The town of Mt. Moriah comes under the thumb of Martha, a ghost who comes back to haunt the teens, who witnessed her death as children, during a “game” of ‘Ghost in the Graveyard.’

So far so many other films ,the revenging ghost is hardly a new concept in horror films, from The Ring to The Woman in Black and a 1000 other films in between you can be forgiven for thinking that you may have seen this all before.  And to be fair you have, Ghost in the Graveyard, riffs on countless other films throughout its run time.  Childhood game leads to childhood tragedy, child at centre of the tragedy leaves town and comes back years later, murders begin again, secrets societies know the truth of what of is really going on, check, check, check , and check. 

Now some of you may already be closing this review down, or at least thinking to yourself, "well this is another film to avoid."  Stop! While  Ghost in the Graveyard,  may sound exactly like the last film that disappointed you, it is in fact a somewhat charming, and effective chiller, that achieves a lot more in terms of scares and watchablity than many films with much bigger budgets.  

The performances of the three main leads are probably the films strongest point.  Props must go to Jake Busey, I must admit I had to check with IMDB that this was in fact  Jake Busey.  Many of you like myself will only have ever seen him in films that require him to act like the son of Gary Busey.  Who would have thought that the man behind Shasta McNasty could be capable of such a sympathetic performance. The  concerned father that holds a secret that will rock the foundations of his daughter's life  performance from his is both nuanced and heartbreaking at all of the right moments in the script.  


Kelli Berglund's and Olivia Larsen as Sally and the school bully Zoe, with whom she must join forces with to defeat the evil, are performances that both hold their own and effectively play off each other while on screen together.  There is a good sense of chemistry between the two actors, and they work well with a script that at times has some cringeworthy dialogue.  

Overall the story is arc is satisfying, and leads to a conclusion that won't leave you screaming at the `TV screen, however, this is a film that could have done with a fair bit of either trimming of ideas, or  a more centralised focus on the direction that it wants to take. There is almost a sense that the director wanted this to have been a two or three part film, and his grand magnum opus, but pressure from the studios either forced him to cut it all down into one film, or perhaps someone didn't say hold on a minute.  

There is a lot of great ideas, and set pieces throughout the film, and Comparetto keeps a fresh eye on many of the plot elements that we may have seen before.  For example by transposing the "haunted house" theme to an outside location, in particular the titular graveyard gives the film a welcome sense of freshness.  The old fashioned haunted house motif is so well worn, even the creaky floorboards have up-cycled themselves.  The use of non standard locations also allows from some clever cinematography, in particular the scenes at night in the graveyard are stunning.  However, like Comparetto, the camerawork at times from Reut needed some reigning in, as at times it felt like he was a kid with a new box , determined to give every camera  technique a shot in the film.  

There is still a cohesive  sense of style to the film and it does look amazing despite its limiting budgetary restraints.  Both Comparetto and Reut understand that when a films budget is low, and you have a half descent script the best way to make a film watchable is ensure that the film looks good, while allowing for the story to be told, without annoying the viewer.  Which in main comes down to it being that film that doesn't rely on jump scares every five, yes there are a few, but the tension, and sense of dread comes from the script and cinematography rather than the viewer waiting for the next  loud bang 

Ghost in the Graveyard, may not the most original film, and despite its inherent flaws it also a highly enjoyable film that draws the best from both the cast and crew.  And while it may not the scariest of films you will watch this year, it does mean that if you are looking for something to show to the young teenagers in your family, this will provide ample thrills, without the risk of traumatising them for life 

After a family's estranged aunt passes away, they're reluctant and creeped out to receive her cremated ashes. But when a series of supernatural misfortunes beset them, they'll have to go through Hell to be rid of her angry spirit.
 
Initial Reaction
 
C. First I have to give credit to the cast. They were dynamic and felt like a tight-knit group with “real” people and not because the script says so. Melinda DeKay, who played Aunt Marion fits the bill as an evil spirit and there were many creepy moments. A lot of this is due to the format that most likely relies heavily on improvisation for the interview scenes. The best comparison I can come up with is the horror version of Modern Family, as most of the movie is in a narrative format but it will jump to the family members being interviewed on their couch. There was even some comedic moments that I felt helped liven the movie up. However, Modern Family works with viewers because it is 24ish minutes and has plenty of elements to move the pacing along: large cast, multiple storylines, commercials, slapstick action-driven elements, and so on. Sadly by 24ish minutes of Ashes it felt like I’d been sitting there for 90 minutes already. It doesn’t help that most of the major goals, such as the aunt’s ashes and the family realizing the ashes are what is causing their misfortune, then deciding to get rid of them is all made clear in the first 10. While attempting to make this a dread-soaked slow burn, by throwing all this information at us so quickly we are kind of left thinking, “okay… what now?”
 
