Reviews
REVIEW: Who’s Watching ‘The Watcher’?
As someone from the New Jersey suburbs, who recently moved back to the suburbs after living in NYC for ten years, I was thoroughly obsessed with the story of The Watcher. I feel more like I’m in a horror movie since moving back than I ever did in NYC. In NYC, everywhere is so busy and loud that the suburbs feel creepily quiet and dark. So, to say I was excited about the Netflix series would be an understatement. I even have an ex who lives near the actual house—657 Boulevard in Westfield, New Jersey, and I live about 45 minutes from the house.
I’ve read The Cut piece on the whole ordeal numerous times. It’s one of my favorite horror stories. I’ve gotten stoned and fallen down many a rabbit hole on theories about the true identity of The Watcher, thinking I can solve it. The wildest thing about the whole story is that there really is no obvious conclusion—it could be anyone who sent those ominous, threatening letters to the Broaddus family. Any new information on the story, which there rarely is, leads nowhere.
The story itself is terrifying to the folks it happened to, yet to outside perspectives it might feel a little dull. The Broaddus family bought their dream home for 1.3 million dollars in 2014, a six bedroom home with more than one fireplace. But Maria and Derek Broaddus, along with their three kids, never even fully moved into the home. One night, when Derek was at the house painting, he went out to check the mail and found a letter addressed to “The New Owner,” and it was like something out of a horror movie. The first letter was threatening right out the gate, reading:
657 Boulevard has been the subject of my family for decades now and as it approaches its 110th birthday, I have been put in charge of watching and waiting for its second coming. My grandfather watched the house in the 1920s and my father watched in the 1960s. It is now my time. Do you know the history of the house? Do you know what lies within the walls of 657 Boulevard? Why are you here? I will find out… Do you need to fill the house with the young blood I requested? Better for me. Was your old house too small for the growing family? Or was it greed to bring me your children…Who am I? There are hundreds and hundreds of cars that drive by 657 Boulevard each day. Maybe I am in one. Look at all the windows you can see from 657 Boulevard. Maybe I am in one. Look out any of the many windows in 657 Boulevard at all the people who stroll by each day. Maybe I am one.
It was signed “The Watcher” and immediately, understandably, it terrified Derek. That first letter alone would have been enough to make me lose my shit if I never figured out who wrote it—But also, I can’t afford a 1.3-million-dollar mansion, so what do I know.
The letter, the writing, and the whole giving themselves a spooky name, truly feels like something fictional. As a kid, I always thought every robber, murderer, and crime boss gave themselves a fantastical name because I read too many comics and watched too many horror movies. So, this thing that felt like a real-life horror movie appealed to me, even as someone who does not get into true crime. Other than the letters and a list of possible suspects that included nearly every person in town (ranging from “angry realtor” to every person living on the street), there isn’t much evidence which only makes it feel more horror movie like—The Watcher feels like they could be Ghostface or Michael Myers (although the latter not quite being that verbose). The only substantial evidence in the case was when they identified the saliva on the envelope as belonging to a woman (I am not a forensic analyst, so I have no clue how that even works).
So, when Ryan Murphy got his hands on the story, I was both happy and worried. I am not Mr. Murphy’s biggest fan (but if I ever get hired to write on one of his projects, I will deny deny deny) and have only fully gotten through three seasons of American Horror Story. But the story of The Watcher was one that felt like it would incredibly work well as a Netflix limited series.
The Saturday after the show was released, I was very hungover and decided to binge the entire thing. I was as excited as someone with a paralyzing hangover could be. The show works well sometimes and other times does not. I think the biggest problem going into the series was that I felt like I could recite it by heart. So when the first episode presented every neighbor as a whacky cartoon villain and added more to that first letter, I was annoyed. But I persevered like the brave soldier I am (I am not). I loved and hated how often we saw a figure run by in the background.
The show became very Ryan Murphy with the addition of the “the neighbors might all be in a blood cult” storyline that went nowhere and the John Graff (played by Joe Mantello) of it all. Graff was a character who I’d thought was wholly made up as he felt like a character ripped right out of American Horror Story: Asylum. John Graff was first introduced in the series as a mysterious man who visits the home and has a creepy chat with the fictional main character of Dean Brannock (Bobby Cannavale). We later learn he is a former resident who murdered his entire family in the home and then vanished. I rolled my eyes at the big reveal that he was this murderer—until I googled it and found out the character was also based on a true story. John Graff was based on a real-life murderer named John List who lived in Westfield, murdered his family, and then vanished. The Ryan Murphy of it all was that he did not live at 657 Boulevard and his murders happened in 1971—he also never visited the home, as he was caught 18 years after the murders he committed.
