I think that one of the reasons that people find the zombie genre is so popular is because it’s so relatable. In every point of history, there has been a very legitimate fear of infection, and of becoming part of a huge mass of the unidentified/unnamed/unclaimed waste left in its aftermath. It’s a terrifying thought to have to watch your body rot and decay into something inhuman before your own eyed. Just as there’s a complex horror of being swallowed into an unmarked mass grave, full of other rotting husks of unknown strangers.
And of course, the more bureaucratic
nightmare of quarantine – the loss of control over one’s freedom, autonomy and
body. The isolation of being a number in a system, a statistic to be glossed
over in news reports, or worse, totally neglected by the system built to serve
and protect you as a citizen.
At the time of this review, the
world is rocked by the Corona virus. Clips of videos and pictures on the
internet show people being removed in hazmat protection, portions of cities
blocked off for quarantine, and countless people reacting to fake or real bouts
of public sickness. Borders have been closed. PPE has been sold out completely
online.
Before that was Ebola, H1N1, SARS,
Bird Flu, Hantavirus, The Spanish Flu, Tuberculosis, Rabies, Leprosy, The Black
Death…
And, something more akin to this movie – the HIV/AIDS epidemic. But before we get into all that…
The Plot:
Maggie, played by Abigail Breslin, has just been given a death sentence – she’s been bitten by an infected person and is now positive for a disease that’s been ravaging the entire US. After trying to run away, she is picked up by her father and taken back to their house in the quiet countryside to await her fate. She’s given only a few weeks to spend with her family before being forced to suffer her final days isolated in quarantine.
During her time at home, she must come to accept her mother’s past death, learn to forgive, and face her mortality while losing her agency and body in the process as she becomes sicker. She experiences the fear and ignorance of even her closest loved ones as she becomes less and less of Maggie and more of something else entirely…
The non-spoiler reveal:
There’s no way around this: Arnold Schwarzenegger plays her dad.
It’s…unfortunate and, frankly, jarring to see older Arnold play a Midwestern farmer and father to a young twenty-something (and father to even younger children). And it’s not to say that he doesn’t try in this film, because he does.
And he does a good job at acting, but what probably drew a lot of people to watch this movie (me included) was what ended up hurting it – it’s an Arnold Schwarzenegger zombie movie at the end of the day. No matter how it’s packaged, that’s what’s going to stick in people’s minds and when this slow-burn drama starts unfolding, it’s…well…
(snob glasses affixed) In “Genre And The Invention Of The Writer”, especially when examining Foucault’s “author-function”, Anis S. Bawarshi said:
“The author-function does not refer to the ‘real’ writer, the individual with the proper name who precedes and exists independently of the work. Instead, it refers to the author’s name, which, in addition to being a proper name, is also a literary name, a name that exists only in relation to the work associated with it. The author-function, then, endows a work with a certain cultural status and value. At the same time, the author-function also endows the idea of ‘author’ with a certain cultural status and value.”
https://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt46nxp6.5
“The author-function delimits what works we recognize as valuable and how we interpret them at the same time as it accords the status of author to certain writers”
https://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt46nxp6.5
I know, you’re thinking, ‘But Brannyk, doesn’t that work in favor of the movie? The reason that we’re talking about the movie right now is because of Arnold “Put That Cookie Down” Schwarzenegger? And also, what happened with the HIV/AIDS talk?’
We’ll get to HIV/AIDS in a minute. First, yes, Arnold and Abigail Breslin’s (but we know it’s Arnold) capital is what drew people in. In fact, that reliance on his capital was incredibly faulty direction that the marketing took – relying on (and exaggerating) the scarce action scenes of the movie. They even went as far as to hype the movie with the most ridiculous tagline: “Don’t Get Bitten” as a way to sell Action-Arnold, and not Midwestern old-dad Arnold.
It’s no wonder that, while it fared well with critics, it bombed hard, not even making back its budget (which probably mostly went to the salaries for the actors, as there was limited effects and locations).
And it’s a shame because “Maggie” is a fresh take on an old trope. And so, patient reader, we get to HIV/AIDS.
Brain Roll Juice:
“Maggie” is not the total chaos and calamity of most zombie outbreak movies. It’s an epidemic, yes, but as we see government-issued brochures given to Maggie, as we hear NPR news reports, and boring, routine doctor visits – this is not a collapsing society situation. Yet, there’s fear and prejudice against those infected. There’s ignorance. Some of it is rational – they are living in the country, where everyone knows everyone and resources are reserved for the larger cities. Maggie is seen as a victim, a carrier, a ticking time-bomb, a troublemaker, and an innocent child.
