With Pearl, director and writer Ti West managed to create a duology of horror films loved by critics and audiences. However, does this second film in a soon-to-be trilogy stand on its own? Or do the expectations of being a prequel derail it? Does Pearl prove a worthy successor to X?
As someone who is a fan of Ti West, I can answer that simply; Horror fans feast this year. Pearl is a movie that will stick with you long after the upsetting credits sequence.
Pearl (2022)
Director and writer Ti West (House of the Devil) strikes horror gold twice in one year in his X follow-up, Pearl. Pearl is a gothic slasher film that serves as a prequel to X. The movie explores the life of a younger Pearl, X‘s murderous biddy, against the 1918 outbreak of Spanish Influenza and the first World War. Pearl struggles with her desire to leave the family farm and be a star. She is under the thumb of her domineering german mother, infirm father, and has a husband who is off fighting in Europe. However, Pearl’s life may take a turn through a meeting with a film projectionist and news of an audition for dancers.
The film stars Mia Goth (Suspiria), who co-wrote the film’s concept with Ti West during the production of X as the coronavirus outbreaks was in full swing, as she reprises the role of Pearl from X with significantly less make-up. The film also stars David Corenswet, Tandi Wright, Matthew Sunderland, Emma Jenkins-Purro, and Allistair Sewell.
What worked with Pearl?
There is a lot to love about Pearl, and in many ways, the prequel is more surprisingly ambitious than X. Pearl, at its best, functions as a companion to X, not necessarily as a prequel that establishes story elements, but rather in themes. That is not to say the film is overly beholden to what came before it, either. The film cleverly evokes the pandemic-era anxiety with the historical Spanish Flu and weaves a pandemic into the story that feels modern but does not overwhelm the rest of the film. The film rhymes with its predecessor in several ways, such as attitudes toward sexuality and pornography, ambition and violent escapism, and even down instances of dialogue. Like Ti West’s earlier collaboration with Mia Goth this year, the film has that x-factor.
“The X-Factor”
Speaking of Mia Goth. Goth is delightful in X as an elderly Pearl and Maxine Minx. However, the way she is unleashed as the young Pearl in this movie is one of the most impressive performances I have seen in a film this year and maybe in the past few years. She is frightening, ambitious, beautiful, terrifying, tragic, charming throughout, and utterly carrying the film. That is not to say that the other performers do not pull their weight, but compared to the role of Pearl, there isn’t as much to do, and they’re better off standing out of the crossfire as Mia Goth decimates the audience. A five to six-minute monologue in the film’s climax featuring Pearl laying bare her sickness and sadness floored my wife and me.
Advertisement
Pearl is also a visually stunning film, down to the technicolor-era trappings of title cards and supernaturally bright colors. Ti West knows his way around a camera, and Eliot Rockett’s cinematography provides a beautiful combination of old-Hollywood visual language with some of Ti West’s usual bag of tricks and some of his go-to editing techniques. Zooms, in particular, carry a terrifying power in this film.
The sumptuousness of the color also works well with the film’s period details, such as costuming and the music by Tyler Bates and Tim Williams. Horror films can sometimes appear overly dark or dingy, but Pearl avoids this by embracing a look of old Hollywood just as X embraced a grind-house grit.
What didn’t work with Pearl?
As much as I loved Pearl, two things temper my appreciation. I think the film filling the role of a prequel to X does it a slight disservice and results in some minor problems. As a prequel to X, the film must line up Pearl’s story with the Pearl of the 1970s. It can be rough stitching at times. For the most part, the film is a success and rhymes with its technical sequel, but other times the threads and loose and frayed. Namely the role of Howard (Alistair Sewell) in the events that are to come in Pearl’s future.
Also, because there was an alligator in X, there must be one in Pearl. These kinds of checklist moments are acceptable, but something I feel also limited the film a bit compared to X. X succeeded in surprising me in some ways that Pearl simply could not because it is a prequel.
