Connect with us

Movies

[INTERVIEW] Discussing ‘The Program’ and Disclosure with Filmmaker James Fox

I had the wonderful opportunity to sit down with documentary filmmaker James Fox to discuss his newest documentary, The Program. Set to release on December 16th, The Program looks at modern disclosure and how we got here. From the events that led up to David Grush, Commander Fravor, and Ryan Graves’s testimony to the United States House Committee on Oversight and Accountability, to where we are today and what we have to look forward to. James has self-funded his previous documentaries, and The Program is no different.

Sit back and enjoy my conversation with James Fox as we discuss New Jersey drone sightings, government backlash, and a whole lot more!

Published

on

I had the wonderful opportunity to sit down with documentary filmmaker James Fox to discuss his newest documentary, The Program. Set to release on December 16th, The Program looks at modern disclosure and how we got here. From the events that led up to David Grush, Commander Fravor, and Ryan Graves’s testimony to the United States House Committee on Oversight and Accountability, to where we are today and what we have to look forward to. James has self-funded his previous documentaries, and The Program is no different.

Sit back and enjoy my conversation with James Fox as we discuss New Jersey drone sightings, government backlash, and a whole lot more!

An Interview with Documentarian James Fox

Brendan Jesus: Whenever I do Ufology-related interviews, I like to start them off on a lighter note before we really dig into things. There have been many representations of extraterrestrials in modern media. Do you have a favorite interpretation of ETs/UFOs/UAPs?

James Fox: How modern?

BJ: We’ll say 70s and on. Fire in the Sky and up. Wait–

Advertisement

James Fox: That was the 90s! Close Encounters is really cool because those reports came directly out of Project Blue Book files. And Hyneck was actually in the movie. I remember at the time people telling me like, “Close Encounters, that one object that did that, that’s what I saw!” And what the beings looked like came out of the Project Blue Book files.

Fire in the Sky was pretty good! I sat down with Travis Walton a number of times. The first time was probably 12 or 13 years ago. We met at a cafe, and the two of us were going to have dinner. I do this often when I really want to capture a story, like really live it. I’ll close my eyes and have the individual I’m interviewing give me a deep level of detail. What they saw, what they felt. I close my eyes and relive it. I did that with Travis Walton; I wanted to be there in the craft with him. See what he saw, feel what he felt. That case is just so extraordinary! They passed the polygraph tests!

I met with a lot of the guys that were with him. One of the guys was working in a Walmart and didn’t have time to get off work. So he told me if I wanted to see him to come to Walmart and he’d take a five-minute break. I went there and he goes, “You ever see a brand new Corvette? Like it’s so perfect–that’s what this craft looked like.” He was describing the level of perfection of this craft in a way I’d never forget. To see it in his eyes…it was a great case.

BJ: If there are aliens proper as we’ve come to see in shows like The X Files or heard of in Dr. Jonathan Reed’s 1999 appearance on Coast to Coast with Art Bell and his recorded alien scream, would you put your money on greys or greens?

James Fox: Greys. It’s funny, there was a witness from the Roswell crash and I had spoken to the individual who spoke directly to Mac Brazel. Mac Brazel was the one who came upon the crash debris site and went to the military base in Roswell, New Mexico, and said, “Hey, you’re talking about this reward…I think I found something..” Mac Brazel told the guy I was talking to, I think he ran the mortuary and was named Glen Dennis. [Brazel] goes, “You know those little green fellas they always talk about?” Dennis goes, “Yeah…” Brazel says, “They ain’t green.”

Advertisement

Image courtesy of Lab 9 Films and Falco Ink

BJ: Unbeknownst to you and your team, when you set a release date of The Program for December 16–you know The Program is releasing at a pivotal moment in modern Ufological history. Where I’m at in New Jersey, as you’ve probably heard over the past month, has been inundated with “drone” sightings. What is your take on this? And do you think these sightings might be some good PR for you to get more laypeople interested in a documentary like The Program?

James Fox: They’re trying to make contact! Kidding. I’ve kept my eye on this. I have a friend who lives in Jersey, and he’s like, “I’m living in the epicenter; I’ve seen them six times!” I asked what they looked like, and he said, “They’re the size of SUVs,” so I asked how they fly. “They’re hovering and they move side-to-side.” Okay, so what about the noise? “Oh, they’re noisy.” In my book, and I’m not talking about incursions over military bases, or the alleged objects that the F-16s have closed in on which have outmaneuver this–that’s some pretty advanced technology. If these little things can hover and outmaneuver an F-16, that’s pretty phenomenal.

