What was the last film you watched?

[Marley Drama]

Nosferatu: A Symphony Of Horror (1922)

This has been on my viewing bucket list for decades. It goes without saying it's one of those "must-see" films because of how influential and important it has become.

Like many classics, there is certain iconography from the film that is known ahead of time. In this case, even the "unknown" in between the famous stuff is somewhat familiar since the story is heavily adapted from Bram Stoker's Dracula.

Allowance does need to be made for the fact that this film is over a century old (I can't be certain, but this could well be the oldest film I've ever watched). Truthfully, some parts did drag a bit... especially the journeying which took place somewhere around the one hour mark. There's also a whole lot of fainting going on, which gets a little wearing. The minute something begins to get intense, someone faints before it all gets too much. All things considered, though, the film holds up impressively well.

Considering the best-known imagery is very gothic, it was something of a surprise to find there was an awful lot of location work that was shot in the cold light of day. These scenes have a charm of their own in large part thanks to the beautiful Northern Germany scenery. It's also surprisingly creepy to see Count Orlok walking round in the open.

Which brings me to the makeup and effects. The way Max Schreck is made up is convincing and unsettling. I can imagine the original audience going to watch this unprepared and being completely horrified by it. I can see the influence this look had on later genre work such as Salem's Lot or The Lost Boys.

Incidentally, the film's most iconic image of the shadow going up the stairs lasts no more than a few seconds (if that), so felt almost anti-climactic. But in that moment it works very well.

I wouldn't say this film is the best of its kind, but it seems quite likely that the best of its kind wouldn't exist if this film hadn't been made. So in a way it is.​

 

[Popular Piggy Defying Gravity]

Nosferatu: A Symphony Of Horror (1922)

This has been on my viewing bucket list for decades. It goes without saying it's one of those "must-see" films because of how influential and important it has become.

Like many classics, there is certain iconography from the film that is known ahead of time. In this case, even the "unknown" in between the famous stuff is somewhat familiar since the story is heavily adapted from Bram Stoker's Dracula.

Allowance does need to be made for the fact that this film is over a century old (I can't be certain, but this could well be the oldest film I've ever watched). Truthfully, some parts did drag a bit... especially the journeying which took place somewhere around the one hour mark. There's also a whole lot of fainting going on, which gets a little wearing. The minute something begins to get intense, someone faints before it all gets too much. All things considered, though, the film holds up impressively well.

Considering the best-known imagery is very gothic, it was something of a surprise to find there was an awful lot of location work that was shot in the cold light of day. These scenes have a charm of their own in large part thanks to the beautiful Northern Germany scenery. It's also surprisingly creepy to see Count Orlok walking round in the open.

Which brings me to the makeup and effects. The way Max Schreck is made up is convincing and unsettling. I can imagine the original audience going to watch this unprepared and being completely horrified by it. I can see the influence this look had on later genre work such as Salem's Lot or The Lost Boys.

Incidentally, the film's most iconic image of the shadow going up the stairs lasts no more than a few seconds (if that), so felt almost anti-climactic. But in that moment it works very well.

I wouldn't say this film is the best of its kind, but it seems quite likely that the best of its kind wouldn't exist if this film hadn't been made. So in a way it is.​

Next should be the movie about the filming with Willem Dafoe (not the recent one). It has its own charm...

 

[Marley Drama]

Fright Night (1985)

While I knew nothing about this film's plot before last night and have had no previous desire to watch, the poster does evoke some nostalgia in me as I remember seeing it advertised on the back covers of comics (of all places). I think it was the arcade game, but the poster was the same. I was never into horror films as a kid (I scared far too easily) and it also looked quite supernatural which never really appealed. All the same, the poster piqued my curiosity. And here I am, watching it for the very first time almost four decades on.

It feels like a little time capsule. It's very 1985. It's all here, right down to the synth soundtrack that drives a lot of the action (a vampire possession sequence even takes place in a nightclub).