Secondly, my other criticism of the film is that Mia Goth’s Pearl so thoroughly devours it that it misses opportunities to explore the surrounding characters. In many ways, the movie sacrifices the extended cast on the altar of Pearl at the expense of a richer characterization. My complaints most derive from two characters: The Projectionist (David Corenswet) and Ruth (Tandi Wright), in that we get some tantalizing glimpses into deeper, richer characters. Frustratingly, these developments are cut short, so the characters suffer for it. Particularly the stern Ruth, whose story seems to run as deep and intertwined with Pearl’s, we do not get to explore. It is less so for The Projectionist, but his scenes reveal an interesting thematic connection to X. I would have loved to see that expanded.
Final Verdict on Pearl (2022)
2022 is an excellent year for horror fans as Ti West has delivered two of the most substantial horror projects of the year in X and Pearl. Ti West’s latest film is wholly subsumed by the charisma and presence of Mia Goth. While some of the necessary but perfunctory prequel elements are admirably handled, the strain of working within the confines of future events can take its toll on the film.
(4 / 5)
Pearl is distributed by A24 and produced by Mad Solar Productions, Little Lamb, and Bron Studios. The film’s runtime is 102 minutes and can currently be seen in movie theaters.
Advertisement
We would love to hear your thoughts on the movie in the comments if you’ve seen Pearl. Enjoy the review? Check out our other horror reviews here on Haunted MTL.
Want more Pearl? (Sponsored)
Have you seen X (2022)? If not, consider picking up a blu-ray before you see Pearl in theaters. Use our special Amazon link to add to your movie collection and help support Haunted MTL.
“The Demon of Death” is the season 3 premiere of the supernatural dramaEvil, 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 the weight of a soul. Father Frank Ignatius (Wallace Shawn) agrees to participate in this test despite his growing disillusionment. David (Mike Colter) and Kristen (Katja Herbers) deal with the ramifications of their confessions. Kristen’s girls go on the warpath with Leland (Michael Emerson). Andy (Patrick Brammall) signs his death warrant.
What I Like about “The Demon of Death”
As season 2 ended with a cliffhanger, “The Demon of Death” picks back up with an interesting addition. The episode provides a more obvious stopping point that Season 2 should have taken advantage of. It dumbfounds me because this addition makes for a more interesting and darker cliffhanger. The added context would have made the cliffhanger more palatable. However, it’s a nice twist for the episode.
Dr. Boggs (Kurt Fuller) and Sister Andrea (Andrea Martin) make an interesting pair that adds complexity to both. We even explore some of Sister Andrea’s character flaws, best displayed by her interaction with Kristen in the next scene. Few wise sage characters that display flaws, making this addition appreciated.
Father Ignatius’ introduction adds layers of interest for a character who will play a recurring role, tying into Monsignor Korecki directly. The yet-to-be-explored relationship between Father Ignatius and Monsignor Korecki (Boris McGiver) evokes an interest.
Advertisement
While “The Demon of Death” isn’t a haunting episode, but explores the mysteries and terror of death through science to provide an interesting environment for an episode. It introduces a new character that adds to the cast.
Tired Tropes and Triggers
There’s not much to report here that particularly crosses the line and what teeters on the line holds a dark comedic tone.
Perhaps Sister Andrea’s flaw might rub some the wrong way, as it deals with her overwhelming faith. However, it’s a minor point at the moment. Again, I lean on liking some complexity for the wise sage archetype.
What I Dislike about “The Demon of Death”
“The Demon of Death” still plays it safe with its supernatural elements, but that does seem to be Evil’s standard. At this point of the series, it seems a strange restraint. However, the new normal remains functionally paranormal.
While the premiere starts with an interesting procedural plot, it doesn’t direct the season like prior premieres. This episode doesn’t deliver a massive refocus as season 2’s premiere, but that’s because its conclusion doesn’t deliver as focused of a direction. Regardless, “The Demon of Death” is still an episode that slips away despite its premiere status.
