Reviews
[REVIEW] ‘MaXXXine’ Brings a Fun, Off-Kilter Closer to the X Trilogy
After a blood-curdling ordeal at a farmhouse in Texas, adult film star Maxine Minx’s road to true Hollywood stardom has been paved with nothing but trauma and blood. Still recovering from her encounter with Pearl and Howard Douglas in X, Maxine finally gets a chance to work on an actual Hollywood production: a B-movie horror sequel called The Puritan II. But amidst her change in luck is a series of mysterious murders plaguing Los Angeles, putting Maxine in the crosshairs of cops and private eyes, while the movements of the infamous Night Stalker set the city, and her hopes of getting the life she deserves, ablaze.
After a blood-curdling ordeal at a farmhouse in Texas, adult film star Maxine Minx’s road to true Hollywood stardom has been paved with nothing but trauma and blood. Still recovering from her encounter with Pearl and Howard Douglas in X, Maxine finally gets a chance to work on an actual Hollywood production: a B-movie horror sequel called The Puritan II. But amidst her change in luck is a series of mysterious murders plaguing Los Angeles, putting Maxine in the crosshairs of cops and private eyes, while the movements of the infamous Night Stalker set the city, and her hopes of getting the life she deserves, ablaze. Welcome to MaXXXine.
I was initially unsure of how MaXXXine would pan out, partly because of some bad feedback I saw of the film, and partly because I was worried it would hydroplane into some weird true crime stuff, given the mentions of the Night Stalker in promotional materials. Thankfully it doesn’t, not in the slightest. But, as the classic song “Bette Davis Eyes” played over the credits, I was left thinking one thing: people will either love this or hate this—no middle ground.
Having now seen it and seen people actually arguing leaving the theatre over the film, I can say, yeah, it’s not going to be for everyone. But for whom the Minx bell tolls, it tolls hard and wild. For me, it is a solid little movie that throws caution to the wind and becomes something pretty interesting because it’s slightly removed from its origins.
A Straightforward Continuation of X, but a Tonal Departure
Though it is a continuation of the story that started in X, MaXXXine feels less like a cohesive third in the triad of films about scorned young women with dreams they’ll stop at nothing to attain. MaXXXine will divide audiences because of how radical the tonal change is from the preceding duology. This film is downright cartoonish at points, since it abandons hagsploitation and old Hollywood for an insane, snow-fueled ride into 80s mayhem.
I was fond of Pearl more than X because it was Ti West getting out of his usual mumbly zone of dark visuals and exploring old Hollywood’s technicolor glory days for what they really were: an unreal diversion built during a much bleaker time in history. I expected MaXXXine to dive more into those depths of unreality, something X and Pearl held as secondary to the film’s much more interesting conversations about sex, gender, and the breakdown of traditional American life in the post-war period, with all the byproducts that came with it (including the rise of modern Evangelical and fundamentalist movements).
MaXXXine, however, is much more interested in discussing that last topic, even coming with a handy montage at the beginning of the film to set the mood of a hazy, heat-stricken city clutched by the pangs of Reaganomics and Satanic Panic. That isn’t to say the film doesn’t have heavy thematic ties to the two movies that came before it (after all, all three are meant to invoke each other), but MaXXXine doesn’t mirror them as starkly as they mirror each other.
It’s in how MaXXXine explores these themes that it really lets you know: this is not a film-grain-pocked granny slasher contemplating aging, or a vibrant character study draped in a faded red white and blue dream. This is a fun, wild movie mocking the insanity of the era’s politics and supplementing it with gory, giallo-inspired horror.
Ti West Loves Old Horror (And He Wants You to Know It)
That giallo aspect, of course, is a lot of aesthetic exercises in lighting and odd camera angles from Ti West and director of photography Eliot Rockett. The duo have worked well together for ages now, so why fix what isn’t broken right?
