The old “rich white people getting away with horrible things, but it’s justified” story. Not because what they’re doing is “good” but rather the other person(s) does such a despicable act that we’re supposed to forget about their white-collar crimes.
​
Inheritance tells the story of Lauren Monroe (Collins), a 30-year-old district attorney who’s the black sheep of her wealthy and powerful family because she’d rather become a civil servant than protect her legendary banker father’s (Warburton) friends. After her father’s death she is left almost completely out of his will, getting only $1million, but with the condition of taking over a secret that no one knows. Her father has been holding a man (Pegg) prisoner for 30 years. Soon Lauren battles with her morality of doing what is right, while going down the rabbit hole of her family’s lies and deception.

The movie starts with a chess metaphor between Lauren and her father discussing how in chess, like in life, you must think 10 moves (or 10 years) ahead. This instantly makes us aware of what sort of “battle of wits,” “cat and mouse” dynamic we are in for between Lauren and her dad’s captive, who goes by the name of Morgan Warner. For most of the story we get truly little of that dynamic, as it’s more Morgan revealing secrets proven to be true. From her father’s affair/love child, to her younger politician brother who is facing a campaign scandal during his reelection. “Wait, you’re telling me he is under 30 and already up for reelection?” Yes, I am.

All joking aside the first 90-minutes are an intimate morality tale of privilege that is tense in all the right places. Despite Pegg doing his “badass” or “grizzled” American accent, it was amazing to see him in something without a lick of comedy. As we are watching this righteous DA begin to cover up these scandals to protect her own, it works as a great upper-class thriller that would have been big in the late 80s and 90s. It even comes with its own Keyser Soze moment; the scene at the end of The Usual Suspects that turned a decent movie into an iconic film. And if Inheritance ended on the chess piece, connecting itself to the opening, then what a movie it would be. I’d probably be giving it a solid 4 or 4 ½. However, that’s not what happens, as another 20-some minutes of story unfold, taking that layered thriller with well-grounded characters, and twisting it into some generic plot that boils down to good vs evil. If the villain literally said, “I’m a bad guy,” it would’ve lessened them to a one-dimensional character.

The extra 20 minutes forces you to realize all the subplots that they fail to tie up, make most of all the reveals and twists feel unjustified. While I believe that anyone can write about sensitive material if it is appropriately handled, the big question is why in the end doesn’t feel earned? Maybe because you have a male writer and director attempting to shock or make a character instantaneously bad (which that act does), but it ends up feeling cheap and lazy. I’m sure you’re able to guess what subject matter I’m hinting toward, would result in a person being held prisoner for 30 years.

I don’t know. On a technical level it is outstanding. The acting is superb until the story devolves them into basic tropes. I hate putting blame on a screenwriter because scripts change exponentially from the pre to postproduction, but it comes down to less is more, and the more time I had with this movie, the more imperfections I found.
 
2 out of 5

Alfred Hitchcock has a lot to answer for. Sure he made superb thrillers, but did he ever stop to think about the legions of knock-offs, homages and copycats he’d inspire? Rear Window provided a template for films about housebound snoopers obsessed with their neighbours’ misdeeds, one that filmmakers are happy to refer to over and over again.
 
Case in point. I was expecting a serious Satanic Panic but I got a frustrating and clunky Rear Window instead.
 
Day 13 is a thriller, the first feature film for director Jax Medel and writers Dan Gannon & Walter Goldwater. We follow teenager Colton (Alex MacNicoll, who looks distractingly like a 30 year old) as he becomes obsessed with the house across the road. Formerly empty, it’s now occupied by love interest Heather (Genevieve Hannelius) and her mysterious guardian Magnus Torvald (Martin Kove, though I mistook him for Mark Kermode on first glance and couldn’t shake the resemblance after that). Colton’s certain that Magnus is up to no good, and comes to believe that Magnus is preparing to sacrifice Heather in an evil Satanic ritual. The cops won’t believe him, so it’s up to Colton to save her…
 
Where do I start with this? Tell you what, I’ll start at the beginning where the movie started – with 2  full minutes of credits over a black screen. There’s no surer sign that a film is going to stretch itself to breaking point to hit feature length than an overly long credits sequence while nothing happens. And sure enough, we’re treated throughout the film to repetitive shots of Colton staring through his window at night, looking at nothing very much while ominous music plays. There’s even a pointless dream sequence towards the end to take up a handy five minutes. Every little helps.
 
