Film Reviews: Flesh is the New Black [Hellraiser, 2022]

 Hellraiser (2022)

[Reader disclaimer: there will be spoilers discussed. Please also be aware that this piece may contain material of a violent or graphic nature].

Curiously, despite the failure of the initial attempt to reboot campy, 80s slashers, it appears that we are in yet again another era of modernity dragging our horror classics kicking and screaming into the 20s - you'll recall, perhaps, that this was first attempted in the late noughties: the problem was that Friday the 13th (2009) and A Nightmare on Elm Street (2010) were, to put it politely, abysmal. 

Modern filmmakers lack a crucial ingredient to making these films shine again and that's having an element of camp and fun. So when I heard Hellraiser (1987) was getting a reboot, I was dubious: what makes the original film legendary (other than the spectacular performance from Doug Bradley) is the gooey gore, the angelic soundtrack, the iconic BDSM-inspired outfits that gave us a queer edge to otherwise evil characters. The whole point of Hellraiser is that pain and pleasure intertwine and become something otherly - that's wherein the horror derives.

So, Hellraiser (2022)...how does it compare?

Firstly, I'll note and praise the pros. Jamie Clayton as Pinhead (or known as The Priest in the film) is exquisite. She's strangely alluring, dangerous yet seductive and inquisitive: I'm not saying whether Clayton was better than Bradley, simply that she brought out a different side of the character that we haven't seen before, which I greatly appreciated. 

Following on from Pinhead, I have to acknowledge the other Cenobites (albeit they weren't given enough screentime, in my opinion): the new creatures from Hell come with a flurry of new, grotesquely beautiful designs, including The Gasp (who evidently looks like a mix and match of Deep Throat and Angelique, two iconic cenobites from the original series), The Masque (who may well be a nod to Face from the original books), The Weeper, The Asphyx and The Mother. This new variety of cenobites is definitely an exciting addition, however, some appear for merely seconds of screentime, which was disappointing. I'm surprised Clive Barker hasn't taken a note out of the Thir13een Ghosts (1999) book yet and created an anthology exploring Leviathan lore. 

The soundtrack is okay. Ben Lovett ended up including some of Christopher Young's original score, which I guess was an attempt at being a homage but ended up feeling like a cop-out. The practical effects were surprisingly great but we don't see the best parts of it being applied until the last five minutes of film time. 

And this leads us to the cons: I have absolutely no time for any of the main characters in this film. I did not care about protagonist Riley (played by Odessa A'zion) nor did I care about her resolve to free her gay brother from Hell after she accidentally sacrificed him to the cenobites. There's absolutely no chemistry between any characters, Riley is a scarily-accurate depiction of an addict but there's no sympathy in this writer's soul for her and she gets her comeuppance. If anything, I was annoyed she lives at the end because she says she's reformed and learnt to accept the death of her brother but absolutely none of the plot up until that point indicates this. Perhaps the only highlight of the end was Roland's (Goran Visnjic) transformation into the next cenobite - it felt ethereal and painful at the same time, which is what  this series is all about. 

I'm not saying this was a bad film. It just wasn't great and, at this point in the genre, I only expect greatness from a reboot of something this iconic. It's not as if these film companies only have a few years on their hands to come up with new concepts - Hellraiser premiered nearly 40 years ago. I want to see love in these reboots, a specific attention to detail and ideas that mesh with the original source material. If Nia DaCosta can do it, then surely bigger production companies can. 

Overall rating: 4/10

- K

Film Reviews: Don't Go Down To The Woods Today [Winnie the Pooh: Blood & Honey, 2023]

Winnie the Pooh: Blood & Honey (2023)

[Reader disclaimer: there will be spoilers discussed. This piece also contains material of a graphic nature].

I often find myself in the film section of my local supermarket, browsing the most atrocious-looking b-movies you've never heard of. And, even more often, I feel obligated to buy and review the most wretched ones, so we can at least laugh and say hey, someone watched it. 

Unfortunately for me, the recent addition to my ever-growing list of films was Winnie the Pooh: Blood & Honey (2023), a surprisingly gory little feature laced with the most misogyny I've seen in a horror since Terrifier 2 (2022): yes, the beloved A.A. Milne character from our childhoods has his own horror film and yes, it is as bad as you're imagining. 

