Reviews
[REVIEW] ‘The Entity’ (1982) Is Real
The Entity follows Carla Moran (Barbara Hershey), a single mother with three kids, doing everything she can to make her way. As soon as she clocks out of her secretary position, she heads to a local university for typing school–Carla wants to give her children the best life possible. Her son Billy (David Labiosa) is a gruff and hardworking kid and is there for her through thick and thin. One fateful night, Carla is viciously sexually assaulted by an unseen force. These attacks grow in force and pain as the nights go on, eventually leading to Billy finding himself with a broken wrist (arm in real life). Carla scours the supernatural shelves at a bookstore and overhears two paranormal investigators discussing a case. After speaking with these two men, they vow to get to the bottom of the entity ruining her life.
One of the most credible and fascinating cases of supernatural activity is the case of Doris Bither. Whether you believe in the supernatural or not, many aspects of this case are hard to discredit. I first became aware of this case when Art Bell raved about a TV movie he had watched called The Entity. Art would go on, a few months later, to bring Dr. Barry Taff onto his show to discuss the real story that inspired the film. While Dr. Taff states that the film was Hollywood-ified, the story’s base elements, moral questions, and overall gist were correct. The physical book is difficult (EXPENSIVE) to get at this point, so my basis on the accuracy of this life-to-screen adaptation is based on Dr. Taff’s words, some articles, and a few other bits and bobs.
The Entity follows Carla Moran (Barbara Hershey), a single mother with three kids, doing everything she can to make her way. As soon as she clocks out of her secretary position, she heads to a local university for typing school–Carla wants to give her children the best life possible. Her son Billy (David Labiosa) is a gruff and hardworking kid and is there for her through thick and thin. One fateful night, Carla is viciously sexually assaulted by an unseen force. These attacks grow in force and pain as the nights go on, eventually leading to Billy finding himself with a broken wrist (arm in real life). Carla scours the supernatural shelves at a bookstore and overhears two paranormal investigators discussing a case. After speaking with these two men, they vow to get to the bottom of the entity ruining her life.
Director Sidney J. Furie and writer Frank De Felitta (based on De Felitta’s novel of the same name) is an astounding feature that breaks many molds, poses intense questions, and puts the answer in the hands of the audience. With a total of 11 split diopter shots and enough Dutch angles to make a 6’ 1” blond hair blue eyed person blush, The Entity is a film that sits with you for a long time. As the violence ramps up, cinematographer Stephen H. Burum gets bolder. Shot composition goes from “normal” to awkwardly framed to give viewers a sense that something sinister is lurking beneath the surface; a subconscious sucker punch of filmmaking magic.
Barbara Hershey provides a brilliant performance that nauseates viewers with a tang of too much authenticity. But it’s the men in the film that are the rubber bands Hershey bounces her performances off of. Dr. Phil Sneiderman (Ron Silver) is the grounding force of Carla’s relationships. You’d think it’s her son Billy who is her rock, but there’s this strange will they/won’t they that was thankfully [mostly] cut out of the film. Dr. Sneiderman tries to go against the plethora of doctors who attempt to chalk Carla’s experiences to childhood sexual trauma. Once Dr. Sneiderman breaks that bond he built with Carla, their entire relationship flips on its head. Sneiderman’s character flip comes when Dr. Webb (George Coe) chalks all of this up to a mass delusion, and he is the one who tells Sneiderman [basically] to disregard Carla’s assumptions and to get her to believe that all Carla wants to do is masturbate and forget about her sexual frustrations.
On the other hand, you have parapsychologists Gene Kraft (Richard Brestoff) and Joe Mehan (Raymond Singer), who attempt to use Carla’s pain to prove what they think is correct. Even though Gene and Joe seem to have Carla’s best interests in mind, they, along with their boss Dr. Elizabeth Cooley (Jacqueline Brookes), see this as an opportunity to further their academic careers–they go so far as to put Carla in danger time and time again.
Thirdly, you have Carla’s constantly out-of-town boyfriend Jerry Anderson (Alex Rocco). Jerry seemingly loves Carla with his heart and soul, but at the core of Carla’s story, he can’t get past his own holdups. Once he sees his girlfriend, who he was moments before saying he wanted to move in with, get sexually assaulted by a ghost right before his eyes, he calls it quits. All of the men in Carla’s life have their own ulterior motives. This goes hand in hand with the men in Carla’s life who have taken advantage of her in more ways than one.
