Connect with us

Reviews

Beverly Knows Best: ‘Serial Mom’ (1994) Review

Published

on

John Waters’ Least Talked About Film Should Be a Mother’s Day Classic…But I Get Why It Isn’t. When a good movie flops, sometimes you find yourself wondering why. When a comedy-horror movie flops, you know exactly why.

Why Serial Mom Flopped: A Comedy-Horror Conundrum

There are plenty of reviewers who simply don’t like horror as a genre but still end up reviewing horror films out of obligation. Even worse, comedy is so violently subjective for some folks that buying a ticket to one might as well be a ride on a mechanical bull. So, I wasn’t so surprised filing through the Serial Mom reviews of the past to see it wasn’t so popular out the gate; its only crime is not being for everybody.
Like some of my past recommendations for movies, Serial Mom errs away from horror; this is especially evident towards the film’s end, where it takes a crime film slant thanks to a prolonged courtroom sequence, but it gets back on track by the end. If you’re able to get past that fact, I’d say go ahead and watch.

Comedy-Horror vs. Horror-Comedy: Where Serial Mom Shines

Still, it’s a comedy-horror instead of the more typical horror-comedy we see. It’s able to invoke a creepy concept and extract humor from it, as opposed to making a horrifying film and injecting humor into it. Every element of this movie is just a few inches off the mark for evoking fear from viewers. Still, I would say the same of something like Tucker & Dale vs. Evil, or even Dead/Alive, which doesn’t scare but uses horror movie tropes and a horror premise to create genuinely gut-busting humor. In the same vein, I got a lot of laughs out of Serial Mom, and not in a so-bad-it’s-good way either.

Serial Mom’s Premise: A Suburban Killer with a Twist

If you haven’t guessed the film’s premise based on the title, you’ve got bigger problems than film critique. Still, the long and short of it is that the picture-perfect suburban housewife Beverly Sutphin, played by Kathleen Turner, is a serial killer who utilizes her murderous talents on all the people who slightly inconvenience her and her family. What follows is a pretty slapstick series of murders, ranging from victims having their livers ripped out with a fire poker, to being crushed by falling air conditioners, to getting set on fire with a lighter and hairspray. There aren’t any truly innovative kills here, but they are pretty good punchlines to the various beats in Beverly’s rampage.

Kathleen Turner’s Performance: The Heart of Serial Mom

Turner is undoubtedly the best part of this film and fits the role perfectly. Her line delivery tends to be drier than that meatloaf she’s serving, and the equally dry humor benefits from it. Unlike many slashers, she treats everything with a rage so subdued it borders on mild discomfort to slight indifference, and just seeing her reactions to the murders she’s committing puts a smile on my face. She isn’t as overtly deranged as other horror moms like Pamela Voorhees & Mrs. Loomis, but more like Principal Wilkins from Trick r’ Treat.

Supporting Cast: Hits and Misses

As for the rest of the cast, Sam Waterston is the same character actor he’s always been but doesn’t bring anything fresh to the table. Ricki Lake is the white bread toast of the picture-perfect family breakfast that is this cast: bland but not offensively bad. Honestly, Matthew Lillard is the only other actor who stands out here. He is essentially playing an earnest version of Stu Macher through his character Chip (i.e., not a serial killer who gets his head crushed by a T.V., but still a complete doofus who loves horror movies). He does a good job in this but doesn’t cut loose as much as I’d like; although, as some will notice, this serves as an amusing unintentional prequel to Scream that shows how Stu got to be so crazy, so I’ll probably rewatch them as a double feature.

Cinematography and Soundtrack: A Nod to 1950s Satire

The rest of the cinematography is on point, with editing in this film that is also pretty conducive to the atmosphere since transitions and musical stings set up scenes to emulate a 1950’s comedy show, more reminiscent of Leave It to Beaver than something like I Love Lucy. Scoring most of the movie is a fantastic soundtrack by Basil Poledouris, where the whimsy of Beverly’s less-than-perfect life and the script’s satirical humor is supercharged by it, bringing borderline cartoonish energy to the rampage she’s going on. Poledouris didn’t have to go this hard on the soundtrack, but
I suppose collaborating with a cinema legend like John Waters means you’ve got to bring your A-game.
BOTTOMLINE: Ultimately, the movie drags a bit longer than necessary with the court procedural element that takes up its final reel. You’re mainly waiting for Beverly to go nuts again for a good chunk of the film if you’re here for horror first. Still, the movie is surprisingly funny, and if you keep an open mind, you’ll get plenty of laughs out of it for what it is: a well-written John Waters movie with a heaping helping of unorthodox humor.

