Film Reviews by NP

Jean Rollin, my favourite director, was responsible for many dark fairytale, horror fantasies between 1968 and 2010, all of them very personal and not necessarily commercially successful. To subsidise his work, he also made a range of porn films, often starring cast members from his repertoire company.

Having loved every one of his ‘legitimate’ projects, it would be narrow-minded not to view his other available offerings – ‘The Seduction of Amy’ and this. Joëlle Coeur, the memorably perverse Tina from The Demoniacs, plays Monica, and Willie Braque, the moustached actor from a number of Rollin’s films, plays underwhelming stud Fred. Ice blond Gilda Stark plays Jackie; the enigmatic Marie Hélène Règne plays Patrice, while pig-tailed Reine Thirion plays the nameless dark horse secretary.

While the many soft-core sex scenes are played with gusto, especially by Coeur, the story is just a means of allowing the cast to disrobe for lengthy periods of time. Let’s not worry about that too much.

Titillation is what we’re watching of course, but there’s no doubt that Rollin’s trademark ‘look’ is often present – his talent for making his well chosen locations look stark and slightly unreal is here. The décor, the skeleton trees; the contrast between drab yet warm interiors and their open fires, to the stark cold of outside is effectively used. The backpacking girls – not really hitchhikers and certainly not schoolgirls – display all of Rollin’s engaging mixture of naivety and sensuality (and certainly don’t deserve the indignities heaped upon them), and the whole thing, although clearly using very small budget, looks atmospheric and is packed with visual detail.

Without anything vaguely supernatural or ‘fantastique’ to sustain it, ‘Schoolgirl Hitchhikers’ is a little dull, with only the performances, which are surprisingly good for this type of caper, and Rollin’s signature directorial style, to recommend it. Enjoyable for what it is, and not as exploitative or sleazy as its title would suggest, it would be churlish not to give it less than 6 out of 10.

Some parts of this film are very reliant on fairly unconvincing CGI, giving some action scenes a cartoonish quality. This is a shame. So what do we do about this? Cry about it, because the budget clearly isn’t generous - or look for other aspects of ‘The Creature Beneath’ worthy of praise?

I’ve always applauded ambition in these projects, even if it doesn’t always pay off – but it is the quieter moments that impress here. The disintegrating relationship between Olive and her very decent boyfriend, her maternal feelings toward the titular creature and the increasingly extreme ways she goes to nourish it; the well-meaning sister’s desire to solve everything with alcohol.

Anna Dawson is sometimes a little flat as Olive, but her performance improves immeasurably once she comes under the influence of the Lovecraftian creature.

I enjoyed this. I liked the idea of a new ruling species coming to life in an outwardly respectable suburban house surrounded by unsuspecting neighbours. Occasionally the budget threatens to bring things down, but never succeeds. My score is 7 out of 10.

With a title as generic as ‘Summer Camp’, I was expected this to be a standard zombie horror film. Nothing wrong with that – but the results are a pleasant surprise because director and co-writer Alberto Marini, along with Danielle Schleif have dared to do something different with the formula.

Great locations, occasionally clumsy camerawork – initially I wasn’t too keen on the hero Will but he grew on me. But it is the twisting, turning storyline that is the hook. You can’t afford to look away. If you do, you’ll miss a major twist. In this spoiler-free review, that’s all I’m prepared to say. My score is 7 out of 10.

This reminds me a little of ‘Don’t Breathe’. Good idea, but gets progressively less interesting and encumbered by over-ambitious CGI effects.

Katherine (Carlyn Buchell), the daughter of rich and illustrious parents, is kidnapped by Hazel (Sharni Vinson) and her arrogant gang. But just who in the name of spoilers, is the real demon here?

It’s a thin story, but a good one. After a short time – in fact, by watching the trailer itself – you realise the gang have bitten of more than they can chew with young Katherine. Once that’s been established, there isn’t much more to say. What we’re left with is varying ways in which the hapless bunch gets dispatched. Some of the kills go on way too long, and none of the characters are interesting enough to justify spending time watching their lingering desperation.

This isn’t a bad film. It’s clearly made on a fairly small budget, but never looks cheap. Not essential viewing, but loud and brutal enough to pass 90 minutes fairly happily. My score is 5 out of 10.

