Killer in Law (2018) - Definitely made for TV

Do you ever watch a film that's actually quite close to being good, but just can't quite stick the landing when it needs to? 'Killer in Law' is no classic.  The plot of a relative who starts out as merely overbearing, but ends up with more sinister motives is nothing new, but that doesn't mean it's necessarily going to be bad.  It depends on the execution.  Here, a grandmother joins her son and his wife and daughter after an extended period, er, 'in an institution' shall we say?  Of course they welcome her at first, but soon things take a darker turn.

And in this outing, some of the actors are actually quite good.  The leading lady is very watchable and can easily handle the role.  Plus the little girl who plays the daughter is decent enough for her age.  Sometimes when youngsters are placed centre stage they're either bad actors or simply annoying.  Here, she's neither.  However, whereas they're good the husband seems to be more like a male model who's trying his hand at acting and the older lady who plays the grandmother uses every ham-fisted overacting technique ever.  Although, perhaps I shouldn't rag on the cast too much.  The script doesn't give them much to work with and the people behind the camera could probably have tweaked the script to higher standards.

During the opening there's so much exposition they might as well have just done one long 'text crawl;' in fact people almost SPEAK in exposition to tell the audience the general set-up for what's to come.  The strange thing about the script is that most of it actually works.  It's like every ten lines of dialogue a child was allowed to add one line before handing writing duties back to the grown-ups.  This gives the dialogue a really uneven feel to it.

When it comes to the story, there's nothing you won't really see coming.  Anyone not a major member of the cast is effectively there for a 'bodycount' (which isn't very high - and don't expect any major gore or ingenious kills or make-up effects).  What you have here is a very bog-standard affair that would have felt outdated back in the eighties.

5/10 You can watch this film while you're doing the ironing (you'll still get the general gist of it)

The Haunting of Julia Fields (2023) - 99% set-up

Apparently, the film with the most 'on the nose' title ever - 'The Haunting of Julia Fields' - was 'based on a true story.' If that means a girl rents a house, then I guess it's correct.  But I'm guessing the film-makers wanted to imply that the supernatural elements which befall her are the part which is supposed to be real.  I guess if you make it until the end you'll realise which parts were supposed to be 'real' and which weren't.  Um, that's pretty much a summary of the movie.  A girl - Julia Fields, would you believe! - moved into a rented house in Florida where she's slowly stalked by more and more supernatural events and entities.

And when I say 'slowly' I mean slow.  The film isn't long (not that much over an hour), but it does tend to drag.  I wanted to like this one more than I probably did, but there just isn't that much that happens.  Unless I blinked and missed the part where the story explains why a young girl (who looks more like she should be in college) can rent her own home and never seems to have to work, the central character does little more than wander round the house in her pyjamas and then hears a noise.

I know some people will say that this is all done to build tension, but there comes a time when the audience is just crying out for something to actually happen.  It doesn't help that Julia Fields lives on her own, therefore she doesn't really have many times where she can interact with any other character - until she encounters one creepy person after the next.  

However, saying all that, I did make it until the end.  It wasn't just because the film was so short that it was easy, but I actually quite liked the lead actress' performance and she certainly did her best with what little she was given.  Plus I wanted to see whether there was going to be some sort of major twist/payoff in the final moments.  I won't spoil the ending, but I will go as far as to say that, although this is an easy watch and has a few moments of creepiness, there isn't that much that a seasoned horror fan won't have seen before, meaning you can take or leave it really.

5/10 You can watch this film while you're doing the ironing (you'll still get the general gist of it)

Freelance (2023) - Nearly... something

There's always an argument between those who lived through the eighties and nineties as to which decade spawned the best 'action' movies.  There were definitely cases for either period, as there were musclemen, huge explosions, islands full of expendable bad guys and crazy locations for terrorists to try and take over form and make their demands.  The the millennium came and the action genre seemed to try more for 'serious' and 'realistic' and those over-the-top blast-a-thons looked like they'd had their day.

'Freelance' definitely feels like it should be more at home in either the eighties or the nineties, but whether it's any good I can't really say.

John Cena certainly has the classic 'action hero' physique and plays the leading role as well as any wrestler who has turned to acting, as he's stranded on one of those nondescript South American countries that always need a dictator or two overthrown and he has to protect the real president and a reporter.

