Film Reviews by NP

This is a really enjoyable, strange, low-key horror film from Argentina. Many scenes are filmed in a sickly yellow light, and the horrific prosthetics are often *just* out of focus. When they are dwelt upon, they look truly horrific.

The story, as has been said elsewhere, comes second to the scares – which is acceptable for the most part, because the film *is* scary, both in terms of jump scares and the overriding feeling of unease, which is beautifully conveyed.

The narrative sometimes descends into a tumble, with it being made unclear which moments are being told in flashback, and which characters to invest in. Truth be told though, this might even be deliberate to enhance the delirium.

A terrific film; happily, both a remake and an Argentinean sequel appear to be in the works. My core is 8 out of 10.

This is a fairly uneventful ‘kitchen sink’ drama in which a married man has an affair with a 15-year-old girl. Very much of its time, it is still a surprise to see how his relationship with the young girl is treated so wholesomely as a romance between two very likeable people, while the unsuspecting (?) wife is equally appealing. Personable, funny, charming and generous - even the two young children are lovely – and as a viewer, you don’t want anyone to get hurt, which is inevitable considering the man’s pretty shocking behaviour.

The affair comes close to being discovered from time to time – whether it does or not, I’m not telling – but there’s no huge drama here as every eventuality occurs gently, which is rare for such a usually gritty ’70s genre.

The acting is what shines mostly here. Tom Bell is Len, the most flawed character, alongside his dad (Robert Keegan); Judy Carne is Len’s wife Joy, a happy and charming actress, and Olivia Hussey plays young Val, whose clear-skinned, wide-eyed appeal is far from the wanton temptress you may expect.

With no real villains to hiss, things could get a little dull from time to time were it not for the characters, but I enjoyed this. My score is 7 out of 10.

This is a slow-to-get-going home invasion slasher that may be light on gore, but racks up the tension nicely. The acting is decent throughout, but the star is the snowbound location that provides a bitter and unforgiving backdrop to the relentless killings.

The order in which characters die is a big surprise – those ear-marked for hero status shouldn’t be complacent; it seems there is no pecking order here.

There’s certainly a familiarity in events here, but perhaps that’s inevitable with so many genre films now released. I enjoyed this; it had a few good twists and a truly ‘meta’ moment from the killer, once he/she is revealed. Considering the circumstances, however, everyone’s clothes remain a little ‘clean’ throughout! My score is 7 out of 10.

This 2017 film is a remake of an earlier picture shot three years earlier, with this later version enjoying more of a budget. It’s good, solid stuff. Directed and co-written by James Klass, the cinematography treats us to many slow-moving establishing shots and interesting, often unsettling angles. It isn’t ground-breaking – the story has been done often before in various shapes or sizes.

I like the leads – they are very naturalistic and personable. Prolific actress Becca Hirani/Fletcher in particular, makes a good impression as cheery, dare I suggest sexy, Hayley, slowly affected by what’s going on in her new dream house. Images of a naked old man, possibly over-used, are nevertheless creepy: kudos to Tony Mendez as Elliot. Faye Goodwin as daughter Penny bares a passing resemblance to a young Linda Blair, and Andrew Hollingworth impresses as husband Eric.

Penny’s babysitter’s not much cop. She follows a recounting of the house’s grim past to Penny with a cheery, ‘Anyway … bed-time!’ Initially, I had a problem with the comparative tender ages of mum and dad to have a grown-up child, but this is explained.

‘Elm Lake’ is not without problems – the voice modulation is repetitive and overdone and the pacing is often sluggish. The messy finale in particular would have been far more effective with a little pruning. A mixed bag perhaps, but the good far outweighs the bad. My score is 7 out of 10.

This is a very slow-moving, character-based post-apocalypse horror. The pacing isn’t as big a problem for me as the sound levels. The dialogue in the first half of this film is frequently inaudible buried, as it is, under the atmospheric mood music – the second half is fine and infinitely more enjoyable.

The direction, locations and acting from the small cast is impossible to fault. When incidents do occur, they are well staged and brutal – they are just very few and far between.

‘The Living Dead’ won’t be for everyone – even less will stick with it due to the early sound issues, and that’s a real shame. My score is 7 out of 10.

