Tag Archives: review

A review of “28 Years Later” (2025)

Perhaps predictably, I truly enjoyed “28 Years Later” (2025).  It wasn’t a perfect film, but it was damned good; I’d rate it a 9 out of 10 on the Nolan scale.  Screenwriter Alex Garland and director Danny Boyle are still the dream team for stylish, breakneck-paced action-horror.  (It was their incendiary creative alchemy gave us the classic 2002 original film, “28 Days Later.”)

The movie has beautiful acting across the board, kinetic action sequences, decent makeup effects, convincing sets, a resonant theme and some gorgeous cinematography.  (I keep reading that the film was shot with … iPhones?  All of it?  Really?)

Jodie Comer and Ralph Fiennes absolutely shine; Aaron Taylor-Johnson is also quite good.  But I particularly enjoyed the performance of 14-year-old Alfie Williams, whose character’s coming-of-age comprises the human story of the film.

On the downside, “28 Years Later” has some problems with pacing and structure — although things like those are especially subjective, and other viewers will hardly notice.

Several characters make decisions that are … baffling.  (Yes, I do realize that Williams’ character is supposed to be 12 years old, and that this is a horror movie.  But … seriously, wtf, kiddo?)  And there are some larger plot questions that I can’t really expand upon for fear of spoilers.

Finally, an abrupt change of tone at the end of the film left me feeling a little nonplussed.  It might make sense in a larger context — the next “28” installment is due out in only six months, and the hard left turn we see in the final moments might be validated where the next movie picks up.  For now, though, I have mixed feelings about this ending.  (I want to know why a lengthy, somber meditation on mortality should end like a Saturday morning cartoon.)

I cheerfully recommend this!  It is obviously not for the faint of heart, but it is highly effective action-horror that still manages to catch the viewer off guard.  And Boyle delivers it with oddball, feverish finesse.




“Salem’s Lot” hits differently if you’ve ever lived in a town named “Salem.”

Yep — we’ve got one in Southwest Virginia; it’s right next to Roanoke, and I lived there for a little while.

The people there are awesome.  There are no vampires.  And the only weird, alarming newcomer in town was me.

Anyway, the new “Salem’s Lot” was damned good.  I loved it.  This movie successfully channeled the dark energy that made Stephen King’s 1975 novel such a feast for horror fans — how the vampires are portrayed.  They are at their scariest when they are mindless, Satanic minions of a mysterious overlord — and perversions of their former human selves.  (I love the “Blade” movies to no end, but their chic, cool, articulate monsters just aren’t as frightening.)

The directing was slick, the storytelling was rapid, and the newly tweaked plot elements worked for me.  The acting was good too.  If you are a genre fan, see if you can spot Pilou Asbaek (the mean-ass, ambitious pirate king from “Game of Thrones”), among others.

This was loads of creepy fun.  I recommend it.



A few quick words on “Dark Matter” Season 1 (2024)

“Dark Matter” (2024) is easily one of the best science fiction tv series I’ve ever seen.  It’s like “Sliders” (1995-2000) got together with “North By Northwest” (1959) to create an homage to Homer’s “Odyssey.”  I’d cheerfully rate Season 1 a 10 out of 10.

I had two concerns about whether I would enjoy “Dark Matter,” after it was recommended to me by a college alumnus.

First, I was afraid that it would be too campy.  C’mon … a nice guy being kidnapped by his evil twin from a parallel universe?  That’s a potentially cheesy plot device, and one I feel certain I’ve seen more than once before … maybe “The X Files” (1993- 2018), or some iteration of “The Outer Limits.”  But this is a surprisingly grounded story that assiduously sticks to realism in its tone and plotting (even if it’s occasionally injected with an effective jolt of horror).

Second, I thought it might be too hard for me to follow.  Its premise relies not only on physics, but on the enigma of the “Schrodinger’s cat” thought experiment.  (I will never truly understand it, no matter how many times I pretend to on Facebook.  Reality is objective!)  But the storytelling here is direct and easy to follow, even if the (logical) surprises take the viewer happily off guard.  If my ADHD-afflicted brain could follow the story, then so can you.

