Connect with us

Published

on

Believe it or not, I don’t like writing bad reviews much, but what can I say? Wes Craven’s Scream 3 is disappointing. Putting aside a certain character’s hair in the movie, let’s look at some problems it has, be they large or small.

Yes, Ghostface is back to kill again, which is to be expected. The usual question will emerge: Who is the killer? We’re also supposed to wonder about the motive. As these sequels pile up, those questions get harder to even ask, and suspension of disbelief becomes more of a looming presence. After all, just how many times can Sidney Prescott (Neve Campbell) be targeted as part of a mass murder campaign, by various assailants, all for related-yet-different reasons? Also, how many times can these plots still involve Dewey (David Arquette) and Gale Weathers (Courteney Cox), and Cotton Weary (Liev Schreiber)?

Unfortunately, Scream 3 doesn’t successfully address all of these concerns. Basically, I had a harder time suspending disbelief and just enjoying the movie. Granted, you can tell they tried to make it work, but it was becoming a tired formula by this point.

The simple reality is, ideas tend to get old after a while. For example, back when Squeaky Fromme attempted to assassinate President Gerald Ford, it was probably more shocking in 1975. Nowadays, though, people are so jaded by shootings that they almost shrug them off at this point. At a certain point, it’s almost unfair to expect people to stay in perpetual shock over tragedies. A similar dynamic holds true for this movie.

Advertisement

Ghostface

Like all Scream movies, part 3 has to reveal Ghostface, then “expose him” at some point. Yes, he introduces himself in an interesting way, as we see he can alter his voice to seemingly match any character he wants. That is sort of a cool ability. However, it’s truly one of the few elements to the mystery that kept my attention. Other than that, the characters seem oddly almost disinterested in the events surrounding them. Could it be they’re written to be too far in on the joke?

Self-Awareness Stretching Thin?

Wes Craven’s original Scream helped rejuvenate modern horror, partly by giving us the self-aware horror movie. While it was never my favorite franchise, I can respect damn near anything for being influential. Also innovative: Ghostface almost has this vibe of the “Anti-Hero” of slasher villains. There’s something “underdog-like” about him, and at no point will the average viewer see him as a near-invincible killer like Freddy, Jason or Michael Myers. It makes the movie seem more real, and we may even identify with the killer more (as freaky as that sounds).

Scream also made fun of itself. The other characters are almost self-aware “stock” characters. For example, Dewey Riley seems like a bit of an everyman, and an underachieving cop. while Gale Weathers is the self-serving, roving reporter. All of the other characters are there to supplement what kids now call “tropes,” and we recover from these elements understanding this idea was somewhat innovative at the time. We are also in on the joke. That can work once, maybe twice, but it can easily be stretched thin as a concept. Scream 3 just seems like a movie that didn’t need to happen. It has nothing new to say.

More Reasons it Falls Short

Sid walks into the movie at various points, characters angrily confront somebody, they fight Ghostface, and that about sums up the whole affair. Like in the original Scream, there are sordid details about Sidney’s mother and father, and, again, we’re supposed to believe that this would result in numerous murder rampages. Unlike, say, Wes Craven’s New Nightmare, where the killer emerges from a nightmare world into reality, Ghostface somehow keeps emerging from long-buried sexual dalliances, to oddly hold people accountable for them who really were not involved. That becomes a very odd pattern, especially if you really try to piece it together.

However, if you don’t even care about the truth behind the murders, Scream 3 has basically failed to do its job. That would describe my experience with this movie. It was not more disturbing than the original two, nor more fun. In fact, there’s another odd factor here which takes away the suspense: There’s never a sense that Sidney can’t solve the mystery and crimes in time to save her life. There’s little tension.

Advertisement

I Don’t Remember Any of the Kills

Here’s the critique that’ll really hurt overall fans of the Scream franchise. I don’t remember any kills from Scream 3 very well, and I just watched it. That’s unfortunate because let’s face it: That’s one of the few elements that might have helped saved the movie. I’m a bit puzzled as to why there aren’t more creative, messed up kills here.

For example, how about someone gets her eyes ripped out and stuffed in her bra? It’s a terrible, shocking idea, and the suggestion might’ve resulted in protesters at screenings…but would it have been a memorable scene? Yes! I feel messed up for suggesting it, but scenes like those are what put Giallo movies on the map. Some of those movies are genuinely on the shitty side, but we remember them because of their creepy, innovative, outright offensive and outlandish kills.

