Reviews

15 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
Devil in Ohio (2022)
5/10
Folk horror center wrapped in tedious teen chaff
13 September 2022
Warning: Spoilers
Those of us who are folk horror fans are forever hungry as they don't make enough of these films (or television series, as the case is here), and what a let-down when someone does it and then...does this.

I didn't care about the goofy lives of high schoolers when I was in high school, and for narrative reasons that escape me, more than half of this series is about teenagers and dating and dances. I have a hard time believing that people who are somehow interested in teenagers and dating and dances care much about agrarian cults, and I have a hard time that people who want to watch a movie about agrarian cults (hi!) care much at all about trite teenage drivel.

At the center of this story is a Luciferian religion which was interesting enough (folk horror fans are familiar with the problem of "whoops, crop problems, so therefore let's sacrifice a human" concept). Very little time is spent exploring the lives of the members of this cult except for their lust to kill someone because of an unfortunate corn smut situation. The concept of isolated cults hidden in the modern world is interesting, and you'd think that'd be red meat for a writer, but...apparently not here.

We're told the cult's origin story in a kind of fast, trite exposition when that should have been the whole story. We should have arrived in the present day after more in-depth depictions of how the cult came to exist and what its internal dynamics were. I particularly hated the satanic cop who's job is to just look evil in his hat all the time. There's no imagination when it comes to these things; they're just tropes. Evil people don't know or think that they're evil. They certainly don't go around looking menacing all the time because who has energy for that.

It's too bad, too. There are some interesting things about this cult, since the cult is not based in some kind of pagan tradition but is specifically based in a rebellion against the supposedly apathetic/unresponsive Christian god, hence the cult retains, outwardly, some Christian aesthetics (nuns, etc.) Here, the inverted crosses actually make some sense; they're not just thrown in there as generic satanic symbols. Inversion is the basis of the cult itself.

But never mind that! Besties are upset that their friends are hanging out with other people in high school and who is going to go to which dance with whom and, like, omg!

You get just a few of those great disgusted "teenage girl in bad movie" dirty looks. Unfortunately they don't occur where they normally occur in stories like this, which is when teenage girls are "proximate to nature," teenage girls apparently (according to almost every movie ever made) being vexed by the prospect of trees and stuff. Like when they move to some new (cursed or haunted) house in the woods somewhere and they just go "ugh" and pop their gum and tap their cell phones with a disgusted look on their face, upset at the foliage. It's a shame too, because in a movie like this you would expect more of that, and I feel cheated. There's a little of it though. I would have gone overboard with it here and had a lot more of it, because it's that kind of a movie.

What is good here, and it deserves special mention, is the music. There is some infernal music based in old English folk aesthetics here which is remarkably well orchestrated. In fact, it's the best thing about this series.

This should have been a three episode series, and all of the pretext around how this cult comes to be known and impacts the modern world should have been completely re-done. The movie tells us nothing about spirituality, religion, mysticism, or really much about the human psyche: our corn is all smutty, therefore we will sacrifice a human to the devil, and it is too bad we are in Ohio where there are no Mexicans around who might suggest that since huitlacoche is totes edible maybe it's an underserved market (I've had it; it's not bad.) and you could make lemonade from them there lemons.

Wasted potential. There's something workable at the center of this and it is just terribly executed with a bunch of teenage drama and psychotherapy and marriage stuff I just wanted to fast forward through.

Worst thing was by the end I didn't care about the fates of the characters, and in stories like this you're supposed to care. Burn or don't burn, get divorced or don't, I don't care.

I liked the little girl who sang, I guess. Mae was pretty good; I liked her psychotic edge. No one else here is interesting.

Unbelievably bland, and a lost opportunity. If you want a good story about crop failure and human sacrifice, you know the one to watch. It isn't this one.
3 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
Delightful!
28 April 2022
Conway's Game of Life is a simulation of cellular life.

Imagine a cell represented as a square or pixel on a grid, and further imagine that the cell has eight potential neighbors surrounding it.

