hscptcrash

X Files – I Want to Believe (2008)

Rating 15
Length 1h 44
Release 1.8.2008
Director Chris Carter
About Though FBI special agent Fox Mulder (David Duchovny) and his partner Dr. Dana Scully (Gillian Anderson) once chased things that go bump in the night, his tireless search for the truth out there has led to his professional exile. However, a missing-persons case leads to the agents’ reunion, along with an encounter with a priest (Billy Connolly) who may or may not be experiencing psychic visions.

First Things First

Right now, I’m sat kicking myself for not seeing this in the cinema. I worked there, for Mulder’s sake. I actually have a vivid memory. An almost ‘Sliding Doors’ moment in which I was done for the evening and the last showing of the day was about to begin. I passed up on the opportunity.
Now, it’s at this point I should clarify, I was possibly one of the strangest ‘fans’. I was such a fan that I wore a Mulder and Scully watch for at least 4 years, even though I’d probably only seen a handful of episodes.
Yeah, I was 8 years old when Scully was sent to spy on Mulder, so I was only allowed to press record on the VCR and watch up until that distinctive theme song. It wasn’t until 1996 or so when it had moved to Saturday nights, that I saw my first full episode. Can you imagine it; being banned from watching the show, but being bought the merch by the same parent?! Then again, this was the same person who, without fail, would buy me a board game every Christmas and refuse to play it with me. Go figure.
Much like a lot of my teens fandoms; Buffy, Star Trek and Angel… I fell a little out of love with X Files. I’d not taken it upon myself to do a rewatch (or a first watch) and I just felt very disengaged in 2008.
However, it’s now 2021. I’ve spent the last few months watching all 9 seasons, and one movie, leading up to this one. I’d been dreading it, I won’t lie.

The Good

It’s X Files. Even with its flaws, I’m in. You’re giving me Mulder and Scully. You’re in theory giving me together Mulder and Scully. What’s not to love. It certainly has its moments that will have any fan happy. When they’re together on screen, its frigging awesome.
It’s a story that is that perfect middle ground. It’s the supernatural rather than the mythology that, at times, bogged the show down. I love the alien shit, but I think the fatal flaw of the franchise is that it wavered too much on that line of ‘are the aliens real?’. At least this keeps it conspiracy lite. Well, except for the priest with a taste for choir boys.
Speaking of the whole pedophilia subplot. It was a powerful thing to address considering this would have still been a rather raw subject, for American viewers in particular. The Boston sex abuse scandal was only exposed in 2002. I’m sure Carter was trying to say something profound about this dirty secret of the Catholic Church. I’m not sure it works completely, but damn I’m still impressed he tried.
The editing in the opening was excellent. It was unsettling and lacking context, but it worked. It was something very different to what we’ve come to expect of X Files and it really got my attention.
Billy Connolly, while giving me the creeps, was a delight to see on screen. Rather strange to see him without his beard, but given his character I was glad of that disassociation.

The Bad

I struggled with Scully’s B-Plot storyline. It felt a little too contrived and almost a plot device hiding in plain sight. The film needed a bit of a change in editing (Like, don’t give me shifty looks to the Father, when the other one was a convicted pedophile, and not give me a resolution to that either way). It’s a shame, because when Gillian Anderson’s scenes worked, it was powerful.
This is the ‘ship that coined the term ‘shipping’. So why the fuck does the film play them off against each other for most of the movie?! Why, after EVERYTHING Scully has seen, is she still a skeptic? Both the relationship, and Scully herself are completely devolved to fit the narrative. It does all fans a disservice.
Our new Mulder/Scully, Dogget/Reyes. I don’t get them and they’re booted out of the script halfway through. While I adore Amanda Peet and she does an amazing job, put Agent Monica Reyes in that role and it blows the whole thing open and adds investment.
Then there’s Xzibit as Agent Drummy as the overly-aggressive skeptic. The biggest problem being that there’s no chemistry between him and Mulder…. so he just ends up shouting.

The Ugly

That fucking beard! What the fuck, man?! I get that the film was trying to show that Mulder was not the same, but did we really need him to wear such a bad joke-shop stick-on beard?! It was cheap, it was tacky and it lasted so much of the movie.

