Troll (2022) - Well... I liked it!

I was actually surprised at the level of dislike this movie received when I came to review it online.  Okay, it's no masterpiece, but it's great fun with really good special effects and totally enjoyable to watch.

Set in Norway, a team of miners accidentally unleash a giant troll which goes on the rampage through the country.  I see a lot of people saying how this is effectively 'Godzilla, but with a troll.' And it is.  But is that so bad?

The fact that it's set in Norway with actors who are definitely 'non-Hollywood,' mixed with scenery and settings which are - again - not in America, go a long way to make this movie stand out among other similar entries in the genre.

Again, I reiterate that it's no masterpiece and that it's without flaws.  Some of the characters I found a little annoying (even though I was watching the 'English dub' of the film), such as the geeky military girl who just so happens to be able to hack a fighter jet while on mission (and then gets no punishment when caught doing so) and the obligatory high-ranking idiot who gets what's coming to him - but I mainly didn't like him due to how much he seems to look like a Norwegian version of James Corden.  

However, those annoying characters aside, the effects really do work.  Obviously, a lot of what the film-makers needed to create were done with computers and I've seen plenty of recent blockbusters with much bigger budgets look much worse than this (what's that third 'Ant-man' film again?).  I thought the troll itself was really well done and the CGI used was integrated well.

Overall, don't go expecting a classic, but there's certainly enough fun here for you to enjoy if you need your 'monster munching' fix and can find this on a streaming service.

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

Lair of the Beast aka Chupacabra Territory (2016) - Blair Witch Chupacabra

Sometimes you really wish you'd get an extra hour and a half of your life back that you wasted on a film.  Perhaps it was my own fault - I could have turned it off, but I didn't.  I was holding out hope that something might actually happen.  Spoiler - it doesn't.

Back in 1999 'The Blair Witch Project' redefined the 'found footage' genre of horror films.  It was a 'mock' documentary about some teenagers who set off into the woods to chart a supernatural myth (and end up falling foul to it).  That's a summary of 'The Blair Witch Project,' but it can also be applied exactly to 'Lair of the Beast.'

It's all filmed 'first person' as four youngsters try to get footage of a creature known as the 'chupacabra' who allegedly stalks and drinks goats' blood.  You can effectively skip the first half.  It's all set-up.  I know the film is supposed to be a 'slow burn' and gradually build up the terror, but it's just boring and nothing really happens that you won't be able to pick up midway.  The characters, although the actors do their best with what they're given. are totally forgettable and you won't remember their names, let alone care about their plight.

I liked 'The Blair Witch Project' and that was hardly a rollercoaster from start to finish, so I was willing to give this one the benefit of the doubt, hoping the second half will pick up.  It never did.  The thing about most 'found footage' movies is that they're cheap to produce, but this one really didn't seem to have anything in the way of budget in terms of special effects, so don't get your hopes up there.

It's just shaky-cam footage of the characters which starts out normal and gradually gets harder to see what's going on as the climax starts to draw closer.  If you like found footage films then you'll have seen better.  Don't bother with this one.  Ironically, I own 'The Blair Witch Project' on DVD.  I wish I'd just put that on instead, as I haven't seen it for a while.

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

Morbius (2022) - Well, it's definitely a superhero film

I'd heard a lot of bad things about 2022's 'Morbius' and seen more than a few memes online, saying what a terrible film it is.  It's a superhero film.  I know it's a superhero film because it plays out like someone has written down every core element of the genre and ticked them off one by one.  

Jared Leto plays the titular character who is stricken with a rare diseased, leaving him crippled.  So he dedicates his life to finding a cure - which he does, only using artificial blood, giving him vampire-like powers.  From there, every trope you're familiar with in modern superhero movies is played out.  Hero gets powers - check.  Bad guy gets almost identical powers - check.  Love interest kidnapped - check.  CGI fight where you can't really make out what's going on - check.  Sequel-bait that's supposed to hook you into a 'shared universe' which doesn't really go anywhere.  And so on.