We begin with a primitive rendition of the original lore - Christopher Robin with his furry friends in the 100 Acre Woods, playing and laughing like the stories before him...except these creatures aren't actually enchanted, whimsical animals. In fact, they're moreso like anthropomorphic monsters, simply described as "hybrids" (though we're only treated to Pooh and Piglet, so I have to assume the budget couldn't meet the demand for the entirety of the gang). 

After Robin grows up, he moves away to pursue a career and family, leaving Pooh Bear and friends to fend for themselves: sadly, they'd grown accustomed to handouts from their favourite human - with no food left and winter closing in, they resort to cannibalism and Eeyore is the first to kick the bucket. Eeyore got off lightly, really: at least he didn't have to sit through the rest of the non-sensical plot, if you can even call it that.

Fast forward to present day, Christopher Robin returns with his fiancee (Mary) to show her his childhood friends, only to discover that his little, pastoral haven has become a dingy, rundown, almost hick-coded campsite, wherein Piglet now likes to torture people and Pooh gorges himself on lube-like honey and blood. Mary gets her face smashed in, Robin is kidnapped and beaten with what appears to be Eeyore's dismembered tail and everything is terrible.

Surprisingly, Robin's fate is the b-plot of this movie: the main focus is on a group of women, who have come to a cottage near the woods as a getaway retreat, following the protagonist's recent ordeal with a stalker. I'd like to tell you that this group of women are driven, survivalist, empowered characters. I'd like to tell you that. Instead, we have a lesbian couple who have no chemistry, a 'nerd' archetype who puts Shelley Duvall's shrieking to shame and a few others who I honestly cannot remember the names of...which probably indicates just how memorable their characters are. 

As you have probably already guessed, the film dives into the massacre of all the female characters, killed off in gruesome ways one by one. The graphic depiction of women being slaughtered is not new to the genre but this film is arguably so sexist in its killings, as (spoiler alert) Christopher Robin is somehow the only one to survive the ordeal, despite being the catalyst for Pooh's cruel, vindictive nature in the first place.  

Despite its interesting premise, this film fails to deliver on all fronts: it's not nostalgic for fans, it's not entertaining for horror movie-goers, it's not even particularly interesting for people going in with no prior knowledge of the inhabitants of  the 100 Acre Woods. Perhaps this is one to stick on when you're absolutely blasted at the next Halloween party but even then, I don't think inebriation will save this one.

Overall rating: 3/10

- K

An Essential Film Guide for Baby Gays

 [Reader disclaimer: spoilers will be discussed. This piece also contains material of a sensitive nature].

Moonlight (2016)

If you're part of the LGBTQ+ community, then I'm sure you've heard the phrase 'baby gay' tossed around in conversation. And for those unfamiliar with the term, a 'baby gay' simply refers to a person of queer association whom is fresh out of the closet, ready to experience all parts of LGBTQ+ culture.

As a queer person myself, I had my baby gay phase. I attended my first Pride in 2012, spent hours in online safe spaces and, of course, watched a lot of gay films; queer cinema (in my opinion) is one of the best ways to initially immerse yourself in the culture. For lots of kids growing up in conservative households or strictly heteronormative environments, queer cinema not only provides representation but also a form of escapism for those unable to come out safely. 

When I began to live my life authentically, I didn't have anyone to teach me. So I hope this piece can be the essential guide for people, like me, who aren't sure where to start.

Gender

Orlando (1992)

Originally a novel by the iconic Virginia Woolf (a bisexual, feminist, pioneer of writing),  Orlando follows a nobleman from the 16th century who remains young forever, experiencing various different forms of love and gender. Orlando (played by the androgynous Tilda Swinton) begins the film as a man but transforms into a woman as they enter the 18th century: this film brilliantly illustrates the duality of the sexes but celebrates a blend of androgyny, queer presentation and defying gender norms.

The Rocky Horror Picture Show (1975)

One of the most iconic musicals in history, The Rocky Horror Picture Show encompasses comedy, lust and horror in the most fabulously camp manner. It is known best for leading man Tim Curry, who plays a cross-dresser from another world (referred to in the film as a "sweet transvestite"): Curry's outfits, consisted of garters, glitter and drag-esque makeup, which consequently paved the way for gender experimentation in the late 70s for a lot of young, queer fans.

A Fantastic Woman (2017)

The most modern film on this list, A Fantastic Woman is an important watch for anyone, regardless of whether you're within the LGBTQ+ community or not. The film depicts the hardships of protagonist Marina (played by Daniela Vega), who experiences assaults, threats and discrimination for being a trans woman. Although it is undoubtedly hard to watch, it's vital for people to see that this is unfortunately the reality for a lot of trans women, but the upside is that not only does this film celebrate being who you are but Marina is played by Vega who is a trans woman in real life as well.

