racism and the rise of the BLM movement. Watching it again, I didn’t get that vibe as much, it actually felt like a creative progression having seen Michael go up against Laurie and the police so many times.

Led by a grown-up Tommy Doyle (Anthony Michael Hall), the townsfolk ignore the police’s advice and focus on taking out Michael themselves. Anthony Michael Hall does a great job portraying Tommy, his character is essentially the mouthpiece of the community. He conveys the fear and frustration that he and his neighbours have endured for decades.

There’s a good reason behind Danny’s inclusion, the same cannot be said for the other characters from the original who’re shoehorned into the plot. Sheriff Leigh Brackett, Lindsey Wallace, Nurse Marion; realistically all these characters would either be dead, retired or have moved away. The only reason they’re here seems to be just for fan service, which is bizarre because I can’t imagine people being just as excited for Sheriff Leigh Brackett’s return as, say, Deckard’s in Blade Runner 2049 or Daniel Robitaille in the last Candyman. They all should’ve been cut.

The Horror

In my review of Halloween 2018, I said that while I didn’t find Michael Myers scary, I certainly believed he was intimidating and a real threat. At certain points I thought the film’s comic relief destroyed Michael’s menace, fortunately that doesn’t occur in Halloween Kills. In fact, there’s little to no comic relief, which I don’t mind. It allows more room for Michael and his presence.

The gore is amped up. Initially I didn’t appreciate this, I thought the kills were too cartoony and they just made the film feel immature. Now however I can see the reasoning behind the extra gore. The horror of Halloween 2018 was mostly focused on the psychological and emotional terror that Michael Myers brought, not an easy task with a character that’s 40 years old. Having achieved that (not to perfection in my opinion) it makes sense that the sequel ups the scale of the horror, focusing less on individual trauma and more on the physical and communal threat Michael poses. Afterall, his body count is a lot higher here compared to the 2018 and original films.

There’s some bog standard jumpscares along with some decent suspense as Michael prowls through the suburbs, slipping into peoples’ homes at random. I certainly didn’t lose any sleep over the horror of Halloween Kills but I admire how successful the film and its predecessor has been at maintaining Michael Myers’ status as a horror icon in the 21^st century.  

It’s a flawed sequel but as I stated before, watching it a second time almost a year after its release presented a lot of pleasant surprises. It’ll be interesting assessing the film once Halloween Ends is out, to see how well it performs as the second part in a trilogy (or quartet if you count the original). For now though, I think it’s a pretty good watch.

I give Halloween Kills a complimentary 8 out of 10.

One More Thing Before 2022

In preparation for this post I read ‘One More Thing Before 2021’. It was a very familiar read; I wrote about how well the blog had done, how not so well the YouTube channel had done, what was happening with my job and career, gave an update on the persistent existential crisis I’d been having for the last four years.

The post left me with mixed emotions. I was impressed by how much had changed and improved but I was also sad by how much had worsened or remained the same.

February saw massive changes; I had moved house and quit my retail job, which was not an easy decision. I didn’t want any employment gaps on my CV but the stress I was experiencing at work had reached a point where it was persistently making me unhappy. On top of that, getting to work from my new residence was taking even longer than it did from my old one. I couldn’t take it anymore. I had to quit.

I had no idea what I was going to do next, I just knew for certain that I wouldn’t work in retail again. Hence I spent a good majority of 2021 looking for jobs, sending out CVs, cover letters and attending interviews.

During this period I of course continued to run the blog, cranking out reviews on an almost weekly basis at some points. I sort of already mentioned this in The Best and Worst Of 2021 but this year has been the best yet for Duffhood. I reviewed three times more films than I did last year and attracted over 200 more reads. Halloween was another success, I was surprised by how much attention my coverage of the Friday The 13^th franchise had gotten the year before hence this Halloween I chose to cover another big name horror franchise: Hellraiser. I’d seen the first six and was always curious about the remaining four I hadn’t seen. It was a fun trip watching numerous directors and writers interpret Clive Barker’s mythology, even when it was really tasteless and misinformed.

I mentioned in The Best and Worst Of 2021 that I had reviewed 23 new releases. That is true however what I didn’t mention was that I actually saw 25. That’s right, there were two new releases I didn’t review and before you ask, those two titles were Halloween Kills and The Devil Below. The reason I didn’t review the latter I gave in my review of Censor and as for why I didn’t cover Halloween Kills, I was too busy reviewing all the Hellraisers. Besides, I didn’t have any strong feelings about it. I had some issues but other than that, I enjoyed it. For that reason I didn’t think a review of Halloween Kills would be a particularly interesting read.