So, it's pretty generic, but some of it's major let-downs are just how little you'll care for Jared Leto's protagonist, Morbius.  He's dull and not that interesting, which would be bad enough, if it wasn't for the fact that the villain - Matt 'Dr Who' Smith - is actually quite fun to watch and it's tempting to root for him.

If you like the idea of a vampire meets superhero film then 'Blade' did this three times over twenty years ago and each time was far superior to 'Morbius' (yes, even 'Blade: Trinity' was better!).  Plus the 'Blade' trilogy seemed to have better special effects, even two decades ago.  The CGI really is laughable in 'Morbius.'

If the whole superhero genre didn't exist until now and 'Morbius' came first, it may actually be considered a classic or a trend-settter.  However, with so many other superhero movies to choose from this one is just buried so far down under the weight of a hundred better entries, it's not worth bothering with, because you probably have better in your DVD collection or can find better on a streaming service.

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

Scream (2022) - Not bad... for a requel

I've been a fan of the 'Scream' franchise since the beginning.  Yes, we all know the original is the best and the follow-ups have basically steadily declined in quality, but I still think they're fun and a cut above the average 'slasher' movie.  So, how does 'part 5' compare?  Well... it's good.  Or does it just seem good because so many modern films are so bad?

Granted it offers nothing new.  If you've seen one 'Scream' film (or 'slasher' flick in general) there's nothing here that will blow you away.  A masked killer stalks and murders a selection of teenage victims until the final act where he's unmasked and ultimately defeated (until the next time, of course).

However, it seems that the original cast have been shelved and we're introduced to new protagonists called... I forget.  They're generic teenagers, but one does seem to have a link to an original cast member from 1997.  The initial characters may be a bit drab, but the writing saves them and there's some nice meta commentary on the genre and society.  Luckily, the story takes a dramatic up-turn when the film-makers realise that they can't really make a 'Scream' movie without the original line-up of Neve Campbell, David Arquette and Counteney Cox - and they save every scene they're in.

So the story is pretty well set-up for a solid sequel with a good cast, writing and tried and tested premise.  The problem for me was how some of the scenes just didn't make sense if you dared to think of the logic behind any of them.  For a start the kills were pretty mundane.  Yes, I guess there's a bit of blood and guts here and there, but nothing you haven't seen before and better/gorier.  The part I couldn't get over was how most of the kills take place in a location that should be packed with people.  It's like the killer has the superpower to teleport himself and his victim to an alternate dimension where only the two of them exist.

Maybe it's just nostalgia, or maybe it's because there are so many bad horror films on streaming services, but, despite it's many flaws, I enjoyed seeing the cast back for one last ride... before the obvious sequel arrives.

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

Red Tide Massacre (2022) - Why so serious?

I've always been a fan of horror as a genre.  So, now we have streaming services I will happily give pretty much anything in the genre a go.  However, there's so much utter dross on there that it seems nowadays the mark of whether a film is 'good' or not is whether I can actually sit through it.  I managed to last the entire of 'Red Tide Massacre,' not that it's exactly a 'great' film - merely watchable for ninety minutes.

There's a monster on the loose by the beach in Florida and a young deputy must team up with a reporter and a scientist to stop the 'massacre.' Oh, and I should probably say that 'massacre' is not the term I'd use for the amount of killing on display here.  Mild deadly rampage would suit it better.

Despite not outright hating this movie, there isn't much to recommend.  Although the acting is competent, the leading man comes across as miserable and surly (despite the amount of female attention he receives!).  If you're hoping for scares, there isn't any.  It utilised many a 'horror cliche' including the one about when a character says 'I'll be right back' they're about to be murdered brutally (didn't 'Scream' point this out back in 1997?) and the 'gore effects' are possibly some of the most laughable I've ever seen.  If blood is required it's - presumably - computer-added in post production and it looks like someone has drawn the red liquid on afterwards like an animated cartoon!

