Connect with us

Published

on

Practically speaking, Mick Jackson’s Threads is not a horror movie, but many (including myself) would say it’s at least on the outskirts of the genre. While many remember the Cold War as a series of scares and propaganda triumphs (such as the fall of the Berlin Wall), “Threads” reminds us what an apocalyptic hellscape would be like. And, although the movie is dark and depressing, it’s also oddly refreshing to see an apocalyptic scenario without things like zombies, cyborgs, vampires, or god knows what else, making it a bit more “fun” for viewers. I think sometimes we need to get a glimpse of horror without the silly tropes (though let’s be real, some aspects of films even like The People Under the Stairs actually could happen, as unseemly as they appear).

Now, obviously, real life is also letting us view such scenarios, with Russia’s current attack on Ukraine, as well as other wars and assorted hellscapes created over the years (in the name of progress, freedom, and peace). So reality itself is reminding us what horror looks like, too, and it feels a bit odd talking about a film being scary when you can already see horrifying scenes on the news. So, with this kind of factual backdrop, how can one view a movie like Threads?

Does it merely distract from real issues, as we might accuse sillier films of doing? Is it even appropriate to focus attention on fictional depictions of deadly attacks, or is it a pathetic distraction? Personally, I think these are odd, specialized issues that pop culture writers don’t often seem to address, and I hope to be a bit sensitive to them as I proceed (though not so over-sensitive that I completely de-value powerful films such as these).

What “Threads” Can Tell Us About Today’s World

Honestly, Threads is one of those movies that I didn’t feel as much as I perhaps should have, and I don’t think I can fully convey why. Perhaps more horrifying than the movie is the fact that, for the most part, it didn’t really move me. I know it has impacted others, and they recount it as being among the scariest movies they have seen. However, it just didn’t rile me up or have me recoiled in fear. That’s when I realized I was simply feeling jaded with a lot of these apocalyptic scenarios. I was desensitized.

Advertisement

Now, obviously, that makes my intake of TV shows and films look bad, but I actually still think those would be a scapegoat. I also generally don’t feel comfortable pinning so much blame on the arts and entertainment. After all, a movie like Threads never really invented the problems it depicts. It only highlights them. The fact that I felt jaded likely has more to do with the broader life circumstances.

As I watched Threads, I am guessing I was thinking, “Well, we won’t be able to entertain or talk our way out of this situation.” And that is exactly the problem with authoritarianism and the dangers of nuclear weapons. After so many decades of being bombarded with all of this pro-war propaganda and artificially inflated scandals, it only makes sense to hit the snooze alarm every so often. At the very least, the non-stop panic alarm gets old, annoying, clichéd, and possibly even stops serving its purpose anymore, much like a car alarm that people ignore. Rather than spring to the vehicle or the motorists’ aid, many think “Man, that’s annoying!”

The Good Things About “Threads”

If you can’t tell, this is by no means a conventional movie review. In fact, I’ll merely mention the main actors’ names here: Karen Meagher, Reece Dinsdale, and David Brierly. That name-dropping out of the way, I might as well discuss some aspects of Threads that I remember appreciating. To begin with, I appreciate that the main characters are all quite detached from the political aspects of nuclear conflagration. There is a confluence of forces that they have little control over, do not fully understand, and wish to ignore. And who could blame them?

Also, in an odd sort of way, I felt out of place watching the whole thing. I live in (and, to some extent, with) the United States, not Britain. So there was already some comfortable distance between myself and the characters and events immediately depicted in the film. However, one thing becomes crystal clear: The social or political positions of the characters would no longer matter after the nuclear bombs go off.

That’s very similar to how it would be in the United States. There would be reduced interest in “Red States” vs. “Blue States” or petty debates in Washington. Would the Central Intelligence Agency even matter, by a certain point, if the mushroom clouds were large enough? And, on that note, if you watch Threads, I urge you to also watch real footage of various nuclear tests, maybe try to remember the cute little codenames. Also, remember how childish the arms race was, with the USSR’s launch of Sputnik inspiring the US to intensify its own efforts to build up its war technology. Also, it should be mentioned that a nuclear attack on the Soviet Union would have been just as devastating as one inflicted by them.

Advertisement

Could a Nuclear Conflagration Lead to Fun?

Obviously, we may look back upon the Cold War “for historical reasons”, but that’s not all. We can still find some relic ideas from that era prominently displayed today. But, again, it’s fortunate that “Threads” dared to strip out the entertainment aspects, just leaving us with the horror. Obviously, a spy aspect would prove attractive to filmmakers and moviegoers, but not every movie or TV show has to be attractive, and not everything should.

That being said, there’s still nothing wrong with looking at art that makes the apocalypse more palatable. After all, humor would become a struggle once such an event occurs…and that pretty much does seem inevitable at some point. But by all means, if the proverbial phoenix can occasionally rise from the nuclear ashes and wink at the camera, we might as well let it. Tragicomedy has its place, too.

What are your thoughts on Threads? Let us know in the comments!

Advertisement

Movies n TV

Returning to the Soothing World of Evil with “The Demon of Death”

“The Demon of Death” is the season 3 premiere of the supernatural drama Evil, created by Michelle King and Robert King.

Published

on

“The Demon of Death” is the season 3 premiere 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. 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.

Evil written in bold, a snake reaches for an apple. Beneath reads Season 3
Evil Season 3 Cover

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.

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

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.

A nun looks down at a therapist who lays on his back. The room suggests a therapists office with certifications lined up on the wall.
A Nun and a Therapist Discuss Certainty

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 out of 5 stars (3 / 5)

Continue Reading

Movies n TV

Rare Exports, a Magical Christmas Horror Movie Mess

Published

on

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.

Santa Claus is coming to town.

Advertisement
Peeter Jakobi in Rare Exports.

What worked

Some movies need to make sense. Some don’t. Rare Exports is one of the latter.

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?

Onni Tommila in Rare Exports.

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.

Advertisement

4 out of 5 stars (4 / 5)

Continue Reading

Movies n TV

Christmas Crime Story, A Nonsensical Holiday Romp

Published

on

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.

Scott Bailey in Christmas Crime Story.

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.

Eric Close in Christmas Crime Story.

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.

2 out of 5 stars (2 / 5)

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Trending