Ben (Aasif Mandvi) seems needlessly hostile as they investigate a soul’s potential weight. The study delivers a thorough scientific process, which makes his resistance linger on the “angry atheist” archetype.
The demon shown on screen certainly isn’t the demon of death the title suggests. While the plot revolves around the mystery of death, there is a demon with a more carnal domain. As future episodes dive into their respective demons, it does seem to be an inaccurate title. However, the demon of the episode will get further focus in a different episode.
Advertisement
Final Thoughts
“The Demon of Death” doesn’t stand out as a premiere but provides an interesting procedural episode. As Father Ignatius will become another key character in the series, giving him an entire episode to introduce him is a nice strategy. While it’s not a haunting episode, it still provides a level of camp with interesting characters to pull it off. (3 / 5)
Released in 2010, Rare Exports asks an important holiday question. One that no one else has dared to ask.
What if Santa was a ten-story-tall monster buried under the ice for centuries?
The story
Rare Exports is the story of a little boy named Pietari. After doing what is frankly too much research for a little boy, he realizes that Santa is not the jolly old elf we all think of. He is, in fact, a monster who eats bad children. And it turns out that Santa was trapped in the ice near Pietari’s little town. All this would be well and good if a Russian mining team weren’t in the process of cutting him out of the ice. So it’s up to Pietari to convince everyone of the dark, horrific truth.
Why were the Russians digging in the snow to find Santa? What was the plan there? What happened to Pietari’s mom? And who did they sell the elves to? Do the elves need air or water to live?
We don’t get answers to any of those questions. And frankly, we don’t need them to enjoy Rare Exports.
This is a wild story about a little boy who discovers that Santa is a mythical monster with a bunch of scrawny old men with big white beards to do his evil bidding and eats bad children who haven’t been beaten by their parents enough. What sort of explanation would help this story in any way?
I mean, we could pick apart why it’s suddenly legal to sell people, or at least mythical creatures that look like naked old men, or why this all happened right next to the only little kid who had the exact knowledge needed. But in the end, wouldn’t that be like asking how Santa gets into people’s homes when they don’t have fireplaces? Doesn’t that objective reasoning just piss on the Christmas magic?
Advertisement
What didn’t work
While Rare Exports was fun, there were parts that I did not appreciate. For one thing, there wasn’t a single woman or person of any color in this film. Literally not one. Not an extra, not in the background. This little Finnish town is populated entirely by white men. And yes, it is Finland and there isn’t a hugely diverse population. But it’s also 2010. People move. Also, women exist.
On the subject of seeing too many white men, we also saw too much of the white men. Specifically, we saw far too many old white male actors entirely nude. There was just no reason for this. These men were portraying elves. They didn’t have to be naked. If they were naked, they didn’t have to have, um, yule logs. Maybe elves are like Ken dolls. There were so many options that didn’t include so much old man wang.
Finally, I wish we’d seen Santa Claus. Not to spoil the ending, but he never actually emerges to attack anyone. And that feels like a cop-out. If we’re going to be teased the whole movie with this depiction of monster Santa, we should at least get to see monster Santa.
Though, after what they did with the elves, maybe it’s a blessing we didn’t see him.
In the end, Rare Exports was well worth watching. It was hilarious, creepy and bloody. And while it wasn’t perfect, it was a delightful holiday horror comedy.
Released in 2016, Christmas Crime Story is about a disastrous robbery on Christmas Eve, and all the many lives impacted by the selfish decisions of one person.
And then, suddenly, it isn’t. But we’ll get to that part.
The story
Christmas Crime Story is the tale of a Christmas Eve holdup gone wrong. We see the story from several points of view, starting with Chris, the detective first on the scene.
Chris is having a hard Christmas Eve. So, on his lunch break, he visits his mom at her diner. It appears that they have a contentious relationship. But nothing is solved in this quick visit.
