Film Reviews by NP

This is one of those films that threatens to slide into the ‘is there something supernatural going on, or is it all in the minds of the main characters?’ category. Not that there’s anything wrong with that – however, it is a plotline that has been done so many times, it would need to pull out all the stops to avoid feelings of repetition.

As I watched this, I hoped it would ultimately prove to be something more, because it is so solidly made and well acted. The scary moments are well staged, and the atmosphere of deteriorating relationships is palpable. When the ending comes, it is a relief that there is no open-ended cop-out. The explanations were cursory, but enough to satisfy.

As babies go, the little fellow in this film proves to be annoying indeed; his constant crying for attention would be unbearable were he not so well cast. A cuter child I don’t remember seeing in a film.

So I need not have been so worried on any level. ‘Nightmare’ (what a shame they didn’t stick with the less generic title ‘Dark Circles’) is a film that is this good, that doesn’t drop the ball at any time, even during the final moments (which have a genuine poignancy to them). My score is 8 out of 10.

Billed as just over 80 minutes, ‘The Appearance’ is almost certainly about 20 minutes longer. More than likely, had that actually been its running time, it might have emerged as something more impressive.

That sounds unfair. There is so much that is good going on here – the lighting, the sense of atmosphere, soundtrack, acting and direction are all hugely impressive, especially considering this is a fairly low budget production. The story contains many good moments too, but there aren’t enough of them to justify the running time.

Set during medieval times, a young inquisitor is called to a suspected case of witch activity. Quite without reason, the inquisitor declares the young girl at the heart of the situation totally innocent, much to the ire of many of those around him. Whether she is or not is for the story to tell, but why he should be so sure of her good name is unclear. What transpires are many events, some supernatural, which either prove or disprove his claim: I’m not telling.

‘The Appearance’ is almost a really good film, but lacks a certain something that would have been partially improved by some generous pruning. My score is 6 out of 10.

What a uniquely strange and haunting film this is. Billed as a horror, which it unquestionably is, it is also a truly heart-wrenching tale of longing and impossible love.

Nina, the titular siren (Margaret Ying Drake), mute outsider Tom (Evan Dumouchel) and lonely Al (MacLeod Andrews) are the three main characters, and with them we spend the 80 minutes of this story’s running time. Inspired by the legend of The Rusalka, director and co-writer Perry Blackshear has these three guide us through a myriad of emotions – loss, friendship, distrust, suspicion and love. Interesting that Tom is a man of deep faith, and it such a refreshing change that faith isn’t used as any kind of catalyst for anything else – it is simply part of his character and it gladdens us that he isn’t totally alone, even after all that transpires.

Al is bereft after his husband – seen only briefly in flashback – is taken from him. When Nina appears, things change slowly. In fact, most things happen slowly, which will ensure this film isn’t for everyone – but I found myself genuinely moved by it.

Terrific, intense performances all around – Ying Drake especially is creepy, sorrowful, alluring and endearing, sometimes all in one scene – allow ‘The Siren’ to stay in your mind long after the credits, and the haunting music, have finished rolling. My score is 8 out of 10.

It’s very difficult to see a film these days without being bombarded with spoilers. Well, I’m giving nothing away here, other than to say that it’s based on Jane Rogers’ acclaimed novel of the same name and is highly recommended viewing.

The story is told slowly and is not just drenched in atmosphere but positively dripping with it. Bleak, blustery and poignant, there are four main players – Natalie Press and Nikki Black, Colin Morgan as Calum, Janet McTeer as Phyllis and the titular island itself. Rolling and rocky, dotted with Calum’s dens festooned with items he’s collected (“You’re like a magpie,” Nikki says at one point). It is beautifully filmed but bitingly cold to look at.

Phyllis’ home may be more heated, but there is little warmth there; secrets, isolation and fearsome independence despite a gloomy future. The friendship that grows between Calum and Nikki is steady charming – but can it survive? The stories that they share betray a real connection, and her illustrations take on a new poignancy during the end credits - look out for them.