This is where every card is pulled out to keep things going to that “appropriate” feature length, with countless scenes of them sitting around basically repeating themselves with:
“We need to get rid of the ashes. I had a dream that says we should.”
“No, it’s disgraceful!”
“Fine, then let’s come to a happy medium.”
And repeat.
One almost feels that if it would have been something like a webseries, its format would be more effective and the constant flashing to interviews wouldn’t cause the movie to drag so much.
 
Big fans of possession movies will find the format enough to (hopefully) stand out from all the Possession of (insert female name here) movies, while still keeping the major tropes. The chemistry among the cast is solid and if anything comes from this it’s that these actors should get more roles. In the end the attempt at making a tension-building slow burn, with the occasional jumpscare backfired, leaving a lot of viewers finding a way to get on their phones.
 
J. I thought the film had some well crafted chills that utilized a pretty great sound design and imagery and that’s a good thing because I felt a lot of the plot points were somewhat paint-by-the-numbers.  For a haunting film you had possession hokum.  Ouija hokum.  Paranormal expert hokum.  Seance hokum.  Character death hokum that wasn’t too surprising, especially in the order that the characters were killed off.  I thought the actress that played the ill fated Aunt Marion, Melinda DeKay was creepy as all hell and what made her beef with her family all the more interesting was that she wasn’t really in the wrong.  They were assholes to her while she was alive and now that she’s not, you better believe she’s gonna haunt their asses from beyond the grave.  There was sparse humor that I thought mostly worked in spades which was welcoming.  One thing that did bother me was the creative choice to have “character confessionals” where they individually speak directly to the camera/audience.  I think these sequences could be omitted and you wouldn’t lose anything other than some exposition that really wasn’t necessary to understand anything.  It would also knock off some runtime minutes.  Also, the inclusion of characters at various points watching Night of the Living Dead (twice!), Frankenstein and Nosferatu was a bit of overkill too.   Even more so when the events in said films were almost mirroring events happening in Ashes.  We get it, these films are classics but once would’ve been enough.  Again, the sound design was great and the moments of Aunt Marion’s unleashing fury on her poor hapless family worked well.  Nothing reinvented the wheel but effective chills and an entertaining ride to the finish is plenty to make this a good watch.  Moral of the story: don't be an asshole to your family members or suffer the usual hokum involved with the inevitable haunts!
 
K.  Alright, so the actors all do a solid job in this one, even if they’re given so-so material to work with.  Technically, it’s pretty sound.  But the story falters left and right, and the tone is all over the place.  The film relies heavily on mockumentary-style confessional interviews and it’s never explained why the family has a camera crew in their living room or why the style shifts without any narrative motivation.  These confessionals seem like a good way to add humor and dispense exposition at first but they become cloying and redundant. 
 
There’s a big problem with this film: the screenplay.  The central dramatic issue is what the family should do with Aunt Marion’s ashes.  The problem is a non-problem.  You can bury them or dump them in the ocean, or throw them away.  It’s easily solved.  Okay, now if it took a long time for the family to determine that the spooky happenings are caused by the ashes, then maybe you’d have something.  But it’s made clear 10 minutes in that the ashes creep everyone out and are likely going to cause problems, which they do.  Then there’s still senseless and poorly written debate about what to do with them, as if anyone would give a shit how they’re disposed of when their lives are in danger.  This is where the suspension of disbelief is broken by false actions from the characters.  Their concern for dealing with the ashes in a decorous manner outweighs their impulse for self-preservation.  Sorry, but I call bullshit.
 
There are also several attempts at shifting tone from comedy to horror to action that don’t really work.  And a paranormal duo, one of which is basically Daredevil.  There’s also a series of unnecessary time and date title cards that serve no purpose.  But the big issue is the lack of narrative drive and characters that are subject to the nonsensical plot rather than having motivations of their own.  This is another cause of technical proficiency paired with absolutely zero storytelling skill.  Cool shots, I’m bored, bro.
 