My Theory On Why Scream 3 Falls Short

I could take heat for suggesting this, but I think Wes Craven wasn’t so much about shocks anymore near the end of his life. In fact, there’s a sense he might’ve been bored with the horror genre, like he may have felt confined to it. I can understand that. Sure, I think it’s fun to see an obnoxious character’s hand in a blender or have them get mauled by a mountain lion, or what have you, but I don’t watch horror exclusively, either. If your heart’s just not in it, it’ll probably be reflected in the movie.

Maybe I shouldn’t say the movie is a failure, but it falls a little short. In terms of its action, an element I like is the “hunter becomes the hunted” dynamic, where Sidney is basically running after Ghostface at times. Still, that’s not a unique “survivor girl” fare. The only other element that’s striking is when characters stumble upon a secret door, which makes it so much more “Scooby-Doo” (though no one in Scooby-Doo was ever dismembered, or even drenched in blood).

Beyond that, most of “Scream 3” is about Sidney Prescott being oddly attached to her mother’s (real or imagined) shortcomings. In the movie, she even works as a crisis worker, talking people out of suicidal thoughts and behaviors. That was sort of a nice angle. However, it also wasn’t enough to sustain my interest in this movie. Why did I write so much about it then? Because Wes Craven was so good that even his lesser movies tend to make me think.

Advertisement

What are your thoughts on Scream 3? Am I being too brutal on it? Scream at me in the comments!

Continue Reading
Advertisement
2 Comments

2 Comments

  1. Nicole Luttrell

    July 15, 2020 at 12:00 pm

    You are not wrong! The only good part was the first ten minutes, because Liev Shriber was in it. After that you can turn the movie off.

    • Wade Wainio

      July 15, 2020 at 12:12 pm

      Like I said, they could’ve at least partly salvaged it with interesting, shocking kills. I even watched a video of all the kills to make sure I wasn’t missing something…turns out I was right to say they weren’t interesting, either.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Movies n TV

Wicked City (1987), a Film Review

Wicked City (1987) is a dark fantasy horror animation following a world at the brink of war as mortals and supernatural being clash.

Published

on

Wicked City (1987) is a dark fantasy horror and the debut feature-length animation of director Yoshiaki Kawajiri. This unrated film adapts the first novel of the Wicked City series, Black Guard. It stars Yûsaku Yara, Toshiko Fujita and Ichirô Nagai. As of this review, Wicked City is available on Prime and Crunchyroll.

As the peace between the mortal and supernatural worlds ends, forces clash in a plot to establish a new order. Tasked with protecting the best chance for peace, Taki (Yûsaku Yara) must guard Giuseppe Mayart (Ichirô Nagai). A Black Worlder named Makie (Toshiko Fujita) remains his partner in this pursuit. Can the three brave the challenges and establish a world of peace?

A woman looks at a man. Behind them looks misty and the conversation seems personal
Makie and Taki

What I Like about Wicked City

Wicked City works best in its parts, providing strong and interesting elements that don’t inherently add up to the whole. The art style and design evoke a memorable aesthetic. There’s a charm to this 80s-era anime that creates either an environment for abominations or spectacles.

It makes sense that Wicked City is an adaptation because the plot depicted seems like parts of a larger narrative we do not see in the film. From what remains, the world and political scheming seem worth exploring. Unfortunately, little of this plot receives depth.

Prior to this, Yoshiaki Kawajiri contributed to many TV shows, exercising a new muscle as he directed a film-length work. He seems invaluable on a team, as his filmography and success indicate, but his directorial contributions don’t seem as critically successful. This effort and work best express themselves in the level of animation and scenes depicted in this flawed film.

Advertisement

Despite the missing pieces throughout the film, the ending seems complete. While there’s clearly room for a sequel, Wicked City tells its story and suggests an answer to the new era’s direction.

Supposedly, this started out as a short film, but Yoshiaki Kawajiri’s execution earned enough attention and respect to get a green light for a feature-length film. This work was all done within a year. Assuming this is true, Wicked City’s completion and animation quality deserve respect.

It received a live-action adaptation. From my understanding, the film adapts the anime, but I hope and imagine some of the manga gets explored to make a more functioning plot.

White background, rubber stamp with disclaimer pressed against the white background.
Disclaimer Kimberley Web Design

Tired Tropes and Triggers

Sexual assault and rape remain grotesquely overused in the film. Such subject matter has a place in art, but its use in Wicked City gravitates more toward exploitation and spectacle. Many of the visual designs make most of the fight allegories for sexual assault atop the actual assaults.

