Connect with us

Editorials

The Worst Blumhouse Movies and Why They Miss the Mark

Published

on

I feel like I’m always taking swings at Blumhouse Productions and would like to explain why I’m usually frustratedly screaming into a mic, “For whomst?!” My relationship as a horror fan with most of the movies this company produces cannot be summed up in quick, snide comments and eyerolls. It’s bigger than that because when Blumhouse gets it right, they get it right. Get Out, Us, Creep, Creep 2, Happy Death Day, Freaky, M3GAN, and Drop are some of my favorite movies from the last 10 years. The Paranormal Activity franchise is the reason I show up for found footage films today. 

However, while the mission to seemingly greenlight anything is good on paper, it does lead to some questionable films. Some projects feel irresponsible to fund, and some that are just bad make up the majority of their library. For every diamond, we get a bunch of movies that leave us scratching our heads and wondering if the obvious conversations were not being had. Which is why I picked four Blumhouse movies I have legitimate beef with. I think these are prime examples of why I have a hard time getting excited when the company’s PR starts up for a new project. I’m also respectfully asking if there are things in place to avoid these issues and concerns in the future.

The Exorcist: Believer

Two girls disappear in the woods and return to their families, who soon learn they are possessed by an evil entity. My surface problem with this Blumhouse movie is that they learned nothing from greenlighting the Halloween trilogy and put the cart before the horse again. However, my main grievance is that I was led to believe this would be a Black-led Exorcist movie. That would have been groundbreaking in this almost exclusively white franchise. More importantly, Leslie Odom Jr. and Lidya Jewett were more than capable of leading this movie. So, why were they shoved into the margins? We had a double exorcism and gave the non-Black child most of the cool things to do. The film also made Odom Jr.’s character the chauffeur for Chris MacNeil, who was shoehorned in for fan service and given nothing important to do. The Exorcist: Believer was unbelievably bad to boot.

Dashcam (2021)

Advertisement

Two friends livestream the most terrifying night of their lives while on a road trip. This movie would have done fine because it was from the team that brought us Host. As we were still in pandemic mode, many of us were curious to see what they would do next. So, there was a lot of face cracks when it came out that problematic Twitter personality Annie Hardy would be basically playing herself in the film. From her political stances, COVID denial, racist rants, and that time she turned a pride flag into a swastika on Twitter, she’s very blatantly a person who does not need a bigger platform.

It’s irresponsible to allow a movie to use her as stunt casting in a Blumhouse production. Again, this movie would have been better off without her because it would have ridden the steam of Host. Instead, it turned people off, and some refused to see it or review it.

They/Them (2022)

A group of teens at an LGBTQ+ conversion camp suffer psychological torture at the hands of the staff while being murdered by a masked killer. I feel there were too many cis people weighing in on this movie. I personally watched an awful person who masquerades as a journalist leap into Twitter conversations where Trans and non-binary people were discussing why this movie wasn’t it. So, I chose to keep my thoughts to myself and listen to the community, who should get a say.

I encourage you to do the same. Here is the Horror Press review by Bash Ortega. I also encourage you to read Kay Lynch’s essay at Bloody Disgusting. Consequence of Sound also had a review that is worth reading. While this was one of the movies under the Blumhouse banner that had its heart seemingly in the right place, we know intention and impact are not the same thing.

Advertisement

Soft & Quiet (2022)

An elementary teacher meets with other white supremacists and then commits a hate crime. This movie felt like a bunch of shocking events strewn together, and I wanted my money back for this rental. I have no idea how this film came to be what it is. Personally, I hope there is a version that doesn’t feel like racial trauma porn somewhere, but this is not it. I kept wondering who this movie is for, and the internet confirmed it wasn’t for POC. With all the ways to capture white supremacy on film, this is what they did? I feel this is the most irresponsible movie Blumhouse has subjected me to. It’s the reason I no longer get excited when I hear a filmmaker I am rooting for is working with the company. 