It's an odd little film. I found it perfectly watchable, but could never take it seriously. There's no nuance and most of the performances are very hammy. At times I couldn't even tell if it wanted to be taken seriously or was just satire through and through.

My biggest struggle with this film was that I found most of the characters very unlikeable (apart from the pretty young lead guy who was most endearing). Of course, the "new neighbours" weren't meant to be likeable, but poor Charley Brewster was just surrounded by awful, annoying people even before meeting the true antagonist. The strident girlfriend is whiny, sulky and possessive. The mother is equally possessive, and has this sing-song scatty sitcom mother thing going on whilst there's something hard as nails just under the surface (none of which is utilised for the good of the film). And the "best friend" has an annoying Shaggy-from-Scooby-Doo "comedy" voice and acts like a five year old (honestly, as terrible friends go, he's in Annie Brackett territory. He's less nasty than Annie, but even more annoying overall). You know you're in trouble when eccentric Roddy McDowall is the protagonist's most sympathetic supporter (I actually really like Roddy in this avuncular professor type role. And I suppose the relationship overall is akin to that of Marty and Doc from another 1985 film).

It also must be said that the SFX haven't aged particularly well, looking quite janky at times as a result of lingering on them. Less would definitely have been more when it comes to showing the audience this stuff. Still, it's plain a lot of work has gone into them and there are a couple of moments that really impress.

Combining the lore of vampires and American suburbia is different enough to keep this interesting. The odds also feel insurmountable at times which is a good thing (even though there's one big cheat at the end that's difficult to forgive).

I'm glad I've finally satisfied my low-level childhood curiosity by watching this and giving context to that advertisement.

​

Next should be the movie about the filming with Willem Dafoe (not the recent one). It has its own charm...

That does look like a good companion to the film. Sadly, Prime wants me to pay to watch it so I'll have to keep an eye out to see if it becomes available elsewhere. Thanks for the tip.

 

[Oh!Carol Christmasson]

NIGHT TIDE (1961)

Free to watch on you-know-where.
It looks like one of the lesser successful stories in an supernatural thriller-anthology series but somehow they've managed to give the film a unique atmosphere, and I think the choice of locations have played a part in it.
It's the kind of cinematography that makes an ordinary street sequence (albeit in a somewhat exotic setting) look interesting.
The moments of the macabre don't look too great but it does have a certain je ne sais quoi.
However, the main attraction is to watch a young and squeaky-clean Dennis Hopper in a tight Popeye outfit - it's sexier than Brad Davis in Querelle.

 

[Marley Drama]

My Bloody Valentine (2009)
AKA My Bloody Valentine 3D

My starting point was a fortunate one: I've previously watched neither this nor the 1981 Canadian film it remakes. Nor did I know anything about the plot, other than it was something to do with miners. This meant I could immerse myself in whatever plot there may be without knowing the outcome. My preference would probably have been to watch the original, but this one was free and beggars can't be choosers (besides, Noughties slashers invariably feel slicker and glossier than their low budget Eighties counterparts, which doesn't hurt).

All the slasher tropes are present and correct here: the small town; the original sin from many years earlier; the significant holiday (silly me not to realise more consciously that it's set around Valentine's Day); plus the usual array of promiscuous teens and twenty-somethings played by actors who are twice their characters' ages.

I think it helped that much of the cast was not known to me for anything specific, whilst being familiar enough to feel almost comforting. Tom Atkins and Kevin Tighe are actors I've seen in other things here and there. Jensen Ackles is a familiar name and face but I have no idea why (I suppose it's one of those names that's not easily forgotten, with a forename that sounds like a surname, and a surname that sounds like a medical condition). Kerr Smith I know from another teen horror of the same decade, Final Destination. His character there was an annoying drama queen. While there are shades of this here, his character here is a mercifully a little more interesting. Plus he's a suspect, of course.

This leads me to the next point: like other slashers from the early Eighties (Prom Night, Terror Train, the original Friday The 13th), this has the added element of mystery around the perpetrator. Cleverly, MBV has its cake and eats it by also incorporating the legendary, almost supernatural serial killer in the style of Halloween, with part of the mystery being the question of whether or not the perpetrator of the original massacre in the mineshaft - long believed dead - has returned for vengeance towards the town.