The thing about The Watchers as a series is, aside from spooky letters, nothing else really happened to the family. Which is for sure spooky enough for real life, but for a show? It leaves you feeling a little empty. The show gave us episode after episode of Cannavale’s Dean and Naomi Watts’s Nora accusing nearly everyone on the entire stacked cast of being The Watcher but the only thing we end up knowing for sure of these fictionalized characters was that it wasn’t Watts’s Nora or Jennifer Coolidge’s eccentric realtor character Karen Calhoun.
A lot of folks in town, both in the series and in real life, felt it might’ve been a hoax done by the father. And, in both real life and in the series, we do know the father wrote at least one letter that was sent to the neighborhood. He owned up to it in his interview with The Cut. But they never sold their story anywhere and took a loss on the house—the series only happened when the extensive Reeves Wiedeman piece for The Cut was bought in a 7 figure deal from Netflix.
So, while the show doesn’t really give any new insight into the case and, spoiler, ends the way the real-life case ended—with the family selling the house at a loss, never finding out the identity of The Watcher, it still makes for a fun, albeit a little frustrating watch. Even to a horror fan who knows the story like he knows all the lines to the first Scream movie.
Maybe one day while staying up late, after smoking ridiculous amounts of weed, I’ll crack the case myself!
Please give me a few minutes of your time as I take a weird deep dive into my favorite movie of all time. Darren Aronofsky’s Mother! is an incredibly divisive film, and I will never refute that. When I was thinking about what angle I wanted for this review, I was coming up blank. Jennifer Lawrence’s Mother is a compelling and beautifully written character so I knew it would fit this month’s theme. Cut to my 51st viewing of the film a few nights ago, a multi-hour call with a very good friend, and three pots of coffee…that’s when I found my angle.
For those who are unaware, the infinite monkey theorem states that if a monkey is given a typewriter and an unlimited amount of time, it will eventually write the entire works of Shakespeare. Even though NPR tried to disprove that, it still feels possible. If there was truly an unlimited amount of time, how could it not happen? But here’s where I have issues with this idea: who is the monkey, and who is the typewriter? Does Mother have the agency to actually change the outcome of her story? Is Him a passive observer? Does Him’s reactions to Mother’s actions dictate her next steps? And what can the death of first Mother/Foremother (Sarah-Jeanne Labrosse) and the awakening of third Mother/Maiden (Laurence Leboeuf) tell us? Join me as I try to decipher whatever the hell this movie is.
Mother! follows Mother, who awakens post-death from Foremother. Mother wanders around the house before being intercepted by Him. Him is a writer who has been frustrated by a bout of writer’s block. Man (Ed Harris) shows up out of the blue and is soon followed by Woman (Michelle Pfeiffer). After their two kids Youngest Brother (Brian Gleeson) and Oldest Son (Domnhall Gleeson) show up, and a fight ensues, one of them dies. This leads to a wild party to celebrate the deceased’s life in which Him eventually gets Mother pregnant. Him overcomes his writer’s block which leads to the downfall of everything.
When I first saw Mother! I was stunned. What started, on the film’s opening day, as a half-full theater ended with me and my friend sitting in a tearful silence. I went back the next day with another friend (the one I had a multi-hour phone call with for this piece) and watched the movie again. We both sat in stunned silence as the credits rolled. Thanks to being a MoviePass member (when it was still a movie a day), I was able to see Mother! every single day for the next five days. I have never had a theatrical experience like I did with this film. What was equally stunning was that Paramount Pictures had the guts to distribute a film like this.
Aronofsky has been very tightlipped about all of the intricacies of Mother!, and that’s okay. Frustrating, but okay. Here’s what we know. There are three main ideas behind Mother! and that is 1) the story of an artist and their muse 2) the destruction of Mother Earth and the most on-the-nose allegory 3) Him is God and Mother is Mary. While these ideas have been talked about to death, I want to look into how the infinite monkey theorem works here and how Him is experiencing one of the wildest examples of insanity seen in film.
Let’s take note of what we can infer as well as what is directly told to us. In the beginning, we see Foremother burn to death/explode the same way that Mother does. Maiden ends the film by turning over and saying, “Baby” as Mother does. Mother’s recitation of “Baby” is quite different from Maiden’s delivery. When we hear Mother say the line it sounds partially panicky, partially forlorn. Maiden’s almost sounds calm and accepting. To me, Mother’s delivery of the line almost feels like she’s calling out for the recently deceased child while Maiden’s call is toward Him.
The wording of this may sound offensive, but it is simply used in conjunction with the infinite monkey theorem. For the sake of my argument, I believe that Mother is the monkey. When I started writing this piece, I thought that Him might be the monkey until I realized I was wrong. The actual inciting incident of Mother! is when Man and Woman destroy the crystal. (The metaphorical biting of the apple.) Him is not just testing Mother, Him is also testing Man and Woman. When Him, Man, Woman, and Mother are sitting around the table drinking coffee, Mother brings out some snacks. One of the snacks is a bowl of what looks like cookies and two singular slices of fruit that look very similar to apples.