Most of the films I saw this year have ranged from pretty good to average. Coming up with my Top 5 Worst Films of the year list was rather difficult because I honestly couldn’t think of many titles that were outstandingly bad. Most of the 25 titles I saw were ok, they had their flaws but they were all pretty original and tried to do their own thing.

In addition to the five titles I selected for the Best of the year, I have to make some honourable mentions; Cruella, A Quiet Place Part II, Malignant, Wrong Turn and The Mitchells Vs The Machines. I recommend those films as well as my top five.

It’s been another bummer for YouTube this year, which frankly isn’t a surprise. In 2021 I uploaded a total of two videos, the lowest in the channel’s history. Those videos were Captain Sweden Vs Godzilla Vs Kong and Peter The Pretentious Pr!ck. Both I think are pretty decent, especially Peter The Pretentious Pr!ck. I’ve had the idea for the sketch for many years and it took months to perfect the script. I was intending to make a series based on Peter like Captain Sweden and Counsellor 6 but by the time I’d finally finished the first sketch, I was so exhausted that the enthusiasm just wasn’t there. That’s not to say there’ll never be another video with Peter, I just don’t expect to see it any time soon.

I believe that when I get a place of my own videos will be produced more regularly as it’s quite difficult, and embarrassing even, to shoot these silly videos under someone else’s roof.

I’m not too disappointed by my performance on YouTube as I feel my performance here on WordPress has made up for it.

In late August I started a kickstart scheme with an events company, which has been a lot more fun and rewarding than my former retail job. It’s a 6-month scheme so if my calculations are correct it should be done by the end of this February. What will happen after that I legitimately have no idea.

Somethings got better, somethings stayed the same and, as I stated at the beginning, somethings got worse. I gave up meditating, drank more often and my ‘existential crisis’ continued. When writing about this crisis in previous end of year reviews, I typically described it as a struggle to commit to certain crafts. I didn’t know if I could be successful in writing, drawing, YouTube or comedy. While this is true, I think it’s time that I come clean and reveal what’s really behind this persistent uncertainty. Five years ago I was diagnosed with anxiety and depression, it is these conditions that I believe are behind my lack of motivation and fear of commitment.

At the end of ‘One More Thing Before 2021’ I wrote this:

“I hope that a year from now, when you read ‘One More Thing Before 2022,’ I come across as more hopeful and certain, I say that COVID is gone and that Godzilla Vs Kong was incredible.”

Well, I was right about saying Godzilla Vs Kong was incredible but not about COVID going unfortunately.

Am I more hopeful and certain? No, but I think I know how to be and realizing that I can’t achieve peace and contentment in the pursuit of artistic and material success is a good start.

So a year from now, when I’m penning ‘One More Thing Before 2023,’ I don’t necessarily want to be writing a list of successes, I want to be describing how better I’m feeling about myself and how happier and less morbid 2023 has been. A basic wish for the New Year I know but after years of labouring towards the impossible, I think it’s what I need.

My plans for New Year’s Eve are pretty much the same as last year’s; watch Adaptation, only this time I’m going to watch it on Blu-ray!

Thank you so much for checking in on Duffhood throughout 2021. I hope you’ve had a Merry Christmas and have a Happy New Year.

Thank you

The Best and Worst Of 2021

2021 has been a great year for cinema. It certainly has been for me since I have reviewed the highest number of films this year than any other year since starting this blog. I covered a total of 23 new releases in 2021, bumping 2016 as the former record holder for highest number of reviews and, I’d like to think, redeeming myself for the mere 7 reviews I cranked out last year.

So instead of picking 3 of the worst and 3 of the best, I’ve decided to select 5 films each category. Because I can!

If you’ve read my previous Best and Worst Ofs then you know I like to start with my greens i.e., the best films of the year. I always found destroying a film more fun than complimenting one hence I like to think of the Worst section as the pudding of the annual feast.

Let’s begin with my top 5 Best Films of the Year.

5. Godzilla Vs Kong

If you’re a long-time follower of mine then this shouldn’t come as a surprise. You knew how hyped I was for the fourth entry in the MonsterVerse series and how much I praised it when I finally saw it. Godzilla Vs Kong had a lot stacked against it; the poor performance of Godzilla: King of the Monsters, the uncertainty of whether of a kaiju series can compete in the modern Western market and of course being the rematch of the most iconic cinematic tournament in history. The fact that the film overcame these obstacles and delivered a legitimately entertaining flick, for fans and non-fans alike, is the primary reason why it’s in my top five. Plus the fact that I’m a whore when it comes to good kaiju films.