The creature itself is hardly groundbreaking.  It's a guy in a mask.  End of.  Okay, it's actually quite a good mask, but it's a 'good mask' if you saw it on someone trick or treating on Halloween, not in a theatrical film.

Most of the victims you won't really care about because they're only introduced into the very scene where they're due to die in.  And if any water is required to be red, the film-makers just slap a red filter over half the lens!  Maybe it would have worked better if it was a bit more 'self-knowing.' Perhaps they could have played into the overall 'cheap' feel.  Sadly, every scene is played straight - sometimes TOO straight and the dramatic music can even drown out the (supposedly!) deep and meaningful dialogue.

So, it has a lot of cons and not many pros.  It's probably not that good if looked at objectively, however, if you compare it to 90% of the horror films that seem to be made deliberately for streaming sites, then it's actually a bit better, or at least watchable, as I proved by getting to the credits only checking my Instagram on my phone a few times during the runtime.

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

Enter the Dragon (1973) - There can only be the one Bruce Lee

'Enter the Dragon' stands as a monument in the martial arts genre and, if you watch the DVD version, you'll be treated to the extended cut which further solidifies its legendary status. The introduction on the DVD is from Bruce Lee's widow and she informs us that this version restores more of the 'spiritual' aspects of Lee's philosophy.  Of course the main focus is the unparalleled prowess of Bruce Lee, showcasing his awesome fighting technique. Watching Lee in action, it's clear the world will never again witness a star of his caliber. His unique combination of philosophy, physicality, and screen presence transcends time, making 'Enter the Dragon' as enjoyable to watch today as it ever was.

The film has a diverse cast which was groundbreaking for its era, featuring talents from various backgrounds that added depth to the story. John Saxon's rugged charm and Jim Kelly's charismatic coolness perfectly complemented Lee's intensity.  You also have the antagonists, led by Shih Kien's Han, who was delightfully over the top. These antagonists, with their elaborate schemes and exotic lairs, imbued the film with a vibe reminiscent of a James Bond adventure, blending espionage with martial arts in a way that was both thrilling and innovative.

The extended cut offers a more immersive experience, with additional fight scenes and character development that enhance the narrative. The choreography is as precise and mesmerizing as ever, showcasing Lee's legendary speed and technique. Each fight is a testament to his dedication to martial arts, making every sequence a masterclass in combat.

'Enter the Dragon' remains today the cultural phenomenon it was at the time. The extended cut ensures that new generations can appreciate the full scope of Bruce Lee's genius, reaffirming why no one else can ever fill his shoes in the world of martial arts cinema. This movie remains a must-watch for fans of the genre, a spectacular blend of action, drama, and timeless appeal.

10/10 The Monty Python Knights of Camelot are currently looking for this

Death Count (2022) - Should have been about half an hour long

Sometimes you watch a film and think, 'Yeah, I can see what they were going for.' It's just a pity they didn't pull it off.  I like the idea of 'Death Count' - it tries to be a satirical social commentary on our addiction to 'likes' on social media.  Eight people awake to find themselves prisoners in an online game where they must perform grisly tasks on themselves for the internet's amusement.  The one who gets the least amount of 'likes' gets... well, it's a horror movie, so it's not good for the loser of each round.

The problem is it's dragged out too long.  One plus side is that there's a decent amount of gore if that's all you're looking for.  The budget means the gore isn't top notch, but if you're forgiving of the lack of finance behind the production then you may be okay on that one.  However, it still doesn't take away from the fact that if you took the excessive bodily mutilation out of the film and trimmed it down by half, you could - sort of - be left with a lesser episode of 'Black Mirror.'

Michael Madsen is in it, too.  Once upon a time that might be a selling point, but his character feels crowbarred in simply because he's the only face you'll recognise.  He looks typically bored, but he's head and shoulders over the 'antagonist' of the piece.  This mysterious masked figure oversees the goings on and he's bad.  We know he's bad because he dressed like a bad guy (albeit one with a low budget for his wardrobe) and he talks like a bad guy.  Every line he says comes from a 'super villain's handbook.' He really his quite painful to watch when he's on screen.

