Tag: Adaptation

BALLAD OF A SMALL PLAYER (2025)

~ jbg ~ Leave a comment

Directed By: Edward Berger

Written By: Rowan Joffe

Based on the novel by: Lawrence Osborne

Cinematography: James Friend

Editor: Nick Emerson 

Cast: Colin Farrell, Tilda Swinton, Fala Chan, Alex Jennings, Deanie Ip, Jason Tobin, Adrienne Lau

Lord Doyle is laying low in Macau spending his days and nights on the casino floors, drinking heavily and gambling what little money he has left. Struggling to keep up with his fast-rising debts, he is offered a lifeline by the mysterious Dao Ming, a casino employee with secrets of her own. However, in hot pursuit is Cynthia Blithe a private investigator ready to confront Doyle with what he is running from. As Doyle tries to climb to salvation, the confines of reality start to close in.

————————————————————————————

Unfortunately , this is another film where it’s a case of style over substance and the strange part is that there is enough substance to truly match the style, but by the end, it just feels so empty and almost like an opportunity wasted.

The film tries to tell the tail as the title suggest in a small way, even though it’s international, it sure does live up to the title. As it shows a small time player who wants to be bigger and more successful than what he is in this growing huge international market, and no matter how much he wins or loses, he still stuck almost insignificant in this world.

Even though director, Edward Berger gives his all and making this film flash and a visual delight with plenty of color and style throughout, not quite making the images always surreal, but definitely always making them feel alive when bright, but also feeling chill and coldness when there is no color and it’s rather plain 

which is rather shocking as with his previous two films conclave and all quiet on the Western front adaptation both seem to be simple yet highly visual with the media stories that seem to plane at the time, but as the film goes along, truly brings the audience in deeperz.

where as here the film seems to go for flash and slowly reveal a more dramatic story underneath, but there’s just no meat to be chewed on as we watch so that the only time the film truly is entertaining is when it comes to the visuals and more visual storytelling rather than the dialogue scenes and the little meat that they offer

Colin Farrell gives his all in his performance as the gambler in the middle of this, but again it’s something we’ve seen before and many other films, and we never quite understand why he makes certain decisions. There are explanations that has left more for the audience to read into. 

Just as Tilda Swinton having a supporting role here, though it feels more like a special appearance as her role is vital, but she’s not given much to do other than have kind of a frumpy noteworthy look and style. 

This one was like watching a steak or a meal that just looks so big and delicious but then when you bite into it is undercooked and thus disappointing 

Where you can imagine how great it could’ve been but have to deal with what it actually is. 

There is glitz and glamour, but they’re still seems to be something missing things. We are supposed to take for granted or figure out from little information we are given as there aren’t that many explanations, but big decisions and actions that we question the meaning behind all of them.

Grade: C

FRANKENSTEIN (2025)

~ jbg ~ Leave a comment

 

Written & Directed by Guillermo del Toro

Based on the novel “FRANKENSTEIN OR THE MODERN PROMETHEUS” ByMary Shelly 

Cinematography: Dan Laustsen 

Editor: Evan Schiff 

Cast: Oscar Isaac, Jacob Elordi, Mia Goth, Christoph Waltz, Charles Dance, David Bradley, Ralph Ineson, Lars Mikkelsen, Nikolaj Lie Kaas, Lauren Collins, Sofia Galasso 

Dr. Victor Frankenstein, a brilliant but egotistical scientist, brings a creature to life in a monstrous experiment that ultimately leads to the undoing of both the creator and his tragic creation.

————————————————————————

Guillermo del Toro’s adaptation of Frankenstein arrives with the kind of anticipation usually reserved for cinematic pilgrimages. It’s a long-gestating passion project by a filmmaker whose devotion to monsters borders on religious. And yes, it’s gorgeous. Ravishing. Sculpted with the kind of gothic precision that makes you want to pause the frame and hang it in a museum (which, ironically, is part of the problem).