4. Candyman

Like Godzilla Vs Kong, the odds were against Candyman. There were so many ways it could’ve failed yet Nia DaCosta’s reboot excelled, paying homage to the original film it’s based on, without copying it or overindulging in references, and telling its own, uniquely poignant story. While technically it is a sequel to the 1992 film of the same name, I like to think of it as a companion piece as it takes the themes and issues the original tackled and explores what’s changed (and what hasn’t) since its release. It’s not perfect; the social commentary isn’t particularly subtle and the climax could do with some more padding but since it’s a horror reboot (of a series that I’m really fond of) and it managed to avoid all the traps most reboots fall into, its totally earned the number four spot on my list.

3. Dune

Towards the end of my review of Dune I started to struggle to come up with things that hadn’t already been said. Now, months after its premiere, I’m really struggling. Let’s just say that by filming one of the most famously unfilmable books in history and in a way that most of the public can comprehend, while being totally original in both its look and writing, made the decision of putting it in my top five best of the year list incredibly easy. I’ll always love the David Lynch version but this was pretty fantastic.

2. Censor

The subject matter alone made Censor a noteworthy film of the 23 I saw this year but had Censor simply revelled in the look and furniture of its setting, with little to say, it wouldn’t be on the number 2 spot. There’s a reason the film takes place in England during the ‘video nasties’ scare of the 80s’. The story itself deals with the issues that were raised in that period, issues that are still relevant today. Censor is a character study of Enid, a film censor haunted by the mysterious disappearance of her sister. The dedication she has for the search for her sister, as well as for her job, lead her to doubt her own memory and sanity. In response to this uncertainty, Enid fights to discover the truth. Through Enid’s struggle, Censor offers a mature and comprehensive discussion of censorship. This is one of the only few fiction films I’ve seen about censorship (I’ve seen plenty of documentaries about it) and it’s the best, no contest.

1. Pig.

This was the most thought-provoking and emotionally-engaging film I saw this year. When the end credits rolled, I wasn’t the same. Pig is well written, funny and very entertaining but its story and characters left me with so many notions about success, failure, grief and identity. It’s certainly another film for the ‘if-you-think-Nicolas-Cage-can’t-act-watch-this’ category as next to Adaptation and Leaving Las Vegas, it’s one of the best performances I’ve ever seen him deliver. There’re no fights, no explosions, no life-threatening stakes, just good character-driven drama. Drama about issues that we all confront at some point in our lives. In my review I give it a 10 out of 10 and I still stand by that rating. When I finished watching Pig, I didn’t think I was going to see anything better and I was right.

Now that we’ve finished the main course, it’s time for dessert. Here’s my list of the Top Five Worst films of 2021.

5. Army of the Dead

This may come as a surprise to some as my review of Army of the Dead was mostly positive. I had my issues but I praised the film for its scale and social commentary. Some time after posting my review, I gave Army of the Dead a second viewing and if I had written my review then, it would’ve been a lot less positive. I was perplexed by all the acclaim the film was receiving from viewers and critics. I only found one member of the cast genuinely interesting, I thought the breeds of zombie didn’t make sense and, amazingly, despite its undead swarms, zombified tigers and beautifully desolate cityscape, I found Army of the Dead to be pretty boring. It just goes to show that, even when armed with all of Hollywood’s resources, without a good script you have absolutely no hope of moving an audience.

4. Ghostbusters: Afterlife

If Candyman is a textbook example of how to reboot a franchise then Ghostbusters: Afterlife is certainly a contender for an example of how not to reboot a franchise. The failures of Afterlife are just like those of many failed reboots of late; over-reliance on references, recycled plots and concepts, prioritizing nostalgia over cohesiveness. The biggest failure of Afterlife however is its total misunderstanding of what made Ghostbusters great. The 2016 film was doing its own thing hence its disdain of the original is excusable. Afterlife however is Ghostbusters 3, knowledge and respect of the first two films is crucial and it had absolutely none. Ghostbusters is deadpan, sarcastic and cynical, the complete opposite of the Spielbergian tone of Afterlife. To make things worse, unlike its contemporaries Afterlife has enjoyed a lot of success both financially and critically hence there’s a good chance there’ll be a sequel. It’s just not fair.

3. Thunder Force

Looking at the premise, it’s pretty clear that Thunder Force is supposed to be a parody of recent superhero films but when you watch it, you realise that most of the comedy comes from the stars flexing their improv skills. It’s the kind of comedy I cannot tolerate; one with no thought or preparation, that is grabbed from thin air and shoved in, regardless of what it adds to the story. Can a good superhero satire get made in today’s world? Probably. The success of films like Deadpool and The Lego Batman Movie show that such a film can do well. Maybe the comic book genre will get its Blazing Saddles or Airplane one day. The only way that can happen however is if a writer settles on a single idea and follows it through. Thunder Force doesn’t commit to being a parody of superhero films. It tries, it shows us a world of superheroes with superhero characters but then it gives up, opting to be an SNL-style comedy film, only to give up on that and try being a superhero parody again. It was one of the most confusing and painful viewing experiences I had this year. I pray there’s no sequel.