Now, if you're expecting wall to wall action and explosions, you may feel a little disappointed, as the action seems a little subdued for a film that looks like it firmly belongs in the 'action' genre.  There are a couple of nice gunfights, but nothing that really stands out or will make you go 'Wow!' and let it stick with you.

The secondary characters are pretty nondescript.  The bad guy is, er, bad.  And the woman Cena is trying to protect is, er, a damsel in distress.  It hits all the major beats of an old school action movie without actually trying to add anything new to the genre.  If it had have been released back in the eighties, I really do think it would have first become lost among the Stallone and Schwarzenegger output, before being cursed to the bottom of a 'straight to video' barrel and forgotten about.  I can't really think of anything overly negative to say, but then I can't really think of anything that I'm going to really remember about it.  I hear John Cena has plenty of fans out there, so I guess this film will always have a dedicated audience to enjoy it - and enjoyable it is, whether you watch it properly, or just have it on in the background, you'll roughly get the same experience.

6/10 Should probably keep you awake if Freddy Krueger was haunting your nights

Chompy and the Girls (2021) - Marks for originality

Some people say that all the best stories have been told.  Others point out that there are only really a handful of stories to tel and that it's all about doing them differently enough to pass as something even vaguely original.  I watch a lot of (bad, straight to streaming service) horror films.  They're just a monster stalking your average bunch of teen until they're picked off one by one.  Most are bad, some are okay, but none really stick with me on account that they really aren't anything new that will actually stand out.

I'm not saying that - the weirdly-titled - 'Chompy and the Girls' is an amazing film which will stay with you until you die, changing your life for the better.  But it certainly is different.  And, in this case that was good enough for me.

The premise is that a teenage girl is meeting her long lost father for the first time in the park when they notice a strange man with a jaw which can dislocate, expand then seemingly swallow an innocent little girl whole.  Naturally, seeing this only a few meters away freaks them out and they do what most of us would do in their predicament - run.

The only problem is, 'Chompy' (as they christen him) starts to follow them round with his mouth open, as if he's selected his next two meals.

Yes, this film probably sounds a bit wacky and 'out there.' It is.  You have to let your brain accept some pretty crazy premises to get anything out of this.  But hopefully the characters should keep you invested.  They're hardly a particularly brave and noble bunch, but, starting out like this, it does give them a long way to go in terms of growth as the movie progresses.

I'm not sure I'd call this an outright 'horror' movie.  Sure, it has some horror elements, but more creepy scenes and a lot of black comedy and banter between the main characters.  It's not perfect.  The main character can be a little annoying with her brat-like behaviour, but she learns a lot on the way.  Otherwise, if you're in the mood for something a little different from your typical Hollywood output then this is actually quite fun.

7/10 if I woke up on Groundhog Day and had to watch this again, I could live with that

The Legend of Jack and Jill (2021) - How quickly will I forget this?

Okay, I confess... I've left it almost twelve hours before getting round to reviewing 'The Legend of Jack and Jill' which basically means I've almost completely forgotten everything about it.  

I think I was consciously invested for at least the opening two minutes, where I saw a woman forced to abandon her children (Jack and Jill, would you believe?) in the British wilderness.  Skip forward to when the kids have now grown up and they're mutated killers and there's a bunch of young adults about to take a hiking trip effectively through Jack and Jill's back garden, so to speak.

You can probably guess what happens next.  One by one our 'heroes' are picked off, blah, blah, blah... The problem is that I'm guessing I'm not the only one who has practically forgotten everything about what they just watched in a matter of hours.  This movie is totally forgettable.  It's problems are that you won't care about the people being killed.  Nothing wrong with that in itself.  It wouldn't be the first slasher film where the people you're watching are little more than 'meat sacks' waiting to be slaughtered.  The trouble is that there's nothing that interesting about the killers either.  Add to it that if you're hoping that there might at least be some inventive kills and gore, there isn't.  The kills aren't that grisly.  The acting isn't that sharp.  The make-up you could probably do yourself if you're going out for Halloween and the overall premise of the killers being (horrific) incarnations of a popular nursery rhyme really isn't explored.  Seriously, if you called this film 'Woodland Mutant Killers' no one would ever say, 'Wow, this is like a slasher version of that old nursery rhyme.' 

I can't believe anyone who sits down to possibly watch this hasn't seen a slasher film before.  You're probably at least slightly into the genre.  Therefore, you've seen better.  You probably have better DVDs in your collection.  Just put one of those on.

