Masters of the Universe (2026) - It does have 'the power' - surprisingly!

Yes, I'm old enough to have played with the original 80s He-Man action figures and - stranger still - even enjoyed the Dolph Lundgren big screen adaptation. So I was a bit hesitant going into the new Masters of the Universe movie, especially when so many other recent adaptations have failed miserably at embracing what made them popular to begin with. Luckily, this one is exactly what a modern revival of an 80s titan should be: a big, bold, wildly entertaining fantasy romp, embracing colour, energy and a sense of fun that feels almost rebellious in today’s blockbuster landscape.

The smartest move the film makes is telling its own story. I was nervous when I heard it was about a young Prince Adam, stranded on Earth, but rather than getting tangled in decades of lore, it builds a clean, confident narrative that newcomers can jump into with ease. Yet longtime oldies/fans like myself won’t feel short‑changed as the movie is peppered with homages to the classic cartoon, from visual nods to sly one‑liners, the kind that make you grin because you know exactly what they’re referencing.

Where similar fantasy tentpoles have stumbled under their own weight, 'Masters of the Universe' stands head and shoulders above them by remembering that this universe was always meant to be fun. I've never seen the actor portraying Adam/He-man before, but he seems to be able to carry the film and the action is punchy, with the secondary characters also being larger‑than‑life and Eternia bursting with personality (if a little CGI-heavy in places). It’s a film that knows what it is and leans into it with gusto.

The result is a crowd‑pleasing adventure that balances accessibility with affectionate fan service - a tricky feat, pulled off with surprising confidence and even a decent performance by Jarad Leto who many were worried when they heard he was cast as Skeletor.

And it was also great to hear Brian May's guitar chords used to perfection once again!

8/10

Mortal Kombat II (2026) - It's so much fun

'Mortal Kombat II' isn’t pretending to be high art and that’s part of its charm. What it is, is a gloriously gory, wildly entertaining slice of videogame‑faithful carnage that finally delivers the tone fans wanted from the 2021 reboot. Limbs fly, spines crack and the film leans into its own excess with a style that the previous entry never quite managed.

Karl Urban steals the show with a hugely entertaining turn as Johnny Cage, firing off razor‑sharp one‑liners and swaggering through every scene like he was born to play the role. His energy gives the film a jolt of personality that the 2021 movie sorely lacked (oh and I don't know the actor's name who plays Kano, but he's still on top form, too!).

The action is where 'Mortal Kombat II' truly shines. The fights are crisp, brutal and packed with fan‑pleasing moments that fans of playing any port from the arcade to the home consoles will know it's straight out of the game. It’s deliciously over‑the‑top and the film knows exactly what it’s doing.

As a sequel, it’s a massive improvement over the 2021 remake. The pacing is tighter, the characters feel more defined and the film-makers finally embrace the franchise’s trademark mix of violence and absurdity. Fans of the series will find plenty to enjoy, from the fatalities to the deeper roster of characters.

Of course it's not a masterpiece, but it is a wildly-entertaining rollercoaster of a ride which should please crowds who are simply looking for a fun time to munch popcorn to.

8/10

Weapons (2025) - Dares to be different

Horror tends to be a genre that sometimes feels trapped in cycles of remakes, sequels and familiar tropes.  However, 'Weapons' is a refreshing reminder that horror can still surprise us. The 2025 film manages to take familiar  ingredients and assemble them in ways that feel new, unsettling and genuinely engaging.

One of the first things that stands out is how stylishly the film is shot. The cinematography has an  atmospheric quality that builds tension without constantly relying on cheap jump scares. Scenes linger just long enough to let dread creep in, creating a slow-burning sense of unease that pays off as the story unfolds.

The acting also deserves a lot of credit. The performances feel natural and grounded, which helps make the characters more than just typical horror-movie victims. Each person in the story has their own motivations and personality and the film takes its time developing them. That investment pays off because when things begin to spiral into darker territory, the audience actually cares about what happens.

Another strength is the way the story develops. Rather than following a straightforward, predictable structure, 'Weapons' reveals its narrative piece by piece. The film gradually shifts perspectives and layers information in a way that keeps viewers guessing about where things are heading. It’s a novel storytelling approach that keeps the tension alive throughout much of the runtime.