2. Willy’s Wonderland

The headline of my review was ‘REALLY Not As Fun As You’d Think.’ I don’t mean to flatter myself but I believe that is a perfect summary of Willy’s Wonderland. All the film had was a good idea (throw Nicolas Cage into Five Nights At Freddy’s) and nothing else. It certainly didn’t have the means to execute its idea; it didn’t have a good script or the budget to make it properly. Nicolas Cage’s mute protagonist is not funny or charming in the slightest, all the other characters are boring and there are Five Nights At Freddy’s cosplays that look better than Willy’s animatronics. Don’t watch it. Trust me, hearing the premise for the first time is way more fun than watching the actual film.

1. Ape Vs Monster

Like with Dune, I’m struggling to come up with things that haven’t already been said about Ape Vs Monster. This is due to the fact that Ape Vs Monster is essentially an average Asylum film and a lot has been said about Asylum films. The only thing that can described as decent about Ape Vs Monster is that it exists. The Asylum chose to prepare a film to coincide with the release of Godzilla Vs Kong and I was silly enough to believe that it might’ve been fun. Half of the exterior shots in the film are stock footage clips, all the monsters and explosions look like ready-made graphics purchased from a visual effects site and the two main creatures the title refers to only confront each other once. Willy’s Wonderland had a good idea that was executed terribly, Ape Vs Monster is a good idea that you can waste an hour and a half witnessing and, surprise surprise, it’s not worth it.

Well, that was scrumptious. Let’s hope next year’s feast is even better. Here’s to more reviews in 2022!

Who’re You Gonna Call? Help. You Should Call For Help. Ghostbusters: Afterlife (2021) Review

Ghostbusters: Afterlife feels like a lot of things, an actual sequel to the 1984 original is not one of them. Throughout its two-hour runtime, the film has an identity crisis that it never resolves. Afterlife cannot decide if it’s Ghostbusters 3, a reboot that simply pays homage to the original film or an indie drama about a struggling family.

Being evicted from her city apartment, Callie (Carrie Coon) is forced to move out into the country with her two children, Phoebe (Mckenna Grace) and Trevor (Finn Wolfhard), and settle in her dead father’s farmhouse. While she tries to sort their financial situation, Phoebe and Trevor search the premises and discover some strange devices. They then learn that their grandfather was one of the legendary Ghostbusters.

The Characters

Callie, Phoebe and Trevor lead the indie drama section of Afterlife, a section that takes up the entirety of the first act and part of the second. Their story isn’t a bad one, it’s one that concerns Callie’s complex relationship with her father, Phoebe’s struggle to socialize and fit in and Trevor’s search for love.

For a period, the film plays like every indie drama we’ve ever seen with its smalltown setting and coming-of-age themes. Of the three characters, Phoebe is the most empathetic but then again, being a teenage outcast, how can she not be? Comedy wise Callie is the most well written. Her sarcastic, cynical humour is very reminiscent of the ‘84 original.

Then they find the Ghostbusting gear. This is where Afterlife becomes a soft reboot of the Ghostbusters franchise. It obviously takes place in the same world as the original but centres on a new group of characters in a totally different setting. As Phoebe experiments with the equipment, she attends a summer school where she befriends a fellow pupil (Logan Kim) and her teacher (Paul Rudd).

I liked the scenes with Phoebe coming out of her box and making connections, I felt like I was watching an actual character with their own history and desires. I cannot say the same for the rest of the cast. They have very little to do, their functions are either to guide Phoebe to certain plot points or set up a reference. This is where the film morphs into Ghostbusters 3 and everything, from the indie drama plot to the shallow characters to the abundance of references, comes together and falls apart.

The References

For me, Ghostbusters: Afterlife is up there with Terminator: Dark Fate and The Predator as one of the worst reboots I’ve ever seen. Like many recent reboots, the film prioritizes mere mentions of recognizable characters, devices and creatures over a strong, concise narrative. In the first and second acts, the referencing, while nauseating at times, is tolerable.

For example, the scenes where Phoebe toys with her grandfather’s equipment while researching the original Ghostbusters’ exploits online aren’t there for nostalgia’s sake. They’re a part of Phoebe’s arc and contribute to the film’s world-building. The reveals of the proton packs and Ecto-1 are a bit schmaltzy but it could be argued that the presentations are justified as it’s technically been nearly 40 years since we’ve seen them. The use of the first film’s score feels out of place. I feel the music is more suited to the original’s 80s’ New York setting hence it’s quite awkward hearing it over shots of modern South-Central America.