Final Thoughts

There are worse episodes that feel way longer than this outing. It is flawed and I did shout “Oh, fuck off Scully.” At the tv screen. Something I’ve not done since mid-series 3.
As much as this was made as a stand alone to bring in the uninitiated, I doubt the franchise would gain any fans from watching this first.

Educating Rita (1983)

Rating 15
Length 1h 50
Release 16.6.1983
Director Lewis Gilbert
About Rita (Julie Walters), a married hair stylist in her 20s, wants to go back to school. She begins studying with Dr. Bryant (Michael Caine), a professor using alcohol to cope with his divorce. Despite his personal problems, Dr. Bryant helps Rita realise her academic potential. In turn, her passion for learning revitalises his love of teaching.

The Good

I loved it from the very start. I’m a Scouser, so of course I’m going to be drawn in to a Willy Russell story that flirts with the original source material of Pretty Women and My Fair Lady (Pygmalion). Without naming them outright, this film takes on the class divide and gender politics that I’d hope not many people would stand for today.
It’s pacing and time span are perfect and allow you to stay invested. The creative team have added players and places in order to expand the story from the two person play Russell wrote. There’s no point in the film where I thought “Ah, that’s where the interval would be.” Something that can be rather obvious if a play is not well adapted.
Michael Caine. Bloody hell, I loved and loathed the character in equal measure. There’s not many men who could bring the charm that he did to the role and it makes the difference. The alcoholism is a difficult thing to portray on film and its something that can suck the humanity out of even the best of people. So to see the character of Frank come alive at the prospect of educating Rita… or rather Rita educating him, it allows you to invest in the character. More so than My Fair Ladys Professor Higgins.
Now, I’ve always been a bit bias when it comes to Julie Walters; she reminds me of my mum. So to have her in a film playing a Scouser, making those ‘ays’ and ‘tarras’, was a bittersweet dream for me. Not only that, but for me, it played almost like I was watching what could have been my mother’s life.
Julie Walter’s in this film is incredible. Anyone who has seen her in anything, will know that she is a chameleon. However, in this we see her evolve the character and bring Susan/Rita from a state of turmoil and wanting to discover herself, to being an independent and confident woman who at least knows who she is in the moment.

The Bad

For me, the suicide attempt of the friend came out of left field. While it was very well handled and approached, I found it difficult to watch for the reality of it and the candour in which Maureen Lipman’s Trish speaks about her sadness that she hadn’t succeeded. It was the final line in their interaction that struck home for me “When I listen to poetry and music, then I can live. You see, darling, the rest of the time it’s just me. And that’s not enough.”
I’ll forgive you if you scoff at first. I certainly did when she opened with the music and poetry; she has been set up as rather pretentious. However, the reveal opens up and and its certainly something that transcends class; the opinion we have of ones self. It’s often rather shit and a battle to challenge.

The Ugly

The synthesiser music seems to clash with the story being told. It seems more like music heard in BBCs Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy (1981) or A Clockwork Orange (1971). It’s a shame really because it doesn’t match the tone of the movie and even goes so far as to make it feel like a TV movie.
Where the fuck is it set? It ain’t Liverpool. It’s really frustrating to know that the source material places it there, but due to bloody politics (Tories again, the bastards), production was moved to Ireland. Can’t help but feel thrown off by not recognising any of the locations.

Final Thoughts

I’m only gutted I’ve never thought to seek this film out before today. Walters and Caine could have quite easily filmed this in the one room without any other participants and I would have been just as enchanted.
That said, give me a budget and Jodie Comer in Liverpool and I would relish a remake. Yes, we’re seeing a lot of 80s vintage in movies, but I feel like this bit of Russell grit will give people something away from the neon and pop.

I Know What You Did Last Summer (1997

Rating: 18
Length 1h 41
Release 12.12.1997
Director Jim Gillespie
About Four high school teenagers try to cover up a hit-and-run case. A year later, they start receiving anonymous letters and each one is attacked by a mysterious man who knows their deep, dark secret.