When the film finally reveals its true antagonist, the payoff is worth the wait. The character is genuinely creepy - not just because of how they look or behave, but because of the disturbing ideas surrounding them. The sense of menace builds slowly, making the eventual confrontation all the more unsettling.

That said, the film isn’t completely flawless. If you start pulling too hard at the plot near the end, a couple of holes begin to appear. Some of the explanations feel a little convenient and certain details may not fully hold up under close scrutiny. Thankfully, the film’s strong atmosphere and engaging characters help smooth over most of those issues.

Overall, 'Weapons' is a stylish, well-acted horror film that proves the genre still has room for fresh ideas. It may not be perfect, but it’s creative, creepy, and confident enough to stand out in a crowded field.

8/10

Good Luck, Have Fun, Don't Die - I definitely had fun

'Good Luck, Have Fun, Don’t Die' is completely bonkers, but in the best, most joyful way possible.  Late one night in your average American diner, Sam Rockwell enters wearing a plastic see-through coat and a bunch of wires, declaring he's from a dystopian future and needs the patrons' help to prevent humanity's destruction.  And some of them will probably die along the way.

It’s such a relief to watch something that isn’t a reboot, a sequel, or a “cinematic universe chapter,” but a genuinely original story that just goes for it. Sam Rockwell is awesome as always, carrying the film with that perfect mix of charm and chaos only he can pull off.  And honestly? Those two hours flew by.   If it had one minor flaw, there are a few flashbacks during the first third of the film which - although kind of necessary to explain the character's in the diner's backstory, sometimes they go on a bit too long and you find yourself desperate to get back to the 'meat' of the story involving Rockwell himself.  And, if you really want to nit-pick, some of the CGI effects in the final act may look a little janky, but there's insane enough to hopefully take your mind off it.

With it's - not that subtle - dose of social commentary we definitely need more movies like this, please.

9/10

Shelter (2026) - Standard Statham

Jason Statham plays, er, well, pretty much every character he's played in the last five years. A former - insert special forces unit - who's destined to get back into the fight to take on - insert whichever gang of bad guys need his brand of justice. Here, he's forced to leave a remote, windswept Scottish island to protect a young girl who's been washed up on his shores while confronting old enemies (including a solid supporting turn from Bill Nighy as a cold agency director).

It's a pretty average Jason Statham film. If you've seen one of his recent action movies, such as 'The Beekeeper,' or 'The Wrath of Man,' you've basically seen this one. The formula is comfortingly familiar: stoic Statham, minimal dialogue, efficient brutality, a reluctant protector role and enough explosions to keep things moving.

That said, it's not the worst in his catalog. The action sequences are well-choreographed and briskly paced, the remote island setting adds a moody, atmospheric backdrop and Statham himself remains reliably charismatic. He commits fully, even if the role doesn't demand anything new from him. The dynamic with the young co-star brings a bit of heart and the film clocks in at just about a reasonable runtime almost without overstaying its welcome.

If you're a die-hard Statham fan who just wants to see him dispatch bad guys with precision, this will suit you perfectly. But it's hardly a stand-out in his career - more of a solid, disposable popcorn flick that delivers exactly what you expect and little more.

6/10

Send Help (2026) - Rami does it justice

I probably wouldn't have watched 'Send Help.' I saw the trailer before another film and wasn't that interested until I saw Sam 'Evil Dead' Rami's name attached to it.  And I'm glad I did.  The film is exactly the kind of horriffic, high‑energy romp you’d hope for from a filmmaker who’s spent decades perfecting the art of spraying fake blood at his cast. It’s great fun from the moment the plot kicks into gear, largely because of the chemistry between its two leads.

Raimi, of course, can’t resist sprinkling in a few of his signature splat‑gore flourishes. They’re brief, over the top and unmistakably him which long-time fans will spot instantly.

If there’s a stumble, it’s in the opening quarter of an hour or so. At first the characters feel a bit too cartoonish, as if the film is trying too hard to be a sit-com, before finally settling into what it actually is - a black comedy horror-thriller. Fortunately, once the story finds its rhythm, that early wobble becomes a distant memory.