And Season 1 ended so perfectly that I’m not even sure I wan a second season.  (It has been renewed by Apple+ TV.)

I definitely get the sense that “Dark Matter” benefitted from having Blake Crouch as the showrunner and head writer.  (Crouch is the author of the 2016 novel that is its source material).  And it’s got great performances by Joel Edgerton, Jennifer Connelly, Alice Braga and Jimmi Simpson.

It’s really good stuff.  Check it out.



Check out Ben Cahlamer’s review of “Alien: Romulus” (2024)!

My friend Ben write a terrific review of “Alien: Romulus” (2024).  You can find it right here over at The Cinema Files.

Nice work, Ben!

(One character could have a vampire bat.)

Gonna write a baseball-centered, period vampire novel with loads of erotic subtext; gonna call it  “Interview With the Umpire.”



My review of Wednesday Lee Friday’s “Spitefully Stabbity Spidery Stuff”

Wednesday Lee Friday’s second horror collection, Spitefully Stabbity Spidery Stuff, is a smorgasbord of dark delights.  This is a diverse, briskly paced and blackly imagined set of tales that will doubtlessly please fans of the macabre.

Friday is nothing if not inventive.  These stories are not only original in their conception, but also frequently close with a genuinely unpredictable twist.  Yet the endings aren’t forced — however unnerving, Friday makes each feel like it is a logical conclusion to the story.

And many of these tales are truly frightening.  You can tell that Friday is a genuine horror fan, because she writes as only a true fan of the genre can — her stories are unflinching, but also injected with a warped humor that is germane to the story concept itself.  There is a natural symbiosis between her pathos and humor that makes each vignette feel tightly constructed.  (It helps, too, that her stories are quickly paced.  Sometimes stories are scarier when they barrel along toward their denouement.) In his insightful introduction to Spitefully Stabbity Spidery Stuff, author Alistair Cross notes that “Friday’s prose has the feel of Bradbury.”  I agree with the comparison.

Another of Friday’s strengths as a writer is her ease in capturing a character’s point of view — and then immersing the reader in his or her perspective.  The author employs direct language to deftly portray her characters’ motivations and states of mind.  The horrific events we witness seem more real when they are perceived by characters who think and speak much the way we do.

There is a nice variety to this collection as well.  The plot drivers here stem alternately from subgenres like sci-fi/horror, psychological horror, supernatural horror or crime stories.  (There are four poems too, along with a bonus — the first chapter of Friday’s novel, A Stabbing for Sadie.)  The author is a fan of true crime, according to her bio.  It shows, I think — the entries I found the most disturbing were rooted firmly in the real world.  There is one story by which I am still a bit haunted — it involves one character’s surprise disappearance and return.  What transpires for this person in the interim is largely a mystery … but the story’s ending is both explicit and maddeningly tragic.  (I’ve refrained from naming any story titles here because I am too concerned about inadvertent spoilers.)

In short, Spitefully Stabbity Spidery Stuff is clever, well executed and sometimes brutal.  I cheerfully recommend it to fans of short horror fiction.



cover

A very short review of “The Exorcist: Believer” (2023)

I’m sorry to report here that “The Exorcist: Believer” (2023) is indeed a bit lackluster.  (The buzz online was pretty critical of the this latest entry in the franchise.)

It starts off strongly enough.  The story’s setup is methodical and well paced, that characters feel real, and the movie does a good job building tension.  It’s in the latter half that the movie falls short — it slides into a chaotic jumble of characters and story elements.  There is one major story development that arrives as a welcome reference to the classic 1973 original film … but it’s written off in an unsatisfying way that has little effect on the plot as a whole.  (I am being intentionally vague here to avoid spoilers.)

There are a few things to like here … it is definitely a little scary in a couple of places.  And the two girls playing the afflicted teenagers (Lidyah Jewett and Olivia O’Neill) are superb.