Caveat starts off as a really good film, promising much horror weirdness. You can just about accept down-on-his-luck Isaac (Jonathan French) taking a job for about five days, in an isolated area, effectively babysitting his landlord’s disturbed niece Olga (Leila Sykes). You can entirely understand his anger when he finds out the location is actually an island – even that he has to wear a harness that prevents him from reaching other rooms, even if it leaves him at the mercy of the unstable girl – and as it turns out, her crossbow! You can allow yourself to just about believe in all this because, with that premise, the story looks to be beautifully directed and should be justifiably brilliant.

Sadly, after a strong start, while the atmosphere remains rich and beautifully muggy, and the acting convincing, the story becomes a repetitious mish-mash of scenes that make less and less sense. Also, Sykes is undoubtedly a good actor, but lacks any kind of sense of threat, even when she is armed.

I enjoyed Caveat, but only up to a point. When it ends on a typically odd note, I found myself in need of a certain amount of clarity to appreciate what I’d just watched. My score is 5 out of 10.

Occasionally touching, breathtakingly filmed, occasionally disturbing but mainly a seemingly disconnected series of set-pieces, Sator emerges as a bit of a chore. Perhaps I’m missing something, but I would have liked more of an actual storyline, or at least some progression of events to match the undisputed wonderment of the production.

I appreciated the film a lot more when I read how virtually every aspect of its production and direction was handled by writer Jordan Graham. June Peterson (Nani) was Graham’s grandmother, and her musings on screen are the results of her obsession with Sator led her to being committed to a psychiatric hospital. She passed away shortly after the film was released.

Although my view of the resulting film has not changed, it was clearly a highly personal and commendable labour of love for the director. My score is 5 out of 10.

Remakes, eh? Little is so divisive. Regarding this remake of Stephen King’s legendary novel – forty years have passed since the original, highly regarded film, so in principle, reminding people of the story, is a good thing. There are a few tweaks made here, so even those who have fond memories of the 1989 film will have something new to discover. But – is it any good?

I’m going to try to put the original out of my mind and review this as a film in its own right. Directors Kevin Kölsch and Dennis Widmyer have turned in a stylish, richly atmospheric film with plenty of creepy moments, and no unnecessary jump-scares.

The cast portraying the initially wholesome all-American family are excellent and believable throughout. The juveniles, who can make or break a story, especially when – as here – they play such large roles, are terrific. Little Gage isn’t required to do much (wisely, given his age) and Hugo Lavoie is genuinely appealing and wins our sympathy. Jeté Laurence as Ellie is wholly convincing, as is Jon Lithgow as neighbour Jud. Jason Clarke as Louis and Amy Seimetz as Rachel are great – never too saccharine, as can sometimes be the case with fictional families in jeopardy. Tell you what – let’s name Leo, Tonic, Jager and JD, who all play versions of cat Church as well. All are excellent.

So yes, this is good. Very good in fact. Not a slavish recreation of the original, but true enough to satisfy the die-hards (at least, you’d think so). It does stray perilously close to farce during the tweaked ending, but I’d say it just about succeeds in its very appealing ideas. My score is 8 out of 10.

This is a middling horror, without much in the way of scares. Inhaling the ‘cremains’ of the former patients of a mental asylum, three out of four students find they are possessed by the spirits of the inmates. The fourth, new girl Emma (Inbar Lavi) has to try and save them.

I’m going to be absolutely honest and admit that Gabby (Holland Roden) kept me watching. The others were nowhere near as obnoxious as teens often are in this kind of film, but not hugely interesting either. Emma’s telepathic sympathy with the former inmates is a way of getting into the story, but like the creepy lone security guard, that plot line comes to nothing.

A reasonable flick then, without ever approaching greatness. The location is very effective and nicely shot; A.D. Calvo’s direction is often very effective, with many moody establishing shots of the various locations – but it never quite lives up to its powerful opening sequence. My score is 5 out of 10.

This is a dark, modern-day fairytale you know is lurching further into ridiculousness, but it’s so stylish and well played, that you go along with it anyway.

In what is for the most part a two-hander, Alice Isaaz and Jacqueline Bisset as Julie and Elizabeth are extraordinary good, and the shifting story allows us to view the characters differently as they reveal more about themselves.

For those unable to take the situation seriously, the film does nothing to make events any more palatable. Even at the end, the audience is invited to make up their own minds about what they have just watched. My score is 7 out of 10.