 
Response
 
C. Without repeating myself or others (which I will be) I think this is another prime example of a newer filmmaker going “I want to make a feature but don’t have a lot of money. What’s a good idea that can work on a low budget? A horror movie? A possession/haunted house movie?  If it’s a mockumentary I won’t have to worry about a script as much (This is not true). Wonderful!”
 
What we’re left with is a movie with story devices that grow stale within the first 20 minutes and a plot that was not planned out well in the scripting phase to give us enough substance to last a feature length. If this was a 30 minute short you would have me and I believe all three of us fully on board. However, we live in a time where it has to be a feature and not only that but a FRANCHISE or CINEMATIC UNIVERSE or SERIES! But as the three of us got to hear Peter Farrelly state a couple years ago, “longer or continuing stories are better just like a novel is better than a short story”... Yeah? I’ll be honest, I’ve read a lot of mediocre novels but I’ve also read short stories that have impacted me for decades. Sometimes a story isn’t meant to be a feature, just as some stories don’t work well as movies. Maybe they’re better suited as a graphic novel or radio drama or painting or hell, maybe even as a fictional SnapChat story, who knows?
 
At the end of the day there’s some great thrills and some funny moments but those parts got lost in the sea of problematic elements.
 
J. Yeah this is a somewhat paint-by-the-numbers haunting film.  With story issues.  Looking back I keep thinking about how many times the family sat around a table (because of course they did), having a conversation about what they should do with Aunt Marion’s ashes.  Jesus Christ! Get rid of the motherfuckers!  Garbage disposal!  Turn on the water full blast and dump them down the disposal.  Problem solved and movie over.  Thirty minutes into it.  I’ll reiterate that I did think some of the scare scenes were effective and the director, Barry Jay, clearly knows what he’s doing as far as shooting that stuff. 
 
K.  I have to agree with my comrades here.  There are some redeeming elements, some humor, and some decent spooky elements, but overall the lack of story dragged all those things down and caused me to lose interest pretty early on.
 
Next time they should team up with a screenwriter so they have something worthwhile to film.

HARPOON will be available on the ARROW VIDEO CHANNEL (and also Amazon Prime and Apple TV) from 18th October
​

CAST: Munro Chambers, Emily Tyra, Christopher Gray
Writer/Director/Editor Rob Grant
Producer​ Michael Peterson Kurtis David Harder

Life on the Ocean waves has never been so much bloody fun.

Rob Grant's latest film Harpoon, is a witty, bloody and tense psychological horror that manages to do the almost impossible and make a horror film about a trio of young Americans both funny, thrilling and captivating.  

I've never been quite sure who the plethora of horror films starring young and attractive Americans are aimed at. In most instances, the protagonists of these sort of films are typically so annoying, that within ten minutes you kind of wish the killer would level up with a nuclear bomb and wipe them from the face of the planet, before you have to endure another minute of their super tanned and ultra-white smug smiles. As my gran used to say "there is nought as obnoxious as an American kid in a horror film".  

Don't get wrong the characters in Harpoon are obnoxious and highly toxic, you'd hate to be one of their close friends, hell the film opens up with one of them beating the living daylights out of another one, just because he believes that he may have slept with his girlfriend. And that's just for starters, as the film progresses and the secrets and lies of their relationships are exposed for all to see not one of them ever comes across as anything other than utterly vile. But that doesn't matter, despite you never being able to root for any of them, Grant's witty and sparse script, combined with his assured direction means that you will be glued to the screen lapping up every minute of this nasty nautical thriller.  

Most of you will be able to count on the fingers of just one hand the number of great horror-comedies, it's one of the hardest things to get right, for every Shaun of the Dead there is a million Transylvania 6-5000s and a billion failed chances to raise a smile or shiver down your spine.  