4/10 a hard trek, a bit like unicycling to Mordor and back

Monster Portal (2022) - Warning: does not contain many monsters

Hey, I've got nothing against horror 'B-movies' - in fact, they make up a significant proportion of my DVD collection.  You don't have to have major actors, great special effects, or even a particularly original story to make a movie enjoyable - as long as it entertains then it usually fits the bill.  However...

If you make a film with the word 'monster' in the title, it does tend to set an audience's expectations.  If you sat down to watch 'Snakes on a Plane' you'd probably not be expecting Shakespeare, but you'd be looking for something that's just a bit of harmless fun.  If you got one sickly-looking adder ten minutes before then end, then you might feel just a little bit 'short-changed' from what the title promised.

'Monster Portal' is an adaptation of an HP Lovecraft story, which is fair enough, but it does relay on giant creatures as part of its central theme.  Sadly, the movie doesn't have the budget to really pull it off.  Yes, there are a couple of monsters sprinkled here and there, but not only is it not enough to justify the title, but they're rendered about as well as your average Playstation 2 cut scene.

Now, I'm happy enough to ignore the special effects if the story is overall engaging and fun (or in a horror movie's case 'scary' would suffice), but here the acting is bad.  Yes, I've seen enough horror movies to know I'm never going to get 'Oscar-worthy' performances, but in this case it basically feels like the actors  are reading their lines off a cue card which is just out of shot.  I guess I shouldn't really put all the blame on the actors, this script is pretty basic and they're probably doing their best with the awfully generic lines they're given, plus you'd think the director might be able to coax something out of one or two of them.

It's not the main characters who are the (total) problem.  They don't turn in very good performances, but I can just about excuse them.  It's more the secondary cast-members who might as well be your average passers by who were roped in to read a line or two here and there.

As I say, B-movies can be fun, but this one just tries to bite off way more than it's capable of.  With a higher budget, better actors and script it might have worked, but, ultimately, it couldn't make anything of its lofty goals.  Oh, and the leading lady goes topless in the last five minutes if you just want to skip to that (best?) bit!

5/10 You can watch this film while you're doing the ironing (you'll still get the general gist of it)

The People Across the Lake (1988) - Strangely watchable

I know the words 'made for TV' are hardly a ringing endorsement for a film - it normally denotes a low budget, no real actors you've heard of and shoved on late at night when no one is ever going to see it anyway.  All that may actually be true of 'The People Across the Lake,' but, despite all its shortcomings, it's actually quite watchable.

It's about a 'typical' (i.e. mum, dad, teenage daughter and younger son) moving from the city to a small, rural town to start up their own business.  However, when they get there it turns out to be possibly one of the most least friendly places to go in America - and that's before random corpses start showing up seemingly under every stone that's overturned.

Again, nothing amazingly revolutionary with the plot, but what made it watchable for me was generally the dynamic between the husband and wife.  The kids don't really get an awful lot of screen time, so it's the adults who are the main characters.  I just found something about them very believable as a couple and, for whatever flaws reared their heads, I still found myself wanting to root for the central characters through to the end.

It's hardly a 'thrill-ride.' In fact you could probably call it a bit of a 'slow burn,' as very little of real note happens during the first half of the movie and it's all just generally setting the scene.  Once all the 'red herrings' have been discounted as to what's going on, when the 'threat' is finally revealed there is a slight element of 'scenery chewing' here and there which does make you want to roll your eyes just a little in terms of various people's acting ability, but it is a 'made for TV' movie, so what do you expect?

It's hardly a classic that will stick with you for very long, but if there's nothing else then this one will certainly fill an hour and a half of your time.

6/10 Should probably keep you awake if Freddy Krueger was haunting your nights

Isolation (2005) - If 'Alien' had simply been called 'Cow'

If someone tried to tell me the plot for 2005's 'Isolation' I'd probably think they were making it up, or, if the film was as they described, I'd think it was some sort of parody film of the 'monster movie' of the horror genre.  But it isn't.

If you think about 'Alien' and how it was set on a spaceship.  Then you think of 'The Thing' and how it was set deep in the Antarctic and sort of combine the overall theme of the two, only set it on a country farm in the middle of Ireland.  One question you may ask is... isn't a farm a lot easier to escape from (as opposed from a deep space craft or totally inhospitable terrain on all sides) - especially if some hideous killer monster was on the loose.  I would say the answer is yes.  But that's just one of the movie's sins.