Be prepared for a slow-burner, but one that draws you in and keeps you there until the story decides to end leaving you to wonder … what next? My score is 7 out of 10.

Often, I will watch a film because of the actors. With Tom Ford, I will watch a film because he directed it. The fact that such terrific actors as Colin Firth and Julianne Moore are in it is a huge bonus. The story, about a gay man coming to terms with age, mortality and life after his partner dies, is not necessarily what I’d usually choose to follow. And yet such is the talent on display here, it is a really ‘easy’ watch – in that it all seems so effortlessly stylish, heart-felt and real, it takes no effort at all to be sucked into the drama. Really effective music too.

The story could be described as thin, but that doesn’t matter when Ford guides us through the day-to-day life of George (Firth), superficially uptight and distant but privately more playful and open. His wonderfully bored rich friend Charley (Julianne Moore) is very watchable too – so much money and beauty, but so listless, her only excitement is at the bottom of a bottle.

Stylish and without the need for huge spectacle to move us, the ending is truly touching. My score is 8 out of 10.

This hugely impressive horror hangs on the success of young James Quinn Markie, who plays Chris O’Neill, son of single parent Sarah (Seána Kerslake). Often in these films where a child’s behaviour suggests he may or may not be under the influence of something demonic, the effects of the possession border on the bratty and petulant in place of a truly believable transformation (this is an understandable side effect of using unpractised performers). Happily, young Chris only fleetingly comes across as merely spoilt, which is just as well given his mother’s disinclination to scold him, and provides a very convincing focal character.

The story stands up very well too for the most part. At times, it seems to be veering on the often-used ‘is the horror real or in the mind of the pill-popping central character’, and at times we wonder if Chris really has been taken over by some evil entity. That things pan out quite differently and unexpectedly is a testament to a well-weaved plot, despite things going a little crazy during the final act.

The locations are stunning, and beautifully directed by co-writer Stephen Shields. My score is 7 out of 10.

Wild alternative comedian Charlie Chuck, Laurence R. Harvey who played Martin in 2011’s ‘The Human Centipede 2’ and Seamus O'Neill who had played deeply perverse David in 2011’s ‘Inbred’, all play some of the titular characters in this bizarre low budget horror comedy/satire. With cast-members like that, as well as other faces that may be recognisable from television, you would think a wild ride was on the cards – but none of them are encouraged to contribute as much custom insanity as you might hope.

“Effenbe. B – b – buckets!”

Is this something that desperately wants to be a ‘cult’ film, is it a satire on ‘the establishment’ or simply creators having fun with a grotesque selection of gore, excrement and pigs? As events become bigger and more spectacular and the most interesting characters expire, it threatens to lose that spark of madness, but remains a convincingly perverse, grotesque world. My score is 6 out of 10.

Jean Rollin, my favourite director, was responsible for many dark fairytale, horror fantasies between 1968 and 2010, all of them very personal and not necessarily commercially successful. To subsidise his work, he also made a range of porn films, often starring cast members from his repertoire company.

Having loved every one of his ‘legitimate’ projects, it would be narrow-minded not to view his other available offerings – ‘The Seduction of Amy’ and this. Joëlle Coeur, the memorably perverse Tina from The Demoniacs, plays Monica, and Willie Braque, the moustached actor from a number of Rollin’s films, plays underwhelming stud Fred. Ice blond Gilda Stark plays Jackie; the enigmatic Marie Hélène Règne plays Patrice, while pig-tailed Reine Thirion plays the nameless dark horse secretary.

While the many soft-core sex scenes are played with gusto, especially by Coeur, the story is just a means of allowing the cast to disrobe for lengthy periods of time. Let’s not worry about that too much.