Soldier's Girl (2003)

Whilst I'm usually against films that cast cis actors to portray trans people (you can read my post that goes into further detail on this here), I make an exception for Soldier's Girl because it's a biopic wherein the cis actor, Lee Pace (who plays trans woman Calpernia Addams) worked closely with the real-life individual in order to play her respectfully and realistically. This film features a trans woman but it's more-so focused on her boyfriend, who was sadly murdered for being in love with her. Despite the tragic ending, Soldier's Girl is worth watching in that it shows that love knows no bounds and that relationships between cis and trans individuals should not be execrated as dangerous and/or unnatural.

Sexuality

Blue is the Warmest Colour (2013)

The unfortunate context to Blue is the Warmest Colour is that the lead actresses were not treated very well at all, and that should be acknowledged, but it still remains an important staple of queer cinema because it illustrates a realistic, turbulent relationship between two women. 

Very often in the media, lesbian relationships are fetishized (mainly for male voyeurism), so this film is refreshing in that it's a relationship just like any other and realistically portrays the experience (not everybody's experience, mind you) of coming out, of not being accepted by friends and ultimately facing a harsher judgement from society for living as your authentic self.

Brokeback Mountain (2005)

It may not have won Best Picture at the 78th Academy awards but Brokeback Mountain is arguably one of the most influential films within queer cinema. It showcases two rangers (played Jake Gyllenhaal and the late Heath Ledger) who start a whirlwind romance, despite their heteronormative lifestyles and personal differences. Although the narrative ends in heartbreak, it is definitely one to watch, if not for the phenomenal acting then for the realistic portrayal of toxic masculinity, struggles with bisexuality and the era-appropriate attitude towards same-sex couples.

Carol (2015)

Carol is regarded as one of the best lesbian films period, as it delves into the complicated nature of divorce, femininity as well as the trials and tribulations of one coming to terms with their sexuality. What's wonderful about this period piece is that, contextually, lesbianism would've been incredibly taboo: it is refreshing, then, to see Carol (Cate Blanchett) accept herself at the end of the film and be unapologetically herself.

Interview with the Vampire (1994)

Anne Rice's novella series (The Vampire Chronicles) consists of 13 books, two of which were adapted to film. The first one was made for cinema in 1994, depicting vampires Louis (Brad Pitt) and Lestat (Tom Cruise) spending decades as "companions". Although it is never explicitly said in the film adaptation, the queer connotations certainly shine through as they would've in the book, and this broody, gothic couple are beautiful to watch.

Further watching/historical context

Paris is Burning (1990)

Fans of RuPaul's Drag Race may be familiar with the terms "sashay, shantay", "touch all of this skin" and "serving face", but what you might be unaware of is that these are sayings that RuPaul use in honour of the vogueing scene of New York City, captured in the 90s documentary Paris is Burning. I personally believe this is a must-see for a lot of people, as the political climate of drag and cis-queer spaces has been strife with a lot of transphobia in recent years, which is unbelievable when you consider that the art of drag was co-founded by trans women.

The Celluloid Closet (1995)

Lastly is (perhaps an outdated) documentary on queer cinema itself, starting from all the way back at the birth of film. The documentary features exclusive interviews with both queer people and allies, as well as clips from films historically known for their atrocious representation and/or their accurate depiction of queer identities. A more recent documentary to watch would also be Disclosure (2020), released last year on Netflix: however, it's important to see where we've come from and how far we've got to go, so I'd highly recommend also adding The Celluloid Closet to your watchlist.

- K

The Pros & Cons of Franchising

 [Reader disclaimer: spoilers will be discussed].

Hellraiser: Inferno (2000)

Have you ever gone for a meal and thought to yourself, 'you know what? I'll be cheeky and order dessert'. In essence, that's the function of sequels: you just can't get enough the first time round and you're hungry for more.

But, as we all know, sometimes more is too much. The Lord of the Rings works because every film (though connected by source material) work as singularities; if you look at the Hobbit series, 2/3 of the films are arguably lacklustre and co-dependent on the far more successful first instalment. A fan following can only take you so far, after all.

The horror genre is no stranger to sequels, often franchising and building a solid fanbase that follows suit. However, one might argue that franchising a film, no matter how popular it might initially be, can damage the reputation and enjoyment of the original story. 

