Dolores Roach, Like a Stoned-Ass Baby
If The Horror of Dolores Roach had one flaw, it was this. For the first two episodes, there wasn’t a body count. Not a single person died. And I’m pleased to tell you that this episode resolved that.
The Story
This episode begins with Dolores battling Gideon. She does manage to overpower and kill him, but it is a near thing.
Left alone with a dead body, Dolores breaks down. She’s panicked one moment, calm the next. But even the calm has a panicked flavor to it. Her hands don’t shake when she puts her earrings back on. But they do when she takes her hard earned money back.
Eventually she realizes that she’ll need to get rid of the body. So she goes to the hardware store without telling anyone what she’s done. Probably a good idea. She manages to look as suspicious as possible, buying duct tape, trash bags, a hand saw and a shovel all at the same time. She’s worried about the cameras in the shop, but didn’t think to wash all the blood off her hands.
When she gets back to the apartment, though, the body is already gone. Left in its place is a note that just states ‘Thank you Mami, I’ll take care of it.’ We can assume this was left by Luis, and we are correct.
After Dolores takes a well needed weed fueled nap, she’s awoken by Nellie outside. Nellie’s offering samples of a new empanada, called Muy Loco. And everyone is going nuts for it.
Everyone except Dolores. She puts the whole situation together real fast, correctly assuming that Luis has butchered Gideon’s dead body and is now cooking him into empanadas.
It is at this point that Luis becomes the scarier person in this situation. While Dolores killed a man in a fit of anger, Luis is way too excited about eating a person. He is just adoring the good attention his new muy loco empanada is getting. All is good right now. But of course, Gideon wasn’t a very big man. And even the largest man will eventually run out of meat to give.
What’s Luis going to do when his new ingredient runs out?
What worked
This episode had some of the best lines of the season so far. Honestly, there are so many lines that just jumped out at me. “Why did he make me do that?” Dolores thinks after killing Gideon. “Stop eating that man in front of me!” she yells at Luis. This is just great.
This was also the funniest episode so far. I loved the cashier at the hardware store, just chatting away about her nephew’s artwork while a woman is clearly having a mental breakdown in front of her. I loved Dolores being impressed by the quality of her massage table. You know, while she’s killing a man on it.
Finally, I loved how realistic Dolores’s response to killing a man was. One minute she’s laughing. Then she’s carefully putting on her earrings. Then she’s panicking. Then she’s talking about how good her candle is. Then she wants to throw up again. While I have no idea what it would be like to kill a man in a fit of terror, I imagine that this wave of conflicting and confusing emotions would be exactly what I’d be feeling.
What didn’t work
The first two episodes of Dolores Roach hasn’t given me much to complain about. And honestly, this one just had one tiny flaw. Really, nothing much but it did bother me. But in the scene with Dolores in the hardware store, her nails are covered in blood. Not her whole hands, just her finger nails. And, for some reason, some of her money. That can be explained, I suppose. But the blood is still shiny red and almost looks wet.
Now, it’s been at least an hour since Dolores killed Gideon. She’s had time to freak out, go to the store and do her shopping. There is just no way that the blood on her hands would still look like that.
It almost seems petty to point this out. But everything else has been spot on, so this is what I have to work with.
All in all, Dolores Roach is an outstanding story. The next episode is the halfway point, and the highest rated episode on IMDB. And I’m hungry for it.
(4 / 5)
By the way, AA season two has officially begun. You can listen to the first two episodes now. Episode three premieres this Tuesday.
Movies n TV
Anna (2013) To Some, Mindscape to Others, a Thriller Film
Anna (2013), also known as Mindscape, is a psychological thriller of a struggling memory detective named John.
Anna (2013), also known as Mindscape, is a psychological thriller directed by Jorge Dorado. This R-rated directorial debut stars Mark Strong, Taissa Farmiga, Brian Cox, Saskia Reeves, Richard Dillane, and Indira Varma. As of this review, interested viewers can watch this film on VUDU, Hoopla, Plex Channel, Pluto TV, Roku Channel, Tubi TV, Amazon Prime, and more. Anna originally released in 2013, but it released in the US in 2014.
Struggling to return to his work as a memory detective, John (Mark Strong) pursues a new assignment. Anna (Taissa Farmiga) views John as her last chance to prove her innocence before she’s condemned to an asylum. As John searches through her memories, a tale of abuse and manipulation unravels.
What I Like about Anna (2013)
Anna earned three nominations but no award recognition. From the Sitges–Catalonian International Film Festival, it earned a nomination for Best Motion Picture. The Goya Awards recognized Jorge Dorado with the 2014 nomination for Best New Director. Finally, Anna received a nomination from the Gaudí Awards for Best Art Direction.
Taissa Farmiga’s performance balances the line between suspicious and innocent, which is necessary for this unraveling mystery. It’s a delicate role, but Taissa Farmiga brings to life the material given.
No products found.
Anna‘s plot rotates around a new fringe science that’s slowly gaining traction. It’s less a dissection of this science and more a norm that Anna expects viewers to believe. It’s an interesting concept, though not unique. Still, it’s a nice additional dynamic to the mystery.