After just a few minutes of watching this extraordinary film, you might find yourself asking, is this pornography? It’s a debate that has been going over forty years – none of the many sex scenes are simulated: what you see is what you get. Due to its nature, ‘In the Realm of the Senses’ has been banned and cut before release on many platforms, and the lead actors found themselves blacklisted for a while following production.

The story-line involves former prostitute Sada Abe (Eiko Matsuda) being molested by her new boss Kichizo Ishida (Tatsuya Fuji) on the hotel where she now works. This not only ignites hitherto unexplored sexual desires in both of them, but ostracises them from their family and friends. Their coupling takes on new taboos – namely torture, strangulation and blood-letting.

Such an unflinchingly raw story is presented in an equally graphic way, and constantly. A scene where a young boy has his penis pulled as punishment seems to have offended most, and the brief moment has been removed from many editions of the film.

The acting is first rate, and survives the necessity of subtitles better than most. Not outside the perverse extremes of Director Jess Franco have I seen such uninhibited performances in a non-porn film – if it is non-porn.

This reminds me a little of the later Japanese film ‘Audition’, where the comparative light-heartedness of the opening acts give way to scenes of uncompromising cringe-inducing torture best watched behind-the-fingers.

Directed and written by Nagisa Oshima, the film had to be processed in France rather than Japan because of its nature. It is an acquired taste and not something I’ll watch twice. There’s no denying, though, it is compelling. You’ll look away occasionally, but not for long. My score is 7 out of 10.

A good performance from the lead (Amy Crowdies), and her journey is certainly interesting, but it is difficult to know what we are expected to take from the film. In linear terms, is the story just Amy’s reaction to her own grief? Are we being told not to have anything to do with outsiders, because they are superficial? Don’t trust lads who wear make-up?

For a modestly budgeted slow-burner, I found a lot to enjoy here. The locations are suitably isolated to lend us a sense of Melanie’s isolation, and the chilly weather adds to this, whilst helping create some picturesque small-town settings. My score is 6 out of 10.

“Does anyone have a mobile phone or anythink?”

A problem with feeding on so much fictional horror content – as I do - is that often you can have a sense of déjà vu. This happened with ‘Curse of the Scarecrow’ – about half way through, I wondered if I had seen it before and had forgotten. The film I was actually thinking of was 2019’s ‘Tooth Fairy’, which in turn had reminded me strongly of 2018’s ‘Scarecrow Rising’. They had all been directed by Louisa Warren, often using many of the same players and locations.

Warren, like Andrew Jones, has proven to be a prolific director (and occasionally actor) of micro-budget horror films. Also like Jones, she seems to have liking for dolls and scarecrows as villainous beings. Once more we have a predominantly female cast menaced by a bloke with a sack on his head. The three main women are flawed – in fact, apart from June (Kate Lister), quite hapless. The peripheral male characters are wetter than wet.

The production is afflicted as low-budget films often are, and none of this would matter at all if the story or characters were in any way interesting. Sadly, despite some competent performances, they are not, and the dullness that hits you after the pre-credit sequence begins is never fully shaken off. If we could care more for the characters, and not have their various plights and tragedies overtly hurled at us, then things would be a lot more successful. As it is, Warren’s films have thus far been interesting without being compelling (of the ones I have seen).

There are a few good scenes. Nancy (Warren) being stuffed with straw is my favourite. With less restraint on blood and gore, it would have been even more effective. The ending is satisfying and seems to be setting things up for a possible sequel. My score is 5 out of 10.

Derry, Maine: we follow the tumultuous and often very funny day-to-day lives of six youngsters, all of whom suffer regularly at the hands of some typically bratty bullies. Making juveniles the film’s focal point is a risk – often, precociousness takes a hold. Happily, there’s not a trace of that here, because the casting and performances are excellent and often provoke genuine laughter. This is just as well, because we spend a *lot* of time in their company. At over two hours, this is a long journey.

I’m familiar with Stephen King’s original story but have not seen the 1990 production. For all the imaginative set-pieces, Pennywise comes across as a Freddy Krueger-type, in a clown’s suit and without the finger-needles. This is no bad thing, and as we see him so seldom, Bill Skarsgård’s various appearances are always a highlight. His machinations and trickery are far more prevalent.