The cast (or staff on the farm) of the film are some of the most uninspired and generic you'll ever see.  They really are a bland bunch and one guy (who's supposed to be at least one of the main heroes!) spends much of the time crying!  I've never met a quartet with less personality therefore I really couldn't care much for their plight when the monster started its munching.

Oh, yes, the monster... it's hardly the xenomorph from 'Alien' or the insanely grotesque shape-shifter from 'The Thing.' It's a scraggly pink sausage creature that writhes and wiggles about the place.  I think it may have teeth.  It's not in it for long - probably due to lack of budget.  

There's not much to recommend about this film.  I don't want to be too harsh on it.  It doesn't have a million glaring faults making it completely unwatchable.  In fact, it's major fault would be just how mediocre it really is in terms of those in the genre.  There's nothing especially bad, but there's nothing that will make you remember it.  Oh, and the monster came from a cow.  Yeah, the cows incubate them, so perhaps this film is at least a good advert for going vegetarian.

4/10 a hard trek, a bit like unicycling to Mordor and back

Invasion U.S.A. (1985) - Who needs the army?

Oh, no!  Communists!  Whatever are we going to do?  Guess we might as well surrender - arguably - the most powerful country in the world with a population of around three hundred million.  What else is there to do?  Certainly not tell a story, if the internet is believed.

Just in case you find the title misleading, 'Invasion U.S.A.' is about a few busload of armed communists, who rock up on America's shores and decide to effectively invade.  Hopefully no other band of scallywags try this in real life, as the States seems to roll over quite easily in the face of a few hundred rowdy men.  Luckily, one man isn't going to have that and in the same way Tom Cruise vows never to let an alien's boot touch Earth's soil, so here we have Chuck Norris wiping the lot of them out.

Apparently, the film was due to be a lot longer, with various subplots that flesh out our one man army's backstory and motives.  But then - according to what I read online - the film-makers thought, 'Nah, we don't need any of that - just stick to the action!'

And that is pretty much what we're left with.  A load of faceless badguys descend on some poor area of a civilian town and the Chuck does what he does best and ends the life of every last one.  Rinse and repeat.  Obviously, he has the grace to save the lead badguy until last - what hero would do more?

You could almost see this film's 'story' as a computer game.  Each 'scene' is kind of like the next level Chuck has to blast his way through.  All they needed was an end-of-level boss here and there with an extended energy meter and you'd have an excellent video game.

'Invasion U.S.A.' is the definition of 'mindless action.' So, if you're expecting anything even close to cerebral than run a mile.  However, if you've just watched 'Rambo' and 'Commando' in the same evening and are still hungry for more, 'Invasion U.S.A.' would make a satisfying dessert.

6/10 Should probably keep you awake if Freddy Krueger was haunting your nights

The Boy Who Cried Werewolf (1973) - Corny, but watchable

During the pandemic, hairdressers around the world were closed, meaning I couldn't get my hair cut for months.  By the end of it, I looked about as scary as a 'werewolf' from this film.  I may be being a little harsh, but what I'm trying to say is not to expect too many scares from this 'horror' film.

Within the opening five minutes you should basically know what you're in for.  After a heavy exposition dump, delivered by a curly-haired boy, we see our first monster.  It's basically a bloke in a Halloween mask (and a cheap one at that) that, at some angles, even looks more like a baboon than a werewolf!  Werewolves are a difficult creature to make look believable on the big screen and it seems you either need to have a mega budget behind you, or some really inventive ways of filming, combined with practical effects.  This movie has neither.

But it's not all bad.  In fact, it's quite good fun - even for a film that relies heavily on a young actor to carry much of it.  Yes, he's a bit annoying, but not as bad as many of a similar age when on screen.  He tries to tell the local population of a werewolf ravaging the surrounding woods, but - as the title suggests - they don't much take to his tales.

There's definitely fun to be had here.  It's cheap and cheesy and if you're in a forgiving mood you can certainly have fun with this one.  Just don't expect any real scares, let alone special effects.  For some reason the scenes which are supposed to be set in the middle of the night (as the characters even state!) are clearly filmed at dusk, or with an odd exposure setting on the film camera, making it look like dusk.  I'm guessing this is simply because it would be too dark to shoot at night, but it adds to the 'low budget' feel of it all.