During her own time of accepting her virus and fate, friends and loved ones try understand how this change will affect them – some say goodbye, some turn away, and some give into prejudice and ignorance.
Throughout the movie (whether intentional or not) the interactions with the community, the government’s awkward involvements, and the sickness itself (not the cannibalistic part, though, duh) is reminiscent of the HIV/AIDS epidemic of the 80’s-90’s. Maggie as a “carrier” of a deadly and mysteriously disease that is clumsily handled by government officials and little understood by the general public pulls a lot from history. We see Maggie losing agency, little by little, with her choices and her own body as she is slowly succumbing to the virus. We see more government intervention by way of law enforcement and medical staff, even when trying to help her. We see her own friends misunderstand her and the community at the brink of hysteria.
In fact, when questioned about the school re-opening and asked whether he would send his child to school with a child with the disease, the mayor of the town had this to say,
“I’m glad I’m not faced with that problem today, and I can well understand the plight of the parents and how they feel about it. I also have compassion, as I think we all do, for the child that has this and doesn’t know and can’t have it explained to him why somehow he is now an outcast and can no longer associate with his playmates and schoolmates. On the other hand, I can understand the problem of the parents. It is true that some medical sources had said that this cannot be communicated in any way other than the ones we already know and which would not involve a child being in the school. And yet medicine has not come forth unequivocally and said, ‘This we know for a fact, that it is safe.’ And until they do, I think we just have to do the best we can with this problem. I can understand both sides of it.”
Just kidding. That was Reagan in ’85. A full two years before forming the President’s Commission on the HIV Epidemic in ’87. And that was after AIDS was named in ’82 and HIV identified in ’82.
Any who, what I’m getting at is that there are similarities that make this a familiar ride in an old trope that I found refreshing, surprisingly rewarding and genuine. While I hope this nod was deliberate, the zombie virus itself pays homage to very real and very deadly diseases in our world as I stated before and while the scary zombie move is fun, this was a good stroll into what other facets the zombie genre could tell. Familiar stories. Heartbreaking stories. Vulnerable stories of communities trying to recover and survive; families learning how to deal with loss and say goodbye; and victims finding agency (in small or big ways) within their suffering and their final moments.
Bottom-line:
A slow drama with Arnold Schwarzenegger and zombies. If you feel like you’re up to that, give it a go.
When not ravaging through the wilds of Detroit with Jellybeans the Cat, J.M. Brannyk (a.k.a. Boxhuman) reviews mostly supernatural and slasher films from the 70's-90's and is dubiously HauntedMTL's Voice of Reason.
Aside from writing, Brannyk dips into the podcasts, and is the composer of many of HauntedMTL's podcast themes.
However, trying to fit in, Iris starts to discover a terrifying secret within this tight-knit group of friends. A deadly secret…
THOUGHTS ON COMPANION (SPOILER-FREE)
Never would I have thought I would be saying that a writer of ‘Fred: the TV Show’ and ‘Fred 3: Camp Fred’ wrote a damn fine film. But here we are.
Writer/director, Drew Hancock, created a funny, clever and interesting gem of a horror film. COMPANION is a great adventure film in the horror genre, focusing on the ideas of identity, self-preservation, the cogito, ergo sum of life, and women’s rights.
And, trust me, I know that sounds like a lot, but that’s pulled off by the superb writing and the acting – it flows together really well. It’s an incredibly precarious job to balance humor, horror and drama. If you go too hard with humor and it’s cringey. You give too much drama and it’s tonal dissonance. If there’s too much horror…well, that’s okay, actually.
But with heavy hitters with incredible comedic timing like Harvey Guillén and Jack Quaid, the cast only elevates the writing and story. Quaid and Sophie Thatcher have so much chemistry and work so well together that the drama feels authentic and raw. Thatcher is such an engaging actress, working with what could have been a very flat role. But she portrays Iris with such intelligence, wit and vulnerability, it sells the idea of COMPANION that would usually require more suspension of disbelief.
I liked the soundtrack by Hrishikesh Hirway. Both the original soundtrack and the songs chosen work well with the tone and plot. Super fun bop. You can tell that the song selections were picked with intent and care, for example, the Goo Goo Dolls’ song playing in Josh’s apartment.
The effects in COMPANION were terrific by being used sparingly but grotesquely, for example, the scene with the slow, tortuous scene with the candle. Most of it is practical, but there are some key scenes with CGI that are really well done.