But. The loiter time [of the Jersey drones] is a lot longer than any drone I’ve ever flown. I fly relatively professional drones for all of my movies and I have some higher-end drones–you have 20 or 25-minute flight times. These objects are up there for hours, I’m told. It’s just really strange that we haven’t had the kind of press conference because you have all these residents, night after night, saying this is happening, and what the hell is going on? Why has the executive branch been so quiet about it?

There have been some statements from governors and mayors, but why aren’t we saying like, “Hey, China’s flying highly advanced drones over our area.” Why are they flying over people’s houses every night? It’s really weird. Having said that. I have not seen any evidence that causes me to eliminate conventional propulsion. Advanced, but conventional.

BJ: I saw a post you made regarding taking odd jobs to fund The Program. What was the process like to get this documentary made?

James Fox: That post was for The Phenomenon, the film I made in 2020. A lot of times, I don’t think it’s told enough, the backstory of what it takes to get these projects across the finish line. I had tremendous hurdles in making The Phenomenon. I had tremendous hurdles to overcome in making Moment of Contact. The Program was even worse.

Advertisement

My distributor was acquired by a larger distributor at the very beginning of production. At the end of production, my distributor stopped paying me royalties. They had all of my films, directly or indirectly. It was like somebody turned off the spigot, and all my income was gone overnight. It has gone on to this day. I went into serious debt making The Program because I didn’t have any money. I was dealing with that nightmare and it’s like the worst-case scenario for a filmmaker, having your distributor rip you off. That larger company said they were making a little transition with their financial department, and they’ll be right on it!

Month after month after month.

I had to deal with that unfortunate aspect. Thank god I was in a position where I could go into debt by borrowing money. It had its challenges. This is the most independent production I’ve done in my 30 years in this field. I don’t have a distributor at all. I’m doing this completely independently. I raised a quarter of a million dollars after finishing the movie just so I could put it out. There are lots of hidden expenses people don’t know about, like insurance, trailers, social media, ads, PR firms, and all that stuff. To do it right, you have to spend the money to do it right.

To answer your question, yes. I’ve done foundational work, parked cars, floor heating, painting jobs, roofing jobs, and worked at a hotel. All of this was throughout my career making documentaries.

BJ: Do you think that having to do that has made you more hungry to tell the stories that you want to tell?

Advertisement

James Fox: Yeah. I never got into this for the money. When I was broke and making The Program I was like, “Well, I’ve been here before!” I picked myself up by the bootstraps. I remember people telling me to put out a GoFundMe and I’m like, “I’m not in a foreign prison right now, I don’t need to take free money.” We have a completely 100%, from start to finish, independent documentary. No executives involved, no distributors involved, no one telling me what to do or what to edit.

Image courtesy of Lab 9 Films and Falco Ink

BJ: I do want to talk about David Grusch in a second, but there’s a Ufologist I have interviewed, I won’t say his name. After he came out with his stories, he reported sightings of Men In Black, gangstalking, white vans parked down the road, and all that good stuff. Have you, from any of your films, experienced anything along the lines of thinking your phone is being recorded or seeing that van day after day?

James Fox: One of the things I reluctantly reported on, I kind of covered it a little bit in The Phenomenon, was a visitation a science teacher had. It was a dramatic UFO encounter, along with the whole school… roughly 360 people in broad daylight. This was in Melbourne, Australia, in 1966. The science teacher, who unfortunately just passed, Mr. Greenwood, had talked about why he went silent for over 50 years. It was because he had a visit from men in suits who were very intimidating. That was the first time I reported on that.

Then I went to Brazil and covered an alleged crash case for Moment of Contact. The mother of two of the primary school witnesses, who came within 10 feet of a live creature in broad daylight, had a visit from the so-called MIB–they were also very intimidating and threatening. I kind of went all in on that report. I had heard stuff like it since the 90s. At the time I didn’t really believe it, didn’t really have enough evidence, and thought it might lessen the credibility of my production so I opted out for a couple of decades. Then I decided to go all in and cover that aspect of the encounter.