The thing with the mystery is that most of the characters aren't that well fleshed-out, and most are quite forgettable. There really weren't that many people on whom to pin a guess. The reveal didn't exactly bowl me over, but was probably as brave a move as this film could make. It did feel like a bit of a cheat, so I suppose the success of the reveal would live or die on whether or not it stands up to a rewatch with the knowledge of whodunnit.

The film admittedly got me with some cheap jump scares. Mostly because of the loud stings that accompany the visuals, which is a cheat but effective in a ghost train kind of way.

The town itself feels very lived-in and rough round the edges. From what I've seen and read, there are some things about American small towns that charm me, and some things I find a little scary, and this captures both (as an example of the latter, there's a reveal of an extrajudicial killing which a number of townfolk have covered up).

There's the added complication of soap opera elements, with love triangles and cheating and a surprise pregnancy. Mileage will vary on how much of this is actually needed, but I appreciated that there was at least a story with different things going on.

Regarding both versions of MBV, I have read over the years about them containing a lot of violence and gore and I did wonder going in if it might be a bit much for my tastes. As it turns out, showing too much is this film's undoing. It's very clearly shot with the 3D gimmick in mind but watching it fifteen years later in 2D, it doesn't hold up at all well in this department. The more it tries to horrify with graphic imagery, the more cartoony and daft it looks. Eyeballs fly out of heads and at the screen, along with any number of other organs and objects. The pickaxe keeps swinging in the direction of the camera. It's more retro cutesy than terrifying, but also a little sad that nothing seems to have been learnt from the early Eighties 3D revival which employed similar gimmicks equally indiscriminately. Less is always more in horror, and this obvious gimmickry cheapens an otherwise perfectly watchable slasher.

There is some three dimensional fan-service, predictably aimed at the core audience of heterosexual teenage boys who no doubt felt the blood rush from their 3D goggles during the prolonged nude murder. Naturally it comes with the usual gender inequality where the male actor in the scene (also one of the writers) got away with a quick flash of the bum, while the woman ran round giving us full frontal for what felt like ten long minutes. Frankly, I'd rather have seen Jensen's Ackles in 3D, but to each their own.

Long story short (too late), this could have been much better, and is never going to be art, but I've seen worse slashers. I might even watch it again years down the line. I'm also hoping my notoriously poor memory for film does its thing so I can enjoy the original in due course without remembering any key information from this one.​

 

[Marley Drama]

Child's Play (1988)

Last night, I wanted something unchallenging and brief and horror-ish, and this suggestion from Primm was a spontaneous choice that seemed to fit the bill perfectly.

Child's Play is one of those films that I've somehow managed to never watch, but feel as though I have because it was one of those phenomena at the time and it seemed to be spoken about in great depth by kids in school. At the time I didn't feel I wanted to watch because it seemed too scary (I was a complete wuss with scary films as a kid) and by the time I belatedly had any kind of interest in the genre it seemed a bit too silly (I had a similar relationship with the equally popular-among-classmates A Nightmare On Elm Street films which I've also never watched. I would like to correct that with at least the original in that series).

One nice surprise in the very first moments of the film was seeing Tom Holland's name at the beginning and realising this film shared genes with last weekend's "Eighties classic first time watch" film, Fright Night. And then Chris Sarandon's name appeared, giving it even more common ground.

It wasn't as daft as I was expecting. I suspect this is by virtue of it being the original film, where the premise is being established and - in the first half of the film at least - there's a degree of mystery around Chucky himself. Of course it becomes a little more quirky once Chucky reveals himself more, but the juxtaposition of the foul-mouth and murderous intentions in this object associated with innocence is always going to be fun.