In the second half, things enter true horror movie mode. The youngsters, by now well established, face Pennywise at his most fearsome and malevolent, especially when they have cause to enter the clown’s realm. Here, we’re treated to a wealth of dark effects, some CGI, but always realistic, horrific and convincing. Without the earlier focus on the characters and their humour, we wouldn’t fear for them anywhere near as much as we do. A terrific film. My score is 8 out of 10.

Initially, this film reminded me of a modern version of 1932’s ‘The Old Dark House’, in which a group of strangers meet up and navigate their way through an awkward evening, where every word and sentiment is laced with some cryptic double-meaning, before events take on a more horrific note.

Here, we meet Will (Logan Marshall-Green), someone so determinedly uncomfortable, it seems there aren’t enough egg-shells in the room to walk on around him. When we (and his outstandingly loyal girlfriend Kira, played by Emayatzy Corinealdi ) meet his group of friends (and his ex-wife Eden, played by Tammy Blanchard) who have organized the reunion in which the story takes place, we feel he has every reason to be so tense.

As is often the case, I enjoyed the ‘journey’ more than the ‘destination’. The finale I found too vague, although the open-ended nature of events is scary. My score for this compelling and stylish production is 7 out of 10.

A lengthy opening section of this film takes place in 1968, with a fairly dysfunctional family indulging in varying degrees of cruelty. It’s a weird little piece, and a good deal more frightening than what happens for a while afterwards.

Before it outstays its welcome, we’re up to the present day. Cue the ‘group of friends’ we always find in these kinds of films – here, they are four chirpy college girls who end a lot of their sentences with ‘I love you.’. They are, of course, staying in the house where the various mis-deeds occurred all those years before, and find the whole thing a hoot. There’s even a ‘dirty door’ at the end of the hall.

We spend rather too long in the company of these young people, but that’s okay because apart from perhaps being a little too cheerful, they are an appealingly wholesome group. The little girl, Irene, is played especially well, by Shae Smolik. As the token juvenile, she’s very sweet, and yet becomes less so later on.

We have to wait a while, but when things get creepy, there are some nice jump scares, competent acting and an ultimately tragic central plot-line. The story of malevolent spirits has been done many times before, of course, but this is well-made, well-directed and not a bad way to spend 95 minutes. My score is 7 out of 10.

This begins as a very appealing film about Oz (Chase Williamson), who meets Tess (Fabienne Thereze) – two happily ‘nerdy’ young people who love playing, and are very knowledgeable of, arcade games. Oz is games technician in a store due to be closed down, and they discover an arcade machine not seen before in the shop. As they play it against their better instincts, it displays unknowable powers …

That’s about as much of the story revealed without going into deep spoiler territory.

The genuinely delightful romance that blossoms between these two slightly eccentric outcasts remains the best thing about this. The horror elements, which straddle the kind of world HP Lovecraft wrote about and David Cronenberg directed, are unusual, bizarre, mostly unexplainable and increasingly fragmented.

The latter half of the film gives itself entirely to this strange world, and the story, such as it is, becomes redundant. This is a shame, because it seems to go nowhere, until an equally strange finale comes along and ushers in the end credits.

I applaud director and writer Graham Skipper for going for something different, but the result doesn’t quite satisfy, despite the naturalistic and appealing performances from the main players. My score is 5 out of 10, mainly for the first half.

As a novice film reviewer of absolutely no repute whatsoever, I had never heard of Richard Stanley prior to the events surrounding the creation of 1996’s ‘The Island of Doctor Moreau’. When first viewing him here, he struck me as someone who fancied himself a little arty, weird and interesting. Indeed, other crewmembers interviewed for this documentary regularly describe him as being ‘unusual’. My feelings toward Stanley went from that to feeling desperately sorry for him: a director, for whom a series of unimaginable catastrophes lost him his reason. 100 minutes later as the end credits rolled, I found myself liking him a lot, and feeling pleased that the disastrous happenings behind the scenes of the 1996 film didn’t seem to have irretrievably broken his spirit.

In fact, it is with some relief that none of the cast or crew interviewed seemed to remain undamaged, and have not lost their sense of humour, after their experiences recounted in this compellingly documented diary of miss-haps.

‘The Island of Doctor Moreau’ is one of HG Wells’ greatest stories, building on horror and ego and great tragedy when one person tries to become God. Not a million miles away from Frankenstein in that regard – and not a million miles away from the incredible egos of two of the film’s main stars, that had long since transcended any effort to contain them.