It's no masterpiece and possibly not even up there with the best of the werewolf genre, but if you're bored and don't have your expectations set too high then you can pass some time with this one.

6/10 Should probably keep you awake if Freddy Krueger was haunting your nights

Silent Predators (1999) - Jaws with snakes

First of all, let me say how much I loved the 80s version of 'Clash of the Titans.' I don't care how cheesy it is, it was still a childhood favourite.  However, it's star - Harry Hamlin - certainly fell off the radar as far as I was concerned.  I'd never seen him in another film, until now.  Yes, the title 'Silent Predators' certainly says 'B-movie' and for a good reason - it is one.

Its plot effectively is a load of nasty snakes gets loose in a small town and starts picking off random nobodies you won't care about.  Meanwhile, Hamlin plays the local fire chief who suspects that the snakes are the cause of the recent fatalities and desperately tries to warn the authorities - unsuccessfully.  What you get is - effectively - 'Jaws,' but with snakes with the local powers that be not believing the threat until it's literally biting them on the a...

When it comes to horror B-movies and snakes, I kind of expected something like 'Anaconda' (which is truly great fun - if you like your cheesy B-movies!), i.e. a giant computer-generated monster-snake devouring people hole.  What I got was real snakes, generally slithering towards the actors until a prosthetic version of the reptile was shoved in for the 'kill shot.' I know it's a small thing, but if you're going to make a film with such a low-brow, simple premise as killer snakes on the rampage, you really should lean into it and make it fun.  The problem is that these snakes just aren't scary.  We've probably all seen large-ish snakes in the zoo and, while impressive, they're not as terrible as other movie monsters.

'Silent Predators' isn't a bad film, but it's hardly memorable.  It is indeed a B-movie and hits all the beats you'll expect for a film of this genre.  Good people tend to fair better against murderous snakes, while those with low morals almost always get what's coming to them at the end of a pair of fangs.  If you find this film on a streaming service, there are certainly worse out there, but you probably won't remember it for anything other than the 'first appearance of Perseus' in nearly twenty years.

5/10 You can watch this film while you're doing the ironing (you'll still get the general gist of it)

The Earth Dies Screaming (1964) - And if you thought 'Dr Who' was cheap

I don't care how good David Tenant's turn as 'Dr Who' was, I grew up with the cheap balsa wood sets which wobbled every time a Dalek breezed past it.  Yes, there were no CGI alien armies trashing New York, followed by the the obligatory 'skybeam' for the protagonist to thwart.  However, they had their old, stuffy - even black and white if you go back far enough - charm.

'The Earth Dies Screaming' is - in case you hadn't guessed it by its title - is unashamedly a B-movie.  I don't think anyone involved in its production was ever thinking this was going to be a classic that was destined to stand the test of time.  It could have had that 'truly British stiff-upper-lip' feel about it, it could have almost slotted in somewhere within a 'Dr Who shared universe.  Sadly, it just comes across as a bit dull.  And cheap.

Most of the world (well, mainly England) drops down dead (?) while going about their business, leaving only a handful of survivors, who find themselves held up in a country pub.  Before they really get too much of a chance to figure out the whys and hows of their situation, they're besieged by alien robots who make the Cybermen look 'high-budget' and threatening.

Um, that's about it.  It's shot completely in black and white, plus it's not a long film and it goes on for a little longer where they're trying to find a way of defeating their metal and then it kind of ends.  Yes, I know it's low budget, so I wasn't expecting for any sort of 'Fast and Furious' car chasing to epic battle-scenes, but it just sort of ends.  And that's it.  On the plus side it really did feel like a short film - hardly over an hour.  It certainly won't waste much of your time if you choose to forget it.  I've literally just finished watching it and I can't remember a single character's name.  I think the main protagonist was old and had multiple chins.  You don't get that in your average Marvel superhero movie!

4/10 You can watch this film while you're doing the ironing (you'll still get the general gist of it)

Zombie High (1987) - Warning, does not contain zombies (sort of)

It's never a good sign when you pause the film you're watching and expect to see the counter reading roughly an hour of the way through, only to find that you're only thirty minutes in (to a movie that's only an hour and a half in total).  In short, this film is a drudge to watch.

I like to think I'm hardly a 'cinema snob.' I've watched every film with 'living dead' in the title and, as long as there's a few brains being eaten here and there I can totally enjoy a cheesy B-movie, especially if it's set in the eighties.