Because for all its visual majesty, the film feels less like a living, beating story and more like a beautifully lit museum chamber piece sacred, admired, but curiously still. Almost like a Wes Anderson film

Watching Frankenstein at home, even on the biggest TV you can justify without shame, is like trying to view a cathedral through your peephole. You get the idea, but not the impact. As The film Is A Gorgeous Experience That Never Quite Comes Alive

Del Toro stages the movie like a theatrical spectacle; wide, grand, operatic. It demands an audience seated in the dark, collectively hopefully

holding their breath. On a smaller screen the whole thing compresses, and so does its emotional force. It becomes one more thing you’re “watching while also texting,” its larger-than-life gestures suddenly feeling muted. Which might be why this film doesn’t reach me. As much as it would in a theater more secluded and direct. 

It’s a reminder of an uncomfortable truth: not every film needs the big screen, but this one absolutely does. Shrink it, and the soul shrinks with it.

A friend once described last year’s NOSFERSTU remake as “a museum piece”—impeccable, reverent, exquisitely lit, styled, designed and emotionally distant. It comes off more as a presentation than a movie. Del Toro’s Frankenstein often slips into that same territory.

The sets are Immaculate. The creature design is inventive. The mood? Pretentiously Overwhelming in the best way.

And yet… it rarely moves you. The emotions are presented but not felt. They are laid before the viewer with academic seriousness, like annotations on a text everyone already knows by heart. Maybe that’s the curse of remaking a story we’ve collectively known since childhood: the beats land, but they don’t surprise.

It becomes less a story and more an opportunity to witness someone else’s interpretation of a myth you’ve heard too many times.

Del Toro is too talented to ever make something bad, but here he feels like a director in his Tim-Burton-phase: Instead of breaking new ground, he’s lovingly recreating  the things that inspired him growing up. Unlike Burton, del Toro doesn’t defang his monsters or turn them into punchlines. He actually adores them too much for that, but the result is still a filmmaker circling familiar territory rather than charting new routes. 

And yes, the del Toro signature remains: a gothic romance at the center, a creature yearning for connection, a broken heart inside a larger-than-life body. It’s easy to see what drew him to the material. It’s also easy to wish he’d returned to an original idea instead.

Christoph Waltz—shockingly—goes big. He’s operatic, but also the kind of actor who benefits from stern directorial supervision. Left unchecked, he can become his own genre. Here, he hovers just on the edge of self-parody, charismatic but distracting. 

The rest of the cast plays it with earnestness and restraint, letting del Toro’s production design do most of the heavy emotional lifting. Sometimes too much.

So… Is It Good? Absolutely. Is it essential?

Not quite. As Frankenstein is an achievement, a vision, a painterly triumph. But it’s also one more retelling of a story that has been told so many times it now arrives pre-interpreted. Beautiful, yes undeniably. But also strangely hollow, like an echo of itself.

It’s a noteworthy film, worth admiring, worth seeing on the biggest screen you can find.

But it’s not a new favorite. More a reminder of what del Toro can do… and what we wish he’d dare to do next.

Grade: B 

THE ACTOR (2025)

~ jbg ~ Leave a comment

Directed By: Duke Johnson 

Written By: Duke Johnson and Stephen Cooney 

Based on. The novel “MEMORY” by: Donald E. Westlake 

Cinematography: Joe Passarelli 

Editor: Garret Elkins

Cast: Andre Holland, Gemma Chan, Toby Jones, Tracy Ullman, Joe Cole, May Calamawy, Tanya Reynolds, Youssef Kerkour 

When New York actor Paul Cole is beaten and left for dead in 1950s Ohio, he loses his memory and finds himself stranded in a mysterious small town where he struggles to get back home and reclaim what he’s lost.

————————————————————————

This is a strange film as it is beautifully film, offering surreal, imagery, mystery, nostalgic throwbacks in a bit of artificiality that the film leans into when it comes to fading memories, or one memory leading to another and connected 

What a strange about this tail is that it plays a bit like film noir it seems to want to head that way, so it plays more like a romance, as well as a psychological character drama that fully tries to illustrate the lead characters, fractured, memories, and emotional state due to this condition 

Though ultimately the problem with the film is that it doesn’t really go too many places it explores the situation, but you never know where exactly it’s headed and it still doesn’t really offer any answers and what it does. They’re not really that big revelations so you wonder what are we supposed to do with this And even though the film doesn’t outright explain anything we’re able to get answers through small little clues

Obviously, the film deals with identity, and whether this is truly the person’s identity stripped away, and who he was before was always an act. This is more the emotional vulnerable him or is he in fact, truly a different person.