For all those interviewed, I was surprised that David Thewlis, one of the main players, was mentioned so briefly – just once, as I recall, with a cursory mention of him being brought in to replace another actor who had grown completely and understandably disenchanted with the shambolic nature of the filming.
The anecdotes range from hugely unfortunate to laugh-out-loud hilarious, as recalled by Marco Hofschneider, Fairuza Balk and Stanley himself, amongst many others, all hugely personable and full of incredible remembrances. It is entirely possible that, with Stanley’s inclusion, and the lack of Kilmer, Brando or replacement director John Frankenheimer (the latter two having passed away), that memories are presented in Stanley’s favour – we’ll probably never know – but the results form the basis of one of the most fascinating and bizarre behind-the-scenes documentaries I have ever seen. It doesn’t matter if you have never seen the 1996 film, I recommend this unreservedly. My score is 9 out of 10.

Watching this film begins like a textbook example of why I love gialli so much. Stunning locations, a strident soundtrack (Stelvio Cipriani is the maestro here), shrieking women and bloodiest blood you ever saw. What is lacking here compared to other giallo films, however, is the usually meticulously manicured leading man – thick of moustache, lustrous hair, heavy of eyeliner – possibly because instead of a sundrenched Mediterranean location, events here take place in a chilly, often rain-soaked Dublin. Instead we have cigar chomping Anton Diffring, who may as well have ‘villain’ tattooed on his forehead, and exotic Dagmar Lassander - and a ubiquitous pair of smoky sunglasses, which always comes accompanied by a glassy sting of doom-laden music.

Despite the change in scenery, this is a typical, striking, solid giallo business as usual: an occasionally muggy storyline, some nasty moments and exotic kills in rooms with high ceilings, a seemingly sluggish police force and sporadic bouts of nudity.

Although the inevitable reveal in the finale was a let-down for me, the surrounding scenes are embellished with a real sense of perverse evil and fast-paced violence typical of the genre. My score is 6 out of 10.

This is a horror tale much in the same vein as the increasingly prolific mould of micro-budget productions by Andrew Jones (‘Robert the Doll’ etc) and Louisa Warren (‘Tooth Fairy’). These projects are often enjoyable, but afflicted with recurring problems typical of low-budget ventures. Happily, this film has managed to avoid a lot of the pitfalls of hard-to-hear dialogue and lack of suspense. Some of the acting is unconvincing, but Faye Goodwin as Amy and Claire-Maria Fox as Vanessa are strong enough to carry things along nicely.
Left Films’ story about a vengeful witch is slightly more pacey than you might expect, too, but still has a listlessness about it that drags many of the early scenes down. Characters will reel off the names of relatives taken by the witch as if they were recalling missing items off their shopping list – but at least attempts are made to frighten, and the Yuletide setting adds some creepy variants on the theme, as well as some measured, festive kills from Frau Perchta (a creepy performance from Tara MacGowran).

Some nice sweeping camera shots, good gore effects and a gleefully satisfying twist at the end involving the seemingly unstoppable witch. This gets better as it goes along. My score is 6 out of 10.

Described as ‘neo-noir’, Nocturnal Animals is one of those films that’s ‘bigger’ than us. That is, it is a production so meticulously put together, and exploring so deeply its own narrative, it isn’t even satisfied to tell only one story: it tells three.

It requires concentration to notice what is being told in present time, in flashback, and also the long moments taken from the book written by the character of Edward Sheffield (Jake Gyllenhaal) – these moments, it should be noted, are from the perspective of ex-wife Susan Morrow (Amy Adams). If any confusion does arise from this, it all clears up as time goes on, and the beautiful cinematic flourishes (Director and Producer Tom Ford has a reputation for rewarding those who watch closely) are a wonderful diversion.

By being ‘bigger’ than us, I mean that every level of ‘Nocturnal Animals’ features people at the top of their game, from the utterly brilliant actors to the extraordinary production values, to Abel Korzeniowski’s heart-rending musical score. By being ‘bigger’ than us, it doesn’t even have to bother with closure for some of its characters – by the heart-breaking close, which is too open-ended for some, you wonder what happens to some of the characters you’ve become so heavily invested in. The film doesn’t even have to rely on excessive gore or horror to make you despair for their fate.
.