The third act is where it all crashes and burns. It’s essentially the third act of the original but minus the self-awareness and deadpan humour. The screenwriters appear to be under the impression that because people have sentimental feelings for the first two Ghostbusters, the sequel to them should itself be sentimental. However, if you watch those films, you’ll realise that their lack of tenderness and affection is one of the things that made them so great. Hence the Spielbergian climax of Afterlife is nothing short of visceral and cringe-inducing.

At its best, Ghostbusters: Afterlife is an average indie drama mixed with a soft reboot that occasionally overindulges in references. As a whole however Afterlife is the former, the latter and the worst thing to happen to the Ghostbusters’ name since the 2016 reboot. I don’t recommend it.

I give Ghostbusters: Afterlife a poor 4 out of 10.

I Think I’m In Love. Dune (2021) Review

After reviewing ten Hellraisers, I needed a break but even before I was fully rested I knew exactly what I was reviewing next. As well as being the best adaptation of Frank Herbert’s novel to date (this is coming from someone who’s very fond of David Lynch’s effort by the way), Dune is a stunning and thought-provoking space opera unlike anything prior from Hollywood.

Paul Atreides (Timothée Chalamet) joins his family in settling on the planet Arrakis to maintain their security and reputation in a hierarchy of interstellar dynasties. A vicious plot to take down House Atreides awaits the family, a plot that will tear Paul from his privileged life as a prince and throw him into a world where only the strongest survive.

The Characters

Anyone who is familiar with Dune’s premise knows that the story is essentially a hero’s journey. This adaptation is aware of that fact as it does mostly focus on Paul. However, it is also aware that, since the days of the original Star Wars, audiences have been seeing nothing but hero’s journeys. Fortunately there’s more to Herbert’s tale than simply a prince’s rise to power, a lot more and this adaptation embraces that.

Paul is an empathetic protagonist in that very few of us can actually relate to what he’s going through but we can all imagine what it’s like. The same can be said about his parents. While the plot concerns numerous characters, our feelings are clearly meant to centre on Paul, his father Duke Leto (Oscar Isaac) and mother Jessica (Rebecca Ferguson).

All three of them are burdened with inescapable responsibilities; Leto is a Duke, Paul is his successor and Jessica is part of a religious group known as the Bene Gesserit. All these responsibilities are challenged when the family lands on Arrakis, Paul has to learn to be a leader and come to terms with the possibility that he’ll have to become one sooner than he expected.

(From left to right) Gurney, Paul and Duke Leto [Credit: Warner Bros.]

The other characters serve as either reminders of the trio’s responsibilities or as threats to them. For example, Gurney Halleck (Josh Brolin) is a reminder of Paul’s need to be martially competent as Gurney is his weapons teacher. Another example is Gaius Helen Mohiam (Charlotte Rampling) who’s a reminder to Jessica of her duty to the Bene Gesserit sisterhood. The Harkonnens clearly represent a threat to the Atreides’ responsibilities. Led by the Baron (Stellan Skarsgård) and his nephew Rabban (Dave Bautista), the Harkonnens share a long bitter rivalry with House Atreides hence they are more than ready to exploit any opportunity to conquer them.

The World

The brilliance of Dune’s worldbuilding has two notable components; the first is its look and the second is how it’s presented.

All the ships, vehicles and buildings on Arrakis look alien enough to pass as something from the future but rusty enough to look like its been used, to look as if this universe has been how it is for a long time, the story does take place in the ten thousandth century after all. The costumes and certain pieces of technology also look alien but unlike the ships and architecture, their alienness is stronger in that they look like they’re from a completely different culture.

A great Spice Harvester [Credit: Warner Bros.]

Dune masters the look of its future but, and this is much more impressive, it also masters the exposition of its future. Anyone who’s read Dune will know how much of an achievement this is.

If the film can’t show the backstory, it’ll weave it into the dialogue, almost seamlessly. There are few points where you feel like you’re being spoon-fed information or enduring an exposition dump. For most of the film you feel you’re just watching the people in this universe going about their business. The only consequence is that some of the dialogue can sound a bit clunky at times but they’re barely flaws in my opinion.  

I’m struggling to find anything else to say as a lot has already been said since the film’s been out for almost a month. If you’ve seen the reviews, they’re glowing for a reason. Unless you’re really not a fan of space operas or period dramas, there’s little reason why you shouldn’t see it. Dune is simply marvellous and I highly recommend it.

I give Dune an outstanding 9 out of 10.

Not Good But Not As Bad As I Was Expecting. Hellraiser: Revelations (2011) Review

I believe it’s in his book Story where Robert McKee explains that the creation of a good story doesn’t just entail the construction of the story but the telling of it. This idea returned to me following my viewing of Hellraiser: Revelations. The film’s largely negative consensus is somewhat accurate. The effects are cheap, the look is cheap and the dialogue is awful. The story however is, in my opinion, quite decent. Perhaps the overall problem is its failure to follow McKee’s principle. It’s a decent story, just poorly told.

