Author Archives: Chris

Hush…Hush, Sweet Charlotte

There’s this ’80s song by Kim Carnes called Bette Davis Eyes, which I had always previously assumed was about “her”[1] being super attractive in a golden age of Hollywood kind of way. It is not a song for which I have paid extremely close attention to the lyrics. But I think I will have to the next time I hear it, because after seeing her[2] turn as Charlotte Hollis, I have a very different impression of what Bette Davis eyes actually are.

The podcast randomization was normal people as the scare, and period piece as the style. And, okay, technically the first 10 minutes were in a different period, but I think it is fair to say that a movie made in 1964 and set in 1964 for the remaining two hours is not truly a period piece. Oh well, they’ve missed before, they’ll miss again. It’s not a big deal when the movies are good, or at least fun. And Hush…Hush, Sweet Charlotte is definitely good, albeit not as good as it would have been if the one sentence description on Hoopla hadn’t been a massive spoiler. Oh well for that.

So the deal is, Charlotte is the daughter of the guy who owns the Louisiana southern gothic plantation town where they live and that is named after him. Well, probably after his daddy, or his granddaddy. Whatever. In 1927, Charlotte is about to elope with a married man, only her daddy found out and put a stop to it. So he breaks up with her at a big garden party, and next thing you know, his hand and head are chopped off and with a meat cleaver, Charlotte is covered in his blood, and the murder was never solved, and it’s 37 years later, and Charlotte is the old crazy lady in a decaying mansion who kids sing rhymes about because even though she got away with it, everyone knows she did it, oh and also they’re about to tear down her mansion to make way for a new hyperspace bypass, and so she asks her cousin to come help her out of this jam. Because with daddy long dead and her particular social circumstances, Hollisport doesn’t really belong to the Hollises anymore.

The rest of the movie is Charlotte slowly going crazy as time and circumstance and the people around her gradually close in on the last tattered shreds of her sanity. It’s a hell of a character study, and even if the best acting in the 1960s does not hold a candle to the best acting today, it still runs rings around average acting today. Plus, I’ll always be a fan of psychological thrillers from the point of view of the crazy person, because it’s impossible to know what’s actually going on. And that is my favorite way to watch a movie, not actually knowing what comes next. (Which I sort of did in this case, but also sort of did not. And that in itself is an impressive piece of storytelling, when even spoilers can be subverted.)

[1] The her in question regarding the line, “she’s got Bette Davis eyes”
[2] Bette Davis’s, I mean

The Odyssey (2026)

I was told that The Odyssey is the continuation of a conversation Christopher Nolan started with Oppenheimer (which I have not seen). I was also told that it was okay, I did not have to do homework, I would just have a different experience if I watched it fresh versus as a “sequel”.

I’m not sure that’s true, as it happens. Now, I’ll admit that if nobody had mentioned Oppenheimer at all, I might not see the connection, although then again maybe I would, since U’d still know it was his previous movie. Like I said, I have not seen that movie and I do not know what happened in it. But I do know who Oppenheimer is, which is to say the father of the atomic bomb, the guy who watched the first one explode, knowing it might ignite the atmosphere and destroy the planet[1], and quoted The Bhagavad Gita: “I am become death, destroyer of worlds.” These are all things that I know already. So when I watch Odysseus spend an entire movie wrestling with the fact that he just changed the world forever, and that everyone except him is paying for it… look, I can connect two dots, you know?

Anyway, the stuff that happens is what you would expect to happen if you’ve read the story before[2], told out of order in a way that is indicative of a Nolan film, but not a confusing puzzle box mystery, really, just out of order for dramatic effect. The acting is tremendous, the visuals are tremendous, and I can only imagine how much moreso the 70mm IMAX version would have been. Maybe someday.

The only thing that dragged was maybe the final action setpiece, and perhaps if I had not already known the outcome, that one would have been fine as well. But it felt a bit obligatory, which is never a good sign. All in all, I will continue Nolan to be a good director who has interesting things to say, but who is not perhaps the voice of a generation.

Really though, even having vision as grandiose as Spielberg’s or Lucas’s is pretty amazing. Not having the voice to go along with it is fine. You’re still amazing at what you do. (For a counterpoint to this, see Cameron, who has the right voice, but only vary sporadically the vision, even though he thinks he does. Honestly, if he didn’t think his vision was in the same scope as the other three, he might be a little better at what he does. But then again, some of those singular moments of vision might have been lost, so I guess he can keep overestimating himself.)[3]

[1] As it happens, this did not occur.
[2] which by the way you should! It’s pretty great.
[3] Why nobody pays me for this quality of insight, I’ll never know.
[4] I’ve been mulling over the sole tagline provided for the movie posters as a collective (in that most of them have no tagline; as usual, the one that does is also the best of the bunch visually), “Defy the gods”, for the past 5 minutes or so. I find it interesting that, with one massive exception (albeit the same exception twice), this is what he spends the entire movie not doing, and also that the two times he does do it are the only times he wins. I’m not sure what lesson or moral or thematic resonance to take from this, considering the cost each time.