BRAINROLL JUICE: THIS HAS VAGUE SPOILERS
I love horror films. Yeah, I know, big surprise. But this type of film highlights why horror is such an important and crucial part of our history and culture. Horror is a lens of a society of the times. Looking back, we can see what creatures scared us. What people were afraid of or should be afraid of.
Horror, by large, is a very social and progressive genre. Monster movies and mad scientist movies of the 1950’s were en vogue due to the rising fears of the atomic bomb and the Cold War. The same is true for the rise in space horror as we had the Space Race and landed on the moon.
Coralie Fargeat has been exploring this with great success with her most recent film, ‘The Substance‘, but first really dove into this with her fan-favorite, ‘Revenge‘. ‘Freaky‘ and ‘Happy Death Day‘, while comedic, explore girlhood, femininity and social expectations. ‘Don’t Breathe‘ turns the trope on it’s head (in a still gross way). ‘Babadook‘ shows the difficulty with being a mother, and ‘Hereditary‘ is a deep drama on matriarchal generational trauma.
What does this have to do with horror and COMPANION? Well, pretty much everything. COMPANION is about what it means to be a woman. Her fears are real and reflect the fears of our society currently. Loss of agency. Loss of identity. Loss of her voice and decisions.
But like all good horror, it will stand the test of time. It will be on the right side of history, as they say. With an incel proxy as the villain and a woman learning about herself, it’s clear what Hancock envisioned for COMPANION. It’s a film about empowerment and reflection of our society right now. And unlike the newest Black Christmas, it doesn’t shove a diva cup down your throat.
“The Demon of Sex” is the third episode of Evil’s season 3, created by Michelle King and Robert King. The central cast includes Katja Herbers, Mike Colter, Aasif Mandvi, Michael Emerson, Christine Lahti, and Andrea Martin. As of this review, it’s available through Netflix and Paramount+ and its add-ons.
The assessors investigate a new marriage that struggles with intimacy. Kristen (Katja Herbers) takes control of her family. Ben (Aasif Mandvi) has an existential crisis after facing plumbing difficulties. Sheryl (Christine Lahti) struggles with the new work culture. Sister Andrea (Andrea Martin) battles a demon.
What I Like about “The Demon of Sex”
Ben usually seems underutilized as a character, especially in personal development, but season 3 works hard to rectify that issue. A skeptic’s disillusionment is an obvious choice for this type of character, but the writing and Aasif Mandvi’s performance drive the execution. It also adds another dynamic to his character referenced throughout the series, if rarely shown again, in the Science League.
“The Demon of Sex” is also a good episode for Sheryl, who struggles and triumphs in her new position. While her character trajectory teeters back and forth, “The Demon of Sex” shows what her development can look like when given the attention it deserves.
Last update on 2025-01-31 / Affiliate links / Images from Amazon Product Advertising API
“The Demon of Sex” also furthers the frenemy relationship between Kristen and Sister Andrea, providing ample material for both characters to explore. “The Demon of Sex” shows Kristen’s willingness to compromise and furthers Sister Andrea’s character flaws.
Leland (Michael Emerson) finally finds an attack that might work on Sister Andrea, beginning a plot thread to explore across the season. Commenting on this plot point might give credit to future episodes, but it’s a compelling example of Leland actually being devious and in control.
“The Demon of Sex” leans on Evil’s dark comedic tone, not intending to haunt the viewer but to entertain them. It dives further into the comical nature of corporate evil and marketing, showing a general shallowness in both arenas in which exploitation occurs. It’s dark, troubling, and entertaining without pulling its punches.
Tired Tropes and Triggers
In an episode titled “The Demon of Sex,” the titular demon seems to hold conflicting motives. First, it grows strong in the married couple’s abstinence, which suggests a different focus. But when acts become carnal, it’s the general kinkiness that makes the demon strong. Considering the couple talks about their troubles with a licensed therapist, it seems to evoke a general kink shame to the execution. However, the therapy also fails to resolve the underlying issues.
A slightly gory moment might unsettle some viewers, but it’s a single moment in an otherwise goreless episode.
What I Dislike about “The Demon of Sex”
As mentioned in a previous review, another demon seems to indicate a more direct concept of “sex,” while the motives of this demon seem more complex. It’s a minor point, but I can’t fathom why they didn’t connect this title with the more literal succubus that’s plagued this season already. Addressing that demon also seems like a more logical entry point as the audience sees what it’s been doing.