It’s not that the film is boring. It’s actually pretty engaging. It’s just that the engagement mostly comes in the form of frustration at some of the creative decisions they went with. MacNicoll is fine as Colton, a bit bland sometimes, but the character himself is awful. He starts out as Generic Moody Teen Archetype #7: resentful of his mother dating and annoyed by his younger sister existing. The family arguments are tedious and grating, and don’t even set anything up considering the mother goes on holiday and is gone from the film forever.
 
One night Colton sees some lights flickering in the house across the street and is curious – fair enough. It happens again, and then he sees the shadowy figure of Magnus moving in at night. This is weird, so what does he do? Does he go over in the morning to introduce himself to his new neighbour?
 
No. Instead he buys $600 worth of surveillance equipment to spy on the house.
 
This is… it’s baffling. Nothing sinister has happened to precipitate this, no matter how badly the music wants us to believe that the house is spooky. He just immediately jumps to spying. He only meets Heather because he goes onto the property and tries to get into the chained basement, despite knowing that someone’s moved in now. And despite Heather seeing perfectly normal, he keeps spying on the house, even capturing her showering (which, ew, this is our hero?).
 
Heather discovers this and doesn’t immediately call the cops, instead letting him continue his surveillance on her guardian – this is initially ludicrous and is the point where I started to check out, but in fairness it does make some sense in light of the film’s ending. It’s just such an unrealistic action otherwise that the rest of the film suffers for it because it shatters the immersion.
 
I’m not going to go into too much more detail, though I could easily rant for pages about how off and weird it all is. One of Colton’s cameras is literally focused on a lawn sprinkler. Why? Because the audience needs to see it, of course, which would be fair enough if there were any reason at all that Colton would have for pointing a camera at that specific sprinkler. Colton does some research on the house in a library, which apparently stocks scrapbooks full of newspaper clippings about that specific house? Why not just stick to internet research, which we saw him do (and incidentally, if you want to look at someone’s online purchase history, you won’t get far by just doing a search for their name, which must be why the scene abruptly ended and we never found out what Magnus was buying).
 
At one point near the climax I had to throw my hands up and take a step away for a moment. After a dangerous near-miss one night, Colton decides he needs to rescue Heather right-now-straight-away… and then he has a nap, giving us the aforementioned pointless dream sequence. The lack of logic here is so frustrating, and it feels like they needed to pad the film out so dropped a dream sequence there even though he’d just said how time-sensitive this rescue was. Gah!
 
It’s not all bad, though. It’s competently shot for the most part, and like I said, MacNicoll is fine and Hannelius is very endearing. I don’t buy their romance for a second, but that’s not their fault. The best performance is of course Mark Kermo- sorry, sorry, Martin Kove. He’s appropriately sinister when needed and makes for a great axe-wielding villain.
 
It’s just a shame that the entire conflict could be avoided with one conversation. I won’t say more on that because spoilers, but one long chat would have ended the film 40 minutes in. But then we’d have been spared the frankly hilarious ending – I don’t think it was meant to be funny, but it was the highlight of the film for me!

I wish I could be more positive about Day 13. It’s the first feature for the creative team and the actors did the best they could with what they had. It’s not a bad concept, it just could have been handled so much better.