While not a horrifying film, it does deliver a mystery that keeps viewers engaged with enough hooks to add an extra layer before something gets stale. That mystery does linger in the mind in some respects but doesn’t haunt the viewer.
Tired Tropes and Triggers
Despite Anna not depicting these moments, sexual assault remains a recurring element of the film. Little remains conclusive, with some suggestions that these are false allegations. Furthering this point, the film depicts Anna as a manipulator and flirt when some incidents suggest she’s a survivor of assault.
Derogatory language might upset some, but these remain brief moments. The use indicates a particular character’s immaturity, but I’ll raise the point regardless. Furthering this line of analysis is a moment where a bullied character is implied to be gay, but it’s likely just an insult.
While not inherently a trigger, this new field of science earns the claim of being somewhere between forensic science and lie detector tests, a massive gap that anything can fit in. It makes everything subjective when the film wants to claim absolute evidence. I can’t help but wonder what exploring that unreliability might look like, but that’s not this film.
What I Dislike about Anna (2013)
The biggest deal breaker for some is this concept of a teen mastermind. I won’t go into details about the mystery, but I am often fatigued with this idea of a teen femme fatale. While Anna gives enough mystery, it’s an overused trope.
Mark Strong’s performance delivers on the material, but John seems so easily manipulated for someone who does this as a profession. While out of practice, I don’t understand why he believes or doesn’t believe information. If Anna depicts John as overly critical or gullible, the film will have a more consistent character.
I assume there remains an understandable reason for the name change, but Anna appears as a common title for a film, spinning a series of some recognition. Mindscape also earns some recognition and competition, but it’s a more memorable title than a single noun name.
Final Thoughts
Anna provides an interesting concept and mystery, but many shortcomings hinder the execution. Viewers eager for a psychological mystery with a drop of sci-fi, Anna delivers an engaging story. However, the market does provide competition, making it a tough film to recommend. 
(3 / 5)
Movies n TV
Tips on Raising Evil from “The Demon of Parenthood”
The assessors investigate cursed toys in an attack against commerce, but Ben has a finger on the issue in “The Demon of Parenthood.”
“The Demon of Parenthood” is the eighth episode of season 3 of Evil, 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 cursed toys in a terrible attack against commerce, but Ben (Aasif Mandvi) has a finger on the potential issue. David (Mike Colter) receives another task from the Entity. Kristen (Katja Herbers) learns more about her missing egg. Leland (Michael Emerson) invites Dr Boggs (Kurt Fuller) to the darker side of spirituality. Sheryl (Christine Lahti) takes her granddaughter to work.
What I Like about “The Demon of Parenthood”
I enjoy the espionage aspect of the Entity, pushing David to questionable grounds as he navigates what’s right against what’s demanded of him. While this plotline doesn’t reach its full potential, this episode highlights one of the more interesting opportunities of this idea. The Entity consistently interferes with the procedural case, possibly covering up abuse to support its objectives. This episode highlights this dynamic to perfection.
Kristen gets pulled in multiple directions, forced to question her trust in David, and faces a unique horror after learning about her missing egg. While I won’t dive deeper into this issue for this review, it’s safe to say this episode belongs to Kristen, and Katja Herbers delivers.
Her unsettling night terrors suggest an intuitive understanding of some of the manipulations around her, highlighting these moments to the viewer by proxy. Beyond these meta moments, the execution of these night terrors remains pleasantly unsettling.
![Evil: Season Three [DVD]](https://hauntedmtl.com/wp-content/plugins/aawp/public/image.php?url=YUhSMGNITTZMeTl0TG0xbFpHbGhMV0Z0WVhwdmJpNWpiMjB2YVcxaFoyVnpMMGt2TlRGYWJYaGtVVFpFYlV3dVgxTk1NVFl3WHk1cWNHYz18MTc0MDQxODA5NA=)
- Katja Herbers, Mike Colter, Aasif Mandvi (Actors)
- Robert King (Director)
- Audience Rating: NR (Not Rated)
![Evil: Season Three [Blu-Ray]](https://hauntedmtl.com/wp-content/plugins/aawp/public/image.php?url=YUhSMGNITTZMeTl0TG0xbFpHbGhMV0Z0WVhwdmJpNWpiMjB2YVcxaFoyVnpMMGt2TlRFdGJuQndVRmhtU1V3dVgxTk1NVFl3WHk1cWNHYz18MTc0MDQxODA5NA=)
- Katja Herbers, Mike Colter, Aasif Mandvi (Actors)
- Robert King (Director)
- Audience Rating: NR (Not Rated)
Last update on 2025-01-31 / Affiliate links / Images from Amazon Product Advertising API
Among a constant trail of failures, Leland lingers in the background as he puts pieces together for his master plan. We don’t see the full scope of his vision yet, but the suspense it builds for future episodes earns its place. I’m interested to see how these plots will evolve, even if Leland’s luck seems to turn sour. Perhaps it’s because of this dynamic that the tension works so effectively.