Titillation is what we’re watching of course, but there’s no doubt that Rollin’s trademark ‘look’ is often present – his talent for making his well chosen locations look stark and slightly unreal is here. The décor, the skeleton trees; the contrast between drab yet warm interiors and their open fires, to the stark cold of outside is effectively used. The backpacking girls – not really hitchhikers and certainly not schoolgirls – display all of Rollin’s engaging mixture of naivety and sensuality (and certainly don’t deserve the indignities heaped upon them), and the whole thing, although clearly using very small budget, looks atmospheric and is packed with visual detail.

Without anything vaguely supernatural or ‘fantastique’ to sustain it, ‘Schoolgirl Hitchhikers’ is a little dull, with only the performances, which are surprisingly good for this type of caper, and Rollin’s signature directorial style, to recommend it. Enjoyable for what it is, and not as exploitative or sleazy as its title would suggest, it would be churlish not to give it less than 6 out of 10.

Some parts of this film are very reliant on fairly unconvincing CGI, giving some action scenes a cartoonish quality. This is a shame. So what do we do about this? Cry about it, because the budget clearly isn’t generous - or look for other aspects of ‘The Creature Beneath’ worthy of praise?

I’ve always applauded ambition in these projects, even if it doesn’t always pay off – but it is the quieter moments that impress here. The disintegrating relationship between Olive and her very decent boyfriend, her maternal feelings toward the titular creature and the increasingly extreme ways she goes to nourish it; the well-meaning sister’s desire to solve everything with alcohol.

Anna Dawson is sometimes a little flat as Olive, but her performance improves immeasurably once she comes under the influence of the Lovecraftian creature.

I enjoyed this. I liked the idea of a new ruling species coming to life in an outwardly respectable suburban house surrounded by unsuspecting neighbours. Occasionally the budget threatens to bring things down, but never succeeds. My score is 7 out of 10.

With a title as generic as ‘Summer Camp’, I was expected this to be a standard zombie horror film. Nothing wrong with that – but the results are a pleasant surprise because director and co-writer Alberto Marini, along with Danielle Schleif have dared to do something different with the formula.

Great locations, occasionally clumsy camerawork – initially I wasn’t too keen on the hero Will but he grew on me. But it is the twisting, turning storyline that is the hook. You can’t afford to look away. If you do, you’ll miss a major twist. In this spoiler-free review, that’s all I’m prepared to say. My score is 7 out of 10.

This reminds me a little of ‘Don’t Breathe’. Good idea, but gets progressively less interesting and encumbered by over-ambitious CGI effects.

Katherine (Carlyn Buchell), the daughter of rich and illustrious parents, is kidnapped by Hazel (Sharni Vinson) and her arrogant gang. But just who in the name of spoilers, is the real demon here?

It’s a thin story, but a good one. After a short time – in fact, by watching the trailer itself – you realise the gang have bitten of more than they can chew with young Katherine. Once that’s been established, there isn’t much more to say. What we’re left with is varying ways in which the hapless bunch gets dispatched. Some of the kills go on way too long, and none of the characters are interesting enough to justify spending time watching their lingering desperation.

This isn’t a bad film. It’s clearly made on a fairly small budget, but never looks cheap. Not essential viewing, but loud and brutal enough to pass 90 minutes fairly happily. My score is 5 out of 10.

After just a few minutes of watching this extraordinary film, you might find yourself asking, is this pornography? It’s a debate that has been going over forty years – none of the many sex scenes are simulated: what you see is what you get. Due to its nature, ‘In the Realm of the Senses’ has been banned and cut before release on many platforms, and the lead actors found themselves blacklisted for a while following production.

The story-line involves former prostitute Sada Abe (Eiko Matsuda) being molested by her new boss Kichizo Ishida (Tatsuya Fuji) on the hotel where she now works. This not only ignites hitherto unexplored sexual desires in both of them, but ostracises them from their family and friends. Their coupling takes on new taboos – namely torture, strangulation and blood-letting.