The scenes of Carla’s assaults are very difficult to watch. At no point do you see an awful-looking 80s attempt at rotoscoping a ghostly figure into the sexual assaults, rather, you watch Carla become overtaken by an invisible force. This truly creates a connection between Carla and the viewers. You are also witnessing this assault happen, and you cannot figure out what is doing it. Even though there are no 80s VFX ghosts, we do get some great Stan Winston effects. One particular gnarly-looking effect is one when an invisible hand harshly squeezes Carla’s bare breasts.
The assaults get more and more rough as they go on. And while they are tough to watch, they’re difficult to listen to. Yes, hearing Carla scream for help and having her son helplessly watch his mother get assaulted is hard to watch. It’s Charles Bernstein’s score that adds a new level of terror. From silence to a deafening guitar lick, undercut by hammering drum strikes, and angelic-sounding piano chords. The second that sound comes through, you know Carla is in trouble.
One of the interesting things I thought during this film was that Insidious is just a watered-down version of The Entity. Plus Barbara Hershey is in both films. In real life, Doris moved houses and the entity followed her no matter where she went. The film ends with a “where are they now” update, and the film also confirms that the entity followed Carla as she moved. Like The Entity, Insidious has a story where “it’s not the house that’s haunted…it’s Dalton.” Also, you have the parapsychologists who are completely mirrored in Specs (Leigh Whannell) and Tucker (Angus Sampson). Gene is the nerdy-looking investigator with glasses, and Joe is the one with the receding hairline and bearded face. Plus, both teams are run by an old white lady.
Funnily enough, James Wan’s production company Atomic Monster has completed a script for a remake of The Entity.
There aren’t many inaccuracies between the real-life story and the film. Dr. Barry Taff states, as I mentioned earlier, that there were a few exaggerated ideas, but the heart of the story is there, and that’s what matters. That being said, the film’s finale puts Carla in a controlled environment–she’s basically a lab rat. Dr. Taff noted that he had pitched that idea, but it was just way too expensive. So the whole liquid hydrogen freezing the ghost subplot did not happen. However, the team extensively studied Doris.
If you haven’t seen The Entity, then you are missing out. This film was incredibly powerful and captures Doris’s story in a way that feels proper and authentic to its source material. The Entity is truly frightening and stands the test of time. Even if you aren’t scared of paranormal stories, The Entity will keep you on the edge of your seat. While the film’s subject matter may be challenging to watch and sit with, I know I will be revisiting this film many times.
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.
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!
Brooklyn Horror Film Festival 2025: The Creep Tapes Season 2
The Horror Press Podcast Ep 51: Frankenstein & Stranger Things
‘Frankenstein’ Review: Guillermo Del Toro Is Off to the Races
‘The Siege of Ape Canyon’ Review: Bigfoot Comes Home
The Best Horror You Can Stream on Shudder in November 2025
‘The Addams Family’ (1991) First-Time Watch Review
Brooklyn Horror Film Festival 2025: ‘Slayed’ LGBTQ+ Shorts Block
Brooklyn Horror Film Fest 2025: ‘CAMP’ Review
Brooklyn Horror Film Fest 2025: ‘The Serpent’s Skin’ Review
The Best Horror You Can Stream on Netflix in November 2025
‘The People Under the Stairs’ Review: A Brilliantly Bizarre Undercover Horror Classic
Slappy Was the Blueprint: How the Dummy from Goosebumps Became A Horror Icon
Glen and Glenda: Don Mancini’s Reverence for Queerness in ‘Seed of Chucky’ (2004)
‘Five Nights at Freddy’s’ and The Story of William Afton Explained
‘Truth or Dare’: Who Did it Best?
The 11 Most Disturbing Horror Movies Ever, According to an Actual Horror Fan
V/H/S Franchise Ranked, Best to Worst
Everything You Need to Know About Jason Voorhees
[REVIEW] ‘Cherry Falls’ (1999) Brittany Murphy Shines in This Cult Classic Slasher