In Closing…

I know I come across as flippant when I drag most of Blumhouse’s films. However, it stems from a place of concern and frustration. Bad movies like Firestarter, Unhuman, Night Swim, and Imaginary are one thing. These movies that clumsily handle important topics that are the reason I’m usually waiting for their titles to hit streaming. Whether they’re putting Black leads in the backseat, greenlighting movies where internet trolls are being given roles, or adding to the canon of racial trauma porn, I’m tired. I don’t know how to fix it because I don’t know if it’s a lack of support or interference regarding the writers and directors.

I don’t know if it’s just quantity over quality leading to some messy and unnecessary movies making it through the cracks. However, if Jason Blum can unpack why M3GAN 2.0 flopped, then it would be cool for him to unpack what he’s learned from the movies that should actually be cause for concern. As a film girl, I would love to see these Blumhouse choices laid out like case studies. Whatever lessons learned and actionable items taken to not make these mistakes again, could be beneficial to other production companies that are also struggling. All I know is an honest investigation is needed if they’re going to keep yeeting films out at this rate. We want to root for all horror. However, it’s hard to do that if we’re wondering who is (or is not) in the room for so many important conversations that need to happen.

Advertisement

Sharai is a writer, horror podcaster, freelancer, and recovering theatre kid. She is the host of the podcast of Nightmare On Fierce Street, one-half of Blerdy Massacre. She has bylines at Fangoria, HorrorBuzz, NightTide, and she is Co-EIC of Horror Movie Blog. She spends way too much time with her TV while failing to escape the Midwest. You can find her most days on Instagram and Twitter. However, if you do find her, she will try to make you watch some scary stuff.

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Editorials

Choosing Shock Value Over Writers Is Very Telling

Published

on

There is a huge difference between a movie being remembered for being good and a movie being remembered because it’s controversial. As a writer, I can forgive an okay film with an amazing script. However, I find it frustrating when it feels like no one believed in the project, so just leaned into the controversy. Stunts were pulled, shock value was sought after, and I am now wondering when the creatives stopped believing in their project.

Animal Cruelty as Shock Value in Horror Cinema

Cannibal Holocaust, a pivotal step toward found footage horror films as we know them today, is remembered for all of the scenes of sexual assault and the murder of actual animals. This takes away from its historical significance because the first thing I remember about it is watching a turtle get murdered and ripped apart. I have a similar issue with Wake in Fright. It’s hard to remember Donald Pleasence, Gary Bond, or the queer implications of this thriller because the filmmaker had kangaroos executed for this film. The scene feels like it goes on forever, and I’m yet to understand why murdering animals needed to be part of the process. 

I finally watched Megan is Missing a couple of years ago, and the exploitative nature of the assault of a fourteen-year-old is what stays with me. Whatever Michael Goi’s intentions were, they were lost because the shock factor of that moment outweighs everything else.

When Shock Value Replaces Meaningful Horror

It feels gross and like yet another male filmmaker mishandling assault on camera. Meanwhile, the film was serving its purpose and had other truly disturbing imagery that would have gotten a reaction out of audiences. It also would have allowed for more discussion about the film as a whole, instead of that scene that becomes the conversation. It’s another instance of male filmmakers mishandling the weight of sexual assault on film.

Things Aren’t Getting Better

However, the movies mentioned above are from different eras. We’d like to think filmmakers by now understand that shock factor doesn’t equal a quality movie. We would be wrong to assume that, though, because Dashcam (2021) didn’t stop at basing a character on an awful person. They actually cast the Trump-loving, anti-vax, and very vocal bigot Annie Hardy to play the character. This led to horror fans familiar with her brand of ignorance being turned off before the movie was even released. It also undid a lot of the goodwill that director Rob Savage earned with his previous movie, Host. To make matters worse, Savage repeatedly defended the choice all over the internet. At one point, he tried to blame her behavior on mental health, and people pointed out that doesn’t excuse racism, antisemitism, and homophobia.

Advertisement

Some of Annie’s Infamous Tweets

This is an especially head-scratching situation in this case. The team was riding the steam of a very popular found footage film. They were also primed to make a video game called Ghosts that had a successful crowdfunding campaign. People would have shown up for this before casting for shock value became the priority. We have had multiple films similar to this that sidestepped using known monsters. What was the reason? The idea came about because of her show, but any actress could’ve pulled that off. It was irresponsible to attempt to give this woman an even bigger platform . It was also the ultimate sign that no one was serious about this project.