The Addiction (1995)

It’s been a while since I have been faced with categories this easy to remember. I have never heard of The Addiction, but boy howdy did it meet the intersection of vampires as scare and 1990s as style. You know how Clerks screams indie comedy, from the dawn of independent cinema? This is like that, but for thesis horror, here defined as “horror for people who would never admit that horror has value, so I made an art house flick instead.”

So what’s actually happening is Lili Taylor is an NYU philosophy student, grappling with important topics like who, at a generation’s remove from the events, was the actual bad guy in Vietnam? But between walking around town to the soothing strains of gangster rap, she gets introduced to heroin.[1] And then she takes the heroin to each of her friends and classmates and professors who she is also dating, and gets them addicted to heroin as well. At one point, a dude tries to tell her about Jesus, and he does not get addicted to heroin, but neither does she quit her addiction and move to the suburbs.

That’s it. That’s the whole movie.

Wait. You said this was a thesis horror movie dressed up as art house drama. That’s just purely arthouse drama. What gives?

Oh. Crap. Um. Let me do some quick rewrites here. Um, let’s see. Okay, what if she’s bitten by a vampire, and then wanders around doing soliloquies in dark sunglasses about who the bad guy really is, but also turning all of her classmates and friends and professors who she is also dating into vampires? And the vampirism is a metaphor for heroin, you see.

Ah. Yes, that would fix it.

Well there you go then!

[1] Or maybe meth, but I think it’s too early to have been movie meth, even in movie New York.

Junkster

You know those platformer games where you are trying to collect all of the things, because collecting those things allows you to collect other things and eventually achievements, but really there’s just something satisfying about knowing you found them all? Like with the Koroks in Breath of the Wild, but if it were actually possible? Or, in this case, if it were incredibly easy.

Junkster luckily has a gimmick. Yes you’re jumping around and fighting space monsters occasionally, but also like half the game is about solving puzzles by building new paths out of the junk you find. There are all shapes and sizes of stuff, from square, to small square, to rectangle, to skinny rectangle, and you attach them to little platforms that can only hold so many, and you have to figure out the way to use them to get where you want to be. Sometimes there’s a timed puzzle element, sometimes there’s a robot you build and then navigate with, sometimes it’s just getting to somewhere impossibly far away or impossibly high. Lots of variety across the twentyish levels.

I can’t exactly recommend it, but it was a bit of not quite mindless fun spread out over like six or ten hours, and also at the end I had another 1000 points of gamerscore on my account. So, y’know.

Ready or Not: Here I Come

A thing I have not seen often is a first horror movie sequel made seven years later. A long time after the field has lain fallow is for horror movie series, sure. But for the second movie in a series? My minimal research shows a couple of Hitchcock sequels, and with Hitchcock not involved, man, I dunno. Probably Psycho II counts though, and that’s a lot longer than seven years. And okay, Aliens is also exactly seven. But I’m just saying, it’s not the norm.

This brings us to the surprise sequel to 2019’s Ready or Not, somewhat appropriately titled Ready or Not 2: Here I Come. This is a movie that understands what being a horror movie sequel is all about. It starts at the exact moment that the previous movie ended. Even better, it immediately dives into the real aftermath of a horror movie, which is the survivor is blamed by the police for pretty much everything. I respect what is happening here.

Okay, the eventual premise is a little implausible. I mean, let me walk that back. The idea that a bunch of other rich and powerful families have their own deals with Mr. Le Bail makes just perfect sense, and the idea that they form a council that controls the world from the shadows, sure, also reasonable. But the actual premise, that someone surviving the plot of the first movie triggers a new contest in which they must compete the same way and whoever kills them becomes head of said council? It’s a stretch, that’s all.

Counterpoint: who cares if it’s a stretch? If Samara Weaving is running around in her wedding dress for another couple of hours trying to survive more heavily armed murderers, who occasionally explode? I’m here for it.

And that’s it. That’s the whole review. I’ll never not watch a horror sequel with the exact same premise, if I already liked the first one. Why would I not? It’s a guarantee of a good time!

Moana (2026)

One thing I heard about the live action Moana remake is that it would have a new Lin Manuel Miranda song. And I was interested to see how they incorporated a new song into the existing plot. It turns out, they did not. Instead, it is over the credits.