2 ginger biscuits out of 5

Caleb Watches Movies, returns to Ginger Nuts of Horror with a review of Apartment 1BR, a film that fellow Ginger Nutter Craig Draheim loved as well "technically strong, and I found myself engaged throughout. While the twists and turns don’t come out of the blue, like the “creepy character” is actually her true ally, as well as some other clichés that are used for constructing the narrative, its strength is in Marmor’s vision, making any of the trivial issues fade while he materializes a captivating story."

 New to Los Angeles, a woman moves into a seemingly perfect apartment complex, and soon finds out that there are consequences for breaking the rules.  

Initial release: 18 July 2019
Director: David Marmor
Music composed by: Ronen Landa
Screenplay: David Marmor
Producers: Alok Mishra, Allard Cantor, Shane Vorster, Nic Izzi, Jarrod Murray, Samuel Sandweiss

 Dark Shadows’ attempts to combine the horror, comedy and soap opera genres in 113 minutes result in defanged fright and humour without bite. It is a lesson in how aiming for too much can ultimately achieve so little.

Tim Burton has directed successful horror cinema from the whimsically creepy stop animation Corpse Bride (2005) to the starkly horrifying slasher musical Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street (2007). His films often meld nightmare with humour while using strong visual aesthetics and befitting colour schemes to create a unique viewing experience. Dark Shadows looked no different with its appealing blend of 70’s and Gothic style. Despite its all-star cast, featuring Burton’s favourites Johnny Depp and Helena Bonham Carter, it’s unlikely the film will linger in our memories for as long as Burton’s previous work.

Dark Shadows was inspired by the original 1966-1971 soap opera of the same name. It opens with an expositional sequence in which the wealthy Collins family moves from Liverpool to Maine in 1760, establishing the fictional fishing town of Collinsport and their Gothic mansion Collinwood. When the Collins’ son Barnabas spurns the immortal witch Angelique, she murders his parents and fiancée, Josette. Angelique curses him to an everlasting life of suffering as a vampire and seals him in a coffin for two centuries.

In 1972, Barnabas escapes and returns to the now-ruined Collinwood to meet his descendants: head of the family, Elizabeth; her moody teenage daughter, Carolyn; Elizabeth’s brother, Roger; and his son, David, who believes he can see his mother’s ghost. Dr Hoffman and Victoria Winters live with the family, having been hired as David’s child therapist and governess respectively. Barnabas swears to re-establish the Collins’ once-successful fishing business, all the while rebuking the renewed affections of Angelique and realising a strong attraction to Victoria, who bears an inexplicable resemblance to Josette (both played by Bella Heathcote).

If you’re looking to be even mildly creeped out, don’t watch Dark Shadows. Although it’s classed as a horror-comedy, there’s nothing horrifying about it, and its comedy is disappointingly inconsistent. What little that connects it to the horror genre is its subversion of traditional Gothic tropes, of which the only humorous take is Depp’s performance as Barnabas. Every single successful joke comes from Barnabas interacting with and adjusting to the ‘future’. It was entertaining to see the trope of the cool and cruel immortal turned on its head, as Depp naively misunderstands common expressions and the norms of modern civilisation – early on, he mistakes the glowing ‘M’ of a McDonald’s sign as the mark of Mephistopheles.

Depp, who also starred in Burton’s Charlie and the Chocolate Factory (2005) and Alice in Wonderland (2010) among many others, is impressively unrecognisable as himself when adopting the role of Barnabas Collins. Michelle Pfeiffer and Helena Bonham Carter were well-chosen as Elizabeth, the collected albeit initially resigned matriarch of the family, and Dr Hoffman, the blunt, alcoholic psychologist (even though the trope of the resentfully aging woman is massively overdone). I would have liked to see more from them both, especially Bonham Carter, whose storyline unfortunately had no impact on the plot, but the focus rarely strayed from Depp and Eva Green as the obsessive Angelique.