Rob Grant's Harpoon hits the mark on both the horror and the comedy, in a film that perfectly balances personal drama, a few fantastically gory scenes, and sense of humour that holds everything together rather than getting in the way of the plot.  ​

One of the key features over and above the script is the perfect casting of the American Comedian and actor Brett Gelman, who provides a sly and sarcastic narration to the film, think Arrested Development mixed with Marvin the Paranoid Robot. Initially, you may be forgiven for thinking that the inclusion of a narration track to a movie that doesn't need it would be a step too far, but Gelman's delivery and the surgical precision of where it is inserted into the film is nothing short of pure genius. It never gets in the way and lays the foundation for a couple of running jokes that will have you doubling over with laughter. In fact, Gelman's narration helps to fill in several plot holes as well as going to explain just why these three desperate character's lives are so intertwined and codependent on each other. The narrator has a sort of voice of God feel to it, but this is not a loving God, oh no, he has nothing short of almost utter disdain for the protagonists. His recounting of seafaring superstitions comes across as an "I told you, but you wouldn't listen" checklist of why all these bad things are happening to you.  ​

The script is an excellent example of less is more. This is essentially a two location film with 95% of the film being set on the boat, which allows for the film to have a tremendous claustrophobic background for the tensions and fighting to play against. We know that there is no escape or respite for our three protagonists.  

Grant could have used the script as a look at the class war, and how the rich boys can basically do and say anything they want without any fear of reprisals, but Grant thankfully keeps this theme to a bare minimum. Instead, he keeps the script focused on delivering a strong look at toxic friendships, we all have them, and we all know we really should throw those people overboard, but, like the characters in the film, we just can't.  

There are echoes, of many literary and film classics littered throughout the film, such as Lifeboat, Alive, and even Moby Dick, the viewer will get a kick at pinpointing many of these nods to other films, while the secrets and lies and the truth about the interrelationships between the protagonists unfolds. ​

Chambers, Gray and Tyra are having a ball as the three protagonists of the film, as mentioned above they pull off the unheard off, and make each of the characters unrelatable and unlikeable, without ever crossing the line into "oh my God just die already". Even Emily Tyra's character, who initially is the most likeable of the three, quickly descends from her loving mother-like figure to a harridan of the highest order.  

​Christopher Gray excels as the spoilt rich kid with serious anger problems; strangely, he becomes the most likeable of the three despite being a complete piece of work. You tell he is relishing at being allowed to throw everything into this performance. Munro Chambers turn as the poor, put upon, Jonah is also a strong performance, only hampered by his somewhat meh character. I felt the filmmakers wanted us to have him as the focal point for our sympathy, but he ends up being just a bit too pathetic, and almost a caricature of what we perceive as everything that is wrong with millennials.  

Adding to the overall enjoyment of the film is an excellent sense of cinematography from Charles Hamilton, who brings a tremendous sense of style and atmosphere to these three people stuck on a small boat film.  

Harpoon is a brutal, dark comedy, and it is hugely enjoyable and highly inventive. You will laugh, cringe and scream obscenities at the screen as lies and revelations of our three protagonists unfold in front of you. 

Harpoon is a razor-sharp comedy, even if it is a speargun.   ​​

A comic book obsessed serial killer teaches his son how to get away with a series of brutal murders until the boy befriends a mysterious man who threatens to expose everything.
 
Initial Reaction
 
C. Artik is violent, jarring, punk rock, philosophical, and comes in at 70mins… What’s not to love? On paper it’s exactly my kind of movie.
 
The movie offers great effects and possibly Chase Williamson’s best performance to date. I found myself invested in where the story was taking us, while a serial killer tries to find someone he deems “pure of heart.”
 
This major issue is traced back to the killer’s motivation or the movie’s theme. Williamson’s character, who one would call “straight edge” and “pure,” potentially fits the killer’s ideal candidate. And when Williamson is captured and his purity is being put to the test, you half expect it to enter into the realm of Martyrs territory. Truly show this battle between good and evil in its raw form. However, this concept and world-building that has been established does not do well in the 70 minute time frame. This is one of the few cases where we needed another 20 minutes to establish more. There could be an argument for ambiguity but there’s a difference between things left ambiguous and plot holes… Artik suffers slightly from the latter.
 
Why does this couple keep child prisoners? Besides the main boy, why are these other children even necessary to the plot or the antagonist’s mission? Besides superheroes representing pure forms of good, is the comic-obsession needed to move the plot forward? Because we lose it by the end.  We are left with a lot of elements that could be expanded upon. The story doesn’t feel whole, rather a movie that was longer but cut down to fit a designated time frame, yet they forgot to simplify the story.
 