The Good

The four leads are what make this film; then and now. I like that the film doesn’t have them walking the halls of a high school and instead have them on their own paths.
Johnny Galecki was a cool spot back in my teens, having grown up in the Rosanne household. Even now, though, he’s still that guy you know from Big Bang Theory. Man can he do creep well, too.
I love the setting that’s Amity but not quite. Its not new, but it does feel refreshing. For me, it also adds to the lack of community I felt watching it. That this isn’t a town that talks to each other.
The music! At the time it was perhaps “eh, its cool”, but now it has that hit of nostalgia. This is up there with Scream 2 for awesome credit song choice.
The hunting of Sarah Michelle Gellar’s Helen is movie perfection. This is the actress I knew as Buffy, so seeing her vulnerable and afraid was beyond disturbing. Then the editing of the whole scene; from the diversion of the cop car that’s taking her home to her almost making it to the crowded streets is phenomenal.

The Bad

Johnny Galecki’s Max was killed off too soon. In fact, the most frustrating part is that they spend so long building up suspicion of him, to resolve it so suddenly, its almost anti-climactic.
There’s also the massive plot blunder of him in the car boot. Yes, I totally get its attempt to build on julie’s unravelling and I guess our sense of smell does not transcend celluloid, but it is improbbable the killer could have cleaned that boot as impeccably as the film wants us to believe.
The final showdown reveals the killer’s mood board of the friends. Well, what do you know, the killer has not only managed to do all the damage he has; he’s been able to get candid photographs of the day developed too. Not something I caught the first time around, but it stuck out like a sore thumb this time.
I so feel like there’s a lake of interaction between our four targets and the rest of the town. I mean, Barry is the jock but there’s no posse?! Ray is given that loner persona, but there’s no one else for the other’s to hang out with. So, aren’t they loners too? It just makes the whole thing feel superficial and that no one is really going to miss these kids when they meet their maker.

The Ugly

I’m not sure I buy the killer’s motivation. In fact, I find the whole thing a little convoluted watching it as an adult. Perhaps I wasn’t distracted by the next “death” as I once was; it certainly wasn’t that I remembered the story.
That ending in the showers. Yawn. Made even worse if you’ve seen the sequel.

Final Thoughts

It’s a film that fairs better the less you think about it. Just watch the pretty people make dumb life choices and Gibb’s mentor weild a hook, give Edward Scissorhands a run for him money in the hair department and be an absolute motherfucking hypocrite.

Flora & Ulysses (2021)

Rating PG
Length 1h 35
Release 19.2.2021
Director Lena Khan
About Flora, a 10-year-old girl with an imaginative mind, rescues a squirrel and names him Ulysses. She soon discovers that Ulysses is blessed with superpowers which help them embark on various adventures.

The Good

This is a heart-warming story about family and superheroes. It takes on an origin story, of sorts, but provides the viewer with enough charm that even those fighting the superhero fatigue will be won over.
Danny Purdi is excellent as the “villainous” squirrel catcher. Community fans will love that he gets to provide some excellent physical movies references throughout the film.
The film made the absolutely right choice when not giving Ulysses a voice. It kept him cute and Grogu-like.
It has a belter soundtrack. Almost GotG-lite.
Allyson Hannigan and Ben. Schwartz were adorable together and apart. The fact that they both reduced me to tears is a testament to them, their ability to demonstrate the hardships of a relationship, individuality and creative blocks.
Matilda Lawler is one to watch. She 10 year old Flora a delight to watch and her narration was perfect. She’ll bring any kid watching onboard straight away.

The Bad

The CGI of both Ulysses and Mr Klaus is a little disappointing. While all the actors work well with the furballs, I just found them reminiscent of the early 2000 CGI; almost too glossy and separate from the rest of the visuals.

The Ugly

I did not like the development of the character William. The actor did a fine job with what he had to work with, but I just really didn’t like the gimmick of him being blind. I most certainly didn’t like the usage of the outdated term “hysterical blindness”. With a film that has the charm that this does, the jokes feel forced and painfully gross.

Final Thoughts

Its definitely a film for families and one those young at heart will enjoy too. There’s some nice Easter Eggs for comic book and film fans alike. Its certainly on my list to watch again.