In the last possible interview, we cover a case that happened in 1990: The Calvine Incident. We cover this in The Program. There were six photographs taken with two witnesses in broad daylight. Military jets were circling the object. It was a fascinating case but we just couldn’t find the witnesses. We found people who investigated the case in an official capacity from the Ministries of Defense for the Royal Airforce in Scottland, Craig Lindsay, and at the last minute, thank god to David Clark, we found someone who came forward and had worked with the two witnesses. They came forward and described these Men In Black. These men in suits came in and scared the living shit out of the witnesses.

To quote him, “They came in after a meeting with these MIB, and they were WHITE AS A FECKING GHOST.” That was one of the most indelible impressions. Like who are these people?

Advertisement

BJ: I’m glad your safety hasn’t been put at risk. You have a unique perspective where it’s clear you’re not trying to promote an ideology, you’re just asking questions and you’re asking the right people. That’s what separates something like The Program from other documentaries out there where you can tell people are coming at it from a point of they think they know what they think they know and that’s the story they’re telling. Whereas you ask, what I feel, are unbiased questions. I think that’s why people are going to really be intrigued by The Program.

James Fox: Thank you, I appreciate that. I’m just Joe Public who’s very curious.

BJ: I’m glad that you bring up David Grusch, and team’s, testimony. It brought a modern wave of disclosure. There’s something powerful about the visual of him sitting there with Jeremy Corbell sitting behind his left shoulder and George Knapp sitting over his right. It’s kind of visually like the angel and demon over his shoulders. Jokingly. Why do you think that out of the three of them, Ryan Graves, Commander Fravor, and Grusch, Grusch was the only one who was so heavily attacked for his testimony?

James Fox: Good question. I asked this internally to a number of folks. They said that he was tasked with going out and uncovering what the intelligence agencies knew. David Grusch, after a couple of years, found the program. He pulled the curtain back. There they were. He found it. They went after him. I remember in a parking lot, with another intel guy I was talking with at the time in D.C., and Grusch was on speaker phone. They were talking and David Grusch sounded like he was terrified for his life. I had never heard anything quite like it. He was legitimately–and I didn’t know it was him at the time. This intel guy turned to me and said, “He needs to go public as soon as humanly possible. He’s worried about his own personal safety.” [Grusch] pulled back the curtain and found what he was tasked with finding. He paid a price for what he found…and for revealing it.

There was no choice other than going public. Making that story public and saying as much as he could without going to jail. My understanding, from people I’ve talked to, is that if you violate your national security oath, there’s no due process. They just pick you up and throw you behind bars. I can’t remember the guy’s name directly behind Grusch. He was the first ICIG. He should have been sitting next to him, but he was behind him.

Advertisement

BJ: In The Program, you touch on the Defense Bill and the prospect of Eminent Domain regarding crashed UAPs. It’s widely known that private companies, like Lockheed Martin, have stated they’ve engaged in crash retrieval. If the government implemented Eminent Domain over these objects, do you think these companies would give their property up? If you think about it, Lockheed makes weapons. If they say, “You can pry this UAP out of my cold dead hands,” what’s there from being Ufology’s version of Ruby Ridge?

James Fox: I’ve been asking this question, specifically, where is it and who has the authority to release it? [Crash retrieval] is deliberately put in the hands of subcontractors. I say in the film that you can subpoena the subcontractors but the folks at, let’s say, Lockheed, they’re a private entity. I was told because of all the pressure and publicity, fairly recently, that there are folks within, again let’s say Lockheed, who want to divest. They want these objects out of their hands for liability reasons.

I remember when I dug into the Wilson/Davis memo, featured in The Program, it was the head of the DIA who got into a phone call where people (let’s say Lockheed) were reluctant to acknowledge what they had. Basically, [the DIA] said shut your piehole and don’t say anything about it. This was according to statements in the memo, which is a bonafide legitimate memo. Some of these folks seem to have more gravitas and power than our elected officials, the people who should be in charge of oversight. That’s the weird part about all of this. Who gave these guys the authority to call the shots?

I’m told that if such a project does exist, and I’m convinced it does, it would be an unacknowledged SAP (Special Access Program) under the umbrella of the DOE (Department of Energy). That would be the best place to hide it with the least amount of oversight. That’s where, if there is such a crash retrieval program, they have it.

BJ: That makes complete sense. Unfortunately, in Ufology, there are quite a few grifters. People who use their positions, or positions they’ve had, to make a quick buck. There are some people that I’m glad did not make an appearance in The Program, but the subjects you do have and speak with are spectacular. What was your process in deciding who to speak with, and how did your subjects craft your narrative?