The other major concern that could connect with the hypothesis above is the editing feels very choppy. This could be argued that it’s because it’s a serial killer movie with punk rock vibes but as we’ve established the two battling characters are both based on a mindset of clarity. So is the ending a juxtaposition of that? That could be cool but it doesn’t feel purposeful.
 
Really it’s unique and enjoyable, with many moments to put you on the edge of your seat. Unfortunately any of my criticism comes down to a lack of focus in the writing or editing, which could take this movie from a fun watch to something spectacular.
 
J. Pretty simple stuff… a guy kills people and is grooming his son to take over the serial killing mantle?  I think.  I’m actually not sure if this is correct because for some reason, the film was confusing.  In the beginning, the kid beats his head against a pole to kill an insect and I kinda felt like doing the same thing.  Why is this happening?  I have no idea.  The serial killer and his wife apparently kidnap children too, although I’m also not sure if this is correct.  Why does the guy love comics so much?  I have no idea.  What does that have to do with anything?  I have no idea.  Somehow, someone got Lauren Ashley Carter, Matt Mercer and Chase Williamson to agree to be in this so that was a solid move.  I’ve man crushed all over Chase Williamson since John Dies At The End and he’s the best part of this film.  There’s some pretty tense moments when the comic loving serial killer does his sadistic shit, especially the scene involving poor Matt Mercer.  There is also gore aplenty and lots of karo syrup.  I actually thought the score was pretty great too and helped to ratchet up the intensity in moments where it was used.  For some reason, this 77 minute film was not very clear to me as far as what and why many of the events in the story were happening but with that runtime, I’d forgive just about anything. 
 
K.  Ah, the heartwarming tale of a serial killer in training.  The first thing that happens in the movie is the boy headbutts a beetle approximately 20 times (I watched the scene a second time to get an accurate headbutt count).  That was one of the highlights. 
 
There’s a good grungy, backwoods atmosphere to the film and good gore effects, though there’s only a few instances where they’re used.  The performances are good throughout, except for Jerry G. Angelo as the serial killer/patriarch.  He’s not really suited to carry a film, most of the time it sounds like he’s reading his dialogue from cue cards while trying to do a Bane impression.
 
Even with the short running time there’s a fair amount of lingering on drawings and moments which slow things up a bit, but I’d guess that’s because there’s not too much in the way of plot.  The good guy tries to save the boy from his serial killer dad, that’s it.
 
Response
 
C. Artik follows an issue that’s popped up with a couple of movies we’ve reviewed recently. It’s in that purgatory of there’s a lot of ideas that go nowhere and would work if they were developed but if you cut all those ideas then you’d have a short film. I know the common comment on this critique is “well I wanted to leave stuff ambiguous.” Right. Kubrick’s The Shining, the work of David Lynch are perfect examples of ambiguity done right. The “ambiguity” in this movie are plot holes and lack of development.
 
That doesn’t mean I didn’t like it though. I think it’s a solid thriller with some great kills. I agree with Kyle that for it being only 70 minutes, the first half feels a lot longer. Once it gets going though, it had me hooked. And as a fan of Chase Williamson since John Dies at the End, I think this is his strongest work. This is one I’d highly recommend once it creeps onto one of the many streaming sites.
 
J. Looking back on this one, I just have too many questions about things that I really shouldn’t have questions about.  I made the comment above that it seems to come out of nowhere that the serial killing family also houses kidnapped children.  Okay, but why?  And when did they start doing it?  This is one of those ideas that could be cut and it would greatly improve the film. The strengths that it does have like the score and some tense scenes of brutality and sadistic shit mixed with gore are a delight but they alone can’t salvage what seems pretty salvageable.  Hell, even Chase Williamson couldn’t salvage this thing and he was the best part of the film. 
 
K.  I’d have to agree with Craig, minus the recommendation.  It’s got a lot of ideas that aren’t developed, it almost has a post-apocalyptic feel even, though obviously they don’t have the budget to get into that territory.  But long story short it feels like there was more stuff to explore in the story that was never addressed.
 
Bloodhound’s average score

Cursed demonic circus clowns set out on a vengeful massacre using tornadoes. A stripper, Elvis impersonator, truck driver, teen runaway, and a dude get caught in the supernatural battle between femme fatale and the boss clown from hell.
 