Airplane! (1980)

Rating PG
Length 1h 28
Release 29.8.1980
Director Jim Abrahams, David & Jerry Zucker
About Ted Striker, a former pilot who has a fear of flying, finds himself burdened with the responsibility of landing a plane safely when most of the crew and passengers fall sick due to food poisoning.

The Good

Unlike the spoofs of film genres in the post- Scary Movie era, this relies on good faith prods at other films. By the time Scary Movie had long past its sell by date, it became tasteless and almost painfull. This, on the other hand, has aged well and runs like a fully formed plot with nods to disaster movies like Towering Inferno and Poseidon Adventure. The point being, you do not have to watch all the disaster movies to enjoy this film.
Leslie Nielson is the perfect for the role of Dr Rumack. I must admit, I know him from the Naked Gun movies so I assumed this was his wheelhouse. I’d known of his “playing it straight” in 1956’s Forbidden Planet, however I thought that was the exception and not this comedy role. I was surprised how late into the proceedings he actually arrived (I I had totally misremembered him being the stare) and it was only upon reading up on the casting and production that I discovered there had been reservations about casting him. Well, that just made it all the more impressive for me.
I loved Otto; the Auto Pilot. It was a little nonsensicle but it made for one most excellent sight gag. Oh, and he even got his own credit on IMDB. Genius.

The Bad

Much like with many films of the age, there are some jokes that do not sit as well as they once did. Nothing that would make me disuade people from watching it, but it certainly made me cringe.
I did not like the charcter of Ted Hays. I cannot put my finger on what it is, but he irked me. I did, however, find comfort in knowing I wasn’t alone in my feelings.

The Ugly

As much as I chuckled and I found it likable. I am rather disappointed that I didn’t laugh more than I did. However, in the film’s defence, I do struggle with a comedy when watching alone.

Final Thoughts

I’m not rushing to watch this again, but I’d certain see it at somewhere like the Prince Charles on a Friday Night; I think it is a film you need to see under the right conditions. Seriously.

Sneakers (1992)

Rating 12
Length 2h 06
Release 13.11.1992
Director Phil Alden Robinson
About Martin Bishop heads a group of experts who specialise in testing security systems. When government agents blackmail him into stealing a top secret black box, his team is embroiled in a dangerous game.

The Good

The cast is incredible. Like, I can’t imagine a director getting a better cast assembled. Certainly not one that includes three generations of Oscar talent.
In particular, Sidney Poitier was incredible. He really had that paternal vibe down. Then he went and gave Samuel L Jackson a run for his money with the use of “motherfucker.”
This is perfect for those who like conspiracy thrillers and heist movies, like Enemy of the State, Lucky Number Slevin and Inside Man. It’s clever and well paced with characters I really rooted for.
The final scene is worth everything. Think Armageddon contract negotiation but a thousand times better.
Even though technology has advanced, and rendered some of what is mentioned in the plot obsolete, I doubt it impacts on the enjoyment that could be had. Unlike, The Net and perhaps Hackers that don’t fare as well.

The Bad

It was a slow burn, which is okay, but with ‘lockdown brain’ I have tended to stick to films under the 1h 40 mark and I did find myself drifting in those first twenty minutes or so. A little tighter editing would smooth out that introduction somewhat.
There was a dodgy accent or two that really sounded off. In particular director favourite Lee Garlington would have been better without the European accent.

The Ugly

Can someone tell me what Robert Redford used to be able to get through that hot room?! Like, seriously? 99 degrees Fahrenheit and that bastard is as dry as a bone. In a high pressure situation? Bullshit, he would be as wet as Lee Evans after the first half of a gig. Yes, I know this is a weird hang-up, but in a near perfect movie, this stands out so badly.
I’m not sure how I feel about David Strathairn’s presentation of a visually impaired person. Why some things that were played for laughs, like talking to someone facing the wrong way, work quite well there are others that don’t sit as well with me. I’m not going to detail it here as it’s not fair for me to say its offensive and I wouldn’t want to prejudice anyone. However, if you’re as like-minded as me; you’ll know when you get to the scene I had the problem with.