The film’s story is structured as a classic murder mystery would be, but takes plenty of pitstops exploring old horror in its many references and tributes: The Exorcist series, Four Flies on Grey Velvet, Blood and Black Lace, Pieces, and Psychoall get their due with West pouring out his admiration for the people who made those films with every flex of his cinematic muscles.
That’s not even getting into the fact that the special effects in this film are pure heat, with lots of practical effects that ooze blood as much as they ooze an appreciation for the craft. The way Weta managed to replicate the look of that bright red, paint-y blood used in 80s B-horror is so unserious-looking but so screen-accurate that I can’t help but love it.
Mia Goth Delivers, but Without the Same Shine Seen in Pearl
Of course, I can’t rule out the possibility this was all meant to be taken deadly serious and the film is not meant to be humorous. But I find that hard to believe given, in addition to the above factors, everybody in this movie is playing into the heightened character archetypes they’re assigned: the macho Los Angeles detective, the sleazy private eye, the hardass auteur director, everyone is playing a stock character in one way or another (albeit, fun ones and they’re doing a great job of it). Maybe the only one who isn’t is Mia Goth in the title role. Playing a stock character, that is, she’s still pretty good in this.
In X, Mia Goth had a brilliant double role as both villain and victim and got to showcase an incredible amount of talent with her physical acting as an aged Pearl. In the prequel, Goth had a sort of Vampire’s Kiss era Nicholas Cage charm; she was completely and utterly unhinged, but that virulent madness of hers was robed in a magnetism that most people couldn’t avoid being hooked by.
The Maxine she portrays in this film skews more towards her work in Pearl, but never really hits the same peaks of the buck-wild screaming she does at the projectionist or her hypnotizing speech to Mitsy in Pearl. She still has some incredible moments here though, with my favorite being a scene early on confronting a would-be attacker and holding nothing (and I mean absolutely nothing) back.
What’s the Verdict for the Most Unique Sequel This Year?
So, the bottom line you might be asking after all this is, “Should I go see it?”. For what it’s worth, I think it’s an obvious yes. But the major caveat you should have sussed out by now is that you should not go into this expecting anything like the previous two films. I would go so far as to say this is probably going to be the Scream 3 of Ti West’s filmography for how polarizing it is; if you like it, you love it, and if you don’t like it, you’ll want to burn down all the studios in Hollywood over it yourself. Unfortunately, I like Scream 3 a lot, so interpret that info as you will.
MaXXXine is a unique little follow-up to X and Pearl, with just the right wild cinematography and just the right wild performances to make it work. And it’s an hour and forty-four minutes of fun on tap– as long as you’re willing to indulge in something a little different, and willing to shed some notions of what your ideal X sequel “should” look like.
Reviews
‘Frankenstein’ Review: Guillermo Del Toro Is Off to the Races
Those expecting Guillermo Del Toro’s Frankenstein to be similar to the book, or to any other adaptation, are in for something else. A longtime enjoyer of the creature’s story, Del Toro instead draws from many places: the novel, James Whale’s culturally defining 1931 film, the Kenneth Branagh version, there are even hints from Terence Fisher’s Curse of Frankenstein, and if the set design and costuming are to be believed, there are trace elements of the National Theatre production too.
The formulation to breathe life into this amalgam is a sort of storm cloud of cultural memory and personal desire for Del Toro. This is about crafting his Frankenstein: the one he wanted to see since he was young, the vision he wanted to stitch together. What results is an experience that is more colorful and kinetic and well-loved by its creator than any Frankenstein we’ve had yet, but what it leaves behind is much of its gothic heart. Quiet darkness, looming dread, poetry, and romance are set aside as what has been sold as “the definitive retelling” goes off to the races. It’s a fast-paced ride through a world of mad science, and you’re on it.
Victor Frankenstein’s Ambition and Tragedy
A tale as old as time, with some changes: the morbid talents and untamed hubris of Victor Frankenstein (Oscar Isaac) guide him to challenge death itself. Spurred by a wealthy investor named Henrich Harlander, and a desire for Harlander’s niece Elizabeth (Mia Goth), Victor uses dead flesh and voltaic vigor to bring a creature to life. His attempts to rear it, however, go horribly wrong, setting the two on a bloody collision course as the definitions of man and monster become blurred.