If you're going to get anything out of this you'll have to severely suspend your disbelief to go with it.  The fact that this online 'show' seems to be known to the entire world, yet only the local police department seem to feel the need to investigate is a major plot drawback.  If you're really in the mood for some low budget torture p**n then this might fill an hour and twenty five minutes if you can find it for free on a streaming service.

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

 Shredder (2001) - Generic, even by 2001's standards

With all the talk of 'A.I.' these days, I'm almost tempted to wonder whether 'Shredder' was actually written by some sort of cheap online algorithm.  Then I realise it was made back in 2001 and so I have to come to terms with that it's possibly one of the most generic slasher movies you're ever likely to see.

If you've seen even one slasher movie and therefore can name one cliche or trope then you'll find it repeated here - only more predictable.  It's about your typical group of good-looking teens/twenty-somethings taking a break to a remote ski resort in order to test their snowboarding prowess.  

And so you get the opening scene of the killer offing a random victim.  Then we're introduced to our 'heroes,' many of which are the most unlikable characters ever committed to screen, so you won't give a damn when they're dispatched one by one.  All the character cliches are there, including an incredibly annoying guy with a video camera whose primary focus is to spout exposition and fill in the audience on things they may not understand (even though someone with an IQ of under five wouldn't get lost in this film.

You'll probably guess who'll survive based on how nice they are and the 'reveal' of the killer is also predictable due to who's not on screen at the time of each kill.  There's not enough inventive gore to keep anyone who's looking for that sort of thing happy.  The killer has no real stand-out look about him and he tends to get rid of the cast by whatever means he happens to have at the time, rather than anything that would be specific to him and would stick in the audience's head.

Overall, there's nothing particularly wrong with 'Shredder' (apart from misleading you into thinking it's some sort of 'Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles' spin-off about their primary antagonist - which would probably be better than what is actually here!) - it's main problem is its so generic that you'll forget it probably before it's even finished.  If you like slasher films then find one you already know you like and put that on rather than take a chance with this.

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

Catacombs (2007) - One person can't carry this

On paper 'Catacombs' sounds like a reasonable concept for a horror movie.  An American tourist who's visiting her sister in Paris, gets lost beneath the city in a network of tunnels and ends up being stalked by something not particularly nice.

Sadly, that's about it and its major drawbacks is its singular focus on the one woman, Victoria (Shannyn Sossamon), who is the film's lone protagonist navigating through the various darkened tunnels.  This doesn't mean the movie is automatically bad as 'The Descent' uses a similar setting and story and yet manages to do so much more with it that 'The Descent' is a cult classic and this one is just forgettable.  From the outset, it becomes glaringly obvious that Victoria, despite her constant running, screaming, and encountering supposed threats, is going to survive until the final act. This predictability strips away any genuine suspense or fear, leaving the audience able to skip to the final ten minutes to actually find out what will happen to her.

And that's really all the film has, i.e. dark chaotic scenes where Victoria is frantically moving through the tunnels and it grows tiresome pretty quickly.  Maybe it's trying to build tension, but the repetitive nature of these scenes makes them feel monotonous.  There are only so many times one can watch a character sprint through dark, narrow corridors without losing interest. The film misses numerous opportunities to develop the few secondary characters who pop up (and guess what happens to them?!) let alone have time to any subplots that could have added depth.

Despite its actually quite clever choice of setting and the potential that could have been used, 'Catacombs' squanders these elements by sticking too rigidly to its lone protagonist and her repetitive plight. The catacombs themselves could even have been a character in their own right, yet are underutilized, with their potential to instill claustrophobia and fear left largely untapped.

There's not much in the way of gore if that's what you're looking for and although it may provide a few fleeting moments of fright, they are overshadowed by the repetitive and ultimately uninspiring journey through one dark, nondescript tunnel after the next.

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