I don't know whether this is a 'spoiler' or not, but there are basically no 'zombies' in 'Zombie High.' Okay, so that statement may be open to interpretation, but if your definition of 'zombie' involves a walking corpse (or 'infected' person, if you're in the '28 Days Later' world) hunting humans down for food, then you're going to be severely disappointed here.

A young girl (supposed to be in her teens, but actually 26 in real life) joins an elite school, only to slowly discover that the pupils are being transformed into mindless er 'zombies.' Nothing wrong with that plot (let's face it... it's basically the story behind every variation of a 'Bodysnatchers' movie and they could be pretty awesome!).  The problem here is that it's just so damn slow.

If I had to sum up 'Zombie High' in one word it would simply be 'boring.' The eighties ambiance is on full display here and everything from the sets to the music and costumes spell out this decade to the full.  It also has a (pre 'Twin Peaks') Sherilyn Fenn as a side character - usually a fine addition to any cast and yet even she can't really elevate the script enough to make this worth watching.

I really wanted to like this, but it's such a slog that I can't really recommend it for anything.  Not even any real gore to speak of.  I guess if you like looking at eighties style sets and wardrobes then you'l definitely get that here, nothing 'horrific' in this 'horror' movie.

4/10 You can watch this film while you're doing the ironing (you'll still get the general gist of it)

Highlander II: The Quickening (1991) - Worth thinking about

It's worth noting straight away that 'Highlander II: The Quickening' is widely regarded as one of the worst sequels ever made.  I can see where that line of thinking comes from.  The original 'Highlander' film was a science fiction tale about an immortal warrior from Scotland (played by non-Scottish actor, Christopher Lambert, but never mind) who had to fight other immortals with a sword until there was only one left - the prize being mortality.

Now, baring in mind that 'The Quickening' is a continuation of that story, I can totally understand why people hated it so much - and why it completely bombed at the Box Office, almost tanking a potentially profitable franchise from the start.  So, if you're looking for a 'part 2' which takes the original's concept further and runs with it then don't watch 'The Quickening.' Just stick with the original.  You'll be glad you did.

I could leave the review there, or I could mention that - if you took 'The Quickening' as a 'stand-alone' story - it could actually be quite good fun.  No, it's still not a great movie.  But if you're definition of 'good' is anywhere near mine - which is effectively: if it entertains me for an hour and a half then I don't regret watching it, then you might actually get something out of this.

The plot may totally contradict the original, but the special effects are good, the sets are really good (for the time and minimal budget) and it has Sean Connery in it.  C'mon, if you're looking for pure unfiltered 'entertainment' then what more can you want?  Okay, if you're still not convinced you also get Michael Ironside as the generic villain who chews up the scenery at every given opportunity.  He's clearly going for it, no matter how bad the script is.

Yes, however much you want to like 'The Quickening' it's still a B-movie and - as a result - will never be more than a 'cult classic' at best (and it's probably not a 'classic' by most people's standards!).  I'm not saying it's amazing and I'm sure as hell not saying that it's anywhere near as good as the original, but all I say is that - if you can put any biases aside that you might have at the direction the film goes after the first outing - there is some small enjoyment to be had at seeing Lambert and Connery on screen for a second time.  They clearly have chemistry and genuine friendship and it's a shame that it was wasted on a movie that's now only known for infamy.

7/10 if I woke up on Groundhog Day and had to watch this again, I could live with that

Anchorman: The Legend of Ron Burgundy (2004) - Pretty good (most of the time)

I have a weird relationship with this film.  Or at least it occupies a rare space in my brain reserved for a select number of films which I can't work out whether I like or hate.  Most people saw it before me and raved about how good it was.  So, when I sat down to watch it, I was obviously expecting something absolutely amazing.  I ended up not liking it at all.  A good few years later I watched it for a second time and it was like watching a film I'd never seen before.  I was cracking up at the silly jokes every few seconds and recognised it for the 'classic' that everyone has always said it was.  Now, a few years later still, I've watched it again and am left with a mixture of my two previous views.

It's about a news team in San Diego during the seventies.  Will Ferrell revels in playing the titular character to the extreme and it's full of very low-brow, silly humour and over the top gags.  But his time as 'top dog' at the station is threatened by the arrival of a woman who may just be able to read the headlines even better than him.