I want to be clear that I like Moana. It’s pretty great all the way around, and not a pain to rewatch. (Which is good, since I have small children and a Disney+ subscription.) But the placement of the new song tells you everything you really need to know about the remake, which is that it is unnecessary. There is nothing wrong with unnecessary things. I got to sit in a darkened room watching flickering lights on a screen with my kid[1][2], and I got to eat popcorn. That’s pretty great.

But yeah, there’s no question that The Rock in a flowing wig or not, this is an unnecessary movie.

[1] “But you have two kids. And a wife!” Yes, and they were multiple seats away, having their own shared experience. I was on an end, and I got what I got.
[2] I understand that “going to the movies” has become unpopular. I don’t think I’ll ever lose the urge or the wonder, though.

Twin Peaks: Fire Walk with Me

First, I didn’t watch Twin Peaks when it came out. Then I didn’t watch it for an additional 35(!) years. Then, the podcast people decided to[1] watch Fire Walk with Me, which meant I had to watch 32 episodes of TV to be ready for watching the movie. Which I have done, over the course of the past maybe not quite a month. And now I’m supposed to review the movie.

I was prepared for how weird the show would be. I was not prepared for how soap opera it would be. I can really see a direct throughline from this show to Passions. Which makes me sad I never went back and watched it before now, but at least it’s now. Another thing I can say is that it predicted modern television, insofar as 10 episodes for this kind of show is about perfect. The second season, at a traditional 22 episodes? It was a complete and total mess, and definitely needed to be shorter. If it had been two more seasons of 10 each, then a little shorter is still not nothing, but also the arcs would have been more tightly described I suspect.

What I loved the most is how seriously it took itself. When the FBI guy throws rocks at a bottle while the sheriff’s office reads the names of suspects, and the one that got read when he breaks the bottle becomes their prime suspect, and the sheriff’s reaction is awe at how good a detective he is? Actually, the thing I liked least about season two is when the sheriff complains that he put up with a lot of strange behavior from Cooper. Because part of what makes the show work is that nobody ridiculed him or took it as strange. It’s just how the FBI is!

Anyway. That brings me to the movie, a prequel in which some stuff happens a year ago and starring different FBI guys which had 5% bearing on the rest of the movie so far as I could tell, and then picks up during the last week of Laura Palmer’s life[2]. It’s a decent movie. As a character study of a girl who is slowly being destroyed by her family life (and her school life, but mostly her family life), and of the people around her who love her (her best friend) and who think they love her (her boyfriends, who do not know about each other, and also that family I mentioned), it’s definitely a David Lynchian character study, but that’s okay. As an explanation of how Bob and her killer interrelate, it… fell short. Massive spoilers for the show and at least partial spoilers for the movie follow, so see footnote [3].

But anyway. I cannot imagine watching this movie first, or especially as a standalone feature. It would never work. And I’m not really convinced it was entirely necessary, with a handful of exceptions. But was it good? Yeah. Mostly pretty good. And whatever else I might say about it, at least someone finally made me watch Twin Peaks.

[1] Well, random, whatever blah blah. The style was sequel plus, I remember that, but the scare? Man, it’s been weeks. I have no idea.
[2] If you do not immediately associate Twin Peaks with the phrase “Who killed Laura Palmer?” then you were not watching television in 1990. Not sure what else to tell you.

Continue reading

Wish (2023)

Last time the kids picked Wish as the family night movie, I was tired and fell asleep for most of it, or maybe I was working? Whatever happened, I missed the majority of the movie. But this time when they picked it, I had nothing else going on. So now I’ve seen a somewhat recent Disney movie. Unlike Friday, when I will probably see an extremely current[1] Disney movie. (Don’t tell the kids, they don’t know yet. They may not even know I took the day off work.)

Anyway, none of that is about sorcery and making wishes and if I’m being honest, pretty mediocre songs for the most part. See, this is the problem with Disney in a nutshell. In the dawn of time when most of Hollywood had extraneous musical interludes anyway, it could be forgiven. And then when it had become habit, well, I guess. But then for a while in the ’90s with Mencken and Rice, the songs were legit good. Then I’m not sure what happened, I was away for a while. I hear Phil Collins was involved? Anyway, then in the ’10s, about half the songs in Frozen were bangers, and right after that they found Lin-Manuel Miranda. So expectations are at an all time high!

And, as I’ve said, extremely not met.

Anyway, there’s this sorcerer, right? And he figures out how to extract a person’s fondest, most heartfelt wish. He uses this knowledge to set up an island commune where people come because their wishes are unattainable, and so they come and give him their wish, and he keeps it safe, whatever that means. But also, once a month, he grants one of the wishes. That’s the setting. The plot is that the main character girl has a job interview to be his apprentice, and what she learns during the interview makes her unhappy[2], so she sings a (decent) song about wishing that the way wishes worked was better than the way they actually work here. At the end of which, she has found perhaps a better way.