Just as we are left a question what’s real as the film is obviously filmed more on sites than actual locations and can easily walk over to the vaccine or memory, but it makes it not only a movie but also makes it feel more staged, but also loose in itself as there is obviously a design to it all, but you never know where it’s gonna go so more like an outfit from the runway, though in the parameters of an outfit that someone could wear daily, but still with that wild streak. As the sets work to show that each time he moves on, he is in a new scene or a new set for him in his life. 

If anything, the film plays more like a dramatic romance that is dreamlike and fits in with movies such as MOOD INDIGO, and THE SCIENCE OF SLEEP where it’s more about the creative forces,  presentation and artistry on display. As the films and the filmmaker seemed to get lost in their imagination and while it all looks good by the end, it doesn’t come too much

Though it all looks pretty and it does entertain it’s very light on material, even though there is plenty of depth. Though sometimes that creativity seems like it is more there to either distract or make up for the lack of action.

Though this film is admirable, if you give it a chance for its beauty and what it attempts to do not to mention where it takes you to and leaves you for you more interpret as it is sweet and old-fashioned now using more modern storytelling techniques. Not to mention the bravery of the filmmakers to make this film and live in the moments.

Another aspect that keeps the film feel more like a stage plays is that some of the noticeable and notable actors play at least three different roles throughout. Usually minor but meaningful ones. That come In each phase or territory that he travels to. 

Andre Holland in the lead is excellent as usual, truly showing his leading man presence, looks and vulberability. Gemma chan as the female lead is so precious though one wishes she was given more to do and play with. Even as with that decision she plays more of a sweetheart who the audience falls in love with, as she is truly innocent throughout.

Hopefully this will be a film that is discovered and studied by Audiences In the future and not just an undiscovered gem. That while shiny isn’t as heavy as it should be. 

by the end, you just wish that it had more to say and something you can grab a hold of so that it could truly match its beauty

Grade: B-

LADY KILLER (1933)

~ jbg ~ Leave a comment

Directed By: Roy Del Ruth

Written By: Ben Markson and Lilie Hayward

Based on the story “The Finger Man” By: Rosalind Keating Shaffer 

Cinematography: Tony Gaudio

Editor: George Amy 

Cast: James Cagney, Mae Clarke, Margaret Lindsay, Leslie Fenton, Douglas Dumbrille, Russell Hopton, Raymond Hatton, Henry O’Neill 

When a movie theater usher is fired, he takes up with criminals and finds himself quite adept at various illegal activities. Eventually though, the police catch up with him, and he runs to hide out in Los Angeles. There he stumbles into the movie business and soon rises to stardom. He has gone straight, but his newfound success arouses the interest of his old criminal associates, who are not above blackmail.

————————————————————————

The films of James Cagney’s work that I see, he is swiftly becoming one of my favorite actors of all time.

As he has a screen presence personality, and tons of range and while this film, is it quite one of his memorable ones.  it’s still an interesting entry in his résumé and one can see why he starred in it.

The film is pre-code Hollywood where anything goes. 

As the first half definitely works and it’s fun, funny and seems to move quite long at a quick pace that stays charming. Though once the second half of the film starts where he has to relocate and go to Hollywood and we see him work his way up the ladder. In various roles for the studio.

Where this part of the film is where the romance starts, it also allows us to see him in various costumes and roles that come off more comedic, and are truly a time capsule of old Hollywood for those fanatics which shows how they would dress up extras as Native Americans and westerns and the special effects that they would use

It also allows us for a good part of the film to see James Cagney with a hideous thin mustache. Now once his life has seemed to have settled his old cronies and business partners from his passing to hunt him down and find him and while this should be thrilling this is actually What brings the film down as it’s not as fun or inventive as the rest of the film and really makes the film dragged towards the end and this film is under 90 minutes already

One quality that is notable is the viciousness in which he treats one of his old female compatriots and seemingly ex lover when he throws her out he’s just so outrageously violent towards her that it almost feels comical, which seems to be what the film is going for but watching it it feels over-the-top and cruel, no matter what happened in their past. I’m talking Tyler Perry melodramatic over the top.