There are three rules by which the cell dies/disappears, or reproduces in an adjacent cell:

1. Any live cell with two or three live neighbors survives.

2. Any dead cell with three live neighbors becomes a live cell.

3. All other live cells die in the next generation. Similarly, all other dead cells stay dead.

From these simple rules, incredibly complex arrays of cell colonies emerge over multiple generations, from stable, static colonies, to kinetic ones, to ones which die out completely. People have modeled simple mathematical calculators using cells populated just-so. The complexity which emerges from this half-century old program/game is thought-provoking and compelling to this day.

There are free implementations of Conway's Game of Life for nearly every platform in existence - almost certainly there is at least one for the device you are reading this on. I urge you to seek one out.

The lead character in the movie begins to notice unexpectedly complex patterns emerging from similar simple algorithms he uses to create visual displays for a techno band.

He begins to wonder how his simple algorithms are generating unexpected complexity.

He becomes fixated on the idea that the universe itself may simply be a gazillion-generations old simulation based on equally simplistic rules - a kind of algorithmic grand unification theory. His fixation leads to obsession.

The people around him think he is nuts.

And that's the basis of the story in Digital Physics.

There's a psychedelic sequence in this that is one for the ages.

Computer nerds, physics nerds, retrocomputing nerds, math nerds, psychonauts, and nerds generally, ought to appreciate this clever, delightful little film.

I guarantee it is probably smarter than whatever you watched last.

And hey, a barely-disguised 80's era fish tank Mac is at the center of the action. And who doesn't dig that?

I enjoyed this quite a bit. What a pleasant surprise!
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
The art and science of causing change in conformity with will
5 April 2022
This is a strange documentary. I hadn't read the description and expected some kind of breezy documentary about memes, but this film posits that memes are actually employed as sigils and hypersigils in the context of chaos magick, and so things are dark right from the outset.

I'm not sure I fully buy the central premise of the documentary. I don't really know the extent to which these online communities had an impact on the 2016 election, which was, as far as I can tell, a reaction to the Obama presidency and social progress moving at a clip which terrified a lot of people.

Even assessing the alt-right as a whole, I don't know how it breaks down between edgy 4chan trolls vs. Garden variety working class bigots, who may not have any connection with meme warfare or care much about the Internet.

Still, there is something unsettling here. I was surprised the documentary didn't discuss Edward Bernays and the way similar systems of manipulation have been employed in the context of business and capitalism (e.g., advertising). The concept of manipulating people in this way is not new; the particular spin it takes in online forums, and especially the people trafficking in these techniques is, perhaps, unique to the modern age.

And more to the point, as to criticisms of this documentary, this central point is missed: whether something is hokum or not has depressingly little connection to its efficaciousness: there are endless examples of human history of complete insanity and ludicrous lies having a cratering impact.

I have been genuinely surprised the degree to which these online cults have been attractive to people. And there seems to be little correlation between the stupidity of the worldviews they're selling and the IQ of the people who buy into them, which is to say, there are a lot of very intelligent people buying into some very stupid, harmful ideas.

Which, perhaps, speaks to a conversation we haven't had which is long overdue: intelligence -- that is, IQ -- and wisdom, are not the same things.

Grain of salt and all, but I find it hard to dismiss the central idea here entirely,

The most interesting thing here is the assertion that the power lies with the collective (vs. Individualist) expression of this technique, and especially the idea that the alt-right seems to have out-collective'd the left, somehow.

I would not have bet on this 20 years ago, but a whole lot of demented ideological pathologies have switched places in those decades, and the Internet may well have something -- maybe a lot -- to do with it.

That this is a form of mass insanity is a mundane and obvious conclusion. If you believe insanity is doomed to failure, you're not going to see much point here. If you believe in the power of mass insanity to disrupt, subvert, and destroy -- and I certainly do -- this is a far more disconcerting documentary.
6 out of 11 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
A triumph.
24 January 2022
What a delight this is. A slice-of-life memoir of sorts about a neurotic (yet normal and recognizable) artist, it fires on all cylinders. Its central metaphor is clever and compelling.