This is another, and probably most accomplished, film from the prolific Steven M. Smith, who directs and co-writes. Made in the midst of the Covid pandemic, the production isn’t troubled by any effects of the restrictions in place during that time. For that, the team are to be commended.

It’s also good to see Colin Baker, Julian Sands, Michael Ellison and (an almost unrecognisable) Toyah Wilcox here. The acting across the board is mostly good, if not great, with the exception of Louisa Warren as Helen. It gives me no pleasure to say that, especially as she has produced and directed an admirable number of low-budget films that I’ve enjoyed a lot. For such a pivotal role, she lets the side down somewhat, looking uncomfortable in front of the camera.

Although the story has merit, the real killer here is the pacing – there isn’t any. Events build up, occur, and return to the status quo before repeating, without ever really getting anywhere. The music doesn’t help, remaining determinedly bland and placid throughout. Technically, the production is fine and unbothered by issues that often affect independent projects; but I find myself marvelling at how some of the bigger name actors are all seated around a table, whilst possibly being spliced together from separate recordings, rather than being drawn in by the ghostly happenings – which, when they occur, are nicely effective.

Smith and Warren’s run of productions shows no sign of slowing down, looking at their IMDB pages and I follow their run of horror projects with interest. While the results can be uneven, at least they are producing regular genre content. My score for this is 6 out of 10.

From the director responsible for 2004’s wonderful ‘Creep’ Christopher Smith helms this period ghostly mystery horror. While there’s nothing particularly revolutionary about this, the slow-burner story – concerning a family’s deterioration after moving into a haunted house – is told effectively.

There are interesting subplots going on – failures on the part of the otherwise commendable Linus (John Heffernan) pave the way for his descent into instability. Adelaide (Anya McKenna-Bruce), the likeable young daughter is also affected, and we’re never quite sure about poor old Harry (Sean Harris, who was so good as Craig in ‘Creep’), a character rendered (unintentionally?) comical in red wig and music hall garb. Eccentricity and unpredictability within a straightforward plot keep things bubbling nicely.

While it never really achieves greatness, ‘The Banishing’ is a good, spooky way to spend 93 minutes – effective locations, atmospheric cinematography and a tremendous central performance from Jessica Brown Findlay as Marianne ensure a score of 7 out of 10 from me.

A difficult-to-warm-to couple move into a haunted house and the usual creepy things start to occur, very slowly. As events move on, Sasha (Natalia Ryumina) becomes ever more interesting, while hubby Peter (Nick Whitmore) behaves more like a jerk.

What really hurts this film is, given the leisurely pace – which allows us to take in the beautifully photographed Eastern European locations – we’re given very few details as to what is going on. The lack of genuine frights should really have given way to a few more explanations as to the behaviour of certain characters and why events in the comparatively eventful finale are happening – but they don’t. My score is 4 out of 10.

Dracula without Dracula is a literally bloodless adaption for most of its running time, although in many ways one of the most faithful. In some ways, I like the idea of the Lord of Vampires being this whispered name rather than being a tangible character in the film, I like the way we think we’re going to see him – and then we don’t. It’s a grand tease.

It does however mean that you have a film featuring a lot of characters conversing in roughly the same location. There are a few moments when the conversations stop and something dramatic happens, sometimes quite effectively, but it’s very rare, although things perk up towards the end.

This is all about mood, about slowly growing unease, about ‘something’ in the house, and I like that. The filming is crisp, the acting is uniformly very good, and I enjoy the tweaks made to this portion of Stoker’s story. By its very nature, this will be too short on action or indeed horror for many people, but it worked for me. My score is 7 out of 10.

I quite enjoyed this beautifully shot, nicely directed, highly brutal and gratuitous horror film. When we were all a lot younger, it was known as a ‘video nasty’ and gained its reputation by being banned on several levels. I do have reservations, however, and fairly sizeable ones.

A Lucio Fulci film, it suffers from dubbing, which is a turn-off for some viewers. It doesn’t bother me, but some of the voices are inappropriately camp. Secondly, and this is the stinger – there’s no real plot. No sense or feeling of growing jeopardy or effective pacing that would make the gloriously gory moments ever more powerful; the anticipation is the thing, and it’s not allowed in this choppy narrative.

Ultimately, it seems to be a series of set-pieces strung together in which to highlight particularly gruesome moments, but without context in a comprehensible story, isn’t as effective as it could be. My score is 6 out of 10.