Advertisement

James Fox: I thought it was important to highlight the bipartisan effort that was going on. I wanted individuals from both parties. That was important to me. It’s refreshing to see both parties working together and being civil with one another. I want to see more of that, we don’t have to demonize an opponent because we don’t agree politically. That was refreshing. Also, I think, okay, if this is true and I’m presenting this case to a jury, who would be most likely in a position to know? Those with the highest clearances and credentials are the ones I leaned into heavily.

People don’t just contact me and say, “Hey, I want to be in your next doc!” It took me years for Hal Puthoff to participate. It took a year just to get him to meet with me and then another year to think about whether he would go on camera. It takes time. Kirk McConnell put his neck out. He just retired this year from the Senate Armed Services Committee, and he was present from 2017 to 2024, investigating in an official capacity with high clearances. He came forward because he was disgusted with what was being said publicly by the former head of AARO.

Obviously, pilots, Ryan Graves is a very credible individual. Sitting members of Congress. People within the intel community. I try to be selective and mindful of–people with the most credibility possible.

Image courtesy of Lab 9 Films and Falco Ink

BJ: I think it shows very well in the final product. You mentioned the word jury in your previous statement and that’s very interesting with one of the last sentiments you put forward near the end of The Program. “We put people in the electric chair based on eyewitness testimony.” That’s an incredibly powerful quote, and I don’t think I’ve heard anyone in this field say anything like that. What does that quote mean to you? Do you think more people should run with that ideology when it comes to disclosure?

James Fox: I just feel like we put so much significance on eyewitness testimony except when it comes to UAPs. That doesn’t make any sense. When you have multiple trained pilots describing something that’s picked up on radar, FLIR, ground radar, airborne radar, seen by four sets of eyeballs…that should be taken seriously! Those guys on the Nimitz case have everything BUT the craft. All the sensory data, the visual data, and FLIR data. It’s damn compelling, and I would NOT call that anecdotal.

BJ: There is still quite a stigma, which you cover, against being an experiencer or having sightings. There are also a lot of entertainment shows surrounding aliens/UFOs/UAPs. Shows like The Secret of Skinwalker Ranch, Mystery at Blind Frog Ranch, and Ancient Aliens. Do you think shows like that hurt the idea of disclosure and stoke the stigma?

Advertisement

James Fox: Ancient Aliens has made quite an impact. It’s memed. “I’m not saying it’s aliens…but it’s aliens!” Those have gotten a lot of traction and interest. I’ve had people that I’ve met with who enjoy the shows. I remember thinking, well it’s not the most credible but okay! Everyone is having fun. I’m not trying to bash them, but I generally don’t watch them. There’s nothing wrong with entertainment. I do try and bring some lighter moments to my work and entertain. I don’t want my work to be like an encyclopedia so I try and make it fun while keeping the substance.

BJ: Like when The Program takes a trip over to Scotland!

James Fox: I made poached eggs and TOAST!

BJ: Final question. What do you want people to take away from The Program?

James Fox: That there’s a very serious and sober investigation taking place right now that could very well lead to the disclosure of a story that could touch the lives of every man, woman, and child on the planet. Whether you believe it’s real or not, I think there’s enough smoke to suggest there’s fire. There’s enough evidence to suggest something truly inexplicable is taking place, and there might very well be an agency or government body that’s hiding definitive proof we’re not alone.

Advertisement

I want to thank James Fox for taking the time to talk with me. His documentary

The Program is available on VOD platforms on December 16th! Don’t miss it!

Brendan is an award-winning author and screenwriter rotting away in New Jersey. His hobbies include rain, slugs, and the endless search for The Mothman.

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Editorials

‘Ready or Not’ and the Cathartic Cigarette of a Relatable Final Girl

Published

on

I was late to the Radio Silence party. However, I do not let that stop me from being one of the loudest people at the function now. I randomly decided to see Ready or Not in theaters one afternoon in 2019 and walked out a better person for it. The movie introduced me to the work of a team that would become some of my favorite current filmmakers. It also confirmed that getting married is the worst thing one can do. That felt very validating as someone who doesn’t buy into the needing to be married to be complete narrative.