Maybe this film needs time to grow on some people (like me!) as on this third viewing I was actually contemplating turning it off, but it was only the confusion surrounding how much I liked it the second time around that made me stick with it.  I don't know whether it's a 'film of two halves,' but I really didn't laugh much for the first forty-five minutes (and it's only a tight ninety minutes runtime all together), but the second half seemed to pick up the pace.  I found myself enjoying it more and more and was glad I stuck with it.

It's certainly not a 'cerebral' film - the gags, as I say, are the lowest you can get and I think you need to get your mind in the right gear before you can fully get whatever enjoyment you're going to get out of it.  I guess I may never see it as the 'classic' that so many do, but it's silly, harmless fun in itself.

7/10 if I woke up on Groundhog Day and had to watch this again, I could live with that

Tower of Evil (1972) - An early entry into the slasher genre

Pretty people.  Remote location.  The cast getting picked off one by one.  It can only be a 'slasher' film, only this one is actually quite early on, making it one of the first of the what we consider a 'modern' slasher film (if 'modern' can still be applied to the seventies!).  It starts off with two old sailors, setting foot on an island for the first time in a while and finding a load of kids butchered, with only one surviving.

Skip forward a few weeks and the only survivor has been returned to civilisation, but in a comatose state.  She can let the authorities know roughly what happened, but they need more concrete answers, so they pick a load of young people (all of which have intertwined love lives!) and send them there to investigate.  Something to do with archaeological artifacts, or something... I guess it doesn't really matter!

What matters is that you get a 'who-done-it?' which will leave you guessing who's going to live and who's going to get chopped up, screaming while being knifed.  And, boy, does the director like screaming.  There's about a five minute montage of most of the characters screaming midway through.  I seem to remember it was about that time I nipped out to get a cup of tea.

Don't expect too much in the way of gore, as the film doesn't seem to be able to produce the funds to manage much in the way of special effects.  And, while we're on the subject of things and how they looked, the whole 'island' they're stranded on looks more like a set than my own living room.

All in all it feels like the cousin of a British 'Hammer House of Horror' film as it's kind of cheesy, but with a few more s3xual references thrown in as if they're deliberately trying to up the rating to an 'R' level.  If you're into the genre, there's certainly fun to have here - especially if you're in a forgiving mood.  Or you've enjoyed 'Yes, Minister' (the British sit-com from the eighties) and you want to see one of its stars (Sir Bernard) in a completely different role.  Plus you have the 'It's...' guy from the opening of 'Monty Python's Flying Circus' thrown in there for good measure.

6/10 Should probably keep you awake if Freddy Krueger was haunting your nights

Late Night With the Devil (2023) - Found footage films revamped

Those long-term horror fans will remember 1999's 'The Blair Witch Project' and how it brought (back?) the 'found footage' sub-genre which was a cheaper way of making horror films and stayed around for about a decade or so before the gimmick became old hat.

'Late Night With the Devil' is effectively 'found footage,' only with a nice period gloss of paint on it and presented in the form of a 70s late night American TV show, rather than the usual video camera footage.  If you can get past the heavy 'information dump' which makes up the first five minutes, we learn that a late night TV talk show will do anything to save its failing ratings and so the producers conspire with the host to create a 'memorable' halloween special to scare their viewers.  Naturally, they - and the audience - gets more than they bargained for.

First of all, the film's charm is in its presentation.  It doesn't come across as overtly 'found footage' and the attention to detail to make it seem like it was a genuine television program from the seventies is truly great.  Everyone plays their parts well and kudos to not just the presenter, but also the younger actress who plays the 'centre' of the paranormal activities.

It's quite a 'slow build' as much of the first half of the show is... well, effectively just the first half of a 'variety' TV show - not much happens that isn't supposed to.  Naturally, as the broadcast progresses, things get further out of hand.  There are a couple of horrific moments, but they're few and far between and the ending is beautifully chaotic.

I think it's worth noting that there's actually quite a lot of humour in this 'horror' film, making it more of a 'black-comedy horror' rather than an outright gore/scare-fest.  Whether you're a fan of the found footage sub-genre of horror, were around in the seventies and need a shot of nostalgia, or just like your horror films, this film is a nice departure from your average modern horror film with no ump scares and real attention to detail and cheeky fun.

8/10 The Force is definitely strong with this one