One can imply that Him is watching Man and Woman closely because he yearns for the romance he feels between them. I think he’s intently watching to see if they go for the two apples. Him has put Man and Woman in this scenario before and they have failed; here they have passed. It’s not until the breaking of the crystal that all hell [literally] breaks loose.
We see moments of reflection and acknowledgment in some actions. When Mother is asked by Him if Man can stay the night she replies with, “Of…course.” A tinge of sadness echoes through the line and she chokes on her words. When Man sees the crystal he asks if it was a gift from Mother and she replies with a singular, “No.” Again, her voice cracks, she sounds like she wants to cry. It’s almost as if she has been asked this before and something inside of Mother is telling her it was Foremother’s heart she was looking at.
There are countless examples of these moments that crossover between timelines. One can assume that if a monkey will eventually type the entire works of Shakespeare, it will also type a few of the same lines over and over. Multiple moments coexist within these different timelines, and something in Mother is letting her know that.
Him is God. The Great Storyteller. The most egotistical man that can exist. The true definition of good and evil. But is he writing Mother’s story or is she in charge of her own destiny? When Mother wakes up, she wanders around the house. She makes her way to the front door, opens it, and steps outside. Before she can take any further steps, as it can be interpreted as she wanted to continue walking, Him stops her. (This raises another question of whether or not she can exist outside of the confines of this astonishingly octagonal house.) It’s clear that Him remembers everything that happens with previous Mothers, but how far will he go to ensure Mother goes the path he truly wants?
Later in the day, Mother goes to one of the walls in the house to paint it. She puts muted yellow paint on the wall but doesn’t seem content with it. Mother puts her hand on the wall and sees the heart beating inside of it, a small amount of decay starts to grow. This prompts her to sprinkle a yellow substance in the paint for a more vibrant yellow, and she seems happy with the choice. This is one of many examples of the house speaking to Mother, warning her of potential mistakes.
Mother’s body fights back multiple times when she makes the wrong decision. Once Man is in the house, she goes to make tea. A cup is dropped and shattered, which sends a terrible ringing through her ears and a painful tightening of her chest. We know the crystal that reinvents the house is created upon the death of each Mother.
Later, Mother goes to the basement to grab sheets for Man after agreeing he can stay the night. As she grabs the sheets, the furnace kicks in. This seems to imply her decision to agree to Man’s stay is a mistake that Foremother made (which we know led to her demise). That same night, she flicks Man’s lighter off the dresser, which causes another bout of intense ear ringing and reveals a sliver of a charred floor. Once Woman is there, Mother finds Woman and Man making out. This reveals more of the charred floor.
Interestingly, we get a moment of Mother possibly making a choice previous Mothers have not. Mother and Woman go to the basement and Woman makes fun of Mother’s plain underwear. After Woman leaves the basement, Mother sees a pair of Woman’s bright yellow underwear sticking out of the washer. Mother throws the underwear behind the washer (presumably to save it and use at a later date) but there’s no furnace sound. Has she finally made a good decision?
After the brothers arrive and have their tiff, Mother is left alone in the house to clean up. The spot where Younger Brother died has now turned into a goopy hole that reveals the then-blocked-off furnace. She rests her head on the wall while emptying the bloody water bucket, and we see the heart again. It’s decaying more and more.
Mother is still making the wrong decisions.
What does all of this tell us? Mother has a certain amount of agency. But also that previous mother’s soul wants her to succeed. We don’t know how many times Him has gone through this series of events, we only know that it hasn’t worked up to this point. We also don’t know what he wants. When Mother becomes pregnant, Him gets over his writer’s block and writes the New Testament. I believe that he’s completely Id-driven at this point. Him lost sight of what he needed to do and remembers the fame that comes with his writings.
The last thing Him says to Mother before she perishes is, “You were home.” As with nearly everything in this film that can have two meanings. Was that line meant to imply that Mother was in her rightful home? Did he think that she was the one who would end this cataclysmic cycle of pain and torment? Or was he saying that Mother was home? Is this his smooth-talking way of getting her heart to retroactively find solace in his love to turn into the crystal he so desperately needs to make Maiden?
Mother! has an undeniably dense amount of layers that become increasingly apparent with each viewing. As I finish this article I have the film on in the background and I’m noticing more pieces of evidence that make my point more apparent. An argument could possibly be made that Him is the monkey and Mother is the typewriter but that all falls down to perspective and selective examples.
If there’s one thing I can leave you with, it’s that Mother! is one of the most important films of the 21st century. With the recent death of David Lynch, many people feel that art in Hollywood is truly dead. Few filmmakers can make a truly astounding piece of art that transcends time with the conversation it creates. Darren Aronofsky’s Mother! is a film that will be discussed for decades, if not centuries. That is unless we completely destroy Mother Earth and destroy it from the inside out.