By the time the credits roll, 'Send Help' has delivered a spirited, stylish and totally entertaining ride. It’s not perfect, but it’s absolutely worth the trip.

8/10

28 Years Later: The Bone Temple (2026) - That's more like it

After loving '28 Days/Weeks Later' (yes, I even loved the second one), I was left a little disappointed by '28 Years Later' as it felt a bit all over the place.  Yet, '28 Years Later: The Bone Temple' is definitely a step up, largely because it finally feels like it knows what it wants to be. Where '28 Years Later' wobbled under the weight of its ideas, 'The Bone Temple' is far more focused for better and for worse. The tighter script is an improvement, but also means some narrative threads fans may have expected to continue are quietly abandoned. Most notably, this doesn’t really feel like a continuation of Spike’s story at all, which may frustrate viewers hoping for a more direct follow-up.

What truly elevates the film are the performances. Jack O’Connell and Ralph Fiennes absolutely carry 'The Bone Temple' through sheer force of charisma. Both actors bring an intensity to the script, grounding the narrative even when it veers into stranger territory.  Their presence makes the world feel real and dangerous and without them, the film would be nothing.

There’s no shortage of gore and the film deserves credit for being unpredictable as you really won't know where it’s heading from scene to scene. Oddly, for a franchise built on the infected, there aren’t actually that many zombies here, which may come as a surprise.  Instead, the horror leans more toward atmosphere, violence and unease than outright undead mayhem.  The much-talked-about click-bait ending is undeniably awesome, delivering a jolt of excitement that lingers after the credits roll, but it also makes 'The Bone Temple' feel more like a very expensive trailer for what we really want to see in 'Part 3.'

Ultimately, this is definitely better than '28 Years Later,' but it may arrive too late to fully reignite the fanbase.  Strong performances, bold choices and a killer ending can’t entirely shake the feeling that this chapter exists mainly to set the table for something bigger.  Still, it’s an entertaining, bloody and confident entry, even if it’s not quite the payoff fans have been waiting for.

7/10

Evil Dead: Rise (2023) - Okay, but kind of generic

Ever since the 80s I've been a massive 'Evil Dead' fan and love the three Bruce Campbell entries and even followed the story via later videogame entries on the PS2 and PS4.  Finally, us die-hard fan-boys were treated to the awesome 'Ash vs the Evil' dead (which was cancelled waaay too early!).  All of those felt very 'in cannon' and kept the overall original film's cheeky, crazy, gory spirit.  However, 'Evil Dead: Rise' is a decent enough, gory little horror film that clearly understands how to push splatter. The practical effects are nasty, the violence is decent enough and the film doesn’t shy away from soaking its apartment-complex setting in blood. As a straight-up possession horror movie, it works well enough, delivering a steady stream of grotesque imagery and bleak atmosphere.

Where it stumbles is in its connection to the 'Evil Dead' legacy. Without the slapstick energy and dry, charismatic humor Bruce Campbell brought to the franchise, the film feels more like a generic possession movie wearing an 'Evil Dead' name tag than a true continuation of the series. The humor is minimal, the tone relentlessly serious and while that approach isn’t inherently bad, it strips away the unique personality that once set the franchise apart from countless other demonic horror films.  And, was it just me, or did the final act have 'Aliens' vibes about it?  I felt like I was watching a reenactment of Ripley rescuing Newt from a parking garage!

That said, 'Evil Dead: Rise' is still an effective and entertaining watch for gorehounds and modern horror fans, even if it lacks the anarchic charm longtime fans may be hoping for.  The final act does use a few classic lines from the franchise, making it feel a little more part of the series.  It’s solid, bloody, and competently made, just not particularly memorable as an 'Evil Dead' entry. 

6/10

The Menu (2022) - Nearly a good cheeseburger

'The Menu' is a slow-burning psychological horror that takes its time setting up the horror aspect, preferring to rely on atmosphere and tension, allowing the unease to build rather than rush headlong into shock value.  This deliberate pacing won’t work for everyone, but it does help establish an unsettling tone.