The ninth instalment in the series, Hellraiser: Revelations sees the families of two missing men trying to have dinner in their absence. They are interrupted by the sudden appearance of one of their missing sons. The families ask him for the whereabouts of the other son. As the night progresses, the delirious man begins to tells his story, which starts in Mexico with the pursuit of a strange puzzle box.

What I Expected

I remember when the trailer for Revelations hit the net back in 2011. Like everyone else, I thought it was awful. It looked like American Pie crossed with Hellraiser, which could be an interesting mix but this didn’t look like it.

I was expecting the all-time worst Hellraiser, worse than Hellworld. I was expecting to be bored by the one-dimensional characters and frustrated by its use of the found-footage technique. I was expecting to have nothing to say beyond ‘it’s awful.’

What I Got

Stephan Smith Collins as Pinhead [Credit: Dimension Films]

Revelations is as cheap and poorly made as its trailer indicates but I can’t help but admire its intentions.

Revelations is a family-drama that reintroduces elements of the original Hellraiser’s mythology. I don’t want to spoil anything (yes, it has things to be spoiled) but I will reveal that the plot involves a resurrection and a cenobite transformation, the latter I haven’t seen since Bloodline I think.

The families we’re introduced to appear to be ordinary well-off Los Angelenos who’re grieving their two missing sons. When one returns, we begin to learn that certain members of both families are hiding dark secrets, secrets that gradually spill out following the son’s reappearance. These are not just flawed individuals, these are people who have acted wrongfully and tried to hide it. They’re not beautifully written but they’re very appropriate for a Hellraiser story as, like Doctor Faustus, they almost deserve what they get in the end.

Is it good? Not really. The constant switching between the found footage and the narrative is unnecessarily baffling, the dialogue is terrible, particularly Pinhead’s as all his lines sound like desperate attempts to sound as deep and meaningful as his quotes from the first couple of Hellraisers, and the performances and overall production value certainly doesn’t help.

While I can understand the universal contempt Revelations received, I cannot call it the worst Hellraiser. Despite what many fans and critics have said, Revelations is attempting to do something dignified. It tries to take the themes and lore of the original Hellraiser and place it in a new context, the problems are simply in the execution. You can say it’s badly made but I don’t think you can truly say you hate it. I can’t anyway.

I give Hellraiser: Revelations a fair 4 out of 10.

One more to go….

In No-Man’s Land Now. Hellraiser: Deader (2005) Review

Hellraiser: Deader is like Hellraiser: Inferno minus the cliches, plus decent characters and an original story. It’s essentially a hero’s journey set in a hedonistic, deprived underworld with the Faustian undertones that are most prevalent in the Hellraiser franchise. Its production value, dialogue and performances prevent it from being anything on par with the original but out of all the Hellraisers I’ve seen so far, Deader is one of the good ones.

Newspaper reporter Amy Klein (Kari Wuhrer) is deployed to Romania to investigate the origin of a video tape that depicts the murder and resurrection of a young woman. She discovers that the tape was made by a cult who refer to themselves as ‘Deaders,’ people who apparently have the means to achieve immortality.

What I Was Expecting

I’m embarrassed to confess here, in the first of my Hellraiser reviews to use the ‘What I Was Expecting’ and ‘What I Got’ format from my Friday The 13^th coverage, that I had little to no expectations of Deader.

I was pretty sure the protagonist was a woman but apart from that, I went into Deader totally blind. I was just hoping it was better than Hellseeker and not as silly as its title.

What I Got

Deader, like Inferno, was another pleasant surprise. Better than Inferno in fact. Our protagonist is more interesting for one thing. She’s not a corrupt cop or a specific stereotype. Amy is a journalist who specialises in stories about drug addicts and delinquents. She smokes and has self-destructive tendencies but not without a clear reason. Her history is more intriguing in that it has strong thematic relevance and is revealed bit by bit as she progresses through the plot, leaving you unsure of her and often speculating.

The setting is very distinct. No English houses, no big American cities, just the cold criminal underworld of Bucharest. For that quality alone, Deader sticks out.

Pinhead is truer to himself in the original than he was in Inferno. He’s less an antagonist and more an anti-hero as the film’s real villains are the Deaders. We learn that the cult aims to open the lament configuration so that they can conquer the cenobite dimension and becomes its rulers. However, they believe that only an individual with little faith and a nihilistic outlook can actually open the box. While this reasoning may be a little silly, it does give Amy a lot of dramatic influence in the plot as she fits the cult’s criteria for the ‘Chosen One’. Hence Pinhead needs her help. He needs her to open the box so that he and the cenobites can get to the cult first and destroy them, protecting their dimension. This is pretty decent stuff.