And there is just something innately creepy about inanimate objects that might not be as inanimate as they appear. This motif with dolls can be traced back from this film to Poltergeist in the early Eighties, Trilogy Of Terror in the Seventies, The Twilight Zone in the Sixties... and the one that started them all: the classic Ventriloquist's Dummy section in Dead Of Night back in 1945. They probably don't even have to be done as well as most of these are. Just the idea of it is enough to send a shudder down the spine (the opposite is true as well. Something that is supposed to be living but isn't can be very disturbing, which is one of many reasons why I wouldn't fancy working in a mortuary).

Tonally it's an enjoyable watch. It has a little of the irreverence of other Eighties horror films but some of their atmosphere, too. There's the lightning over the building from Ghostbusters. The cute present that turns into a nightmare from Gremlins. And the "don't give a crap" anti-hero in common with A Nightmare On Elm Street. Crucially, it also takes itself seriously enough for me to feel a degree of investment. I mean, the idea of a six year old kid being framed for murder and locked up in an institution is nothing if not dark.

Casting is decent enough. It's good to see Chris Sarandon in a more sympathetic and human role so soon after Fright Night. Something about Catherine Hicks reminded me of Mary Richards (influenced, no doubt, by me being deep into a rewatch of The Mary Tyler Moore Show). There's McGee from The Incredible Hulk. Brad Dourif gives it his all. Alex Vincent is also a standout as Andy. It's a rarity for me to watch a child actor that doesn't grate, but here's one. Of course, the crying scene at the institution is probably his 'big moment', but most kids can put on that performance at the drop of a hat if they want something badly enough, so I was more impressed with the consistency throughout, which I suspect is also helped by Holland's direction and the editing. 1988 must have been the year from it with junior horror leads, but Alex is quite a few years younger than even Danielle Harris.

Anyway, I found it a watchable and fun film, and I'd be up for watching the sequels at some point - especially since there aren't quite as many as I'd thought.​

 

[Marley Drama]

The Resort (2021)

The poster looks rather el cheapo, and the general vibe of the film from this and Prime's description of the premise about four friends exploring a haunted, abandoned resort in Hawaii makes it look rather... unpromising. But sometimes watching something with an open mind and low expectations can yield gold.

Sadly, this isn't the case here. It feels rather like a sub-par student film that's had a bit of money thrown at it for some inexplicable reason. We spend a lot of time with the four narcissistic millennials, who persistently call one another "you guys". One the men has a man bun (how very mid-2010s); The women make duck lips when they speak, but we know the smart one is the one that can have a conversation that's not about herself (so long as she's speaking about her current interest trend of ghosts and spirits). We also know she's our final girl because she's marginally less interested in Instagram than the other girl (oh, and because the film bloody tells us from the start she's the only survivor. How conceited to think they have enough of a story get away with the whole film being told in flashback).

Long story short, then, they're pretty annoying, difficult to like and not the brightest pebbles on the beach.

We spend a lot of time with them in the first hour of the film, mostly doing very little other than engaging in banal conversations. The only relief from complete boredom comes from some attractive scenery (mainly the Hawaiian island, but I suppose one could also count the rear nudity from the nicer looking of the two men. How refreshing for a horror film to gender-reverse its double standards).

The Blair Witch Project seems to be an influence on this film, with "The Half-Faced Girl" replacing the titular character of the original. Once things (eventually) begin to get creepy, it feels the perseverance of sticking with the film is worth it. But this lasts for a minute or two before laying it on with a trowel, showing us everything that should be hidden and going overboard with the makeup and effects (which are admittedly quite disturbing and effective at times. If only this much effort had been put into the writing).

Part of me wonders why anyone would watch this. Then I remember I did just that, and I feel a great sadness.​

 

[DallasFanForever]

HERE (2024)

With an entire movie being shot in only one room, and from one point of view, I had my doubts how they would pull this off. I knew at the very least Tom Hanks and Robin Wright would give it some credibility given their history. After a very slow start this movie more than delivered. The house itself is the real star of the film as we see all the events that transpired there over the years from the different families that lived there. I really liked the concept and ended up highly enjoying this movie.