Then, most of the rest of the songs are pretty terrible, excepting only the main bad guy[3] song about being underappreciated, but also the plot is a little overstretched? But then when they got to the climax, that song is pretty solid and brings most of the rest of the movie back on track. It turns out the movie was about how you should follow your dreams even if they are difficult, instead of handing them over to someone else and just hoping something randomly works out for you, and ps it probably won’t. At least if it didn’t work out for you on your own effort, you still burned with its fire your whole life instead of being an empty shell.

And that’s a pretty good message for a kid movie, really. Not even a terrible message for an adult movie, all things considered. But I’d still rather just watch Encanto[4] for the 18th time.

[1] Heh. “Current”
[2] Spoilers: she learns (or maybe we learn this during the infodump scene, it would make more sense that way I guess) that when you give up your fondest wish, you also forget it, it’s just gone out of you entirely. And then, bigger spoilers, she learns that the sorcerer picks and chooses which wishes gets granted, and never grants the ones that are potentially dangerous to the island, by which he means dangerous to his control over the island. Like how an old man’s wish to be inspirational to the next generation is too vague, and might result in some kind of revolutionary uprising. (Specific boring wishes, like wanting to be the best hairdresser, those are okay.)
[3] Awesomely, his name is Magnifico
[4] I sort of understand why I don’t have a review of Frozen. No review for Encanto is simply inexcusable, though. Whoops.

The Fall of the Readers

I have read a four book series to my (at the time[1]) five year old son. I’m not saying he saw every plot twist coming[2], but he is absolutely capable of focusing on the story and retaining information between books. I’ve been considering The Hobbit, although Mary says he’s too young for chapter five.

Anyway, The Fall of the Readers marks the end of Alice’s journey from orphaned apprentice to… well, to whatever she is destined to be, right? Can’t very well give away the farm right at the end, can I? But the point is, she has done three or four impossible things before breakfast, and it’s time to take the fight to the Readers[3] themselves. This will probably involve puzzles and mazes and friendship, like usual, you know?  And also like sacrifice, if the last couple of books are any measure.

And that’s only part one…

I declare myself satisfied with this series. It did not end the way I expected, it had a major reveal that I also did not expect, and it was worlds more my speed than a lot of the books that I read to him. I mean, I also wanted to know how things turned out! …as opposed to already knowing is most of what I mean, but also as opposed to not really caring.

[1] (As of today, he is six, you see)
[2] To be fair, I’m not saying I did, either
[3] If you know, you know. If you don’t know, well, it’s right there in the title. You can’t exactly pretend to surprise.

Malignant (2021)

I swear I’mma watch a semi-generic action movie soon. I even have one in mind! If I can just get to a stretch of more than zero movies in a row on the horror podcast that I have actually seen before. Well, it didn’t happen yet though.

Malignant is “split” for the scare and “dumb” for the style. I will say that I understand why people would have called this movie dumb, but it honestly kind of worked? Maybe better if I hadn’t pre-known the genre categories they were aiming for, but if I’m being real, I’d kind of forgotten / zoned it out by the time I actually watched.

To business! See, there’s this pregnant lady and she has had a lot of miscarriages, apparently because her boyfriend is down to just shove her into a wall so hard the back of her head caves in the drywall. But that’s okay, because a shadowy mysterious figure obliterates him later that night. And now Madison and her sister are in a race against time and the ever more suspicious police to figure out who the figure is, why she keeps having visions of his murders, what he has to do with the fact that Madison is adopted and remembers nothing of her childhood before that, and what all of this has to do with the psychiatric hospital in the first prequel scene where things were not really going well for the staff.

Were there dumb character decisions? Unquestionably. Who breaks into an abandoned hospital in the middle of the night to look for old files and just assumes everything will turn out fine? …okay, besides me. I would absolutely do that. But who else? This is not survival behavior! Was some of the plotting dumb? Here I mean plotting around certain emergences and especially certain retractions, about which I should not say more. But the special effects were cool and it did undo a previous massive plot hole.

My point is, I’ll forgive a lot when a movie can keep you guessing for a little while and is also, if not scary, at least pretty horrifying to boot. I’m not sure how I missed this one, to be honest. I think when it came out I mentally classified it as part of the Conjuring cinematic universe and then completely tuned it out. I now deem this to have been a mistake, but 5 years late is better than usual, to be honest? Still, I hope they do not make a sequel. It’s a complete story! Let it be, y’all.