Although Pfeiffer, Green and Bonham Carter performed well, they didn’t contribute to the comedy unless they were interacting with Depp, and even then, there were exceptions to this rule. In particular, the physics-defying sex scene over halfway through had me physically cringing. Though Depp was the sole source of Dark Shadows’ effective comedy, he wasn’t consistent in his humour, and when he was funny, I never keeled over with laughter; at most, I smiled to myself. The fault lies with Seth Grahame-Smith’s script rather than the acting; it often used cheap jokes and clichéd dialogue that could only ever be awkwardly delivered.

I also attribute the inconsistent humour to Burton’s difficulty mimicking the tone of the original soap opera, struggling even to put it into words: “it had a weird seriousness, but it was funny in a way that wasn’t really funny. We just had to feel our way through it to find the tone” (Mitchell, 2012). A lot of the film’s failings can be explained by Burton’s attempts to capture this soap opera style.

Due to the ongoing nature of soaps, they explore a myriad of ideas with no time constraints while movies are limited in time and in what they can develop.  Dark Shadows had a whole nursery of subplots running around unsupervised with hardly enough screen time to give them the attention they deserved. There were hints at underlying familial issues I would have enjoyed seeing explored. I presume a later reveal is meant to justify Carolyn and Elizabeth’s strained relationship, but the explanation does not equal resolution. A final heart-to-heart between the two would have brought this subplot to a satisfying conclusion. Instead, I was left wondering why Burton bothered to signpost their rocky relationship at all. Most of the subplots were left similarly unresolved or hastily explained in the climax, a supernatural fight that felt rushed despite its glacial pace. The finale struggled to tie up the plot’s loose trails, ultimately asking more questions than it answered.

Because there were so many half-realised ideas crammed into two hours, characters were often forgotten or developed at the last minute. Although the 1972 storyline begins with Victoria moving in, seemingly establishing her as the main protagonist, the focus jarringly switches to Barnabas as soon as he is awakened twenty minutes in. The script then forgets Victoria’s existence, save for a few shots in a three-minute-long montage, until it’s once again necessary.
​
The ending appears to set up a sequel with one seemingly concluded subplot reopened in the last frame, though this was never followed up. The suggestive final scene was explained by Burton as being “more to do with [the film’s] soap opera structure” than the intention to produce a sequel (ibid.) This sounds more like a last-minute justification based on the movie’s moderate failure. It received generally negative reviews and grossed $29 million in its USA opening weekend despite its $150 million budget (IMDb, Dark Shadows, n.d.).

I really wanted to like Dark Shadows. It was obviously a passion project for Burton and some members of the cast who were fans of the original series as children (Radish, 2012). In trying to combine horror, comedy and soap opera elements, the film captured none of the above, save for a few repeatable one-liners from Depp, rendering it directionless and unsatisfying. For that, I give Dark Shadows a four out of ten.

Growing up in Michigan as a horror fan, there’s one thing you must (not like) love, The Evil Dead franchise. I’m not sure if the same rules pertain to the younger generations (maybe It Follows) but it felt that way for me. Michigan action and science fiction fans must also have that blind loyalty for Robocop, though unrelated to the topic at hand. So, like many, my first experience with the work of Joe Lansdale was through the film adaptation of his story Bubba Ho-Tep, starring Michigan native, Bruce Campbell. See, the rambling was with purpose.

Joe R. Lansdale is considered one of the “most well-known, unknown authors.” While his work is considered in the same vein as a pulp novel or the B movie at the drive-in, Lansdale has become an anomaly as an author who can mix every genre together in one project and yet make something truly entertaining with emotional weight at its core. The documentary, All Hail the Popcorn King provides a 55-minute glimpse into the life behind this distinctive voice.