Final Thoughts

This is a good movie. Not a movie you’ll watch all the time, but it’s a movie you’ll watch and think, damn I enjoyed that. I also have a sneaking suspicion that a viewer much more familiar with Redford’s back catalogue

Stop or my Mom Will Shoot (1992)

Rating PG
Length 1h 22
Release 17.4.1992
Director Roger Spottiswoode
About When cop Joe calls-off his relationship with his girlfriend, his mom pays him a visit. She starts to interfere in everything that he does and soon gets involved in one of his important projects.

The Good

Estelle Getty is what makes this film as enjoyable as it is. Firstly, she’s the best Golden Girl (which I would imagine says a lot about me) and she has that dry Yankee humour. There’s no one else you could put in that role.
Secondly, some of the characteristics of Tutti remind me so much of my own mum. For example, Tutti finding the gun and ‘cleaning’ it to actually break it. Yeah, that was my mum. Clothes, PCs, food… you name it, she’d mean well but it would always go wrong. It’s a little bittersweet, but so god damn funny.
The plot is rather poor, but its not the plot you’re watching this for. It’s the dynamic between Getty and Stallone. It bloody works. On some level a lot of us recognise the relationship these two people have (see above) so we not only relate, but we can laugh as it happens to someone else.

The Bad

I love JoBeth Williams, but the character of Lt Gwen Harper is so shit. It’s like the film gave with one hand by making her the boss, but took it away with the other by making her relationship with Joe so public and unprofessional. What’s so bad about it, is that it makes me question how she got her position in the first place.
Stallone does not want to be in this movie. You can feel that from his performance. Some of it can be explained away as the character’s relationship with the mother, but it’s more than that. It’s a shame, because it looks like it could have been a real laugh being on that set.

The Ugly

Some of the dialogue is very dated and cringe. In fact it plays like a mid 80s film, rather than one from 1992. From the stewardess purring “You looked real sexy in those diapers” to “I like wearing my underwear more than once before changing them.” Just makes me very, very grateful the 80s and 90s are far behind me.
The film’s score is painfully repetitive. Maybe its that I’ve been spoiled by incredible soundtracks of recent years, but this was cheap and distracting.

Final Thoughts

It’s dated, the plot is a little hit and miss, but I laughed at good few times and at 1h 23 I certainly don’t think I’ve wasted my night.

The Girl in the Photographs

Rating 18
Length 1hr 35
Release 19.10.2015 (no UK cinematic release)
Director Nick Simon
About Two psychopaths target a young woman (Claudia Lee), a photographer (Kal Penn) and a group of models at a secluded house.

The Good

This film takes a risk with its ending. It *almost* works. The idea of an open ending to a stand alone horror film in a way that’s not a rug pull (see I Know What You Did Last Summer, House of Wax and Saw) is rare. There’s no showdown, there’s no final girl. Now, considering the rest is formulaic as fuck, that ending really impressed me.
Yeah, that’s all I got folks. This film was garbage and I actually almost turned it off.

The Bad

By calling your ‘slashers’ psychopaths, does not free you of having a motive. Towards the back end of the film we get the idea that he has some sort of feelings for our lead, Colleen. However, where does the second guy factor in to this infatuation? There’s also the fact that we come into the film at victim 7. The film made loose connections to the photographer, Kal Penn, but just didn’t follow through. If only the film unpacked the fact that the two men were in the same year as Penn’s character, it would have made for a much more satisfying movie.
As much as I love Mitch Pileggi, the incorporation of the police force within the town was frustrating and of no use to the plot with how they were used. Just throwing around “No body, no crime.’ And repeatedly telling Colleen there’s nothing they can do is utter bullshit ;and the stereotype we moved away from almost two decades ago. When these photographs are popping up and they resemble the missing persons report… they would have to do something. While I do like the fact that the psychopaths are left to kill another day, if you’re also going to make the police incompetent and the reason these girls have died, at least have them as part of the body count.
How is the disappearance of seven people not caused commotion in this town? How is it not a much bigger thing, that’s going to make the local news at the very least? I just find so many of the things in this so illogical.
Did we really need the commentary of “the photographer” on consent. He actually says “permission isn’t sexy”. Which is made all the more galling by the fact that the guy is using a big ass camera with a massive flash to photograph Colleen.
Oh, and while we’re on the topic of consent. Having a guy secretly film his casual sex is one thing. Having the girl discover it and then masterbate to the footage is very much another and absolutely not okay. Remembering, the issue is not the sex, but the violation and lack of consent. My biggest issue being who this film’s demographic is and what it might say to them.