Ready or Not is about a fucked up family with a fucked up tradition. The unassuming Grace (Samara Weaving) thinks her new in-laws are a bit weird. However, she’s blinded by love on her wedding day. She would never suspect that her groom, Alex (Mark O’Brien), would lead her into a deadly wedding night. So, she heads downstairs to play a game with the family, not knowing that they will be hunting her this evening. This is one of the many ways I am different from Grace. I watch enough of the news to know the husband should be the prime suspect, and I have been around long enough to know men are the worst. I also have a commitment phobia, so the idea of walking down the aisle gives me anxiety. 

Grace Under Fire

Ready or Not is a horror comedy set on a wealthy family’s estate that got overshadowed by Knives Out. I have gone on record multiple times saying it’s the better movie. Sadly, because it has fewer actors who are household names, people are not ready to have that conversation. However, I’m taking up space this month to talk about catharsis, so let me get back on track. One of the many ways this movie is better than the latter is because of that sweet catharsis awaiting us at the end.

This movie puts Grace through it and then some. Weaving easily makes her one of the easiest final girls to root for over a decade too. From finding out the man she loves has betrayed her, to having to fight off the in-laws trying to kill her, as she is suddenly forced to fight to survive her wedding night. No one can say that Grace doesn’t earn that cigarette at the end of the film. As she sits on the stairs covered in the blood of what was supposed to be her new family, she is a relatable icon. As the unseen cop asks what happened to her, she simply says,In-laws.It’s a quick laugh before the credits roll, andLove Me Tenderby Stereo Jane makes us dance and giggle in our seats. 

Ready or Not Proves That Maybe She’s Better Off Alone

It is also a moment in which Grace is one of many women who survives marriage. She comes out of the other side beaten but not broken. Grace finally put herself, and her needs first, and can breathe again in a way she hasn’t since saying I do. She fought kids, her parents-in-law, and even her husband to escape with her life. She refused to be a victim, and with that cigarette, she is finally free and safe. Grace is back to being single, and that’s clearly for the best.

Advertisement

This Guy Busick and R. Christopher Murphy script is funny on the surface, even before you start digging into the subtext. The fact that Ready or Not is a movie where the happy ending is a woman being left alone is not wasted on me, though. While Grace thought being married would make her happy, she now has physical and emotional wounds to remind her that it’s okay to be alone. 

One of the things I love about this current era of Radio Silence films is that the women in these projects are not the perfect victims. Whether it’s Ready or Not, Abigail, or Scream (2022), or Scream VI, the girls are fighting. They want to live, they are smart and resourceful, and they know that no one is coming to help them. That’s why I get excited whenever I see Matt Bettinelli-Olpin and Tyler Gillett’s names appear next to a Guy Busick co-written script. Those three have cracked the code to give us women protagonists that are badasses, and often more dangerous than their would-be killers when push comes to shove. 

Ready or Not Proves That Commitment is Scarier Than Death

So, watching Grace run around this creepy family’s estate in her wedding dress is a vision. It’s also very much the opposite of what we expect when we see a bride. Wedding days are supposed to be champagne, friends, family, and trying to buy into the societal notion that being married is what we’re supposed to aspire to as AFABs. They start programming us pretty early that we have to learn to cook to feed future husbands and children.

The traditions of being given away by our fathers, and taking our husbands’ last name, are outdated patriarchal nonsense. Let’s not even get started on how some guys still ask for a woman’s father’s permission to propose. These practices tell us that we are not real people so much as pawns men pass off to each other. These are things that cause me to hyperventilate a little when people try to talk to me about settling down.

Marriage Ain’t For Everybody

I have a lot of beef with marriage propaganda. That’s why Ready or Not speaks to me on a bunch of levels that I find surprising and fresh. Most movies would have forced Grace and Alex to make up at the end to continue selling the idea that heterosexual romance is always the answer. Even in horror, the concept that “love will save the day” is shoved at us (glares at The Conjuring Universe). So, it’s cool to see a movie that understands women can be enough on their own. We don’t need a man to complete us, and most of the time, men do lead to more problems. While I am no longer a part-time smoker, I find myself inhaling and exhaling as Grace takes that puff at the end of the film. As a woman who loves being alone, it’s awesome to be seen this way. 

Advertisement

Ready or Note cigarette

The Cigarette of Singledom

We don’t need movies to validate our life choices. However, it’s nice to be acknowledged every so often. If for no other reason than to break up the routine. I’m so tired of seeing movies that feel like a guy and a girl making it work, no matter the odds, is admirable. Sometimes people are better when they separate, and sometimes divorce saves lives. So, I salute Grace and her cathartic cigarette at the end of her bloody ordeal.