Some of the dialogue is a little too on the nose and a lot of the makeup effects are cheap looking but dramatically, out of all the sequels I’ve seen so far, I think Deader maintains the balance of respecting the original’s mythology and telling a new story best. It’s still a straight-to-video sequel but it’s a straight-to-video sequel that really, really tries.

I give Hellraiser: Deader a strong 7 out of 10.

Not long now!

Whoa. This Isn’t Good. Hellraiser: Hellseeker (2002) Review

Baffled pity are the best words to describe my reaction to Hellraiser: Hellseeker. It’s a film that looks to have been made by talented and competent people with a screenplay that seems to have been written with a lot of consideration, yet the final result is unengaging, difficult to follow and at times unintentionally comical.

A husband and wife are involved in a car accident. The husband is left with amnesia while the wife is missing. The husband tries to patch his memory as the police suspect he murdered his wife. His struggle to prove his innocence leads him into a world of paranoia and madness.

What I Remember

Hellseeker is the last of the Hellraisers I saw. I haven’t seen any of the sequels beyond this one. I actually recall very little from my first viewing of Hellseeker.

I remember that Ashley Laurence returned and reprised her role of Kirsty. I remember that her role was small as her husband’s character was the protagonist. I felt the film was like Inferno in that it had a dark look, involved police procedure and had a mind-bending plot that led to a big twist. A part from that, I remember nothing.

What I Saw

Unlike Inferno, which was better than I recalled, Hellseeker was worse.

Kirsty shouldn’t be in this. It’s not her story. Here she’s just a stereotypical lost love. Whenever we see her it’s almost always in a schmaltzy flashback where she’s smiling or making love. She could’ve been replaced by an original character and the film wouldn’t be that different. It seems she was just shoehorned in for fan service.

Kirsty’s husband, Trevor, could be an interesting protagonist if written better. Despite knowing his desire and weakness, I never found him fun to watch. Joseph Thorne from Inferno wasn’t perfectly written but I was at least curious about what was going to happen to him and how he would react. I felt very little of that for Trevor. This is rather tragic because towards the end of Hellseeker you begin to realise that whoever wrote the script made an effort. Setups are paid off, questions are answered, mysteries are solved. The skill and talent is there, it just fails to perform.

In addition to the weak script, there are moments that are camp and were clearly not intended to be. In the opening scene, we see that Trevor and Kirsty’s car crash is caused by Trevor losing control of the car while kissing his wife. How can anyone take that seriously?

Later in the film, a co-worker attempts to seduce Trevor by shoving him up against a vending machine. Trevor casually responds with “my wife just died.” My jaw dropped.

Hellseeker has to be the worst Hellraiser I’ve seen so far because while Hellbound and Hell On Earth had their issues, they were at least entertaining. Hellseeker is like the original but if you drained all the character and drama from it. The result is painfully boring.

I give Hellraiser: Hellseeker a tiresome 5 out of 10.

This is the last of the Hellraisers I’ve seen, the remaining sequels are a no man’s land for me so expect short, straight-to-the-point reviews of the remaining four similar to my Friday The 13^th reviews. October 31^st is just a couple of weeks away. Get your costumes!

In Straight-To-Video Country Now. Hellraiser: Inferno (2000) Review

I have a lot of admiration for Hellraiser: Inferno. While cliched and dull at times, the film is essentially a David Fincher-style detective thriller with some Hellraiser thrown in, resulting in a combination that works surprisingly well.

The first of the series to be released direct to video, Inferno tracks the efforts of Detective Joseph Thorne (Craig Sheffer of Nightbreed fame) in identifying the perpetrator of several grizzly murders. At one point in his investigation, Thorne discovers a lament configuration and when he obliviously solves it, a series of disturbing and inexplicable events take place.

What I Remember

I viewed Inferno once as a teenager and the main thing that stuck in my memory was how well-made it looked. I didn’t really have any specific expectations going in but I assumed the film was going to appear, in some way, cheap. Hence I was surprised by Inferno’s almost cinematic quality.

I recall the new cenobite designs that debuted in the film, which I thought looked cool, and I’m pretty sure Pinhead was barely in it. There were some good bits but I do remember being quite bored for the majority of Inferno as it seemed to be just a long, dark police procedural.

What I Saw

Just like Bloodline, Inferno is better than I remembered. It has its dull bits but it also has its good bits where it’s quite engaging. Now this isn’t to say that Inferno is a forgotten classic, some of its scathing reviews are not completely undeserved.