As a fan, this is a great little doc that fits perfectly with Lansdale’s style. It is all over the place in how the information is presented or formatted but it works, and within it are pockets of heartfelt insights on topics like race. He even discusses being a liberal in East Texas, why he stays there, and how it has allowed him to respectfully address subject matters from both a liberal and conservative point of view. It feels like the audience is hanging out with the author, as he’s showing us around town and talking about the things he loves in a down-to-earth fashion. Actually, it feels like he’s more inclined to give us little facts about his town, the drive-in, or discuss martial arts (or martial “science” as is referenced) than his work. We are treated with the doc highlighting three of his most influential or popular works with Bubba Ho-Tep, the Hap and Leonard series, and The Drive-In, which are great crowd pleasers and introductions to the author’s style.

I was 100% into it. However, as the credits rolled, I found myself asking, “What was the purpose of this documentary?” Is it a “fluff piece” destined to be a special feature for some adaptation of his work? Because that’s what it is. I imagine if I showed this to my partner, who likes Bubba Ho-Tep, yet hasn’t read any of Lansdale’s writing, she’d think he was interesting but there’s not enough content or depth to hook her into checking out his work. So, this is a “by the fans, for the fans” piece, here to fill the small niche that wants it.
​
I wish I had more to say to really shore this up and help bring more people on board with an incredible author, but I find myself about to enter the realm of verbosity for the sake of a higher word count. If you’re already a fan then definitely check it out. If you’re interested and just starting out, then read some of his work first. If you’re anywhere from don’t care to unsure, this won’t sway your opinion at all. Whatever camp you fall into, it definitely gave this reviewer enough reason to reread some of his personal favorites.
 
4 out of 5 as a fan
3 out of 5 as a reviewer

Robert Eggers, a New England fanatic is back at it again, doing what he knows best. Sticking to the same genre and place as his last hit, ‘The Witch’. Within the first five minutes, it’s clear what is different to its predecessor. It’s a black and white film done in an aspect ratio of 1.19:1 - giving it that aged feeling, which is different for sure but a difference most welcomed. According to Jarin Blaschke, the custom monochromatic filter they used was designed to reveal the many blemishes within the skin.[1] I think this choice really works, giving it that gritty and weathered feel to themselves and the environment throughout the film. Although, at face value the idea of a black and white film puts people off. Which isn’t fair, but that’s the reality of it.

Initially the idea came from the story of Small’s lighthouse near Wales: Two lighthouse keepers, both named Thomas, one older and one younger, a storm comes and they become stranded. Robert found that having these two people with the same name in a confined space would prove to blur identity - making it become strange. Now, initially the main character gives the lighthouse keeper a fake name to prevent him from knowing his true identity. Maybe I missed it, but I feel as if we should have been given some form of notification of his true identity earlier on, so we know he’s lying - it could have even been subtle. Either way, this first name helps us differentiate between both, but I do feel there was a lost opportunity there.

The highlight of the film is most definitely Willem Dafoe’s performance as Thomas Wake. An old Sea Salt with a strong connection to his lighthouse, a connection that Patterson’s Thomas envies and is curious over. This obsession over this large phallic building becomes the very centre of this movie. Giving us very confusing scenes at the start but then eventually unpacking it - although not entirely - towards the end. Willem’s accent becomes almost immediately awe provoking. Although hard to understand, his idea stemmed from Sarah-Orne-Jewett, who interviewed aged sea captains who used this dialect.[2] It’s difficult to understand, so in a way it is a negative point, you need your listeners to understand in order for them to enjoy it. It’s a major risk and all in all i feel sorry for those who can’t understand but, it is a great touch and it didn’t affect me that much, but you have to take these things into account. If you do understand, you are in for a treat. This film is littered with beautifully crafted monologues coming from Older Thomas, all of them hit the spot. Their choice in art direction really compliments Willem’s performance here, placing the light in spots that make him appear almost celestial, in charge rather. Just make sure you’re fine with the sound of farts because you’ll hear them constantly - this is done mainly to show dominance over young Thomas, which is a perfect vulgar touch.