I cannot wait to see what single shenanigans she gets into in Ready or Not 2: Here I Come. I personally hope she inherited that money from the dead in-laws who tried her. She deserves to live her best single girl life on a beach somewhere. Grace’s marriage was a short one, but she learned a lot. She survived it, came out the other side stronger, richer, and knowing that marriage isn’t for everybody.

Continue Reading

Movies

The Best Horror You Can Stream on Shudder in January 2026

Published

on

My New Year’s resolution is to spend more time watching my favorite app. Luckily, Shudder is not taking it easy on us this holiday season, so I may meet my quota this January. The streamer is bringing in the new year with quite a few bangers. We have classics from icons, a new title from the first family of indie horror, and a couple of lesser-known films that have finally found a home. So, I am obviously living for this month’s programming and think most of you will too. I have picked the five films that I believe deserve our collective attention the most. Get into each of them and start your 2026 off on the right foot. 

The Best Movies to Stream on Shudder This Month

Carrie (1976)

A sheltered teen finally unleashes her telekinetic powers after being humiliated for the last time. Carrie is the reason I thought proms might be cool when I was a kid. This Brian De Palma adaptation is one of my favorite Stephen King adaptations. It is also an important title in the good-for-her subgenre. I cannot help rooting for Carrie White (Sissy Spacek) when I watch her snap at this prom and then head home to accidentally deal with her mom. The only tragedy of this evening is that Carrie had to die, too. I said what I said, and I will be hitting play again while it is on Shudder. This recommendation goes out to the other recovering sheltered girls who would be the problem if they had powers. I see you because I am you.

You can watch Carrie on January 1st.

Marshmallow (2025)

Advertisement

A shy 12-year-old gets sent to summer camp and finds himself in a living nightmare. While Marshmallow did not land for me, I know plenty of people who love it. Which makes this the perfect addition to the Shudder catalogue. I am actually excited to see more folks fall in love with this movie when it hits the streamer. If nothing else, it will help a few folks cross off another 2025 title if they are still playing catch-up with last year’s movies. It also gets cool points from me for not taking the easy route with the mystery it built. I hope you all dig it more than I did, and tell your friends about it. Perhaps you could even encourage them to sign up for the app.

You can watch Marshmallow on January 1st.

Chain Reactions (2024)

Tobe Hooper’s The Texas Chain Saw Massacre cemented his horror legacy over fifty years ago. So, it is long overdue for a documentary where horror royalty can discuss its impact on them and their careers. I have been waiting for a couple of years to hear Karyn Kusama and Takashi Miike talk about Hooper’s work and how he inspired them. So, I am super geeked that Shudder is finally giving me the chance to see this film. The streamer is also helping the nerds out by adding The Texas Chain Saw Massacre (1974) and The Texas Chain Saw Massacre 2 (1986) this month. If you are also an overachieving couch potato, I will see you at the finish line next week.

You can watch Chain Reactions on January 9th.

Advertisement

In the Mouth of Madness (1994)

An insurance investigator discovers the impact a horror writer’s books have on people. I love chaos, and John Carpenter chaos happens to be one of my favorite kinds of chaos. While we talk about The Thing and Halloween all the time, this maestro has given us plenty of horror to celebrate. In the Mouth of Madness is very much one of those titles vying for a top spot among the best of his filmography. To sweeten the batshit pot, this movie features Sam Neill. You know that he only shows up in our genre if the movie is going to be legendary. You cannot tell me this is not a Shudder priority this month.

You can watch In the Mouth of Madness on January 10th.

Mother of Flies (2025)

A terminally ill young woman and her dad head to the woods to seek out a recluse who claims she can cure her cancer. The Adams Family has been holding court on Shudder for years, so it feels right that Mother of Flies is a Shudder Original. More importantly, this fest favorite has one of the best performances of 2025. Which makes it a great time for people to finally get to see it and get in line to give Toby Poser her flowers. Whatever you think your favorite Poser role is, it is about to change when you see her as Solveig. I am being serious when I say that this movie might be the first family of indie horror at their best.

Advertisement

You can watch Mother of Flies on January 23rd.

New year, but same Shudder. I would not want to go into 2026 any other way, personally. I hope these horrific recommendations bring you the good kind of anxiety.  Or at least distract you from the state of the world for a bit.

Continue Reading

Horror Press Mailing List

Fangoria
Advertisement
Advertisement