“The Demon of Sex” sets the groundwork for future plot points. While not a fault of the episode, it blends in the background, doing what it needs to and little more. I don’t mean to pretend this is a negative, but it doesn’t haunt the viewer like past or future episodes.
Final Thoughts
“The Demon of Sex” delivers but remains buried around more memorable episodes with more lasting power. It sets up key points for several characters and allows some to shine, but it doesn’t hold iconic moments to look back on. Ultimately, it functions as intended and keeps the audience eager for future developments.
Dark City (1998) is a Cosmic Horror film directed by Alex Proyas, though I’ve seen labels of tech noir, which certainly fits. This R-rated film stars Rufus Sewell, Kiefer Sutherland, Jennifer Connelly, and William Hurt. As of this review, Dark City is available to Kanopy and Amazon Prime Video subscribers, with additional purchase options on other services.
John Murdoch (Rufus Sewell) wakes up in a hotel bathtub, plagued with strange memories and amnesia. Chased by strangers, he follows his memories of Emma (Jennifer Connelly), avoiding those who hunt him in his desperate attempt to understand his situation. As mysterious forces hinder him, Dr. Daniel Schreber (Kiefer Sutherland) claims to know secrets that might help. Emma Murdock (Jennifer Connelly) haunts him.
What I Like about Dark City
Dark City earned 12 awards and an additional 19 nominations. These recognitions include the 1999 Saturn Award from the Academy of Science Fiction, Fantasy & Horror Films and the 1998 Bram Stoker Award. In short, Dark City earns a strong critical reception.
Part detective tale and part cosmic horror, Dark City lures its viewer in with its aesthetic and premise. I hesitate in saying that the mystery drives the film as the beginning narration does spill most of the finer points. However, Rufus Sewell delivers a performance of someone so overwhelmed and out of his element that the terror shows despite our knowledge. This film wants the audience to know the mystery, focusing on characters learning the truth to hook them.
Rufus Sewell, William Hurt, Kiefer Sutherland (Actors)
Alex Proyas (Director) – Alex Proyas (Writer) – Andrew Mason (Producer)
Last update on 2025-01-31 / Affiliate links / Images from Amazon Product Advertising API
Every performance nails its particular niche. From Kiefer Sutherland’s Dr. Schreber’s untrustworthy scientist to Jennifer Connelly’s mysterious Emma, each performance enriches the plot. This praise belongs to the entire cast, as many performances hold nuances that make sense after learning the entire truth.
Dark City maintains tension for most of its runtime, with the ending being an exception. That isn’t to say that the film fails to create a haunting story, but the focus shifts as the characters learn more about their situation. While both parts of the film accomplish their objectives, it does minimize the horror.
Tired Tropes and Triggers
At the backdrop of this story, there’s a serial killer murdering sex workers. It’s a familiar plotline, and Dark City doesn’t push against its familiarity in most aspects. However, the reasons behind this plot are somewhat more complex beyond simple shock value.
There was one notable voyeuristic nude scene, but the first naked body is Rufus Sewell’s John. Besides these moments, Dark City doesn’t lend itself to voyeurism. Instead, it prefers a largely sexless and detached perspective, which seems common among Lovecraftian-inspired properties.
What I Dislike about Dark City
As briefly mentioned, Dark City doesn’t deliver a traditional mystery because the beginning narration spoils most of that mystery. While this doesn’t inherently hinder the film, it’s a decision that doesn’t seem to make much sense. Most of the narration gets shown or told to the audience later. It’s as if the audience isn’t trusted to understand these elements. However, this film repeats this information or shows it with better execution, making the narration unnecessary.
Without divulging too much, the ending empowers a particular character that hinders the cosmic horror influences. It’s hard to believe the danger of cosmic forces when they prove to be your equal.
While not a fault of Dark City, The Matrix would focus more on empowering its main character through realizing some truth. Since The Matrix came out a year after this film, Dark City holds a stronger claim to the trend. However, the execution of this plot point goes to The Matrix. Despite the drastically different focus and genres, I can’t help but wonder how much The Matrix’s success has overshadowed this film’s lasting power.
Final Thoughts
Dark City creates a tense journey for audiences to follow, combining cosmic horror and tech noir to create something unique. It’s a cult classic that earned an award after its digital re-release because few films provide its unique mix of genres. If you crave a dark mystery where humanity must adapt to overcome the impossible with a flare of cosmic horror, this film might satisfy your craving.