Ralph Fiennes is the clear standout, delivering an excellently menacing performance, but Anya Taylor-Joy does well to add an emotional heart to the film as the film’s moral compass. Their dynamic is easily the strongest element of the movie and keeps things engaging even during its slower stretches.

Where 'The Menu' really shines is in its sharp satire.  The film takes some satisfying jabs at pretentious food culture and self-important critics, skewering elitism with a wicked sense of humor.  These moments are often the most entertaining, balancing the film’s darker themes with comedy.

That said, for all its ambition and clever ideas, the movie isn’t without flaws. There are several moments where suspension of disbelief is absolutely required, as certain character decisions and logistical elements don’t fully hold up under scrutiny.  A few glaring plot holes threaten to pull you out of the experience if you think about them too much.

Despite these issues, 'The Menu' remains a fun and stylish psychological horror that at least tries to do something a little different.  Strong performances, sharp satire and an unsettling mood make it worth the watch—even if it doesn’t completely stick the landing.

7/10

The Housemaid (2025) - Flawed moments, but ultimately pretty good

'The Housemaid' was a lot darker than I imaged (as I didn't really know much about it prior to seeing it in the cinema) and I think its biggest plus point in the strength of its performances, even if it occasionally stumbles in its storytelling. While the film positions Sydney Sweeney firmly at its center, delivering a decent leading performance, it’s Amanda Seyfried who ultimately steals the show. Every time she appears on screen (well, mainly for the first three quarters), the film gains an extra layer of unpredictability and intensity, making her presence impossible to ignore.

Where 'The Housemaid' shines most is in its atmosphere. There are several genuinely tense and powerful sequences that linger long after they’ve ended.  However, the film isn’t without flaws. It does drag in places, particularly around the three quarter mark, where the pacing slackens and the momentum falters. Some plot developments feel less like organic character decisions and more like narrative conveniences—moments that exist purely to steer the story in a specific direction rather than reflecting how people might realistically behave. These issues don’t derail the film, but they do blunt its impact slightly.  And, there's a moment that happens about five minutes before the end that I felt was almost too unbelievable to take.  In fact, I try not to think about it too deeply as it's just so unrealistic that it almost completely derails the film's believability in once go.

Despite these shortcomings, 'The Housemaid' remains a well-acted and often gripping thriller. Its dark tone, strong performances - especially from Seyfried - and exhibits moments of genuine tension making it an engaging watch overall. If you’re in the mood for something unsettling and character-driven, it’s an enjoyable, if imperfect, watch.

7/10

Nobody 2 (2025) - Okay, but a bit derivative 

I absolutely loved the first 'Nobody' film.  Every YouTube review I saw told me that pretty much everyone who saw it also enjoyed it.  Therefore, I was pretty excited to see the sequel and pleased it received a little more mainstream attention as, despite the initial excellent reviews, it didn't really 'clean up' at the Box Office.  However, although the sequel mostly succeeds as a piece of entertainment, it can’t quite escape the shadow of its predecessor. The result is a sequel that’s perfectly watchable and often fun, but ultimately a bit too comfortable retracing familiar ground.

Bob Odenkirk once again proves that his unlikely action-hero turn wasn’t a fluke. He slips back into the role with ease, balancing dry humor, world-weary menace and sudden brutality as effectively as ever. Watching Odenkirk dispatch goons with barely concealed irritation remains the film’s biggest pleasure, even when the script leans heavily on beats that feel lifted straight from the first movie.

The action is solid and competently staged, but there’s a nagging sense of déjà vu throughout and a lot more reliance on computer effects like explosions seem evident this time.  So the film does tend to play it safe, repeating the same escalation structure. It’s fun, but it rarely surprises in the way the original did.

Christopher Lloyd’s return is a welcome highlight, but Sharon Stone, however, feels miscast as a secondary villain. While she’s clearly a capable actress in the right role, her character comes across as underdeveloped and oddly disconnected from the rest of the story, as if added late in the process. 

In the end, Nobody 2 is okay—an enjoyable action sequel with a great lead performance, but one that leans too heavily on what worked before instead of evolving. Fans of the first film will likely have a good time, even if they’re left wishing it could have pushed the franchise further.