As most creatures are organic, there’s a heightened amount of body horror. There’s a level of separation in animation as opposed to live-action body horror, but this point certainly applies to those sensitive to such material.

From what we learn of the characters, many decisions directly contradict their supposed purpose.

Advertisement
The Wicked City written over a black background. Beside the film cover is a woman with her bare and cracked arm exposed. Beside her is a man and some colorful creatures.
Wicked City Live Action Cover

What I Dislike about Wicked City 

Wicked City circles forums and rank-listings as a cult classic or niche horror, but it’s flawed in almost every way. Ideally, such works might have a plot that draws one in. Wicked City has a concept of a plot that evokes interest but doesn’t communicate it well or explore its depths. Ultimately, it’s a film made up of its parts. The good gets outweighed by the dysfunctional points.

Frankly, the romantic tension between the two leads is underdeveloped. I hesitate to say it doesn’t exist because there’s some work implemented with this in mind. Viewers note the work in the film, but it lacks polish or sensibility.

Final Thoughts

Wicked City is a flawed work from a successful animator. If given more time to develop, perhaps a staple of the 80s might exist. Unfortunately, the film has merits in its parts but falls in connection to the whole. However, for those who can overlook the limitations and exploitations, there are many worthy parts that excel in terms of animation quality and creative decisions.
2 out of 5 stars (2 / 5)

Continue Reading

Movies n TV

Late Night with The Devil

Published

on

Released in 2023, Late Night with the Devil is a found-footage movie about a late-night host who’d do anything to have the top-rated show.

Don’t worry, it’s not about Jay Leno.

The story

Our story begins, as many found footage films do, with a quick explanation. What we are going to see is the surviving footage from the last episode of a late-night show, along with some never-before-seen footage of backstage during the fateful night everything went wrong.

We then meet Jack Delroy. He’s a late-night host of the show Night Owls. And a year after the death of his beloved wife, he worries that his show is going to be canceled. The ratings are freefalling. So, on Halloween, he invites a girl named Lilly on the show who claims to be possessed.

Advertisement

Because that’s going to go well.

David Dastmalchian in Late Night with The Devil.

The show begins with a monolog, like most late-night shows. We then meet the first two guests, a claimed psychic named Christou and a stage magician slash skeptic named Carmichael Haig. After hot-reading the audience, Christou appears to have a real psychic vision. One that involves Jack’s deceased wife. He then proceeds to vomit black sludge all over the stage.

You’d think that would be the end of things. It would be stupid to still bring on the possessed girl after a warning like that.

But, of course, the show must go on.

What worked

Late Night with The Devil dedicated itself to the found footage vibe. As such, it felt very much like you were watching something from the 70s. The whole movie is at a lower, grainy resolution, unlike some other horror films that eventually and subtly switch out for a more modern and clear picture. The clothes, the music, the cheap and cheesy costumes. It all reminds one of a good episode of the Brady Bunch or Bewitched. Even when someone’s puking black blood or has worms pouring out of their freshly opened gut.

Advertisement

I was also quite impressed by the acting in this film. Especially that of David Dastmalchian, who played Jack Delroy. This role was performed to perfection. Jack manages to come off as a kind, compassionate man. The sort of person you’d be comfortable talking to, even about the most horrible moments of your life. You get the feeling that you could tell him about the worst moments of your life and he’d thank you for sharing.

This kind facade never slips. But we also see his true motivations. He doesn’t care about anyone, no matter how kind he acts. The show must go on is his entire drive and mission. He didn’t let a little thing like a guest dying stop him. Or a mental breakdown on stage. Or even his dead wife calling to him from beyond the grave.

The show must go on. And on, and on.

Even Dastmalchian is outshined, however, by Ingrid Torelli who played Lilly.

Lilly was a creepy character from the first time we saw her. There is something so unnerving about a child who knows far more than they should. This is a hallmark of demon possession films, all the way back to Reagan. But there’s also something else about the way she behaves that has little to do with the possession. She is always looking to either June or Jack for direction. As much as she speaks to the adults like she knows one, she is still always looking to please the adults around her. She is eager to look at the right camera at the right moment. She is eager to be obedient. It’s hidden, but for someone who has seen enough cult content, it’s easy to spot. She played a former cult victim very well. And that was perhaps the most terrifying part of that character.

Advertisement
Laura Gordon and Ingrid Torelli in Late Night with The Devil.

What didn’t work

This was almost a perfect movie. Then, like so many others, it just couldn’t stick the landing.