The Ugly

The over-use of Wes Craven’s name in all of the publicity. He was a producer, nothing more. There is nothing in this film that can be said to be inspired by his body of work and its only made worse by the over zealous use of “This was the last film he worked on.”
Few things I didn’t understand: who the fuck wrote the blog? Who made the connection to the photographer, and was it every single photograph? If so, why?
Oh, why is the boyfriend such a dick? Like, really? Can someone explain to me? He seemed lovely and really trying to make things work, but Colleen was clearly not on the same page. When Psycho Tom tells boyfriend “you should have treated her better” all I could think was that he really should have been saying that to Colleen.
The blood, the gore! Jesus, I know it was an 18 and everything, but come on! Its been proven time and time again that not showing a death is much more effective. Why do we need to see all the blood?!

Final Thoughts

This film has potential behind the gore, but the editing and unresolved questions leave it being little more than garbage. Its not even clever enough to be considered an exploitation film.

Film Review: Evolution (2001)

Rating PG
Length 1h 41
Release 22.6.2001
Director Ivan Reitman
About Professor Ira and Professor Harry are called in to analyse a meteor that crashes at Arizona. Soon, they learn that the organisms found on the meteor are evolving and reproducing rapidly.

The Good

From the get go, it plays much like a Ghostbuster outing. The undervalued underdogs in the professional field saving the day. For me, I can never get enough of the Ghostbusters and, at the time, this was as close as I was going to get.
The cast is pretty perfect. David Duchovny plays on his Mulder persona, but gives him much more charm and less morbid back story. Duchovny carries the lead duties really well and I always wonder why he didn’t get more oportunities.
Orlando Jones gives us black-meta commentary and sleaze I never quiet caught before and Julianne Moore is trying to give us the anti-Scully. It never quite works, and it has me wishing Anderson was there playing the role, but I can’t deny that Moore does try.
The graphics still stand up. as good as early noughties graphics can of course.

The Bad

It takes a long while to really get going. Partly because of establishing Scott’s character in the opening. While this does have pay off, it does stall the proceedings somewhat.
I’m not sure I like the clumsiness of Moore’s character. It feels like acting clumsy and is too forced.

The Ugly

That sleeze of Orlando Jones. Barf! I know its college, but him trying to get it on with students and discussing showering with his all-female basketball team is just gross. I probably thought nothing of it at the time, but watching it in light of so many accusations within the industry, it makes you question the mind-set of the writer. Yeah, call me snowflake all you want, but its the normalisation of off-the-cuff remarks like this that have allowed this behaviour to go on, unchecked, for so long.

Final Thoughts

Had this been an X-Files or Ghostbusters sequel, in which we could do away with the introductions, this would be an amazing film. Tonally different I’m sure, but amazing non the less.
That said, this is a film I will watch again because it’s fun, the good guys win and we have Sean William Scott singing to a pterodactyl-type creature.

Film Review: Willy’s Wonderland (2021)

Rating 25
Length 1h 28
Release 12.2.2021
Dir Kevin Lewis
About When his car breaks down, a quiet loner agrees to clean an abandoned family fun center in exchange for repairs. He soon finds himself waging war against possessed animatronic mascots while trapped inside Willy’s Wonderland.

The Good

It’s chaotic and bonkers. It is Cabin in the Woods meets Jennifer’s Body by way of The Dead Don’t Die. It’s not going to everyone’s cup of tea but it is entertaining.