7/10

28 Years Later (2025) - Good, but a bit 'all over the place'

I remember being completely blown away by the 2002 zombie film (that - technically - isn't a 'zombie' film) '28 Days Later.' Some people weren't that taken by the initial sequel '28 Weeks Later' but I actually loved that too.  So I was desperate to see the long-awaited third entry in what is now a trilogy.  Yet, to my dismay, many reviewers didn't seem to be saying it was that good.

And, they have a point - sort of.  Roughly the first third of the film is definitely strong, but then it seems to take a turn and becomes quite a different film.  Now it's less solid and more messy that starts to mostly work on vibes and momentum rather than the tight storytelling and acting it started out with. 

It’s good fun overall with enough chaos, tension and a few moments that you might not see coming.  But it has plotlines that don't seem to go anywhere and even stylistic techniques that are abandoned about a quarter of the way through.  One minute it’s grim and bleak, the next it’s oddly sentimental or almost playful and the film doesn’t always transition smoothly between those moods. It can feel like a couple of different movies mashed into one.  Still, the acting is pretty even all the way through, so even when it stumbles, it’s rarely boring and - hopefully - the ambition counts for something.  Not a classic, but an enjoyable, uneven sequel that’s easy to recommend if you’re already invested in the series.

7/10

 The Exorcist III (1990) - Which version did I just watch?

The Exorcist III' is one of those horror sequels that is probably better (in some places!) than people expect. The original was a genuine classic which still stands up to this day, but the second sequel in the franchise kind of sneaks up on you with how genuinely creepy it can be. The atmosphere is definitely moody and unsettling, plus some of the imagery (especially the now infamous hallway scare!) will still make you jump, but whether you'll see much of Brad Dourif's excellent performance will depend on which version of the film you watch.

I don't know whether I watched the original or the director's cut, but this one felt like the studio took a hacksaw to it, as there feels like there are missing pieces every other scene. The narrative jumps around, character motivations get fuzzy and the overall story just never seems to find its stride. I'm sure there was a better movie hiding underneath the edits, but what’s left ends up being a bit messy and harder to follow than it should be.

Still, the core creepiness is strong enough to make it worth a watch, even if the final product is uneven. Solid scares, but unfortunately choppy storytelling.

5/10

Money Plane (2020) - So, so bad.  I love it

Yes, 'Money Plane' is absolutely every bit as terrible as all those YouTube reviewers said it was—maybe even worse.  So, if you brace yourself for a cinematic train wreck, you can wring a hell of a lot of entertainment out of it.

The whole thing feels like somebody pitched “Die Hard on a casino airplane” and then immediately left the room, leaving everyone else to just… guess.  You get characters who either look like they’re sleepwalking through the movie or, on the complete opposite end, chewing scenery like they’re auditioning for a villain role in a Saturday morning cartoon (Kelsey Grammer, I'm looking at you - how did you ever get roped into a film like this?).

The plot is basically a series of wild, disconnected ideas glued together just firmly enough to keep the plane in the air.  You’ll get moments that make you go, “Wait, what?” followed immediately by something even funnier or weirder and the movie just kind of barrels forward like it knows you’re not here for logic anyway.  And don't expect even anywhere near the amount of action you might get in similar (better!) films like 'Die Hard, Under Siege' or 'Air Force One,' as the main actor spends much of the movie sitting in the cockpit flying the plane!

So, if you embrace the chaos 'Money Plane' has as much goofy charm as 'The Room,' only with a man trying to er 'get it on' with an alligator.  It’s so earnestly silly that it crosses over into that “so bad it’s good” zone, where you’re laughing with it, at it, around it - in fact, whatever works best for you.  It’s not good film-making, but it’s definitely a fun.

Basically, don’t watch it expecting a hidden gem.  Watch it because sometimes you want a disaster that knows it’s a disaster… and maybe even sort of revels in it.

6/10

Cobra (1986) - Not Stallone's finest, but still fun

Sylvester Stallone’s 'Cobra' is one of those movies that practically defines the 80s and their attitude towards action movies, without actually being one it the decade's best.  It’s not even one of Stallone’s best in terms of his filmography, but it's goofy enough and self-knowing to offer fans of the genre a spot of big, loud, dumb fun.