The Pros

Saw (2004)

Let's look at the pros of franchising. For one, a sequel (or many) can be an exploration of the source material, a chance to expand the fictional universe. Long-time fans, even new ones, will seize any chance they get to see their beloved characters facing new challenges. 

The Saw franchise, for example, brings something new with every instalment: sure, it's all the same torture-porn, characters essentially being punished by a sadomasochist with a God complex, but we enjoy the Saw films because of the creative traps. The simplicity of the first film left room for any crazy device imaginable: from a cuff around the ankles to the Rack in Saw III (2006) and the even more so impressive 10 Pints of Sacrifice from Saw V (2008).

A Nightmare on Elm Street (1984)

Another pro of franchising is, of course, the money; a household name can become a cash-cow with the right kind of marketing. A Nightmare of Elm Street is one of the most recognisable franchises in horror history, not only for its creative kills but for its iconic antagonist, Freddy Krueger (played by Robert Englund). 

So, if you slap Krueger on anything, it's highly likely that the fanbase will come running to watch it. Take Freddy vs. Jason (2003) for example: according to Rotten Tomatoes, it holds a score of 41%, a considerably low number in comparison to the original film (which stands at 94%). However, devoted fans of the franchise still appreciate and love the film because it retains its campy portrayal of the character. Even at domestic box office, it made a profit.

The Cons

The Conjuring (2013)

Now let's look at the cons. One of the biggest issues that franchises face when churning out multiple films is that the lore can become inconsistent and sloppy, consequently creating loose ends and plot holes. The aforementioned Freddy vs. Jason, for example, creates tension by demonstrating Jason's weakness, which is supposedly water: long time fans of the Friday the 13th franchise will find this dubious, however, as Jason is no stranger to water and it's highly unlikely that he's suddenly developed a phobia of it.

The Conjuring series is also victim to this. Whilst the first few movies were actually credible, the following spin-offs (including Annabelle (2014) and The Nun (2018)) are arguably examples of weak storytelling, an overuse of tired tropes and ineffective jump scares. They don't hold the same gravitas as the original films, which actually take the time to create tension and build an interesting concept from the ground up.

The Babadook (2014)

Some creators, such as Jennifer Kent, are aware of the dangers of franchising. Kent (who directed The Babadook) ensured that herself and her producers already owned the rights to a possible sequel because she didn't want there to be another one: in her own terms, it was "not that kind of film", in that The Babadook was intended to be an artful horror that acted as a standalone tale. 

I believe that Kent (as well as visionaries such as Ari Aster or Jordan Peele) understands that it's not guaranteed that a film's integrity gets compromised by franchising, but that if a story is self-contained and well-rounded in its delivery the first time, then that process doesn't need to be duplicated. It would only be for money, after all.

Conclusion

Friday the 13th: Part 8 (1989)

Franchising is not always a death sentence for films. In some ways, the audience and the creators greatly benefit from delving further into the stories we've grown to know and love. However, there's an undeniable correlation between sequels and their performances (both financially and entertainment-wise) that suggests that less is more in most cases.

I love the horror genre but even I have to admit that when it comes to franchises like Hellraiser, Friday the 13th and Saw, I often don't watch past the first three films because they lack in quality, uniqueness and entertainment in comparison to their original debuts. So, I'd argue that franchising is fun but be aware that if your favourite movies start churning out sequels like there's no tomorrow, then maybe it's best to stay clear of them.

- K

 

What Makes A Great Horror Villain?

[Reader disclaimer: spoilers will be discussed].

Hannibal Lecter from The Silence of the Lambs (1991)

When it comes to horror films, there's usually one, major selling point: the antagonist. What would any franchise be without their iconic baddie? If you picture Hellraiser (1987), the first thing that should come to mind is Pinhead. Alternatively, if you were to think of the Nightmare on Elm Street or Friday the 13th series, you'd think of Krueger and Voorhees rather than the main cast.

So what makes a decent horror villain? Is it the traumatic backstories, the distinct appearance? Well, in this writer's opinion, there are four main elements to a great antagonist: a lack of motive, unique characterisation, the omittance of dialogue and facial expression.

A Lack of Motive

The Man from Hush (2016)

What's scarier than a man set out for revenge? Well, I'd argue a man without a need for it. A lack of motive, seen in such films as Hush, The Strangers (2008) and The Purge (2013), creates an unsettling atmosphere for viewers because a villain without motive is equally a villain without conscience, and therefore someone the hero cannot be reasoned with. 