As fast as the dialog is here -- and it is really fast (I watched the British dub), it will occasionally pause to take a breath, lingering for a moment on an illustration of an alleyway, a cityscape, a dripping faucet, or a night sky. All of the tricks cartoonists have are deployed here to wonderful effect - big exaggerated facial expressions, hilarious fantasies which can only really happen in animation, but more than this, there is so much beauty throughout.

This is simply a pleasure to look at: generous, lush color, and the artist's eye for amplifying the essence of things. When I watch it again, I will pause it a lot. There's so much to look at here. Although the style is different, I kept thinking of those New York City montages in Fritz the Cat linking the scenes together. I really appreciate it when animators think to do that.

Funny as this is, there's so much heart to go along with its intelligence and verisimilitude. I sympathize so much with the protagonist, and I suspect a lot of people will, too. I had to rewind during the pizza selection conundrum sequence because I was laughing so hard: I've been there.

All of this is tied together by an excellent, thoughtfully selected soundtrack. I'm taking notes and will have to hunt down a few of these for my mix.

Outstanding.
15 out of 15 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Y2K (1999 TV Movie)
2/10
Scut Farkas, Ken Olin, and Joe Morton but no mecha-shark Voltron thing forming in the Atlantic
17 October 2021
For some reason, they covered Y2k problems with the power grid, nuke plants, and aircraft, but not a single second of this putrid film was dedicated to the mecha-shark Voltron thing that was supposed to form in the Atlantic.

In which sharks join forces into a six mile tall mecha-shark Voltron thing that attacks the East Coast, that was prophesized for Y2K.

This is a lot like covering the Last Supper from the standpoint of Zagat's, focusing on the cuisine itself, like "The bread was a little dry" and ignoring the whole Judas thing and the coming crucifixion of Christ the Lord.

Hence, in this instance, covering tedious mechanical failures while completely ignoring the mecha-shark Voltron thing forming in the Atlantic, which I trust we can all agree was the real fear of Y2K.

The film is also devoid of killer bee attacks, Yeti sightings, or Dan Hedaya, focusing instead on the fairly remarkable choice to put Scut Farkas in a position of responsibility smack dab in the middle of the millennium apocalypse.

Also Chekhov's Gun here *should be* Joe Morton.

But at no point in the proceedings did anyone suddenly realize they have Joe Morton to deploy against the forces of darkness and destruction such as, oh like for example, the mecha-shark Voltron thing forming in the Atlantic.

It is like having Charles Bronson in a film as just some guy who never trashes bozos. Like in The Indian Runner.

A real disappointment, this one, and no nudity either, on account of it seems to be a made-for-TV movie in the puritanical United States in which everyone apparently hates boobs along with mecha-shark Volton things forming in the Atlantic.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
Minotaur cults are just not as frightening as Satanic ones.
5 August 2020
Warning: Spoilers
Minotaur cult in Greece is performing human sacrifices of itinerant hippies. Donald Pleasance, a priest, investigates, then eventually explodes Peter Cushing, the cult leader, with religious relics.

There's your spoiler.

It would seem to take a lot of serial failures to screw up a film with Peter Cushing, Donald Pleasance, with Brian Eno handling the soundtrack, but this fails on every level.

It is too boring to be funny in a bad movie sort of way. There's almost no plot here and they stretch this out to excruciating extremes. There's no slow burn either: the pacing is horrible and they show you the ritual room and the stupid Minotaur statue right out of the gate (seriously, this is a bush league mistake - how can anyone mess this up?).

You know what's coming minutes in and you sort of don't care.

The setting is mostly underutilized. You're in Greece: use it. There's a little bit filmed around old ruins. There's a lot you could do here with curses or somehow link these Minotaur enthusiasts back to their ancient ancestors.

The cult, its beliefs, and its practices are goofy and uninteresting. A talking Minotaur statue with gas jets shooting flame out of its nose was probably, on paper, a lot scarier than the ludicrous thing it turned out to be in the movie.