Have We Tried Trying?

While making chaotic choices is one way to be memorable, is it worth it? In theory, someone(s) spent a lot of time and energy writing these stories. Wouldn’t actual storytellers prefer people to compliment their work instead? Celebrating their imagination, uniqueness, and skill instead of yelling about controversy and shock value. This isn’t a censorship thing. I’m used to being unimpressed with movies and asking,What was the reason?As a writer, I also know that there are ways to elicit responses from people without traumatizing them. We are literally tasked with putting characters and situations on the page that make people think and feel. Which is why going through the process of getting an idea greenlit and then leaning into something ghoulish like animal cruelty is baffling. Instead of casting a known Twitter bigot, you could just write a character based on assholes of that ilk. 

Whenever I see films coming out that seem more interested in courting controversy than trying to find their audiences, I pause. I cannot help but wonder who really decided this. Clearly, someone didn’t believe in the script and felt that upsetting people for the wrong reasons was the move. That outdated idea that any press is good press snuffed out whatever spark initially got people on board for the film. It is sad that someone(s) didn’t believe in the power of the written word. They doubted the effectiveness of storytelling and decided to go big in the wrong ways. Instead of stepping it up in the script department and figuring out if the proposed stunt is a band-aid for something missing on the page, they decided to go nuclear. They shocked us in the worst of ways, and now we are stuck on impact rather than intention.

How Did We Get Here?

I’m not trying to sound like a boomer, but the rise of social media has made this worse over the years. Studios seemingly want controversial content rather than actual art. The pursuit of going viral has replaced the idea of trying to actually do or say something. It’s all about adding AI to movies to spark outrage and make it trend. The worst people you know are getting cast in movies, so they can cry witch hunt when accountability enters the chat. Shocking the people for the wrong reasons seems to sadly be at main goal too often. 

How did we get here? I’m seriously asking. I mean, we know capitalism and people who don’t value art buying studios are a huge part of it. However, I feel like there is a missing piece of this puzzle. Maybe it’s just collective brain rot, and I want it to be more than that because I know the power of a good script. Hell, I know the power of a mid script in the hands of the right person. I want to believe in writers even if their vision is in the shadows of a circus. 

Advertisement

Is The Shock Value Worth It?

What do I know, though? I’m just a girl, sitting in front of a computer, asking the industry to believe in writers again. Back scripts that actually say something instead of figuring out how get them canceled. Make movies that spark conversation for legitimate reasons instead of incredibly head-scratching decisions that pull focus. Some of us deserve smart movies that challenge us for the right reasons. That’s why we flock to the original ideas, live for international films, and look to indie filmmakers. We crave disrupters who manage to break the cycle of crap we constantly get spoon-fed.

That’s what inspires me to keep beating my head against the wall. It’s what gives me hope that I’ll get to make things one day. Maybe I’m naive, but I want to at least try because I love writing. I don’t want to just cast a real bigot and call it a day. Not when I can write characters based on bigots and hopefully prompt actual conversation. I want my people discussing my dialogue and metaphors, instead of animal cruelty that makes people sick. In a perfect world the system would allow more room for that. We deserve scripts that can stand on their own without shock value leading TikTok to talk.

Continue Reading

Editorials

Tim Burton, Representation, and the Problem With Nostalgia

Published

on

Tim Burton was not always my nemesis. In the not-too-distant past, I was a child who just wanted to watch creepy things. I rewatched Beetlejuice countless times and thought he was a lot more involved in Henry Selick’s The Nightmare Before Christmas than he actually was. I was also a huge Batman fan before Ben Affleck happened to the Caped Crusader. To this day, I still argue that Michael Keaton’s Bruce Wayne was one of the best. So when I tell you I logged many hours rewatching Burton’s better films in my youth, I am not lying.

However, as I got older, I started to realize that this director’s films are usually exclusively filled with white actors. Even his animated work somehow ignores POC actors, seemingly by design. This is sadly common in the industry, as intersectionality seems to be a concept most older filmmakers cannot wrap their heads around. So, I was one of the people who chalked it up to a glaring oversight and not much more. I also outgrew Burton’s aesthetic and attempts at humor when I started seeking out horror movies that might actually be scary.