Imagine yourself in the scenario of Hush: a man attempts to break into your home and kill you. Why? Because he "can" and that's it. What would you do? In this situation, one would hope to regain control and order through bargaining or, at the very least, exploit one of their weaknesses. As human beings, we fear the unknown more than anything else, so if the thing attacking us cannot be reasoned with in any logical fashion, then we are rendered completely helpless. 

Villains with a motive are, in a way, able to gain our sympathy; villains without one leave you unable to find closure in the wake of their actions and vulnerable to their attacks, making them far more terrifying than the average horror baddie. 

Unique Characterisation

Captain Spaulding from House of 1000 Corpses (2003)

Every villain in horror history can easily be identified by their unique characterisation, but it takes a team of very creative costume designers and writers to make a truly great one; as aforementioned, the scariest villains can be the ones without motive, but that doesn't mean they have to lack personality or presentation.

Take Captain Spaulding, for example: a curator of the horrific and whimsical, a lover of fried chicken and a showman of curiosities. Sure, he has no motive for the murders he commits throughout the film (other than self defense and general amusement) but his dialogue and iconic appearance is what makes him thoroughly enjoyable (albeit terrifying) to watch. 

We fear those without motive but we also fear those who are grandiose, unabashedly violent and forthcoming with their murderous intent. There's more room for reasoning, sure, but it's just as unlikely that you'll survive. Spaulding kills for the fun of it but that doesn't mean he's a completely emotionless psychopath: he likes to have fun with his victims, prolonging their torture, much to the horror (and delight) of us, the audience.

Omittance of Dialogue

Michael Myers from Halloween (1978)

From Krueger's iconic taunts to Chucky's witty one-liners, we're all too accustomed to villains mouthing off during their confrontations with the good guys. So what about villains who don't speak a word? Arguably, the thing that makes Michael Myers terrifying (other than that lifeless, recycled Captain Kirk mask) is that he never speaks a word.

In Halloween, Myers' motives are unclear, mainly because we never hear him talk or vocalise his intention: we know his plans and mindset through the dialogue of others. His silence is arguably just as unnerving as not having a motive in the first place; verbalising their thoughts, no matter how self-indulgent or deluded they may be, at least gives us clues to the mindset of a villain. Our deductions are moot when it comes to Myers because the only things we know are what the protagonists know: we are truly observers in that sense, unable to predict his actions. So if you were to cross paths with him, you'd likely be cut down without reason, which is terrifying in that you'd never know when you were about to die.

Facial Expression

Art the Clown from Terrifier (2016)

Now let's look at the other end of the Michael Myers spectrum, from a blank expression to a pantomime-esque one. 

I'm biased here but I find Art the Clown to be one of the best modern horror villains, simply for his facial expressions. Like Myers, Art lacks the ability to talk, but the biggest difference is that what he lacks for in dialogue, he certainly makes up for in his gruesome smile and widened eyes.

Art's facial expressions, akin to that of Gwynplaine in The Man Who Laughs (1928), unsettles us due to the connotations: a smile would suggest happiness or joy, a terrifying concept when placed in the context of the villain sawing a woman medieval-style from groin to head. On the flip-side of that, Art's cold, calculated stare (as seen in the pizzeria scene) is just as scary, especially when he switches back and forth between the two expressions in a seemingly effortless fashion. 

This, coupled with Art's love of the tricycle and theatrical fun with body parts, makes him seem almost child-like, which arguably lulls you into a false sense of security. Art seems like he could be reasoned with because he presents himself as infantile at times, or naïve and vulnerable, but the truth is that he kills for fun and we know that simply through the sheer delight on his face.

- K

The Quarantine Movie Marathon - Part 7

 [For the previous parts, click below. As mentioned before, spoilers ahead!]

Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 5 | Part 6

White Noise (2005)

V to Z

• Wake the Witch (2010) - I don't even know if this counts as a film: this was nearly two hours of my life lost and I can't tell you a single thing I remember from it. [1/10]
• We Are What We Are (2013) - The original is better but this does have a good slow-burn pace to it. [6/10]
• Wes Craven's New Nightmare (1994) - The meta-style is certainly entertaining but it feels rushed, as if they were trying to cram as many homages to the original series in as they possibly could. [5/10]
• White Noise (2005) - Stereotypical paranormal horror but it wasn't that bad. [6/10]
• White Zombie (1932) - Legosi is fabulous, as always. [7/10]
• Wither (2012) - A hidden gem: the limited budget is used so effectively for a truly gory and entertaining film. [8/10]
• World War Z (2013) - This film and its soundtrack is slept on, just saying. [8/10]
• You're Next (2011) - I first watched this film five years ago and I remember thinking it was so inventive. On second viewing? Not as clever as it makes itself out to be. [5/10]
• Zombi Holocaust (1980) - The ending falls flat slightly but this is a great example of Italian horror in the 80s: plentiful gore and cheesy dialogue. [7/10]

And that's it! If you've been tuning in every week, thank you for reading: I'll be back soon with more original content.