Guillermo Del Toro’s Frankenstein is more Hellboy in its presentation than it is Crimson Peak; it’s honestly more similar to Coppola’s Dracula than either of them. The film is barely done with its opening when it starts with a loud sequence of the monster attacking Walton’s ship on the ice. Flinging crew members about and walking against volleys of gunfire, he is a monstrosity by no other name. The Creature (Jacob Elordi) cries out in guttural screams, part animal and part man, as it calls for its creator to be returned to him. While visually impressive (and it remains visually impressive throughout, believe me), this appropriately bombastic hook foreshadows a problem with tone and tempo.
A Monster That Moves Too Fast
The pace overall is far too fast for its first half, even with its heavy two-and-a-half-hour runtime. It’s also a far cry from the brooding nature the story usually takes. A scene where Victor demonstrates rudimentary reanimation to his peers and a council of judges is rapid, where it should be agonizingly slow. There’s horror and an instability in Victor to be emphasized in that moment, but the grotesque sight is an oddly triumphant one instead. Most do not revile his experiments; in fact he’s taken quite seriously.
Many scenes like this create a tonal problem that makes Victor’s tale lean more toward melodrama than toward philosophical or emotional aspects; he is blatantly wild and free, in a way that is respected rather than pitied. There are opportunities to stop, breathe in the Victorian roses and the smell of death, to get really dour, but it’s neglected until the film’s second half.
Isaac’s and Goth’s performances are overwrought at points, feeling more like pantomimes of Byronic characters. I’m not entirely convinced it has more to do with them than with the script they’re given. Like Victor working with the parts of inmates and dead soldiers, even the best of actors with the best of on-screen chemistry are forced to make do. The dialogue has incredibly high highs (especially in its final moments), but when it has lows, how low they are; a character outright stating that “Victor is the real monster” adage to his face was an ocean floor piece of writing if there ever was one.
Isaac, Goth, and Elordi Bring Life to the Dead
Jacob Elordi’s work here, however, is blameless. Though Elordi’s physical performance as the creature will surely win praise, his time speaking is the true highlight. It’s almost certainly a definitive portrayal of the character; his voice for Victor’s creation is haunted with scorn and solitude, the same way his flesh is haunted by the marks of his creator’s handiwork. It agonizes me to see so little of the books’ most iconic lines used wholesale here, because they would be absolutely perfect coming from Elordi. Still, he has incredible chemistry with both Isaac and Goth, and for as brief as their time together is, he radiates pure force.
Frankenstein Is a Masterclass in Mise-En-Scène
Despite its pacing and tone issues, one can’t help but appreciate the truly masterful craftsmanship Del Toro has managed to pack into the screen. Every millimeter of the sets is carved to specification, filled with personality through to the shadows. Every piece of brick, hint of frost, stain of blood, and curve of the vine is painstakingly and surgically placed to create one of the most wonderful and spellbinding sets you’ve seen—and then it keeps presenting you with new environments like that, over, and over.
At the very least, Del Toro’s Frankenstein is a masterpiece of mise-en-scène down to the minutest of details, and that makes it endlessly rewatchable for aesthetic purposes. This isn’t even getting into the effervescent lighting, or how returning collaborator Kate Hawley has outdone herself again with the costuming. Guillermo Del Toro tackling the king of gothic horror stories, a story written by the mother of all science fiction, inevitably set a high bar for him to clear. And while it’s not a pitch perfect rendering of Mary Shelley’s slow moving and Shakespearean epistolary, it is still one of the best-looking movies you will see all year.
Perhaps for us, it’s at the cost of adapting the straightforward, dark story we know into something more operatic. It sings the tale like a soprano rather than reciting it like humble prose, and it doesn’t always sing well. But for Del Toro, the epic scale and voice of this adaptation is the wage expected for making the movie he’s always dreamed of. Even with its problems, it’s well worth it to see a visionary director at work on a story they love.