The film is a crime keeper comedy and does whisk along rather quick, but truly James Cagney is the only reason to watch this film. He is the star and truly is one in this film. While the rest of the cast is good enough but not all that memorable 

James Cagney said in interviews it’s not one of his finest. In fact, I had never heard of it until it came up on a streaming service and decided to give it a chance.

So for this one I say watch at your own risk, but if you’re a James Cagney fan, I think it’s enjoyable

GRADE: C 

THE RUNNING MAN (2025)

~ jbg ~ Leave a comment

 

Directed By: Edgar Wright 

Written by: Michael Bacall and Edgar Wright 

Based on the book by: Stephen King 

Cinematography: Chung-Hoon Chung

Editor: Paul Machliss 

Cast: Glen Powell, Josh Brolin, Michael Cera, Colman Domingo, Alyssa Benn, Sean Hayes, Lee Pace, Katy O’Brian, William H. Macy. Emilia Jones  

A man joins a game show in which contestants, allowed to flee anywhere in the world, are pursued by “hunters” hired to kill them.

—————————————————————————

Where to begin with this one? First off, let me say that I am a huge fan of director Edgar Wright. Though I have to say this is his most disappointing film from a personal standpoint.

Though it is not his fault, but throughout the film, the only time the film seems to have his madcap energy and directing prose is really in the scenes with Michael Cera. Which is where the film feels fun and unpredictable. Which is what you are kind of expecting the whole film to be.

This version plays supposedly a little bit more to the original book by Stephen King then the previously filmed the version of it starring Arnold Schwarzenegger.

I can’t really say because I’ve never read the book .

Though while this story seems like it would do well on the big screen I prefer the previous version of the film maybe because while not sticking exactly to its material it does play well as a satire Moore in the 1980s of what the future might be 

Whereas watching this version of the film, the satire feel somewhat dated and beat you over the head with a message that I think or would hope most viewers already enough and furthermore, this film just feels like it didn’t need to be made. It just feels like such a big budget Entertainment but yet it lacks the death.

Worst of all, even though Edgar Wright, cockroach and directed the film other than the Michael Cera scenes this film felt like it could’ve been made by anybody any director worth their weight as that is how uninspired the story and visuals come across it just all feels colorful yet basic 

Now don’t get me wrong the film is perfectly entertaining for a popcorn movie but again if you’ve already seen the original from the 1980s, this is just a retread that has been updated and seemingly to have more action instead of inside of a studio more in the world and the villain has changed from the game show host to the CEO behind the scenes 

Most of the major actors seem more like they’re doing cameos that were done all for the paycheck and we’re finished in a day or two, though they are stitched into the film and storyline to be major players

The lead played by Glenn Powell does try but this feels like a film that definitely needs a known star who has a history within the action genre so you already know they can pull it off whereas Glenn Powell is a star who is somewhat known but does not have a big screen personality he is more of an actor so this every man surviving comes across more as a concoction, and then letting the audience believe it also, even though his character is supposed to be this angry man full of rage and that’s why he keeps surviving. The problem is that Glenn Powell comes across as such an affable guy you can understand his anger, but you don’t believe that he has that much built up inside of him that is just keeps pushing him ahead. He just seems like your average decent guy now whereas in the past, that would work for an action hero to be identifiable here it makes it seem all the more implausible.

Now while the film is never truly boring, it doesn’t run a bit long and could’ve easily been shortened by 20 minutes as it feels like the film just wanted to give you more action and that’s really the only reason for the length of time whereas the story could’ve been told a little bit shorter.

Especially when they have scenes devoted to a seemingly satire of the Kardashians throughout, which seems there as alternative programming for viewers in the film to watch, as it is at least more innocent and less violent than most of the game shows that are presented as well as to just make fun of reality shows in general in the end feels unnecessary

Throughout this review, trying not to compare the two but also the introduction of a third act character who truly proves integral to the whole film feels random at best  and at worst like lazy storytelling that had to be put there because it was part of the story of the original and in the book. Has even as it seemed to pre-date AMERICAN GLADIATORS at least the villains. The hunters had personality whereas here, though they could be compared to ice they feel a bit more random and mysterious again, typical villain, who each seem to have a look, but only to come across in costume.

