Connect with us

Reviews

GROWING PAINS: A Spoiler-Filled Review of ‘Orphan: First Kill’ 

Published

on

Isabelle Fuhrman’s return to the role of Esther is full of curveballs and whiplashes of horror fun. In my first Orphan review, I asked if anybody had asked for this film to happen. Was it worth it? Did this movie need to be made? Yes. Emphatically, yes. I had a lot of preconceived notions and thoughts about how this movie would be a snooze-worthy rehash of Jaume Collet-Seura’s work. Still, I am happy to eat my humble pie and say that entering the third act of this film, I was COMPLETELY and UTTERLY incorrect. This movie has a rough start, but it is very, VERY good, and has a twist I didn’t see coming at all.

My spoiler-free review: it’s unreasonably good for a sequel to a 13-year-old movie; not perfect, but pretty great if you’re not looking for straight-laced, hair-raising horror. If you liked the first one a lot, you’ll probably like this. Don’t watch this if you haven’t seen the first because it will kill everything fun about the original. Alright, everybody cleared out? Good, onto the

SPOILERS AHEAD

Yes, once again, it’s the classic story of a young girl who is a grown woman with dwarfism, turned con artist, turned serial killer. Tale as old as time, I know. But that tale is being told with a fun spin on it.

In the directing chair this time is William Brent Bell, director for both of The Boy movies. Honestly, his directing isn’t anything to write home about, with its occasionally poorly composed shots and focus issues. Still, it does serve to fulfill the illusion they’re trying to pull off by making the 5’3 Fuhrman look a foot shorter (even if there are some funny shots meant to show off “Hey, she makes a convincing kid, right? We did good, huh?”).

There’s some wonky editing at points, like with the simulated one take early on, but it works all in all. Cinematographer Karim Hussain of Possessor fame makes some pretty good lighting choices, especially with Esther’s first meeting with an art therapist at the asylum she’s locked up in; I can appreciate the novel use of some flashing red emergency lights giving you glimpses of the tiny terror.

Advertisement

And when it comes to selling the illusion, we must address the makeup and costuming, as Doug Morrow and the rest of the makeup unit’s work is stellar in creating a charming, practical look for Fuhrman. While it’s occasionally funny looking, I prefer it to any clunky attempts to digitally de-age Fuhrman that would have been employed by a lesser crew.

Regarding the structure of the film, the intro sequence is pretty good since it drops any pretense of us not knowing about the first film, but that welcome wears out. The first half of the movie is regrettably where it feels much more like a retread of the 2009 film than its own entity. Do not, I repeat, DO NOT let that drive you away searching for a new movie to watch; it’s just something I must warn you about. This all changes around the 50-minute mark.

In a returning performance, Isabelle Fuhrman isn’t as genuinely frightening as she was in the original. Still, I think that has a lot to do with the plot structure less than her ability to be scary. Esther, as a threat feels a little sillier this time around as a villain you love-to-hate, and angles on her as a sociopath con man who happens to have killing as a side hustle. She’s very mustache twirly when no one is around, with a full suiting up montage to her own piano music, and it’s very fun.

As far as the other performers go, the highlight is Julia Stiles, who at first seems like she’s treating this with a much more serious performance than it deserves, with Tricia mirroring Farmiga’s grounded character from the first film and sounding dire and dour all the time…

But then the whole world of this film goes batshit insane.

Advertisement

The bold choice to turn her from a protagonist to a deuteragonist who is just as mean-spirited and evil as Esther made me love this movie and flip from mildly bored to thoroughly entertained. Matthew Finlan’s Gunnar as her conspirator isn’t anything special with clunky line deliveries and dialogue, but his demise is especially enjoyable.

As far as the other performances go, Esther’s newfound father, Allen is flat feeling against the exceptional Tricia, but he’s doing the best he can with the crumbs he’s allotted. The character of Detective Donnan is kind of just a lurking cop gargoyle with a preternatural amount of insight on Esther being evil. Still, he makes the perfect red herring as Esther’s would-be nemesis in the little dose we get of him.

I wouldn’t mind seeing this become a low-budget yearly franchise, just going through the families she terrorized on her way through America. You know, before eventually getting kicked into a frozen lake.

BOTTOMLINE: The film doesn’t just avoid the pitfall of being a safe, predictable sequel; it does a triple backflip over the pit for extra style and doesn’t overstay its welcome. This is a solid “must-watch” addition to your docket of movies for this weekend.

You can watch Orphan: First Kill on Paramount+!

Advertisement

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