Stallone plays Marion “Cobra” Cobretti, a sunglasses-at-night (how 80s!) rogue cop who’s introduced slicing the tops off supermarket cans with a knife because… well, because it’s 1986.  The plot is little more than a vehicle for his one-liners, explosive shootouts and Stallone driving a cool motorbike.  The story isn't long and the villains feel like they wandered in from a much weirder movie—yet that odd clash of tones makes it feels like two completely different stories were stitched together.

Every shot feels engineered to make Stallone look impossibly tough (as I'm sure he was trying to keep up with Schwarzenegger at the time!), the action sequences are nice and 'real' (i.e. long before everything had to be CGI) and the film takes itself just seriously enough that it loops right back around into being entertaining.  Brigitte Nielsen starts off as a siren-type character and ends up practically as the 'girl next door.'

If you’re looking for a genuinely great 80s action movie, there are better options.  But if what you want is a simple dose of pure, uncut 80s cheese with Stallone at peak “cool cop” intensity then 'Cobra' absolutely delivers.  It’s a flawed movie, but also a wildly entertaining one and sometimes that’s exactly the charm you’re in the mood for.

7/10

Witchboard 2 (1993) - Possibly better than it had any right to be

I'd never even heard of 'Witchboard 2' when I decided I was in the mood for some low-budget horror, so I have no idea how it relates to 'part 1' (or even if there was a previous entry that ran narratively into this one).  So, going into 'Witchboard 2,' I really didn’t expect much.  It’s cheap, definitely looks like a made-for-TV movie and the premise isn’t exactly groundbreaking — another story about someone messing around with a Ouija board and getting more than they bargained for.  But, to my surprise, there was actually enough here to keep me entertained all the way through.

The movie leans into its cheap and cheerful charm and, while it’s not scary in any real sense, it moves along with just enough mystery and weirdness to stay engaging.  I even found myself taking a bit of cheeky enjoyment out of it — the kind where you realize you’re having more fun than you probably should be.  Some of the plot twists actually caught me off guard, which is more than I can say for plenty of bigger-budget horror flicks in general.

Sure, it’s not original and it has that unmistakable early-’90s “cable movie” feel, but for what it is, 'Witchboard 2' offers a solid dose of supernatural fun if you're in a particularly forgiving mood.  You could definitely do worse in the world of made-for-TV-style horror, especially if you can watch it for free like I did on a streaming service.

6/10

Marching Powder (2025) - Danny tries Trainspotting 

Believe it or not, I'm actually quite a fan of Danny Dyer.  I don't expect he'll ever win any Oscars, but he's watchable enough to be amusing if given the right role/material.  However, 'Marching Powder' tries hard to blend gritty realism with cheeky British humor, but the result feels a bit confused. The film seems to believe it can channel the spirit of 'Trainspotting' — complete with drug-fueled escapades, introspective monologues and moments of grim social commentary. Unfortunately, it lacks both the talent and the depth to pull it off.

Dyer, while a decent enough actor in the right role, struggles here with the dramatic readings of his lines. His trademark cockney banter and rough-edged charm aren't up to the film’s attempts at serious character development.  It’s as if someone thought, “What if we made a cockney version of Trainspotting?” — only to forget that those introspective, tortured inner monologues don’t quite land without an actor of Ewan McGregor’s emotional range and sheer antihero qualities.

The film isn’t without merit: a few scenes carry that familiar Dyer energy and the direction captures the grime and chaos of London’s underbelly and social tensions.  But the tone is all over the place — one moment it’s a dark comedy, the next it’s a gritty morality play and neither fully sticks the landing.

In the end, 'Marching Powder' feels like a a decent attempt for Dyer to try to be more than his previous roles, but, although it wants to be profound, it ends up as a muddled showcase of him doing only bits of what he does best.