This film is chaotic, bonkers and the perfect vehicle for Nicolas Cage. This is gory, volatile type of horror that is more likely to make to chuckle or squirm than scream.
It’s not for everyone, but it feels like Cabin in the Woods (2011) meets Jennifer’s Body (2009) by way of The Dead Don’t Die (2019). So while its not going to be everyone’s cup of tea, if you like those movies this will be, at the very least, entertaining for you.
The lighting in this film (aside from the migraine inducing strobe) is incredible. I can’t put my finger on how it was done, but it adds light to the screen so you can see the action, without dulling the atmosphere.

The Bad

Nicolas Cage doesn’t speak. Now, he does a perfectly excellent job at presenting the character without words. That, I have no issue with. I just really missed Cage’s manic dialogue.
There are few really weird plot choices that are left unexplained. They just seem like plot devices and that’s a little disappointing.

The Ugly

The flashing/ strobe lighting that’s used at the beginning and partway through is nauseating. I totally understanding the artistic decision for it, however it detracts more than it adds.
With Nicolas Cage’s character mute, he’s not well rounded. It means we’re in the same position as the rest of the cast, but it has come at the expense of not investing in any of the characters.

Final Thoughts

It’s flawed (What Nic Cage project in the last decade isn’t), but well worth your time.

Film Review: Shocker (1989)

Rating: 18
Length: 1h 49
Release: 27.10.1989
Dir : Wes Craven
About: A serial killer uses the electricity from the electric chair in which he was executed to return from the dead. Later, he sets out to exact revenge on a football player who turned him in.

The Good

The music is my absolute favourite part of this late 80s gorefest. It’s rock and ‘heavy metal’, and feels really ironic. I’m pretty certain that wasn’t the intent, but it certainly works much better here than in Christine (1983).
The final act is amazing, rather meta and absolutely bonkers. If anything, I wish everything that came before was more like this. The final act plays out like the love child of Ghost in the Machine and Last Action Hero. It’s this section that really does open the story up to Craven’s original intent: a tv series.
Johnathan Parker is our ‘final girl’ in Shocker. It’s a refreshing change of pace to have a male lead in this sort of genre movie and in the role of the ‘final girl’ no less. While some of the choices for this character aren’t perfect, and I’ll look at those below, he still offers something other than what viewers might be used to.
Mitch Pileggi playing the mass killer is mind boggling brilliance. Anyone who has seen him in X Files would be forgiven for not recognising the actor, however those familiar with his time on Supernatural will understand upon watching this, why he got the role.

The Bad

It’s not a smooth plot and each of the three acts feel like they are directed by three different directors. Between the dodgy audio, lack of subtitles on Amazon Prime and what I would say are questionable editing choices, I really did struggle when it came to following at some points.
The biggest issue of course being the connection between Pinker and Johnathan. It was something I suspected, and something revealed in the movie. However, it was only upon reading up on the plot after the fact that I’d had it confirmed.
The conflict between Johnathan the ‘football star’ and Johnathan the goofball who knocked himself out at practice. I don’t get why he’s so goofy. This guy is meant to be so amazing, that his ‘football status’ is in many news reports throughout the film. That doesn’t mesh with this guy who walks into things and trips up on his own feet.
There’s a little too much overlap with Craven’s Nightmare on Elm Street in terms of Johnathan having premonition type dreams about the killer. I’d have loved if instead these dreams revealed his past and his connection to Pinker, just to remove itself from deja vu.

The Ugly

The comedy element is a little in limbo for me. It’s too much and not enough at the same time. The film holds back, leaving the comedy a little lukewarm and slightly off kilter. While I welcome the comedy, I did want more.
Read any blurb on this movie and it boils it down to Pinker being dead and wreaking havoc. That, I must say, is the most enjoyable parts of this movie, however it ignores the fact that it takes almost half the film to get to that point. There’s so much build up and establishment of the character of Jonathan. For me, I’d have opened up at the point of execution and had more of a reveal to Johnathan.

Final Thoughts

It’s flawed, its a bit of a mess, but damn I love it. There are little bits I missed due to the quality, but that’s what a rewatch is for, right?!

Open Letter to the Government Regarding Supply Teachers

Dear Dan Carden

Urgent financial help via Coronavirus Job Retention Scheme (CJRS) for supply teachers

I am writing to you regarding the financial oversight of supply teachers during this third national lockdown, which has seen teaching moved online as part of the government’s plan to curb the spread of COVID-19, including the new variants that are present in the country.