This one tries to be different and while it is much different then the original screen version and manages to set itself apart. It’s not necessarily for the better. When it’s difference really doesn’t help it and makes the co promised version we got, just a bit better. Even if it let the book’s fans down and not one of its stars favorite films. As he feels the movie is filmed too flat.

As by now there have been so many copycats, we borrowed from this story in plot and managed to do better and impress, and also do mean and go to the worst offenses of exploitation It’s pretty much hard to impress or top at this point.

It’s quality entertainment as long as you don’t have your hopes up .

Grade: C+

CONTEMPT (1963)

~ jbg ~ Leave a comment

Directed By: Jean-Luc Godard

Written by & based on the novel “IL DISPREZZO” By: Alberto Moravia

Cinematography: Raoul Coutard

Editor: Agnes Guillemot 

Cast: Jack Planace, Brigitte Bardot, Fritz Lang, Michel Piccoli, Giorgia Moll

A French writer’s marriage deteriorates while working on Fritz Lang’s version of “The Odyssey”, as his wife accuses him of using her to court favor with the film’s brash American producer.

————————————————————————

Tortured Myself again, by watching another Jean Luc-Godard From my Criterion Collection, sight unseen.

I know how dour that already sounds. You just have to know that me and Jon Luc Godard films have had a love-hate relationship. I have actually liked and enjoyed some films that I didn’t expect while other films that are considered classics I found rather boring noteworthy for different reasons.

I like the ideas of Jean-Luc Godard, in his style though the films not necessarily as much at times they work, but usually not at least for me as they become statements which might have worked at the time as bold but now come across as pretentious, cinematic, theatrical games, there is a living quality to them in an absurd quality, as they are usually quite beautiful, but leaves the audience lost to find their own way, which is commendable, if not having

I will say watching the movie is like reading a classic book you don’t like and wonder why so many do as it feels more like an assignment that you’re determined to finish 

This is one of those movies where you’re going to come up with your own theory or understanding of it so I’m only gonna present my interpretation.

Now it’s always entertaining watching a younger Jack Palance in a film, as well as young women, riding bicycles in skirts. Though watching Fritz Lang steal the movie in his scenes was worth it

It is another movie of Brigitte Bardot being torn supposedly between Teague lovers neither of which is seem a good choice, but one is better than the other and her never having chemistry who is the one who is older, has more money and seems more want her only physically.

This film is a satire film making, but it seems to turn more into a domestic drama romance of a deteriorating marriage.Even as it explores the themes of selling out or staying, true to your principles.

That was it’s a beautiful locations still end up being a hang out movie that is in the middle of paradise yet everyone is oblivious to the beauty of their surroundings or they’ve been there so long that it is normal to them, though the film still manage to showcase the beauty and appeal of Brigitte Bardot and it seems like while everybody in the film can see her beauty she is like the background to them. They’ve grown so used to her that it’s normal, but will still contest her. Well, the film and filmmaker bathe her and loving light as well as give her a meaty challenging role. Though questionable if you might actually like her by the end

One can say that at least she gets to play full character other than just a fantasy or an object of beauty pretty much a bombshell, though she does Grace the poster, so it she did help sell tickets for this phone as next to Jack Palance she’s the biggest name in the film and of course Fritz Lang. No, she seems to be the entrance or introduction for us to the Phil as the camera lingers on her

Throughout the film, we see the games that all the characters seem to be playing weather in love relationships filmmaking financing.

Now one can see where Martin Scorsese got part of his score of CASNO from. It gets  annoying a bit at times watching its source play throughout. The score “ST. MATTHEW PASSION BMV 244/PART TWO: WIR SETZEN UNS MIT TRANEN NEIDER”’By Johann Sebastian Bach 

Which leads me to wonder Did he use it to subconsciously say that all these characters are in this Idyllic Wonderland in that they are alienated from it due to mounting domestic pressures & alienation from one another

Didn’t expect this to become one of Godard Morchella Ching films even though it’s seams like most of them are as the film deals with alien nation. It almost feels more like a Michelangelo Antonioni film only no not as long, and this seem to have more of a cruel, ending the natural ending.