Such an unflinchingly raw story is presented in an equally graphic way, and constantly. A scene where a young boy has his penis pulled as punishment seems to have offended most, and the brief moment has been removed from many editions of the film.

The acting is first rate, and survives the necessity of subtitles better than most. Not outside the perverse extremes of Director Jess Franco have I seen such uninhibited performances in a non-porn film – if it is non-porn.

This reminds me a little of the later Japanese film ‘Audition’, where the comparative light-heartedness of the opening acts give way to scenes of uncompromising cringe-inducing torture best watched behind-the-fingers.

Directed and written by Nagisa Oshima, the film had to be processed in France rather than Japan because of its nature. It is an acquired taste and not something I’ll watch twice. There’s no denying, though, it is compelling. You’ll look away occasionally, but not for long. My score is 7 out of 10.

A good performance from the lead (Amy Crowdies), and her journey is certainly interesting, but it is difficult to know what we are expected to take from the film. In linear terms, is the story just Amy’s reaction to her own grief? Are we being told not to have anything to do with outsiders, because they are superficial? Don’t trust lads who wear make-up?

For a modestly budgeted slow-burner, I found a lot to enjoy here. The locations are suitably isolated to lend us a sense of Melanie’s isolation, and the chilly weather adds to this, whilst helping create some picturesque small-town settings. My score is 6 out of 10.

“Does anyone have a mobile phone or anythink?”

A problem with feeding on so much fictional horror content – as I do - is that often you can have a sense of déjà vu. This happened with ‘Curse of the Scarecrow’ – about half way through, I wondered if I had seen it before and had forgotten. The film I was actually thinking of was 2019’s ‘Tooth Fairy’, which in turn had reminded me strongly of 2018’s ‘Scarecrow Rising’. They had all been directed by Louisa Warren, often using many of the same players and locations.

Warren, like Andrew Jones, has proven to be a prolific director (and occasionally actor) of micro-budget horror films. Also like Jones, she seems to have liking for dolls and scarecrows as villainous beings. Once more we have a predominantly female cast menaced by a bloke with a sack on his head. The three main women are flawed – in fact, apart from June (Kate Lister), quite hapless. The peripheral male characters are wetter than wet.

The production is afflicted as low-budget films often are, and none of this would matter at all if the story or characters were in any way interesting. Sadly, despite some competent performances, they are not, and the dullness that hits you after the pre-credit sequence begins is never fully shaken off. If we could care more for the characters, and not have their various plights and tragedies overtly hurled at us, then things would be a lot more successful. As it is, Warren’s films have thus far been interesting without being compelling (of the ones I have seen).

There are a few good scenes. Nancy (Warren) being stuffed with straw is my favourite. With less restraint on blood and gore, it would have been even more effective. The ending is satisfying and seems to be setting things up for a possible sequel. My score is 5 out of 10.

Derry, Maine: we follow the tumultuous and often very funny day-to-day lives of six youngsters, all of whom suffer regularly at the hands of some typically bratty bullies. Making juveniles the film’s focal point is a risk – often, precociousness takes a hold. Happily, there’s not a trace of that here, because the casting and performances are excellent and often provoke genuine laughter. This is just as well, because we spend a *lot* of time in their company. At over two hours, this is a long journey.

I’m familiar with Stephen King’s original story but have not seen the 1990 production. For all the imaginative set-pieces, Pennywise comes across as a Freddy Krueger-type, in a clown’s suit and without the finger-needles. This is no bad thing, and as we see him so seldom, Bill Skarsgård’s various appearances are always a highlight. His machinations and trickery are far more prevalent.

In the second half, things enter true horror movie mode. The youngsters, by now well established, face Pennywise at his most fearsome and malevolent, especially when they have cause to enter the clown’s realm. Here, we’re treated to a wealth of dark effects, some CGI, but always realistic, horrific and convincing. Without the earlier focus on the characters and their humour, we wouldn’t fear for them anywhere near as much as we do. A terrific film. My score is 8 out of 10.