Reviews
‘The Siege of Ape Canyon’ Review: Bigfoot Comes Home
In my home, films like Night of the Demon and Abominable are played on repeat; Stan Gordon is king. One of my favorite stories surrounding Bigfoot and Ufology is the Bigfoot/UFO double flap of 1973, which Stan Gordon has an incredible in-depth book on. The Patterson–Gimlin film couldn’t hold a flame to Stan Gordon’s dive into one of my home state’s most chronicled supernatural time periods. But as much as I love the Bigfoot topic, I’m not ashamed to say I don’t know half of the stories surrounding that big hairy beast. And one topic that I’m not ashamed to say I haven’t heard of is The Siege of Ape Canyon.
The Harrowing Events of Ape Canyon
Washington State, 1924. A group of miners (originally consisting of Marion Smith, Leroy P. Smith, Fred Beck, John Peterson, August Johannson, and Mac Rhodes) was on a quest to claim a potential gold mine. Literally. The miners would eventually set up camp on the east slope of Mount Saint Helens. Little did they know their temporary shelter would be the start of a multi-day barrage of attacks from what they and researchers believed to be Bigfoot. What transpired in those days would turn out to be one of the most highly criticized pieces of American lore, nearly lost to time and history…nearly.
I need to set the record straight on a few things before we get started. One, I don’t typically like watching documentaries. Two, I believe in Bigfoot. Three, this documentary made me cry.

Image courtesy of Justin Cook Public Relations.
Reviving a Forgotten Bigfoot Legend in The Siege of Ape Canyon
Documentarian Eli Watson sets out to tell one of the most prolific Bigfoot stories of all time (for those who are deep in Bigfoot mythology). It’s noted fairly early in the film that this story is told often and is well known in the Washington area. So then, how do people outside of the incident location know so little about it? I’ve read at least 15 books on and about Bigfoot, and I’ve never once heard this story. This isn’t a Stan-Gordon-reported story about someone sitting on the john and seeing a pair of red eyes outside of their bathroom window. The story around Ape Canyon has a deeper spiritual meaning that goes beyond a few sightings here and there.
Watson’s documentary, though, isn’t just about Bigfoot or unearthing the story of Ape Canyon. Ape Canyon nearly became nothing more than a tall tale that elders would share around a campfire to keep the younglings out of the woods at 2 AM. If it weren’t for Mark Myrsell, that’s exactly what would have happened. The Siege of Ape Canyon spends half its time unpacking the story of Fred Beck and his prospecting crew, and the other half tells a truly inspiring tale of unbridled passion, friendship, and love.
Mark Myrsell’s Relentless Pursuit: Friendship, Truth, and Tears
Mark Myrsell’s undying passion for everything outdoors inevitably led to bringing one of Bigfoot’s craziest stories to light. His devotion to the truth vindicated many people who were (probably) labeled kooks and crazies. Throughout Myrsell’s endless search for the truth, he made lifelong friends along the way. What brought me to tears throughout The Siege of Ape Canyon is Watson’s insistence on showing the human side of Myrsell and his friends. They’re not in this to make millions or bag a Bigfoot corpse; they just want to know the truth. And that’s what they find.
The Siege of Ape Canyon is a documentary that will open your eyes to a wildly mystical story you may not have heard of. And it does it pretty damn well. Whereas many documentaries feel the need to talk down to the viewer just to educate them, Watson’s documentary takes you along for the ride. It doesn’t ask you to believe or not believe in Bigfoot. It allows you to make your own decisions and provides the evidence it needs to. If you’ve ever had a passing interest in the topic of Bigfoot, or if you think you’re the next Stan Gordon, I highly recommend watching The Siege of Ape Canyon.
The Siege of Ape Canyon stomps its way onto digital platforms on November 11. Give yourself a little post-Halloween treat and check it out!