In the end, I have no problem, admitting maybe I didn’t quite get it as much as others did as I loved the concepts and drama that was introduced that lead to discussions and conversations even after you watch the film no again I can’t say I enjoyed it, or necessarily would need to watch it again

A WORKING MAN (2025)

~ jbg ~ Leave a comment

Directed By: David Ayer

Written By: David Ayer and Sylvester Stallone 

Based on the book “Levon’s Trade” by: Chuck Dixon

Cinematography: Shawn White 

Editor: Fred Raskin 

Cast: Jason Statham, Jason Flemyng, Michael Pena, David Harbour, Arianna Rivas, Merab Ninidze, Maximilian Osinski, Cokey Falcon

Levon Cade left his profession behind to work construction and be a good dad to his daughter. But when a local girl vanishes, he’s asked to return to the skills that made him a mythic figure in the shadowy world of counter-terrorism.

————————————————————————

Jason Statham and his movies are becoming almost an annual offering to audiences and cinemas 

They are usually the same type of action thriller with a similar character who has a dark past and is seeking vengeance or justice for someone close to him. He is usually trying to live a normal life, but forced to use his past skills. 

One of the reasons why these films are successful as they fulfill a niche sort of like in the past when Liam Neeson would have his older character action thrillers or even when we have had we weaknesses for certain stars like Jackie Chan and his family, action, comedy errors or imports that were usually filmed in Canada and heavily voiceover or when jet Lee had a bit of a resurgence in the United States and he starred in a bunch of disposable action thrillers that made respectable box office

what helps with Jason Statham is there even though he plays the similar roles he also showed in spy in a general that he has a sense of humor about himself and other than these movies he seems to stay away for media. It’s rare that you see him being interviewed on a show you don’t see him out and about at public events offering sound like that could get him judged or he seems to keep to himself so that he remains a mistake that no matter what side of the political spectrum you’re on you don’t mind him.

he’s the action hero that most men wanna be especially older men who just want their action, film, simple and violent and for women he provides to look of an older handsome in shape, gentleman, daddy, so to speak the strong and silent type who has a British accent, so makes him a little bit of an international Playboy also 

this is all to say that this film plays pretty basic and like the usual Jason Statham action thrillers only this is more disappointing because there doesn’t seem to be a sense of fun about it. It’s pretty straightforward and for all it’s dark elements. It never seems to show it in execution 

most of the characters that he encounters along the way, even the villains are kind of forgettable. He seems to be facing kind of the same villains that Denzel, Washington faced in the equalizer, the Russian mob only again whereas in the equalizer, they were really no threat to Denzel and he disposed of them without breaking a sweat here Jason Statham it’s a little moist, but still breaks. No sweat eliminating not the entire rushing but a fraction of it.

Due to them, kidnapping his bosses daughter, as part of a sexual trafficking ring, and then killing anybody who comes into his path, a few of whom are Russian mob family members 

The action sequences here are more gunplay than hand to hand combat that Statham is more known for. We also get a glimpse of his past and that his character suffers from PTSD so that this adventure actually helps solve it because he can get out his frustrations and feelings through the violence..

David Harbour earns his check and a supporting role that is more as a friend and advisory than him actually seeing any action sequences himself so that he fills out the role of another big name being in the cast that also usually accompany Jason Statham movies. Such as his character  having a child. Usually a daughter.

so as you can see this film is not only a by the numbers, action film, but also a buy the numbers for adjacent Statham film. It hits all the familiar beats. You know what’s gonna happen before it does and ends pretty much as expected so it really offers no surprise and as long as you’re fine with that, you shouldn’t be disappointed , but looking for more this is not the film for you

he pretty much takes on all the action other than when he finally does fine the daughter she gets to have a bit of her own revenge, but even the usual flashy henchman in this home who do you think are gonna be bad asses and being a final fight with Statham, they are dispatched so quickly and so easily. It was like they were giving a grand presentation only to be barely a warm-up at it reminds one of the assassins and Keanu and how ridiculous ridiculously over the top they were.

Another factor that leads to further disappointment with this film is there a David Ayer directed it now he didn’t write it. He is more of a noted Screenwriter and director who usually offers more gritty action in crime films. This seemed more by the book and slick then actually having anything noteworthy. 