What a waste of Cushing and Pleasance, and it's a waste of your time too even if you like cheesy horror. That the move is tedious is a far larger offense than its goofiness, and man this really, really long and really, really boring.

However, stick around for the Spinal Tap meets Emerson, Lake, and Powell theme that runs over the closing credits. It's the best thing about the film by far.

Terrible film by conventional horror standards, terrible by camp standards, terrible by MST3K standards. This movie has no redeeming qualities.

Except that closing theme -- man, what a gas!
2 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
It's like, how much more woke can this be?
18 April 2020
And the answer is none.

None more woke.

There are funny parts here.

He's ok.

Some of this felt like pandering. Some time in the past it was decided you could make sweeping generalizations about groups of people or regions of the country provided you were punching up: bigotry is fine, in other words, provided that on a collective basis you've got less power than the people you're stereotyping. This is apparently a rule of cultural physics now.

I'm sure people who enjoy this sort of thing enjoyed this special.

I found it about 50% funny and 50% lazy. I don't feel attacked, offended, or uncomfortable; it is more tedious than it is challenging. Nor do, I presume, the whole of the Midwest, or the hippies in Asheville, North Carolina, who are probably more confused than anything.

This was like watching a Twitter woke-off; a series of social justice memes thrown out for mutual approval, re-tweets, likes, and upvotes.

Still, overall, worth watching. He's got potential.

I recommend it, but it is nothing I'll remember in a year's time.
3 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
Funny. Depressing.
3 September 2019
This is a really well written and performed comedic meditation on the current condition of the United States. I've watched a lot of Quinn over the years and I am pretty sure this is the best thing he's done.

His conclusions that it's all basic coming to an end is depressing and I'm not convinced he's right about that, but he's right about the current state of things.

Lots of really clever observations here and his take-down of all 50 states, one-by-one is particularly memorable.
10 out of 11 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Dark August (1976)
7/10
Better than I expected.
15 August 2019
A modern yarn about a curse. Less a horror movie than a modern folk tale, I suspect those expecting horror are the ones most disappointed in this.

I was impressed overall with the cinematic competence of this semi-obscure film. Well-cast, well-acted, and well directed, there is also a soundtrack by William S. Fischer which adds a lot - in particular a beautiful piano piece while the local witch assembles a remedy for a child.

Great Vermont scenery, and J.J. Barry is well-cast here as a modern everyman thrown into this bizarre and tragic situation.

The magical ritual herein will be interesting for students of the occult: drawing variously from Christianity (the Lord's Prayer), Qabbalah, bits from Crowley (IAO) and Wicca, along with a fairly extended tarot card sequence are well done.

This is not a great film but it is a good one, if you aren't expecting something to keep you on the edge of your seat. This is just not that kind of story.
5 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Another Life (2019–2021)
3/10
I hate to join the mob, but this is really, really bad.
30 July 2019
I haven't the slightest clue of how this all came together. And, I find myself irritable that I am in agreement with so many commenters on this show, but it really is sort of like if you took the most annoying Millennial stereotypes and - for reasons clear only to the writers - put them in space.

The premise by itself could, I suppose, be developed, although not particularly interesting in and of itself - some crystalline alien thing lands, and they send a crew full of 20-something Starbucks baristas into space to go to the planet it came from, for some reason.

It is a writing failure that I want bad things to happen to this crew. I cheer when they die, I cheer when they lose, but I groan when we are subjected to their shallow and uninteresting sex lives.

What a waste of a budget. I don't understand why anyone thought this would be entertaining, or why they are scraping the floor for the worst writers they can possibly find.

I'm giving the show 3 stars for Katee Sackhoff who is wasted in this, but fine as far as her character goes, and the CGI which is alright.

Somehow I made it to the very beginning of Episode 9, but I'm done. I don't care how it ends, especially since I am almost positive it won't end with what I really want, the entire ship exploding and taking the whole crew with it. I'm sure at least some of them will survive and there will be some kind of cliffhanger which, in its presumptuousness that I care, will tick me off.