Initial Reaction
 
C. This comment will probably be made by the others but going in to a movie called Clownado comes with a certain understanding, a SyFy channel movie of the week. I’ll say on a positive note that this must have been a blast to make among friends who wanted to take their chances at making a movie. For finishing it, I commend them because it’s no easy task. 
 
The issue I have with a lot of these scary clown movies as of late is ultimately a clown is a performer with a level of charisma and talent (it’s a very difficult art that takes years to master). Yet, in the modern incarnation of the scary clown there’s no charisma or fun to convince us that they could maintain a show that people would even want to go see. This takes it to the extreme of these clowns feel more like goons from some 1940s noir that decided to throw on makeup for a quick buck.
 
This gets me into the script, which is based around murderous clowns and kind of a revenge plot but let’s not get too tied down to narrative shall we? 1/3 of the dialogue is written like a noir with all the cheesy lines and the voices to follow, 1/3 is written like normal present day speech, and 1/3 goes to extreme hillbilly stereotype. And none of them work. It’s obvious there wasn’t much focus, which is what could have taken the movie from what it is to at least enter the realm of Mystery Science Theater fans.
 
If you’ve been reading our stuff or know me, there is an understanding that I’ll ramble on about theory, throw out lots of references, play Devil’s advocate, all those joyous things to make you (the reader) bored… This time I’m truly at a loss for words.
 
J. Based on the title alone you would expect this to be something along the lines of the dumb-as-hell Sharknado films but surprisingly you would be wrong.  Somehow, this is worse.  The production had twenty-six producers who must’ve all pitched in their last $10.  The acting ranges from mediocre to downright atrocious.  Hardly any of the so called plot made a damn bit of sense.  The murderous clown gang were all annoyingly grating, especially the lead one, Big Ronnie, who the director must’ve told, “just act like the worst version of The Joker you can possibly do.”.  You’ll want to punch the mother fucker yourself after hearing his laugh for the second or third time and you’ll still have to suffer through it another fifty before the credits roll.  There’s grue aplenty but everything is shot in extreme close up for reasons I can only speculate and every body is filled with an orange jelly looking substance for some reason.  I will say that nothing ever really gets boring but that isn’t even close to being enough of a reason to sit through this thing.  For some damn reason, Linnea Quigley makes an appearance which has got to be a new career low for her.  I’m sorry it came to this Linneah.  To make matters even more complicated, the titular “clownado” is merely a way for the supernatural murdering clown gang to get around instead of getting from place to place in a tiny fucking car which might’ve been a slight improvement? 
 
K.  My expectations were low with a title like Clownado but they couldn’t sink fast enough to keep up with this disaster.  Let’s start with the acting.  It is community theater level all around.  The performances are wooden, awkward and hurried.  It seems as if the director forced his friends, who have no interest or experience, to be in the film.  There’s random close ups of “gore effects” which are really just lots of fake blood and hunks of fake flesh.  It’s not scary.  It’s not funny.  It’s just sad.  There are arbitrary drone shots in an attempt to fake production value, as if the audience would be fooled.  I don’t take pleasure in bashing movies, but Clownado exists and I watched...and I have regrets.  I would rather chug a gallon of diesel and swallow a match than watch this again.
 
Now that I think about it there is one redeeming quality about Clownado, it made me realize how little time we have in this life and how we shouldn’t squander watching films like this.
 
Response
 
C. I’d love to have a discussion on the movie but there’s really not a lot to be said. Clownado is what I’d call a “For The Laughs” movie. This does not mean it’s necessarily funny or “so bad it’s enjoyable” but it’s one of those ideas that doesn’t have enough substance to actually be made. Everyone in this creative field has some project that is ridiculous and was most likely birthed from you and your friends shooting the shit over drinks (I have one too). These ideas may sound like a blast when describing them but that’s all you’ll get from it.
 
J. Bottom line: this was rough to even get through.  For numerous reasons that we’ve outlined and some we probably didn’t just so we wouldn’t have to think about this fucker again.  For me there were two extremely important things that didn’t work in this film: 1) the story made no sense at all.  If we can’t follow what’s happening, you better be creative as all hell or it makes viewing a goddamn chore.  2) the acting was just God awful.  Again, this makes getting through anything a goddamn chore.  Better luck next time to these folks and hopefully the next film is watchable at the very least. 
 
K.  [See above, re: self-immolation]
 
Bloodhound’s average score: ½ out of 5