 

[Oh!Carol Christmasson]

With an entire movie being shot in only one room, and from one point of view,

Do you mean it's all shot from the same camera angle? That seems very...novel.

 

[DallasFanForever]

Do you mean it's all shot from the same camera angle? That seems very...novel.

Yes it is. The entire movie focuses on the living room of the house and from the exact same angle. I know people saying they won’t see it for that reason but looking back on it now I enjoyed how they did it. The house, and that particular view out the living room window is the entire premise of the movie and everything that happens there over the years. It’s almost like you’re looking at these events through the eyes of the house itself, if that makes any sense.

 

[Marley Drama]

Campfire Tales (1997)

Once again, expectations were low for this one. Any immediate information about the film gave the impression of low budget, and this was apparent from the first scenes and opening titles which looked quite "made for TV" (or, to be more accurate about this specific film, "direct to video"). Still, this needn't be a bar to enjoyment, so I continued.

The timing of this one is interesting. It arrived shortly after Scream, but before the deluge of Scream-inspired postmodern slashers. As a showcase for many of the urban legends that would soon begin appearing in films (and franchises) like I Know What You Did Last Summer and, to an even greater extent, Urban Legend. With this context, it's apparent that Campfire Tales was surprisingly influential, and the reason it's surprising is that I wasn't even aware of this film, so perhaps it was forgotten very quickly while it's higher budget followers are still talked about today.

The postmodern smart-talking and omniscience isn't as prevalent here as in other films of the era. Some sections are played completely straight, with the most obvious ersatz-Scream tone being in the linking "kids around the campfire" scenes, with the four slasher character archetypes (the cocky, alpha male jock; the thoughtful final girl type; the smart-mouthed girlfriend who takes no crap; and the nervous geeky type who likes a joke).

Part of the reason I put off watching this film all through October was that I'm not hugely fond of anthology films. There aren't that many that resonate with me (the recently-mentioned Dead Of Night being a notable exception). All the same, these kinds of stories demand to be confined in order to keep their purity, and it worked well.

The effort to tie things together a little at the end was welcome. While it's not a great film, it's certainly enjoyable enough for a cosy All Souls' Day night in.​

 

[Oh!Carol Christmasson]

I know people saying they won’t see it for that reason

I want to see it exactly for that reason.

It’s almost like you’re looking at these events through the eyes of the house itself

I wonder how that looks in a haunted house story.
Actually they could make it even more novel: let the action happen in the other room not shown on camera.
After all, HERE screams for the sequel THERE.

Part of the reason I put off watching this film all through October was that I'm not hugely fond of anthology films

I think it's difficult to make all the stories equally good, and the lesser successful parts stick out like a sore thumb even if those parts would be satisfying in isolation.
And then there's the challenge of making it all connect in a plotdriven or artistic way.
Nevertheless, there is something fascinating about the more extreme anthologies like Todd Haynes' Poison (1991).

 

[Marley Drama]

The entire movie focuses on the living room of the house and from the exact same angle.

I want to see it exactly for that reason.

Same here. I'm quite intrigued by the idea, and I do like a good "confined space" setup.

And then there's the challenge of making it all connect in a plotdriven or artistic way.

This film did make an effort to do this at the end. The problem was it only included two of the three stories when wrapping up, so I was left feeling they hadn't crossed all the "t"s and dotted all the "i"s.

 

[Oh!Carol Christmasson]

Speaking of Bloody Valentine, I think I once nominated the 1981 film's theme song in one of the Music Top Tens.
It sounds oddly folksy pleasant for its subject, like some of the popular tragedy songs mostly made in the 1970s.

 

[Treeviewer]

Ghostbusters II (1989)
The sequel. Not much new on offer but a fun revisit for the characters.

 

[Marley Drama]

Gods and Monsters (1998)

This was a last-minute "Plan B" film. I had Fight Club all ready to go but my partner flat out refused to watch it based on the visual imagery evoked by the title. I can understand and respect this since it's the reason I to had never wanted to watch, but I had a sudden desire to check it out after realising that Ed Norton is in it. Paired with Fincher and the fact that it seems a highly respected film, I was persuaded. Ah well, perhaps another time.