Luis Pomales-Diaz is a freelance writer and lover of fantasy, sci-fi, and of course, horror. When he isn't working on a new article or short story, he can usually be found watching schlocky movies and forgotten television shows.

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Reviews

‘Other Mommy’ Review: Jessica Chastain Can’t Save This CGI Mess

Published

on

Of all the horror movies to be described as a runaway train, Rob Savage’s Other Mommy is the first in recent memory to have that quality as a negative. A more focused piece of over-the-top supernatural horror would capitalize on starting at a high speed and just gunning it. It would get increasingly faster, more horrific with its effects and reveals, more stunning and spectacle-filled. But Other Mommy never utilizes the momentum it starts with. It stays at the same steady, uncomfortable pace. And it gets old, very fast.

Other Mommy Is Missing a First Act

The movie begins in what should have been the second act; it never does stop haunting the narrative that Other Mommy feels like it’s missing 30 minutes of setup and 10 minutes of breathing room that would actually get you to care about what’s happening.  Bela (Arabella Olivia Clark) is a young girl already well acquainted with a creature known as Other Mommy. A supernatural being that can change shape and size to her liking, becoming anyone she wants and then some. The entity only desires one thing: for Bela to let it into her heart and give it a new body.

Bela’s parents, Ursula (played by Jessica Chastain, in a dual role as the Other Mommy) and Russell (Jay Duplass), become aware of the space-bending creature in the film’s very first scenes. Soon, they’re on the run from the creature that’s trying to tear the already strained family apart. But the overwrought family drama of an unfaithful mother and a scatterbrained father forced to hide their struggling marriage from their kid is smothered. Much like Chastain’s performance, it’s drowned out by a barrage of aggressive and unimpressive digital effects trying to milk every single moment for a fright, desperate to keep audiences’ attention.

A Clumsy Digital Effects Showcase That Smothers the Story to Death

Other Mommy is primarily concerned with showing off its titular monster and her reality-bending powers, jumping from one “scare filled”, dreamlike sequence to the next; heavy, heavy quotes on scare filled. You become inured to every trick the film has as it shows you all the most unimaginative uses of a shapeshifting, size changing monster possible. There is no clever framing or use of shadow to obscure it, no restraint at all really. The directing is frenetic and clumsy, but it makes sure to make the monster as clear as possible. It’s all out in the open, plain to see, and bizarrely mundane for a depiction of a demonic interloper.

Every jumpscare-a-minute scene moves too fast and is too overlit to ever scare. The bright and inappropriate atmosphere fails the already rough looking digital effects. What it amounts to is a choppily edited and disjointed assortment of scenes, with weak imitations of Trevor Henderson style abominations center stage. Tall and small and melty variations of a CGI Chastain, none of them work to evoke tension or fear or any emotion other than the occasional eyebrow raise for how goofy some of them look.

Advertisement

There are a few moments where Chastain teases at playing the monster effectively without face and body morphing effects, sporting a genuinely disturbing countenance and creepy voice. But as soon as these fragments of interest come, they’re washed away by warping her into a lanky, slinking monster of ridiculous proportions. What we get out of the dual role is a boring creature for the feature, and a dry, one-dimensional protagonist, both squandering the phenomenal actor Chastain is.

Other Mommy is Full of Dull Performances and Squandered Potential

Duplass offers little with his supporting role, providing flat dialogue and flatter comic relief as a middling SNL sketch’s idea of a clownish father. It’s worth noting Clark actually provides the most interesting performance among the entire cast, a feat impressive from such a young child actor. But even her endearing and heart-breaking time as Bela is too little and too shadowed by the faulty composition of the film it’s trapped in.