With a shocking moment tied into this episode, “The Demon of Parenthood” creates one of the more haunting episodes. However, the greatest accomplishment in the episode is what it establishes for the future of the series. While not all these points follow through by the end of Evil, it’s still an episode that ripples across the show’s progression.
Tired Tropes and Triggers
Without diving into too many details, spousal abuse and murder occur in the episode. This abuse might indicate a demonic influence, but such points remain speculation.
A severed body part and some gore stand out in this episode. It hardly earns enough attention from fans of gory horror, but the squeamish should tread carefully toward the end.
What I Dislike about “The Demon of Parenthood”
Many dropped ideas seem genuinely interesting, building to some potential development that receives little payoff. Missing these opportunities will never feel satisfying. While some changes are understandable, it creates holes in the narrative. For example, Dr. Boggs’ dark seduction slows in pace, becoming implied or withheld from the audience soon after “The Demon of Parenthood.” These experiences often adapt the concept of evil that the show seeks to bring to life.
Sheryl’s compliance with Leland’s plan still seems underdeveloped as a concept, especially with how far she takes it in this episode. While later episodes add a different perspective, I can’t help but feel these are retcons or concepts not thoroughly thought out.
Final Thoughts
“The Demon of Parenthood” progresses the plot and delivers some genuinely haunting moments. While a retrospective assessment does note many missed opportunities, the episode stands up beyond these missed opportunities. 
(4.5 / 5)
Movies n TV
You’ll Have a Bloody Good Time with this Eternal (2004) Health Tip
When Raymond Pope’s wife disappears, he follows the trail. But each lead points him to the Eternal beauty of Elizabeth Kane.
Eternal (2004) is a horror thriller written and directed by Wilhelm Liebenberg and Federico Sanchez. This R-rated film stars Caroline Néron, Victoria Sanchez, Conrad Pla, and Ilona Elkin. As of this review, it is available for Amazon Prime members with renting options from Spectrum on Demand.
When Raymond Pope’s (Conrad Pla) wife disappears, he’s swept into the mystery of Elizabeth Kane (Caroline Néron). As his investigation becomes increasingly bizarre, bodies pile up and point to Raymond Pope. Will he clear his name, or will this bloody rampage drown him?
What I Like about Eternal
While all of the performances add to the film, Eternal thrives on the charisma and mystique of Caroline Néron’s Elizabeth. She enchants her targets, lowering their defenses until that final moment.
Conrad Pla’s Raymond Pope also requires a delicate approach to succeed. The sleazy and hypocritical detective seems genuinely concerned for his wife (at least initially) and sells that concern. While far from an easy character to root for, the audience understands him and the danger he faces.
There’s a heavy erotic thriller angle that Eternal delivers on. I’ll linger on this point in later sections, but it certainly knows how to build tension within a single scene or between characters. These moments don’t feel forced, and while they often target a male audience, interesting dynamics rise above general exploitative content, if only slightly.
This seems to be a passion project between the creators, Wilhelm Liebenberg and Federico Sanchez. This passion lingers in the moments to deliver something unique, if not without its flaws. The film doesn’t hold back, a point that fluctuates between negative and positive depending on the situation. Regardless, it holds a charm in that commitment that’s hard to replicate without passion behind the scenes.
Tired Tropes and Triggers
The film labels itself as “Inspired by True Events,” which only relates to the general discussion of Elizabeth Báthory. It’s also worth mentioning that, much like Vlad Dracula, her story remains heavily dominated by modern interpretations. I won’t pretend to hold exclusive knowledge of these historical figures, but cultural interpretation reduces realism. The claim means little to nothing.
The predatory queer trope applies to Eternal, with little complexity to challenge the point as the violence often targets women. It’s important to note that Elizabeth acts as a femme fatale in general, but the targets remain clear. However, this film did earn a moment of recognition from the Glitter Awards (a clip was used in 2006), which might suggest the standout performance of Caroline Néron’s Elizabeth earns back some goodwill.
What I Dislike about Eternal
The erotic thriller holds a stigma that Eternal doesn’t challenge. Elizabeth remains a clear femme fatale with a slightly supernatural twist. While the performance executes this character perfectly, viewers likely know if this remains an interest or a tired cliche for themselves.
While most of Raymond’s acts make sense for the character, I hold issue with the end. Without going into too many details, he is asked to do one thing to protect himself and does the opposite for no reason. Perhaps this indicates supernatural influence, but such a claim lingers in headcanon.
The film ends ambiguously, which hardly seems fitting given the evidence and weakens the overall film. A definitive ending, or something moderately more definitive, would strengthen Eternal.
Final Thoughts
Eternal’s major obstacle in executing its erotic thriller is that of tired tropes in the modern era. If one looks past these dated points, there’s a haunting thriller that can meet moments of excellence. The plot falls short in many areas towards the end of the film. Ultimately, if a vampire-esque thriller interests you, Eternal certainly adds its perception to the niche but in a familiar form.
(3.5 / 5)