Near the end of the film, there is a strange scene that doesn’t seem to mesh with the rest of it. It appears to be a collection of Jack’s memories. Whether they are true memories or not is left to our interpretation. But they explain the entire reveal of the whole movie. In dull, excruciating detail.

This series of scenes was insulting. It was the equivalent of asking someone if they got the joke. But are you sure you got it? Wait, let me explain it and really just kill the effect altogether.

We were already laughing. Or, to step away from this metaphor, we were already creeped out. We were already grossed out. We were already living in the scene, sitting in the audience right next to the lady who lost her son or the man dressed as a skeleton. Rather than explain the twist, which didn’t need explaining, this scene pulls us rudely out of that audience and deposits us back in the real world.

All that being said, Late Night with The Devil is still a terrific horror film. It was dark, it was gorey, and it left us with unsettling questions even after the ill-planned info dump. If it isn’t already on your Halloween watch list, it certainly deserves a spot.

Advertisement

4 out of 5 stars (4 / 5)

Continue Reading

Movies n TV

“B is for Brain” (Evil: S2E8)

“B is for Brain” is an episode of the supernatural drama Evil. The assessors investigate new brain mapping research.

Published

on

“B is for Brain” is an episode of the supernatural drama 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. It originally aired under CBS before moving to Paramount+. As of this review, it’s available through Netflix and Paramount+ and its add-ons.

The assessors investigate new brain mapping research that might expose others to God and Hell. Kristen (Katja Herbers) struggles with aggression as Andy (Patrick Brammall) returns from his expedition. Ben (Aasif Mandvi) struggles with what he sees while in the brain mapping process. David (Mike Colter) returns to the basics to find God.

Ben (Aasif Mandvi) strapped into a strange device on his head. He holds his thumbs up.
Ben Tries out the Brain Mapping

What I Like about “B is for Brain”

“B is for Brain” provides a unique opportunity for viewers to gain more insight into Ben’s past. While not his episode, as “B is for Brain” balances the leads nearly perfectly, he has his most emotional moment in the series so far. Despite the lower stakes, it provides a more vulnerable moment than “E is for Elevator.”

Leland (Michael Emerson) and Sister Andrea (Andrea Martin) meet again on more equal terms and establish their hostile relationship. Sister Andrea proves herself to be a woman who doesn’t back down when a Satanist tries to intimidate her. It also raises the necessity of David’s training, creating a more tangible threat.

Kristen’s deteriorating relationship with Andy reaches a boiling point as her impulsiveness and hostility reach new heights. It seems her sabbatical to the monastery might have increased the evil influences. “B is for Brain” builds upon what “S is for Silence” introduces and creates an interesting interpretation of the last episode’s events.

Advertisement

“B is for Brain” brings a new dynamic to its horror by focusing on how technology, science, and religion intersect. There’s an incredibly diabolical conversation on how this technology could induce fear to empower religion. This idea evokes a more subtle horror than most episodes.

White background, rubber stamp with disclaimer pressed against the white background.
Disclaimer Kimberley Web Design

Tired Tropes and Triggers

There is a potential nay-theist trope. By that, I mean there’s a single line where one can interpret an atheist character turned from God because God turned from them. It’s a single line that remains interpretable, but it’s worth mentioning.

There’s a moment of self-harm with clear implications that this is a pattern with the specific character. This harm has some implication of demonic influence, but this remains unconfirmed at the moment. I will mention this becomes more obvious as the season continues.

A man holds out a jar and a nun holds out a knife
A Satanist and a Nun have a Conversation

What I Dislike about “B is for Brain”

Unfortunately, such a big reveal for Ben’s character doesn’t have time to get fully explored in “B is for Brain.” While the focus between the three is great, a few big reveals only earn a light address. It’s less that Ben doesn’t get a fair amount of attention and more that these subjects don’t receive that attention.

A similar point remains relevant about the claim of using brain mapping as a way of evoking religious conversion. That point merits interrogation from the characters and the plot, but it’s only lightly touched on. Further expanding these points is that there’s only light reference in the future specifically about brain mapping.

Final Thoughts

“B is for Brain” gets placed into two memorable episodes, diminishing its lasting power. While not a fault of the episode, it does overlook some potentially big reveals. Some of the more relevant character moments will receive the attention they deserve in later episodes, but it doesn’t aid “B is for Brain” in execution. While a strong and enjoyable episode, diving into those moments might have created an episode that haunts the viewer.
3 out of 5 stars (3 / 5)

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Trending