The trailer for Other Mommy may have caught audiences off guard at the cinema in the past few months. But ultimately, that trailer showed the movie’s entire hand. Other Mommy is a pasty, crooked collage of elements from the supernatural horror movies producer James Wan made the backbone of the genre a decade ago. That doesn’t make it a throwback; just a rehash of cliches, with no structure and no sense of cohesion. It never amounts to anything more interesting than what the marketing material showed, which is a tragic end for a film, if there ever was one.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Reviews

‘Luz: The Flower of Evil’ Review: A Colorful Nightmare

Published

on

Luz: The Flower of Evil is a movie simultaneously charged with and mired in ambition. It’s genuinely comical how overly ambitious of a first-time film it is for writer-director Juan Diego Escobar Alzate: a microbudget, shot on location in the mountains of Colombia, character driven psychological horror film meant to explore the very nature of good and evil while also tackling cults and misogyny.

So, it’s shocking how much of it works. Not all of it works, not at all, but it is cohesive enough to serve as a surprising experience with the colorful aesthetic it employs and incredibly dark places it goes to.

What Is Luz: Flower of Evil About?

After the death of their mother Luz, three sisters in a rural cult community find their faith waning. The three are the centerpiece of an elaborate theology crafted by their cult leader father, a man who is becoming more difficult to deal with by the day. So, when he brings a mute boy into town, chaining him up and claiming he’s the people’s messiah, an already tense situation devolves into outright madness. What ensues is the slow dissolution of the cult, and the torturous end of an already fractured family.

Let this usual synopsis section also serve as a content warning: the film does depict sexual violence very early on, about 25 minutes into the film. It’s not Irreversible levels of horrifically long, but it’s also not particularly brief and still graphic content by its nature. It can be difficult to stomach, so I’m mentioning it now for those who would rather avoid that sort of thing.

A Ponderous Arthouse Folk Horror About Good and Evil

The film has shocking moments, but it’s not very interested in shock value. This is first and foremost a slow burn, a piece of arthouse folk horror that is more about bleeding out than it is about a violent demise. The most obvious comparisons are to The VVitch and Midsommar, but even that feels like an inappropriate mix, even when it leans towards Aster’s commercial darling or Egger’s colonial nightmare.

Advertisement

Fundamentally, Luz is a study about people who mythologize suffering and cruelty and excuse it as being driven by outside spiritual forces rather than their own decisions. It’s about deconstructing harmful religious and cult mentalities, and it wears its philosophy on its sleeve (aggressively so). Alzate creates a visually and textually fascinating meltdown of his characters and the community they find themselves within.

I would say it’s a “descent into madness” if it didn’t feel clear that the characters were already in a tailspin right at the film’s outset. The script, especially through its second act, starts to feel repetitive and a little simplistic, with a somewhat anticlimactic ending and dialog that starts to feel less naturalistic and more tedious. But it’s an interesting dissection of a family, even if it’s rough around the edges.

Hyperreal Sense of Color, But Shaky Directing and Writing

The film’s most obvious and striking feature is its hyperrealist palette, bearing a rich Technicolor aspect that permeates throughout the entire runtime. Colorist Felipe Martinez U paints the mountainous countryside with such vibrancy, a simple but very effective contrast to the dying days of a cult the story centers on; bleak, muddy times, punctuated by vibrant nature all around. Aesthetically, it’s pretty clearly visually inspired by the early works of Pedro Almodóvar and the visual warmth of Robin Hardy’s The Wicker Man.

Even the naturalistic tendencies of Terrence Malick make an appearance here, though how much of that is just in the gorgeous location scouting and how much is actually emulated by Alzate is up for debate. All around, the film lacks polish. The camerawork is amateurish in some ways, slightly cramped and occasionally uninspired in its framing. Sometimes the oversaturated look of the film can feel a little saccharine and heavy, but the pop of color here feels purposeful enough that I can forgive it as being highly stylized rather than trying to mask the weak points of a first-time director.

Is Luz: The Flower of Evil Worth the Watch?

In the search for great Latin American horror, Luz was an odd duck to stumble upon to be certain. But I’m a champion of strange birds with a lot of character, so you do the math.

Advertisement

Luz: The Flower of Evil is a struggle of a film, hard to watch at points despite how visually appealing it can be. It’s a brutal, bleak piece of psychological folk horror that certainly has a thin audience and will test the patience of even those the premise appeals to. But it does have as much substance as it does style, even when it treads into murky waters, and for that I think it’s worth the watch.

Continue Reading

Horror Press Mailing List

Fangoria