“The Exorcist: Believer” isn’t a bad horror movie, exactly.  It’s really just average — and it has the misfortune of being compared to the original.



exor - Copy

You need to watch “The Fall of the House of Usher” (2023).

“The Fall of the House of Usher” (2023) is goddam terrific.  I have never thanked a college buddy as enthusiastically for inviting me to watch his Netflix with him.

It’s unflinching and unfailingly loving of its Edgar Allan Poe source material.  (The eight-episode miniseries actually draws from a number of Poe’s works — not just the eponymous 1839 short story.)  The acting is top-notch — particularly from leads Carla Gugino, Bruce Greenwood and
Mary McDonnell.  The dialogue is priceless.  And it is genuinely scary!  (Yes, a lot of us really love Poe, but you must admit that it is challenging to make his works fresh and truly frightening to a modern audience.)

I almost said that I loved it more than “The Haunting of Hill House” (2018), another superb horror miniseries by director Mike Flanagan that employs much of the same cast.  “The Fall of the House of Usher” can be considered an unofficial sequel to both the 2018 miniseries and 2020’s “The Haunting of Bly Manor.”

My heart still belongs to Hill House, though — although “The Fall of the House of Usher” is Flanagan’s best, in some ways, I think “Hill House” tells more a human story, with redeeming, realistic characters that we genuinely worry over.

“The Fall of the House of Usher” is a close second, though.



usher

A short review of Season 2 of “From” (2023).

“From” Season 2 (2023) wasn’t quite as good as Season 1.  The show borrows so much its obvious inspiration, “Lost” (2004-2010), that it also inherits that program’s central flaw — an overabundance of mysteries that confuse the narrative.

Season 1 was … mostly a self-enclosed, tidy horror tale that was reminiscent of the various iterations of “The Twilight Zone” — waylaid travelers in a mysteriously  inescapable town are stalked by supernatural monsters.  Smaller mysteries were peppered into the plot, and for me those story points were mostly just distracting — but it didn’t detract from my overall enjoyment of the show.

Season 2, however, introduced so many subplot mysteries that the story sometimes became a little difficult to follow.  (Or are they really subplots?  We’re now shown that the monsters of Season 1 are only one element of the supernatural landscape that our protagonists must survive.)

My complaint above should be taken in context, though — “From” is still the scariest show on television.  It’s got some really good writing and some terrific characters, with a few standout actors that hit a home run every time they’re onscreen.  One is David Alpay as a the group’s hilarious, antisocial genius; another is Scott McCord as a gentle giant with the mind of an eight-year-old boy.

“From” is still an amazing watch.  The second season wasn’t perfect, but it was still great.  It remains the show that I am surprised that so few people are talking about.



from

A few quick words on the series premiere of “Secret Invasion” (2023).

I’ve never actually read a comic book featuring the shapeshifting alien Skrulls.  The story concept always seemed too campy for me.  (And it still does.)  But I still had loads of fun with the first episode of Marvel’s “Secret Invasion” (2023).  I’d cheerfully rate this new limited series an 8 out of 10.

There are two clear reasons here.  The first is that I love comic book stories in which ordinary, non-powered characters are working with (or against) superpowered characters — it makes the story and action feel more grounded in reality, and the juxtaposition is always fun to explore.

The second is that the Marvel Cinematic Universe just happens to be good at the cloak-and-dagger stuff.  It’s a little surprising, if you think about it.  Here we have a fictional universe known for linchpinned by story conceits derived from science fiction or magic.  Yet the MCU’s stories about spies, governments and politics remain fan favorites.  (Look at the broad-based appeal of 2014’s excellent “Captain America: Winter Soldier,” for example.)  As I’d hoped, I really enjoyed the twists and surprises of the first episode.

Samuel L. Jackson, Martin Freeman, Emilia Clarke are always a pleasure to watch.  And I’m starting to understand that Ben Mendelsohn is really terrific too.

This looks to be one of the better MCU outings.  I recommend it.



si