Look, if you offer me a movie that features the involvement of John Carpenter in some capacity I am already in. I’ve seen virtually all of his movies and of course I’ve seen In the Mouth of Madness and absolutely loved it. It feels strange to review a film I love, but you can love something and view it critically.
So, while I have a soft spot for In the Mouth of Madness it’s also not my favorite of Carpenter’s films. That’s okay. Even not-so-great Carpenter can be pretty great. With the exception of Ghosts of Mars (2001), of course.
You can currently stream In the Mouth of Madness on Shudder.
“Do you read Sutter Cane?”
Part of the appeal of the film is the Lovecraftian nature of it all. The film, written by Michael De Luca (The Lawnmower Man (short), Freddy’s Dead: The Final Nightmare), borrows heavily from Lovecraft’s canon. Interestingly, though, Carpenter did not sign on to direct the film right away, only signing on after Tony Randel (Hellbound: Hellraiser II) dropped out. Carpenter taking on directorial duties makes a lot of sense given the Lovecraftian nature of The Thing (1981).
The film picked up the fantastic Sam Neill as a lead, just shortly after the release of Jurassic Park. Also rounding out the cast are Julie Carmen, Charlton Heston, David Warner, and Jürgen Prochnow as Sutter Cane. The film also has a young Hayden Christensen, before he murdered all those younglings.
The film, like several of Lovecraft’s own stories, is a framed flashback depicting one man’s encounters with unknown powers that drive humanity mad. In the Mouth of Madness follows John Trent, an insurance investigator, his hired to investigate the disappearance of mega-author Sutter Cane and tracking down his next manuscript. As these things go, Trent uncovers twisting and terrifying secrets about Cane and his work.
What Worked About In the Mouth of Madness?
I already have my Halloween costume for next year planned out.
Sam Neill’s John Trent is an unlikable dick of a protagonist and it totally works. He’s not a sympathetic figure despite his traumatic experiences. Much like Lovecraft’s own protagonists, he’s smug, insufferable, and ultimately doomed. Neill ultimately carries the film with sheer unlikability and to see him fall to inevitable madness is a joy.
The film, when Sutter Cane (Jürgen Prochnow) finally appears, really clicks. Ultimately this is not until a good portion of the way through the movie, meaning that the first 40 minutes or so feel a bit scattered. Prochnow’s Cane makes for a fun, albeit limited menace in the runtime and inspires some fun reveals. He doesn’t really figure into the film for the duration, however.
The film’s strength ultimately lies in an exploration of perception and the altering of reality. The exploration of this, however, is limited to the second half of the film. Some of the ways this is accomplished are fantastic, others slightly less.
Had the film not dabbled too much into setting up Hobb’s End, then perhaps there would have been more horrifying scenes of reality-warping. It is commendable that the film manages to evoke so much anxiety in the amount of time it explores these themes.
What Did Not Work About In the Mouth of Madness?
Children: Always creepy, not always relevant.
In The Mouth of Madness throws together a lot of ideas and repeated images, but ultimately many of these elements fail to add to a cohesive whole. What the film is showing is snippets of different Sutter Cane stories, but few of these images amount to much. The church, the children, the owner of the inn and her chained-up husband, and the paperboy. They’re all elements of Cane’s writing creating a reality but they just create strange, albeit effective images that just create strangeness for ultimately strangeness’ sake.
Granted, it’s a film directed by John Carpenter and all this strangeness is executed well, visually. There are some genuinely creepy sights and scenarios, for sure. But it just ultimately feels like a series of distractions. The film tries to establish the wide body of work of Sutter Cane becoming reality, but it comes up short. The film really doesn’t take off until Sutter Cane actually appears and begins affecting reality around John.
Final Verdict
As a fan who enjoys the film, the director, and the Lovecraftian themes I can still recognize there are some fairly substantial flaws with In the Mouth of Madness. Carpenter’s direction and sense of macabre are on-point, but the film feels too scattered and wanders too much.
This is a film where the last half is what you’ll end up enjoying most, especially given the absolutely stellar acting of Sam Neill.
(3.5 / 5)
Are you a fan of In the Mouth of Madness? Do you agree with this assessment? Let us know in the comments.
All I can say is I love In The Mouth of Madness in the way that I’ll always watch it when it pops up on tv, but a few months later, don’t ask for a plot synapsis.
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.
Mindscape Cover of Anna (2013)
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.
Disclaimer Kimberley Web Design
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.
Mark Strong as John
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)
“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.
Evil Season 3 Cover
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.
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.
Disclaimer Kimberley Web Design
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.
Horrible Realizations at Night
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)
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?
Eternal Poster
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.
Disclaimer Kimberley Web Design
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.
Elizabeth (Caroline Néron) and Irina (Victoria Sanchez) Drink Wine and Plot Crime
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)
E V
March 20, 2020 at 2:51 am
All I can say is I love In The Mouth of Madness in the way that I’ll always watch it when it pops up on tv, but a few months later, don’t ask for a plot synapsis.