This film actually makes their last collaboration, the beekeeper a damn near masterpiece. as at least I fell offered up what was expected, but had a hint of fun. This is more dour than it needs to be.

But that is also the magic of Jason Statham‘s longevity that usually there will be a couple of really bad films, but then he’ll shock you with one that’s genuinely decent or even good that it renews your faith in him.

What is surprising is that not only was this shot back to back? Was David Ayer and Jason Statham’s film THE BEEKEEPER but at this film was also written by his former costar Sylvester Stallone and David Ayer together. As this was supposed to be the start of a franchise based on the character from writer, Chuck Hogan’s book series based on the character, Levon Helm.

That Sylvester Stallone originally won to produce as a television series before they decided to make this film, even with state of not even being their first choice Liam Neeson was

Grade: C

CLOWN IN A CORNFIELD (2025)

~ jbg ~ Leave a comment

Directed By: Eli Craig 

Written By: Eli Craig and Carter Blanchard

Based on the novel by: Adam Cesare 

Cinematography: Brian Pearson 

Editor: Sabrina Pitre 

Cast: Katie Douglas, Aaron Abrams, Kevin Durand, Will Sasso, Carson MacCormac, Vincent Muller, Cassandra Potenza, Verity Marks 

A fading midwestern town in which Frendo the clown, a symbol of bygone success, reemerges as a terrifying scourge.

————————————————————————

This film at first brings nothing new or noteworthy to the table as it plays pretty standard not necessarily an homage to 1980 slashers, but it plays like a basic one that I could’ve been from that time. As it feels cut and dry and fits all the basic clichés. 

It Does it seem to have knowing about it and a bit more of a sense of humor but really just seems to offer more of a modern spin. 

It’s interesting as most of the victims seem to be killing teens only who seemed to be the few who are clued in to the killer as the adults seem to always constantly turn a blind eye.

This feels like a film that tries to play into that haunting aspect a few years ago of just random clowns on abandoned roads or in the dark like a cult that had many sightings across America, which, if this film would’ve came out around that time would’ve been perfect advertising only this film is actually adapted from a very successful book series.

never read the books it’s based upon though watching this film does make me actually want to read it and it sequels

The kills don’t even feel that inventive most of the time they are more trying to set it up a standard for this next generation by showcasing the past when it comes to violence.

As the violence here seems to be the element that might set the film apart from other teen horror films as this is a noted, rated R and doesn’t go for that PG-13 aftermath violence only. Which should PLEASE gore fans out there?

Looking at the cast in the direction is the film at times comes across as a CW channel version of a horror film or even one of those Hulu original horror films that they have every year around Halloween, which aren’t great, but at least are somewhat fitting the season and offering up content. It feels like it pays homage to the 1980s slasher films a bit too much.

This film feels like a lighter version for the same audience as the horror film THANKSGIVING by Eli Roth. Only hear the film comes off a little too smooth and a little to planned 

Even with Katie Douglas as the lead. The film never truly catches fire and she’s an actress who I am actually a fan. She and the other actors stay true to their character types until their endings.

Luckily, it gets better by the second half as one scene comes across as original and it’s more of a comedic scene, which seems to start the film on a totally new path. At that point, the film at least still be quite sharp, but feels like it will start to beat itself have its own identity that sets itself apart.

Then you realize also that maybe the reason why the first half was so stale is it was setting us up for the revelations in the second half that they were hoping might be able to save the film. Wish I which one could say that that works, but it at least offers certain elements that are a breath of fresh air.

Now you do get some THE PURGE vibes at times. 

As this film certainly loves to show off and use shotguns.

Even dispatching one of the few minority characters who ends up being the most annoying of them all in such a cruel, most violent way. The other one perish is way too early even before we get to know that character which is cliché and while logically isn’t the first victim, though is the first victim in modern day where the film is set.

The film does offer rebelling against tradition, exposing the ways in which it is bad or stunt the growth of others. As a theme offering an anti-conservative message, which might have been one of the reasons that bothered as well as bad promotion and merchandising for the film.

Which one is hurting a lot of films these days, especially the more independent feature films.

By the end, it even starts to feel a bit predictable. 

Though one is disappointed a bomb as it’s not likely to have a sequel or build an audience even though many have said that the sequel book is much better.