The upshot was that a compromise was reached and Gods and Monsters was it. It was a suggestion from Prime after adding Fight Club to my watch list - presumably off the back of it being another Academy Award winner of the same era.

I was in the position of watching this blind, since I knew almost nothing about it, I'm not familiar with James Whale (the film director - not to be mistaken for the radio presenter) and I only know his films by name reputation. This may have peeled away a layer or two of additional enjoyment for me, but was certainly no bar to investing in the story presented here. The people and pop culture referenced in the film could just as easily have been inventions for this film since it builds its world carefully and weaves real-life references in.

First impressions were fairly underwhelming. I felt it had a "made for TV" type of quality at times, a view reinforced quite early on in the running - during the scene where the vacuous squealing fanboy arrived to interview Whale - when a boom mic dipped into shot and stayed there for several seconds. For a few moments I thought this must be deliberate and waited patiently for the payoff, but came there none.

The three key actors give great performances. Ian McKellen gives good sleaze. Manipulative old predators getting unworldly young men into positions where they can be ogled, touched or otherwise objectified is, sadly, a very truthful archetype, familiar to anyone who has spent time at a gay social gathering or bar. I'm sure they still exist (the predators, that is. Gay bars I'm less sure about. Everything seems so fluid and open nowadays they might be surplus to requirements). Lynn Redgrave is a surprise here, and I suspect unrecognisable compared with other roles. Brendan Fraser is equally surprising. I immediately associate his name with George Of The Jungle, so it was good to discover he has some acting chops with a substantial performance (of course, I've since realised he's more recently been lauded for The Whale)

There's something of the mid-life crisis fantasy to this film, with Fraser's character the key fantasy figure, which comes across in every aspect of his relationship with Whale, from the handyman lured into close proximity to the emotional intimacy to the situation they share during their sittings to the towel-dropping scene where he's finally baring skin to Whale willingly (an uncomfortable scene since it seems almost to come from Stockholm Syndrome or a fascination with the glamorous life. And even more so since it escalates to a sexual assault and violence). This is contrasted nicely with his character's working class earthiness in scenes away from this world, drinking beers in the bar, engaging in laddish banter with his friends (one of whom is an ex-girlfriend he's trying unsuccessfully to get back into bed).

Helping keep the audience engaged are familiar names and faces. Elizabeth Taylor and Princess Margaret both show up at one event attended. And Pamela Salem - best known to me as a key member of The Firm in Eighties EastEnders - is Whale's mother in flashbacks.

I came away feeling unqualified to give any kind of verdict as to its greatness, other than to say I'm glad I watched.​

 

[Payton's Magic Christmas Light]

The first part of the Horror movie series of "Scream" 1996

 

[Treeviewer]

ALIEN: ROMULUS (2024)

ALIEN (1979) and ALIENS (1986) rank very high among my favorite films, but otherwise I have little use for the rest of the franchise; I think the other ALIEN / PROMETHEUS films range from forgettable to terrible. ROMULUS started out pretty solid, seemingly trying to combine the techniques of the first two films. This could have been an enjoyable if derivative movie, but the last third is a boring mess. Elements of all of the other movies were incorporated, leaving the film feeling less like a cohesive narrative than a patchwork of scenes lifted from other movies.

I watched this over the weekend and endorse your comments. They must have thought the quotes from the other movies were clever but it was overdone.

 

[Marley Drama]

The Reef: Stalked (2022)

The 2010 original is, to my mind, simply one of the best shark films ever made. Indeed, if Jaws wasn't so embedded in my top spot, I would view The Reef as the #1 film of its kind. Like the earlier croc film Black Water, from the same team, it turns any limitations into strength by giving a film based on simplicity with a small cast, a taught story based on real-life events, and realistic animal behaviour with no CGI or animatronics. It's also very Australian, which is no bad thing.

When it was released, I read a couple of comments about Stalked that suggested it didn't live up to the original, so I went in with expectations lowered. All the same, it's a very disappointing film compared for anyone who has seen the original.