Furthermore, the atmosphere is great in this film, you can almost taste the sea spray as you watch it. This all comes down to the great cinematographer Jarin Blaschke, who in this case won two awards for this film. Alongside Damien Volpe's great sound design, making the film feel much like a pressure cooker.[3] Although, some may be put off with it reminding them of the tinnitus they are so desperately trying to ignore. This is because they use a foghorn as a form of tedious repetition, giving us a headache on purpose. Personally, I love this, and it definitely adds to the experience in the form of creating a connection between us and those living amongst it.

The tale is structured quite well, splitting off into four different sections: Burn | Sin | Descent | Madness. It all comes down to that initial sin committed by the younger Thomas, it’s quite an eye striking scene and is heavily symbolic. Although, I do love the symbolism that this film has with its seagulls and how it allegorises the lighthouse… I do feel as if you won’t get it straight away, other than what the lighthouse represents since it’s very on the nose. That is why I feel to fully enjoy and understand the film with all its allegorical meanings, you must give it a second watch. This is due to the dialogue being difficult to understand at times and everything not really hitting you completely. Now the way the descent into madness is handled, I personally think is done well. From simple dinners on stormy nights to hard work on the island. A mystery about older Thomas’ first companion that slowly gets unfolded and the stunning psychedelic visions of nineteenth century, nautical folklore creatures. Ultimately ending with an open yet closed finish that keeps you thinking.
​
All in all, it’s a great addition to Robert Egger’s holster of great films. I give the Lighthouse a powerful eight out of ten - verging upon a nine. I would have given it that nine if it did not require that second viewing to gather everything but don’t let that discourage you, this film is truly a beauty, albeit full of farts.
 
- Jarod Vass
 
 
 
Bibliography:
Evening Standard. 2020. The Lighthouse Review: A Dark Tale Of Men, Madness And Twisted Fantasies. [online] Available at: <https://www.standard.co.uk/go/london/film/the-lighthouse-review-robert-pattinson-a4349831.html> [Accessed 20 April 2020].
 
Jewett, S., 1884. The Mate Of The Daylight And Friends Ashore. Forgotten Books.
 
Penevant, 2020. The Lighthouse - A Dark & Stormy Tale. [video] Available at: <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F-Dusv4FHFU> [Accessed 19 April 2020].


[1] (Penevant, 2020)

[2] (Jewett, 1884)

[3] (The Lighthouse review: A dark tale of men, madness and twisted fantasies, 2020)

Witch Tales (Cuentos de la Bruja) is an indie horror movie that is the first to be filmed in both English and Spanish simultaneously, as it stars an all Latinx cast. Let me just start off by saying that the definitive version of the film is the Spanish version. The actors seemed a lot more comfortable and natural delivering their lines in Spanish. With that being said, the thing that carries the film is the ambitiousness of it, the cinematography, and the neat tricks director Mike Lyddon used to capture some creepy moments.
​
The film is an anthology, made up of three short films that are framed by another storyline, where a witch (played by Mayella Lloclla) is seen brewing something “special” for Halloween night. The witch serves as the host of the show (think the Crypt Keeper in Tales from the Crypt) and introduces us to the films. It works wonderfully, as it sets the tone for the collection of films and also gives the audience something to look forward to in between.

In the opening scene the camera is moving into a mysterious room, while a spooky score sets the mood. Then, the camera moves upward, and we see the witch mixing the contents of her cauldron, and immediately it feels like we’re at the beginning stages of a haunted attraction. This helps get in the frame of mind for the three films, and signals to the audience that this isn’t a film that is going to take itself too seriously.

The films have clever storylines, with some interesting twists thrown in, but let me be clear about this; they’re very cheesy. Their style reminded me of the 90’s Goosebumps show or Are You Afraid of the Dark except with more mature themes.