I Was Over Tim Burton Before It Was Cool

So, how did we get to episodes of the podcast I co-host, roasting Tim Burton? I kind of forgot about the man behind all of those movies I thought were epic when I was a kid. In huge part because his muse was Johnny Depp, whom I also outgrew forever ago. I wasn’t thinking about Burton or his filmography, and I doubt he noticed a kid in the Midwest stopped renting his movies. I didn’t think about Burton again until 2016 rolled around.

In an interview with Bustle for Miss Peregrine’s Home for Peculiar Children, the lack of diversity in Burton’s work came up. That’s when the filmmaker explained this wasn’t a simple blunder or oversight on his part. He also unsurprisingly said the wrong thing instead of pretending he’d like to do better in the future.

Tim Burton said,Things either call for things, or they don’t. I remember back when I was a child watching The Brady Bunch, and they started to get all politically correct. Like, OK, let’s have an Asian child and a black. I used to get more offended by that than just… I grew up watching blaxploitation movies, right? And I said, that’s great. I didn’t go like, OK, there should be more white people in these movies.Bustle

Advertisement

Tim Burton Is Not the Only One Failing

We watch older white guys fumble in interviews when topics like gender parity, diversity, politics, etc., come up all the time. It’s to the point now where most of us are forced to wonder if their publicists have simply given up and just live in a state of constant damage control. However, Tim Burton’s response was surprisingly offensive in so many ways. The more I reread it, the more pissed off at this guy I forgot existed after we returned our copy of Mars Attacks! to the Hollywood Video closest to my childhood home. While I knew I wouldn’t be revisiting Edward Scissorhands and Beetlejuice, his explanation for the almost complete absence of POC in his work burst a bubble. 

We Hate To See It

Tim Burton’s own words made me realize so many obvious issues that I excused as a kid. Like Billy Dee Williams as Harvey Dent in Batman, it was the only time I remembered a Black actor with substantial screentime in a Burton film. Or that The Nightmare Before Christmas was really named the late Ken Page’s character, Oogie Boogie. As a Black kid, what a confusingly racist image with a helluva song. So, Burton saying the quiet part out loud is what led me to reexamine the actual reasons I probably stopped watching his work. His problematic answer is also why I don’t have the nostalgia that made most of my friends sit through Beetlejuice Beetlejuice

I love the cast for this sequel we didn’t need. I am also delighted to see Jenna Ortega continue working in my favorite genre. However, from what I heard from most of my friends who watched the movie, I’m not the only person who has outgrown Tim Burton’s messy aesthetic and outdated stabs at jokes. I am also not the only one paying attention to what’s being said about the Black characters on Wednesday. Again, I’m always happy to see Ortega booked and busy. However, I also refuse to pretend Burton has fixed his diversity problem. If anything, this moves us deeper into specific bias territory.

Tim Burton’s Bare Minimum Is Not Good Enough

He will now cast a couple of Brown people, but is still displaying colorism and anti-Blackness. Histhingsseeminglycall for thingsthat are not Black folks in key roles that aren’t bullies. He still feels that’s his aesthetic. If we are still dragging him into the last millennium, will he ever work on a project that truly understands and celebrates intersectionality? Or will he continue doing the bare minimum while waiting for a cookie? I don’t know, and to be honest, I don’t care anymore. I’m not the audience for Tim Burton. You can say mythingsno longercall for thingshe’s known for. In part because I’m over supporting filmmakers who don’t get it and don’t want to get it.

If a director wants to stay in a rut and keep regurgitating the mediocre things that worked for him before I was born, that’s his business. I’m more interested in what better filmmakers who can envision worlds filled with POC characters. Writer-directors that understand intersectionality benefits their stories are the people I’m trying to engage with. So, while Tim Burton might have had a few movies on repeat during my VHS era, I have as hard of a time watching his work as he has imagining people who look like me in his stuff. I will never unsee “let’s have an Asian child and a black” in his offensive word salad. However, I don’t think he wants me in the audience anyways because he might then have to imagine a world that calls for people who look like me.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Horror Press Mailing List

Fangoria
Advertisement
Advertisement