I usually want to root for Eli Craig’s movies but they always seem to fall a bit short where it feels like something is missing that could truly help put them over the top. Maybe it’s because the films play basic yet they have quite the spin that should make them a cut above.

Grade: C

VENUS (2022)

~ jbg ~ Leave a comment

Directed By: Jaume Belaguero 

Written By: Jaume Belaguero and Fernando Navarro 

Based on the short story by: H.P. Lovecraft

Cinematography: Pablo Rosso 

Editor: Luis De La Madrid

Cast: Ester Exposito, Ines Fernandez, Angela Cremonte, Maugi Mira, Aten Soria, Maria Jose Sarrate, Sofia Reyes, Federico Aguada 

Horror invades the concrete corridors of a cursed apartment complex on the outskirts of Madrid.

————————————————————————

As usual, this is a film that might be best to go in blind. Does this offer quite a mystery in a surprise?

This film for all of its original elements end up being somewhat predictable. Even as it always keeps you guessing with all the detours it takes on the road forward.

As it does, keep changing genres, yet staying thorough with its story and characters. As it is a Pulpy noir crime story, one minute, a horror film the next, then on the edge of being a thriller, as well as a supernatural tale. Before in the last act being a story of revenge or a director Luc Besson style  action film.

The film starts off slow, though quickly gain speed as mentioned in the third act you think that’s the way the rest of the film will go before morphing into something different and more satisfying. 

especially with the journey that the film has put the characters and the audience through. Not to mention how the film has built up to these moments and characters and even the tone.

It continuously tries to throw you off center though it seems to be somewhat predictable, especially if you’ve seen this type of film before but at least it’s trying.

The film offers this mix you find that they feed quite well off of each other. As it’s based on a short story by H.P. Lovecraft that tells you the places this story will take you.

The problem is that for all that it inspires and tension it makes the audience feel. It never offers up a good enough release. As it builds up you expect something bigger then what it eventually offers. Which is wild but feels a little bit too tidy and minuscule for what it seems to hint at. 

Though being helmed by Jaume Belaguero who works best with the supernatural and thrillers. Sometimes both in small spaces like in his films REC and SLEEP TIGHT. That unfortunately this one doesn’t rise to the occasion as his others have. As this one seems almost like a greatest hits for him or seems to have reached a limit. 

Grade: C+

THE MOTEL (2005)

~ jbg ~ Leave a comment

Written & Directed By: Michael Kang

Based on the novel “WAYLAID” By: Ed Lin

Cinematography: Lisa Leone

Editor: David Leonard and Colleen Sharp

Cast: Sung Kang, Jeffrey Chyau, Jade Wu, Samantha Futerman, Clint Jordan, Eleanor Hutchins, Ron Domingo, Jackie Nova 

Thirteen-year-old Ernest Chin lives and works at a sleazy hourly-rate motel on a strip of desolate suburban bi-way. Misunderstood by his family and blindly careening into puberty, Ernest befriends Sam Kim, a self-destructive yet charismatic Korean man who has checked in. Sam teaches the fatherless boy all the rites of manhood.

————————————————————————

Even though it offers a coming-of-age story from A different viewpoint. It also shows how universal themes and experiences most of us all have at some points.

It barely offers any answers or true endings, but that is how certain aspects and problems are in

Life also. Especially wanting to be an adult but still acting like a child. 

The film Feels unfinished to a certain extent. As it is already short in running time. That you in the audience wanr more from the film and the characters. You want to stay with them showing how much they mean to you and how strong the filmmaking is, that you have formed a bond with them.

The film is kind of a downer and has quite a few explicit material that might make some in the audience uncomfortable.

Showcasing a young man going through puberty with no male role Models. No real emotional support for his interests. Forced into the family

Business. Bullied and in the friend zone with his crush. 

It also showcases Sung Kang in an early

Role before being in the FAST & FURIOUS franchise. In a role that has the character who comes and shakes things up. Who becomes a debauched role model of sorts. Though has a tragedy behind him.

The film feels like a short story that was needed to be shared. A rarity that unfortunately is never followed up, but serves as an example of something shiny and worth your attention.

Though as an adaptation it seems like lighting in a bottle for both. 

Grade: B-