The strongest of the three films was the first one, Cycle of Terror (Cyclo de Terror) which is about a thug, played by Renato Babilonia, murders someone and then is subsequently followed around by the same horrific scene. I won’t say too much about this one because watching the storyline unravel before you is most of the fun, but there was one neat trick the director did to capture the creepiness on screen without overt goriness. I’ll give you a hint in that it involves rodents and a decomposing dead body the rodents are snacking on.
​
The second film, Experiment in Terror (Experimento de Terror) has my favorite short in the whole film. There’s an old-school radio at the front of the scene, and behind, unfocused and blurry, a mad scientist is experimenting on a woman in a wheelchair. This was the most visually creative shot of the movie and showed the director’s prowess with the camera. Raul Chamorro, who plays the antagonist, did the best acting this entire film sees. He did an excellent job of portraying a maniacal mad scientist and was the best acting seen in the movie. His acting, coupled with some great music, really made Experiment in Terror a fun watch.

Unfortunately, in the third film, there is a significant drop in quality. The final short is about a narcissistic chef who doesn’t seem to have a single redeeming quality. He treats his coworkers like dirt, neglects his family, and has an affair behind his wife’s back. The story is slow to develop without any real characters to root for, as the main focus of the whole story is an unlikeable chef. Somewhere in the slow, plodding story is a revenge plot, and the ending scene was decent enough, but not quite worth the payoff. Of the three shorts, this stood out as demonstrably the weakest one of them all.

There’s nothing groundbreaking here, and the acting isn’t the greatest in the world, but there is some creative camera work used to tell the stories. And despite the cheesiness of the costumes and sets, the film does a good job of capturing some grossness (so I would strongly suggest against eating while watching this!). All in all, I thought this horror anthology of films was fun enough. If you liked any of the aforementioned shows like Goosebumps, Tales from the Crypt, or Are You Afraid of the Dark and want to see those style of stories with more mature themes and starring some Latinx authors, this film would be perfect for you on a chilly night around Halloween time.

You can now buy the WITCH TALES blu-ray from the following sites –
Ebay –https://www.ebay.com/itm/203022663315
​Amazon 
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B089QZNVLY/
On this site
http://www.horroranthologymovies.com/witch-tales-blu-ray/

​

It’s a local legend. No one is sure if this “Camp Slaughter” place is real or not. But a group of college kids renting out a cabin deep in the woods of Pennsylvania will soon realize the truth. They’ll realize the danger, too. Or rather, the cannibal out in the woods will bring the danger to them…

​Born in Mexico but raised in the United States, Sergio Gomez lives in Philadelphia with his family. He enjoys reading, martial arts, cooking, but most of all writing. His favorite superhero is either Batman or Hellboy depending on the day.

Find out more about Sergio by checking out his website Authorsergiogomez.com

Warning: the following contains spoilers.

Filming for The Cabin in the Woods originally began back in 2009 and was scheduled for release the following year. However, due to financial issues MDM were having it was shelved until it was taken up by Lionsgate in 2011 and finally released in 2012. However, the delay ended up working in the film’s favour as Chris Hemsworth was cast as Thor during shooting so by the time the film came out it gained more interest from Hemsworth’s newfound status.

A group of American college students go on what they hope to be a fun filled weekend away in a cabin in the middle of the woods. Little do they know that by the time night falls the five of them will be fighting for their lives as they become part of a carefully orchestrated ritual in an attempt to appease the ancient gods. Terrorised by the Buckner family who are hell bent on hunting each and every one of them it’s on Dana to decide to save the world…or destroy it.

At first, I didn’t like any of the characters as I just thought of them as your typical teen slasher stock characters. We have the athlete, Curt (Chris Hemsworth) and his sexy girlfriend Jules (Anna Hutchison). Dana the awkward virgin - sort of - (Kristen Connolly), the new guy, Holden (Jesse Williams) and Marty (Fran Kranz) the stoner who no one takes seriously. Once I watched more of the film, I realised that these characters were more rounded than they first appeared. This was done purposely both by the scientists in the film to ease the ritual process, as well as the directors of the film to parody the archetype characters of the genre as a whole. Although they were more complex than I first thought, I still didn’t feel much of a connection to most of the characters. In fact, the only person I really liked was Marty although I did feel for Curt and Dana the rest of the characters didn’t do it for me.