Advertisement
Chris goes on to pull over a man speeding. When the man, named David, pulls over, Chris discovers something in the trunk. That something must have been pretty damn incriminating, because rather than open the trunk, David shoots him dead.
We then switch to David’s pov for the night. Then his girlfriend’s pov. Then, the man his girlfriend has been cheating on him with. And on and on we go, until we see how all of these different stories and people come together for a dark, sordid Christmas Eve.
What worked
The first thing I want to say about Christmas Crime Story is that it’s heartwarming. Like, to a fault, which we will be talking about.
The ending is very sweet, in a Christmasy sort of way. Families come together, people are filled with joy, and all is right in the world for almost everyone. Except for Lena, who deserves to have a bad Christmas, everyone gets a happy ending.
That brings me to my next point. The characters, mostly, are all deeply sympathetic. Even when David or James are killing people, you feel bad for them.
Advertisement
You don’t agree with what they’re doing, but you do feel bad.
You have to feel sympathetic for the man whose girlfriend hired a killer to merk him. Or the woman whose daughter has cancer. Or the guy who just can’t find work, even though he’s trying to make good decisions. You want things to work out for them. You want them to be okay. Even when they do terrible things.
Finally, I always love stories told from so many different points of view. It’s always fun to see a story unfold in a nonlinear way, but in a way that makes more and more sense as we get more points of view. It’s a hard thing to pull off, and I think Christmas Crime Story did it very well.
What didn’t work
Unfortunately, all of the sympathetic characters and clever storytelling methods in the world won’t save a story that doesn’t work. And Christmas Crime Story just does not work.
Let’s begin with the ending. The big twist near the end of the movie. I won’t spoil it, but you will for sure know it if you’ve seen the film. Or, if you waste your time watching the film.
Advertisement
As a rule, twists work when they make sense. Not when it feels like the writers threw up their hands and said, “Okay, but what if everything we just did for the last hour and fifteen minutes didn’t happen, and instead…”
This wasn’t clever. It wasn’t fun. It felt like the writers didn’t know how to end their movie and just decided to cheat.
Finally, I mentioned earlier that Christmas Crime Story was heartwarming. And yes, that is nice.
But is it maybe a little too heartwarming?
I mean, we have an adorable angel of a child with cancer. Her parents don’t have enough money for her treatment. We have two poor guys who are in love with a black-hearted woman. And we have a detective so sweet and kind that he makes you rethink ACAB. And, he’s about to get married to his pregnant girlfriend. And they’re naming the baby after his mom. And his name is literally Chris DeJesus. His mom’s name is Maggie DeJesus. I tried to think of a sillier less subtle name to use as a joke, and I literally couldn’t think of one.
Advertisement
They could have at least named him De La Cruz. That would be more subtle, and I still would have complained.
In the end, Christmas Crime Story just missed the mark. It came very close to being a good movie. But it focused too much on how it wanted you to feel, rather than telling a satisfying story that made sense. Much like that third glass of eggnog, it’s fun in the moment and regretful after. If you’re looking for a satisfying Christmas horror, I’d suggest looking elsewhere.
This website uses cookies to improve your experience. We'll assume you're ok with this, but you can opt-out if you wish. Cookie settingsACCEPT
Privacy & Cookies Policy
Privacy Overview
This website uses cookies to improve your experience while you navigate through the website. Out of these cookies, the cookies that are categorized as necessary are stored on your browser as they are essential for the working of basic functionalities of the website. We also use third-party cookies that help us analyze and understand how you use this website. These cookies will be stored in your browser only with your consent. You also have the option to opt-out of these cookies. But opting out of some of these cookies may have an effect on your browsing experience.
Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. This category only includes cookies that ensures basic functionalities and security features of the website. These cookies do not store any personal information.
Any cookies that may not be particularly necessary for the website to function and is used specifically to collect user personal data via analytics, ads, other embedded contents are termed as non-necessary cookies. It is mandatory to procure user consent prior to running these cookies on your website.