5/10

Halloween 5: The Revenge of Michael Myers (1989) - One big yawn

After the surprisingly okay 'Halloween 4,' here we have the fifth entry in the long-running slasher series which takes a noticeable step back (we're not including the 'Marmite-esque 'Halloween 3: Season of the Witch,' as that didn't feature Michael Myers as the antagonist).  'Halloween 5: The Revenge of Michael Myers' tries to continue the story of Jamie Lloyd and her relentless, masked uncle, but the result is a sluggish and unfocused sequel that lacks any of the previous tension and atmosphere that made the 1978 original a classic.

The pacing is one of the biggest letdowns here. For a film about a silent killer (in an inside out William Shatner mask!) stalking small-town victims, Halloween 5 takes way too long to get going, with long stretches where nothing really happens.  The original suspense of John Carpenter’s original are replaced with meandering scenes and virtually no character development.  And, while we're on the subject of the 'characters' (and I use that term loosely!), almost everyone here is hard to like.  The teens are written as generic horror cannon fodder and even Jamie—played again by Danielle Harris—feels more like a plot device than a fully realized person this time around.

Donald Pleasence returns as Dr. Loomis and he gives his usual committed, slightly unhinged performance.  At least his intensity provides a few memorable moments, but even his larger-than-life presence can’t save the muddled story or elevate its dull execution.  By this point, Loomis’s obsession with stopping Michael feels more repetitive than anything else.

Despite Pleasence’s dedication, 'Halloween 5' fails to capture the suspense or spirit of any of its predecessors (I even preferred 'part 3' or any of the Rob Zombie remakes!).  With its slow pace, unlikable cast, and lack of real scares, it’s one of the weaker and more forgettable sequels in the franchise.

4/10

The Island of the Fishermen (1979) - I was expecting Peter Weller to turn up!

Alright, let’s not kid ourselves — 'Screamers; starts off slow. The kind of slow where you might check your watch and wonder if you accidentally tuned into an old TV sea adventure instead of a horror flick. It’s got that very ‘70s, old-fashioned vibe — you know, the kind where every line of dialogue feels like it’s setting up something you’ve already guessed five minutes ago.

Well, it's got all the B-movie greatest hits here: a mad scientist doing questionable ocean experiments, a greedy rich guy plundering nature’s treasures and a bunch of hapless folks who clearly haven’t seen a monster movie before (as it doesn't end well for the cast of extras!). It’s predictable as hell — but weirdly charming about it.

Then comes the second half, where things finally start to splash. The “monsters” show up — and, oh boy, they’re literally guys in giant fish suits.  At first, it’s impossible not to laugh… but give them a few minutes and, somehow, they start to grow on you. Like rubbery, bug-eyed goldfish who just want to be loved (and dump a load of priceless treasure at your feet - bless 'em!)..

It’s not scary, it’s not original and it’s not winning any awards for pacing — but if you’re in a forgiving mood and fancy some classic creature-feature cheese, 'Screamers' is a surprisingly fun little dive into schlocky waters.

6/10 — predictable, fishy, but good fun once it gets going

Black Roses (1988) - Tennis racket vs demon

'Black Roses' is one of those 80s horror films that starts off a bit rough around the edges but gradually grows on you.  Technically, it’s far from amazing — the acting is uneven, the effects are cheap with the 'monsters' being little scarier than a slightly above average Halloween mask and the pacing wobbles — but, as the story unfolds, it somehow becomes more entertaining.

The film follows a demonic heavy metal band corrupting the youth of small town America, one by one.  While that premise may scream 'cult classic,' what really seals the deal is how seriously it’s all played. There’s no wink to the camera, or detour into parody — 'Black Roses' commits fully to its ridiculous premise without ever veering off into how cheesy it truly is.

And yet, despite all that seriousness, the movie is actually loaded with deadpan cheese.  It’s this straight-faced delivery that makes moments like the now-infamous scene where a school teacher fights a demon with a tennis racket utterly hysterical (Ash from 'Evil Dead' only had a chainsaw and boomstick to do this!) — possibly one of the most unintentionally funny sequences in 80s horror.

For fans of the genre, 'Black Roses' delivers just the right mix of cheap creature effects and rock-fueled absurdity to keep things fun once it gets going. It may not be technically good, but it’s never boring and sometimes, that’s all that matters.

6/10