This film has been labelled as a comedy horror and where I do agree with this, I think there was definitely a clear split in where these two elements were. The comedy mostly appeared in scenes at the lab at least, for me anyway. Whilst there were some funny moments amongst the teens at the cabin these were few and far between and were mostly around Marty’s character. The comedic aspects of the lab were strategically placed to allow the viewer some relief between the more horrifying scenes.

I’m not sure whether it was intended to be funny or sexy but Jules’ makeout scene with the taxidermied wolf was more horrifying than any of the bloodiest scenes in the film, her attempt at being sexy was very cringeworthy. But, despite being labelled as the whore I feel that this is an unfair statement towards Jules, yes, she attempts to be sexy –  again, very cringey but maybe I wasn’t the target audience - but she is in a happy relationship with her boyfriend and only behaves this way after drinking and the lab’s involvement. The attempts at sex appeal throughout the film could again be parodies of other teen slasher films. The opening scene with Dana in her underwear seems irrelevant to the rest of the scene but if we look at other films of this genre a half-dressed woman being spied on through her window is a common trope.

Marty is also named ‘the fool’ which, considering he seems to have the most sense out of the five of them, doesn’t ring true. Not only does he suggest to the others that they should leave the basement and its artifacts alone, he also figures out that this was not all just an unhappy accident. It’s safe to say that if everyone had listened to him in the beginning there is a good chance that they would’ve had a much more fun weekend.

I am conflicted about how I feel towards the films ending, I am both satisfied but also disappointed as the end felt rather anticlimactic, but I can also understand why it happened the way it did. Throughout the film ancient Gods were alluded to and the people at the lab constantly stressed the importance of the rituals in order to appease them and keep humanity safe but by the end we still haven’t gotten a proper explanation as to who these Gods are and how the yearly rituals came to be. Considering that the opening credits showed multiple ancient ritual/sacrifice scenes, I was hopefully that the ancient world would’ve been given more focus. The end wasn’t what I expected and although I would’ve liked one last final fight to the end rather than the passive finish we got, I did still enjoy it and found it was almost more impactful than more blood considering the amount that was spilled through the rest of the film.

The director, Drew Goddard – also known for Buffy the Vampire Slayer - made good use of sound and lighting; much like how he mixed the comedic elements in with the more horrific scenes to keep the viewers on their toes he did the same with the sounds that were used. In the opening credits we are presented with creepy and intense music but when the film begins it immediately changes to an upbeat tune and the lighting was noticeably lighter creating a feel good mood. Lights and sounds were used well so that they complimented the mood of the scenes evoking specific emotions within the viewer. I also really liked the subtle hints that were threaded through the narrative that after watching the film a second time I really began to notice and understand the significance. I found it really interesting that each of the rituals show in the film were based on other well-known films and monsters for example, the Kyoto ritual is referencing The Ring, Buenos Aires is King Kong, Madrid is Dracula etc
​
On first watch I wasn’t a huge lover of the film but despite the fact that horror isn’t my preferred genre – in fact I usually attempt to avoid it at all costs – it is now something I would gladly watch again. It is safe to say that although production got off to a rocky start, the film managed to make a comeback making a worldwide gross of $94,348,403 from a budget of $30,000,000. Overall, I rate this film an 8/10.
 
 
BIO
Megan Harris is an avid bookworm and film watcher who loves anything packed with action and unexpected turns. From a young age she has always been daydreaming of far off lands and daring adventures and at the age of 15 began to write her own tales and poetry which she shares on her Instagram page @meganilonaharris . Her favourite authors are L. J. Smith, Sarah J. Maas and Darren Shan, all of whom inspire her own work.