I understand the purpose of this action and welcome school closures as my time on supply between October and December 2020 did see a great inconsistency in individual school approaches to maintaining a COVID secure environment for students and staff. I personally have had to isolate three times owing to contact tracing in schools. In two of those instances, I suffered a financial loss due to having to isolate during term time.
While the Prime Minister is insisting that schools are safe, I must disagree and insist that it is a very subjective matter that does need urgent attention and scrutiny. I have experienced schools with robust cleaning routines that still have high numbers of isolations and I have experienced a school in which I refused to return owing to no precautions taking place outside of having windows open.

While I intend to outline my personal difficulties that have led to me contacting you today, I would ask you to understand that I am one of many people currently in this situation due to the revised stipulations of the CJRS when the scheme was extended until April 2020.

I became a teacher of Religious Education in 2009 and spent the better part of ten years dedicated to my career. However, in October 2018 it became apparent that my father, suffering from end-stage COPD and heart failure, was no longer able to care for himself. Being a proud man, he was reluctant to ask for any help and support from the State, therefore I made the difficult decision to become his carer and return to the family home. He died in November 2019 and while this was a blessing due to his diminished condition rendering him bedbound, the timing has led to great personal difficulties.

There are many issues regarding education that I am sure you are already aware of, and are not the focus of today’s correspondence, but they do explain my reluctance to return to teaching prior to the outbreak of COVID-19 and the subsequent lockdown in March 2020. However, by July 2020 it was clear what impact the virus had on the country in terms of employment opportunities and I began registering with CER, a teaching supply agency. I worked consistently from my time of employment in October 2020 until the announcement of this third lockdown and the closure of school buildings to all but specific students.

During the first lockdown, I was faced with an income of £409 a month, while my outgoings were nearing £700. My issues regarding Universal Credit, while something I would like challenged, is not my specific concern today but a mere piece of the problem. When the regular income of supply teaching replaced the monthly UC allowance, I was grateful to be able to, once again, support myself. However, and I hope you can appreciate this, the money I earned was all used to play ‘catch up’ as it were. At no point was I able to even consider saving for what now appears to have been inevitable, school closures. This is not to say that I have not been looking for permanent positions within schools for further financial security. Being trained in Religious Education and not practising any faith, and the historic emphasis on the International Baccalaureate in which RE plays no part, does make roles difficult to obtain irrespective of the current situation.

I now find myself working one day a week at a high school. This placement was arranged in December and I am lucky to have had the contract honoured.However, this is not enough financially, and I have been waiting to hear from CER about flexi furlough which was mentioned as an option when school closures were first announced. This has not transpired as there has been no changes made to furlough despite the imposed lockdown meaning my working opportunities have been drastically reduced. This is beginning to put me in a position where I will eventually have to make decisions regarding paying bills or purchasing food. This is not something a qualified teacher of any status should have to make.

I trust that you recognise and appreciate that myself, and other supply teachers, have provided a vital service that without, some schools would have had to have closed during the first term of the 2020/2021 academic year. Supply teachers have taken on a front-line role, with the understanding that if they were to come into contact during their daily work, they would have to isolate without pay and it is a gross injustice that we should accept the same while we do not have access to paid work. While some supply teachers make a choice due to financial stability, it is ignorant and wrong to assume we are all supply for this same reason.

Supply teaching has often been considered a thankless role and one that has a stigma attached regarding the individual and the quality of his or her teaching rather than a situation brought about by personal circumstance. I hope you can see from my situation; this is not the case. I would also urge you to understand that this oversight of financial support only compounds the issue and is conveying an opinion of our worth.

I would welcome specific consideration to how the Government is able to support myself and other teachers who are currently registered with a supply agency and would welcome an assurance from you that this will be looked into as a matter of urgency and raised with colleagues in the DfE, the Treasury and Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs (HMRC)with a view for immediate and retroactive implementation.

I look forward to your positive response on these very important matters.

Yours sincerely,

Hannah-Lynette Hunter
Teacher of Religious Education