Reviews
[REVIEW] SXSW 2025: ‘Drop’ It’s Hard Not to Fall for This One
Drop is a surprisingly cool take on domestic abuse survivors woven into a thrilling narrative of a woman who is forced into a situation where she can trust no one. A single mother who survived an abusive ex-husband goes on her first date in years. She soon discovers that her first-date jitters are the least of her worries when she begins receiving anonymous drops on her phone. As the drops get more terrifying, she soon realizes that her son and sister’s lives hang in the balance as a mysterious tormentor forces her to carry out a chilling plan on her date.
Drop is fun, sophisticated, dangerous, and over the top in all the right ways. It is definitely worth checking out in a theater to see all of the jaw-dropping mayhem unfold.
Many genre fans know Christopher Landon from his wildly popular slashers (like Happy Death Day, Freaky) and his time in the Paranormal Activity universe. Because he’s carved out a name for himself in these two very different horror arenas, most of us leaned in when we heard Drop would be a thriller. I’m happy to report that Landon’s newest film has the energy of Wes Craven’s Red Eye. Elder millennials like myself might also feel a similar vibe to Robert Zemeckis’ What Lies Beneath chaotic conclusion. It is the kind of thriller that’s unafraid to go off the rails and swing big. Luckily, the payoff is huge and a compelling entry to an overstuffed subgenre. Drop breathes new life into the first-date-gone-wrong films and reinvigorates the mystery genre. It feels like a Hitchcockian fever dream filtered through a modern day lens.
A Fresh Take on the Thriller Genre
Violet (Meghann Fahy) wins us over immediately. We have all either been an abused woman, witnessed the abuse, or have seen the end results in the news. So, we instinctively want to root for her as Fahy begins making her a relatable survivor. She’s funny, smart, cool, and grounded and is easily everything more women characters should be. Fahy is also captivating as she drives this film to the out-of-this-world ending while having so much thrown on her plate. She navigates the humor, guilt, fear, and shame spiral as she ascends to her place as a badass. I also appreciate that while Violet’s past is central to the story, she is never a helpless victim. It is giving a final girl who survived her slasher and will carry those lessons with her instead of starting at square one for the sequels.
Her supporting cast is also very fun and filled with red herrings that make you doubt your prime suspect. Is the culprit her hot date, Henry (Brandon Sklenar), who has been very patient and understanding with a woman he is only meeting in person for the first time? Is it the cool bartender Cara (Gabrielle Ryan) who has kept an eye on Violet’s date? Or is it the many other characters she has encountered in this fancy restaurant? Because Drop is a proper mystery, it makes everyone seem like the perfect suspect. Which I enjoy as someone who sees a lot of predictable movies just lazily hand you the culprit in the first five minutes.
Stunning Cinematography Elevates the Mystery
Drop is fun, sophisticated, dangerous, and over the top in all the right ways. It is definitely worth checking out in a theater to see all of the jaw-dropping mayhem unfold.
Drop falls into theaters on April 11.
10 of the Most Important Women in Slasher History
[Review] ‘Mother!’ (2017) Is the Greatest Movie of the 21st Century
[REVIEW] SXSW 2025: ‘Drop’ It’s Hard Not to Fall for This One
[REVIEW] SXSW 2025: ‘Ash’ Can You Handle Flying Lotus In Space?
[Review] SXSW 2025: ‘Clown in a Cornfield’ I Was Not Familiar With This Clown’s Game
Bring Billy Zane Into Your Home With Our ‘Demon Knight’ Giveaway!
Unnamed Footage Festival Vol. 8 Has an INCREDIBLE Lineup!
[REVIEW] Demon Knight (1995) Is A Delightful Character Actor and Special Effects Extravaganza
[REVIEW] ‘Ms .45’ (1981) Goes Full Lock, Stock, and One Smoking Barrel
Our 10 Favorite Short Films From Final Girls Berlin Film Festival (2025)
‘The People Under the Stairs’ Review: A Brilliantly Bizarre Undercover Horror Classic
Glen and Glenda: Don Mancini’s Reverence for Queerness in ‘Seed of Chucky’ (2004)
Slappy Was the Blueprint: How the Dummy from Goosebumps Became A Horror Icon
‘Truth or Dare’: Who Did it Best?
Was This Film the Blueprint for Malignant? No, It’s Even Better Than That: A SPOILER-FREE Review of ‘Cherry Falls’
HORROR 101: Five Nights at Freddy’s and The Story of William Afton Explained
This Is What Makes Sue Ann from ‘Ma’ a Terrifying Yet Loveable Horror Villain
Mia from ‘Evil Dead’ – A New Kind of Final Girl
Is ‘Butcher, Baker, Nightmare Maker’ Too Problematic for 2022?