The film suffers with major sequelitis. The subtlety and tension-building of the first film seems to be present at first (at least, once we're past the "Home and Away does domestic violence" stuff which takes up too much of the first half an hour). We spend some time feeling uncomfortable in the water, but without any sign of a shark. Then there's a little splash nearby, and by the time we look there's just a ripple on the surface. This is the kind of thing the first film did so well.

But once the protagonists begin to understand what's happening, all subtlety goes out of the window and it attempts to lean heavily into Hollywood popcorn fare: the White Shark pursuing them is huge and relentless and - unlike the original film which got into our heads by leaving questions about if there is indeed (still) a shark nearby - there are very few windows where it's not attacking or about to attack. They leave the shark on one side of the island, get into a boat on another side and as soon as they're on their way again, up pops the shark. We also see far too much of it. As I remember, in The Reef, we only saw the shark from the characters' perspectives, which was genuinely creepy. In Stalked, we cut away to shots of the shark swimming nearby and are even treated to Jaws-type shark POV shots as it approaches them. The shark also helpfully waves its dorsal fin (which looks quite cardboard-y) again and again so we and the characters know where it is, which immediately removes any suspense. There also appear to be a few shots which use CGI. And it looks very poor indeed in these moments.

All of Andrew Traucki's animal attack films have a degree of soap opera tension: 2007's Black Water has the woman revealing to her sister (but not her husband) that she's pregnant; 2010's The Reef has the on again/off again couple (currently off again) ending up at sea together; 2020's Black Water: Abyss has that annoying love quadrangle, with the slutty woman pregnant. All of the films also feature a theme of female empowerment or women as "survivors" that - because they're something more than slasher films feels like something more than the "final girl" trope.

Stalked takes these elements to a different level with an unmistakable "girl power" vibe. All the main cast is female. They land on an island inhabited solely by women (apart from one boy who is quickly forgotten when his sister becomes more important to the story). And this is where the "backstory" comes in, with the lead character suffering from post traumatic stress due to her sister's untimely murder one year earlier. This element works at times since her sister's drowning means that water triggers creatively shot flashbacks for her. And what better activity to overcome her aquaphobia than taking tiny kayaks out onto the open ocean for several days.

This means only man with any kind of role in the story is violent, controlling and abusive. And the misandry doesn't stop there. We get all metaphorical with it, with the shark itself becoming a less-than-subtle symbol of the abusive predatory male forcing its unwanted attention on helpless females (don't point out that they're in its habitat attracting it by splashing and spearfishing, because that would be victim blaming) . We just know this shark is male, because the film all but tells us that a female one would be much more helpful and supportive. One of the characters even pointedly reminds us of the surfies' nickname for the Great White: "the man in the grey suit".

And with this theme in place, it's not enough to simply survive. The oppressor must be cancelled. Which means Old Testament/Hollywood destruction. There are some stupid decisions taken during the course of the film, but the one that took the biscuit for me was when the protagonist refused to paddle the tiny boat any further and announced to her girlfriends they needed to kill the giant shark themselves (and sod the Great White's "vulnerable" status, I suppose. After all, anything Blake Lively can do...). What comes next is beyond ridiculous.

It's a decently acted film with lovely scenery and some very promising moments that ultimately ends up cannibalising itself with its pseudo-feminist message, like a gutted shark eating its own intestines. Forget this one and treat yourself to watching the original 2010 film.​

 

[Oh!Carol Christmasson]

since her sister's drowning means that water triggers creatively shot flashbacks for her. And what better activity to overcome her aquaphobia than taking tiny kayaks out onto the open ocean for several days.

Characters looking for trouble, and then getting it, often looks like a cheap and unnecessary stress factor to me.
"A dangerous mission into space", "someone gets involved with the mafia" - and then everything "spirals out of control". I find it impossible to overlook the risks being taken in order to create a risky tone. It's kinda like putting the cart before the horse.
I will not watch this film.