- K 

The Quarantine Movie Marathon - Part 6

 [For the previous parts, click below. As mentioned before, spoilers ahead!]

Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 5

The People Under the Stairs (1991)

T to U

• Teeth (2007) - It's a great feminist horror but it's still somewhat lame: I'd be more on board with it if the editing weren't so shite. [5/10]
• Terrifier (2016) - Some good quality gore and an iconic, uniquely horrifying villain. [8/10]
• The Amityville Horror (1979) - I wouldn't even say this is a particularly scary horror film but it's certainly well-edited and tense. [7/10]
• The Blue Skeleton (2017) - Confusing, boring and anticlimactic. [4/10]
• The Bunker (2001) - It's not bad...not great either. [6/10]
• The Cabin in the Woods (2011) - I mean, there are no words that will do justice to how good this film is. [9/10]
• The Children (2008) - Guilty pleasure: a lot more fun at parties with friends. [5/10]
• The Dead One (1961) - It's nice to see the 'voodoo' origin used within this era but it's horribly racist: definitely didn't age well. [3/10]
• The Exorcism of Emily Rose (2005) - Surprisingly balanced and better than your average exorcism film. [8/10]
• The Eye (2002) - The elevator scene gets me every time. [8/10]
• The Giant Spider Invasion (1975) - The spider is actually kind of cute and all of the men are perverts. [2/10]
• The Grudge (2002) - America could never. [8/10]
• The Hills Have Eyes (1977) - Gnarly deaths and decent jump scares! [7/10]
• The Hole in the Ground (2019) - Films like this validate my need to never have children. [7/10]
• The House with 100 Eyes (2013) - Sound editing is abysmal but it's definitely a disturbing watch. [5/10]
• The Lighthouse (2019) - WHY'D YA SPILL YER BEANS? [9/10]
• The Ordeal (2004) - I'll never look at rural pubs the same again. [7/10]
• The People Under the Stairs (1991) - White capitalists get their asses handed to them, so you know it's good. [8/10]
• The Quiet Ones (2014) - The pacing is bad and the storyline doubly so. [4/10]
• The Shining (1980) - I don't have much to say on this other than, despite it being a decent film, it is overrated. [7/10]
• The Silence of the Lambs (1991) - Best of the Hannibal films. [8/10]
• The Sin Eater (2003) - Yet another religious fanatic film with a somewhat interesting concept yet a terribly executed storyline. I miss Ledger, man. [5/10]
• The Stand (1994) - The stereotypes have aged poorly but I have such a nostalgic love for this film...even if it is six hours long. [7/10]
• The Stepfather (2009) - Predictable, terrible, awful...other synonyms for bad. [4/10]
• The Texas Chainsaw Massacre (1974) - A true horror classic. Also can we talk about how fucking fast Leatherface is? That's goddamn terrifying. [9/10]
• The Thing (1982) - Other horrors wish they have the level of practical fx this film has. [9/10]
• The Thing (2011) - I know they used a mix of both but I wish they'd stayed as far away from CGI as possible because it makes everything look tacky. [5/10]
• The Void (2016) - I have no idea what's happening but it looks amazing. [7/10]
• The Witch (2015) - A baby gets mashed in the first 10 minutes...delicious. [8/10]
• Thir13en Ghosts (2001) - If you ignore the racist stereotypes, you can enjoy Matthew Lilliard in one of his most underrated performances. [6/10]
• Thoroughbreds (2017) - Olivia Cooke is an absolute superstar and this film just illustrates how damn talented Anton Yelchin was. [8/10]
• Train to Busan (2016) - Yon-Suk? More like Yon-SUCKS, am I right, lads? [8/10]
• Underground (2011) - What a forgettable and boring film. [2/10]
• Us (2019) - One of my favourite film soundtracks of all time; Lupita is a powerhouse. [9/10]

Next week: V to Z

- K