Joseph Thorne is every corrupt cop you’ve ever seen. He drinks, takes drugs, hires sex workers and is distant from his wife and daughter. He’s a stereotype but his arc is actually rather interesting. Like a lot of cop characters, he has a strong moral stance. He doesn’t believe in monogamy but he does believe in the sanctity of children, hence when he learns that the killer is leaving a child’s severed finger with each of his victims’ bodies, Thorne becomes obsessed with tracking him down and retrieving the child from his captivity. He knows he’s an unholy man but he believes his police work, even when it involves unethical methods, outweigh his sins. It is this quality that the plot exploits and challenges, testing Thorne and his moral conduct.

You can tell that Inferno is trying something here, something dignified. I won’t get into spoilers but the first and second acts are teeming with neo-noir cliches. The third act however is where the supernatural element takes centre stage and all the questions that have amounted start getting answered. Whether or not the ending forgives the rest of the film is up to the viewer but in my opinion, it kind of does.

Inferno isn’t camp in the slightest. It’s an original tale that properly implements the Faustian themes of the original. Pinhead’s role is minor but it’s supposed to be. He’s not the big bad of the film. He is the final result of the protagonist’s indulgence, just as he and the other cenobites were in the first film.

It’s full of cliches but the story it’s trying to tell is way better than any of those of the last three sequels and for that I can’t help but applaud it.

I give Hellraiser: Inferno a rewarding 7 out of 10.

5 down. 5 to go. We’re half way there guys!

Aaaaaand We’re In Space. Hellraiser: Bloodline (1996) Review

We’re not far from my no-man’s land of the series as we’ve past the first three Hellraisers, which I’ve seen numerous times, and we’re now onto the fourth, which I only saw once or twice, my last viewing being many years ago. My review of Hellraiser: Bloodline is not going to be a complete assessment of the film because, having six more films to review, I simply don’t have the time. Instead I’m going to outline what I remember of the film, my thoughts about it and then I’m going to describe my most recent viewing and compare my former opinion with my current one.

The final in the series to be released in cinemas, Bloodline focuses on three men from three different generations of the same family. The first man is an 18^th century French toymaker who constructs the first lament configuration, the second is an architect in 1996 who has built a skyscraper that resembles the puzzle box and the third is an engineer aboard a space station in 2127 who is working to destroy the box for good.

What I Remember

Bloodline’s premise never left me. How could it? For a horror sequel set in space (an alarm bell for any franchise) Bloodline had an ambitious story. I recall the French aristocratic past, the very 90s’ present and of course the space station of the future. I recall plenty of the visuals from the Siamese cenobites to Pinhead’s hound. Despite the original premise and colourful settings, I remember being quite bored during my initial viewings. I believe I found the modern-day segment particularly unengaging with the protagonist just being a plain old family man.

I knew we learned things about the lament configuration and that it was made by some old craftsman but that’s all I remember. The specifics about its link to hell and the cenobites I have no recollection of.

What I Saw

Bloodline is a lot better than I recall. The present day stuff I still found to be a bit dull but I got a lot more out of the 18^th century segment, had a blast with the gore and makeup effects and appreciated the inter generational narrative that flowed through the three segments.  

Bloodline is sort of a cleverer, more bohemian Hellraiser III, which isn’t too surprising considering they’re both written by Wishmaster scribe Pete Atkins. It has the camp of Hell on Earth with the gore effects and bizarre cenobite designs, however it also has Hell On Earth‘s dull protagonist. The characters in the Paris and space station segments aren’t bad. Phillip LeMarchand, the 18^th century toymaker, is a likable every man with a wife, a home and a prosperous career. Duc de L’Isle, the aristocrat who commissions the box, is deliciously seedy. Paul Merchant, Philip’s 22^nd century descendant, is intelligent and very determined.

John Merchant, Philip’s 1996 descendent, is the same family man I remembered. He didn’t surprise me. I was only interested in him when he was with Angelique, an immortal demon summed by Duc de L’Isle. She’s similar to Julia in that she uses seduction to achieve her aims but unlike Julia, she is completely inhuman. She’s a demon who desires to corrupt people using temptation.

Pinhead is a bit more like how he is in the first two films. There are moments when he’s hammy, stroking a cenobite hound, elegantly describing how ripping people a part and having the time of his life doing it. However, when with Angelique or John, he becomes the emotionless, indifferent super being we were all introduced to in 1987.

If Hell On Earth is a guilty pleasure then Bloodline is an innocent one. John and his family are dull and the idea of people being able to remember their ancestors’ memories is pretty silly but with its strong supporting cast, epic story and occasional campiness, I’d say that, out of the ones I’ve seen so far, Hellraiser: Bloodline is probably the second best Hellraiser film. There’s a lot to like about it and it doesn’t deserve the overwhelmingly negative reception it has.

I give Hellraiser: Bloodline a decent 6 out of 10.