It may seem like another one of these situations where the Internet hive mind has gone nuts and launched a jihad against a television show but it really is that bad: stupid, insulting, cringe-inducingly bad.
2 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
We have been making movies about these problems for 50 years now.
29 April 2019
You've seen this *sort* of story before. Encapsulated summaries will use words like "alienated," "disaffected," and "pessimistic." "Middle America" will be in there somewhere too.

I used to be on team "Buck up, lil' cowboy," mocking the apparent privilege and entitlement of young adults, or kids on the cusp of adulthood when they got all moody about their lives and prospects.

But after decades of school shootings, suicides, terrorist attacks, obliteration of our landscape (aesthetically, environmentally, and economically), I give.

I kept thinking about Tuck & Dar from "Made in U.S.A (1987)" while watching this. Those two characters existed in the same America. This film, "An American in Texas" is set only a few years after Made in U.S.A., but the film itself was made 30 years later and the nihilistic leads from Made in U.S.A. could have stopped for gas in this Texas town, dressed as they were in the earlier movie, and you would not have noticed any stylistic or thematic interruption. Tuck & Dar's Centralia and Times Beach have echoes in the plastic plant which seems almost demonic in this film. Or maybe it's more like Dorian Gray's painting.

You can also bring up the Linklater/Bogosian film Suburbia as a discussion point here (though that was not nearly so dark as this one), and you could even go back to Easy Rider to see where things start to crack in America.

The thing that has to be understood about 1990 is it was not clear that the Gulf War wouldn't turn into a major regional war and result in a draft.

We're now used to these limited foreign adventures in which only the enlisted are involved, but in 1990 our most recent war of reference was Vietnam. The Gulf War was limited, over quickly, and was nothing like Vietnam but when it was happening, it was scary, because then - as now - it was hard to sort propaganda from fact. It turned out to be "v1.0" of modern warfare; these undeclared pseudo-wars on the other side of the globe where no one ever even whispered the term "draft" or "rationing," and which a lot of Americans could even forget were happening.

An American in Texas is set against that backdrop but it is not about that time and place -- that time and place is just an excuse to talk about us, now. To talk about the lack of optimism, or if you want to use a really trite term, something like "The Death of the American Dream." The same people who roll their eyes at this now are the same people who have been doing it since the 1960s.

I think the film was excellent and the performances superb. These young actors were incredible, and Barry Corbin is always a welcome presence. You've also got Jello Biafra in a small role, hamming it up (in an otherwise somber film, it's excusable - the directors clearly want you to notice it's Jello playing a Texas politician.)

This is a punk film, not a metal one. In the film, it is 1990 but this is about today, and we've been at this now for a half a century, trying to figure out what's gone wrong. I don't know that we make any progress here in figuring all of that out, but maybe if nothing else, there's cold comfort in recognizing that someone else notices it.

I can find no fault with the performances, script, or direction, and the soundtrack is excellent.

People who hate this film were probably predestined to before the script was ever put to paper. A lot of people either don't see America in these terms or, alternately, are in denial.

It just seems like we could have been, should have been, could be something more.

I liked An American in Texas. It will never have a large audience. But for me, it landed.
5 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Actually, I think this is one of the best low-budget 70's occult horror films I've seen.
30 June 2018
No one going into a low budget film like this should expect a masterpiece, but reading the reviews, I was prepared for something far less competent than this movie about an intergenerational curse as the product of a witch burning (think Mario Bava's Black Sunday but set in modern day - well, 1971 - Staten Island).

You sort of expect barely-good-enough performances and barely competent direction with something like this, but several things really threw me for a loop:

First is the performance of the smoking hot Shelby Leverington, the revengeful protagonist of the movie. Her performance here exceeds expectations which adds to the surreal quality of the film generally.

I should also mention, in particular, the performance of Norman Parker as Jake, who matches her excellently and believably.

The other thing is the unsettling yet appealing left-field prog-psych soundtrack which was notable enough that it kept drawing my attention.

There are no big twists here and the plot is hardly original, but the direction is competent and it exceeds a lot of other films with this sort of subject matter from that time period.

I don't agree with the negative reviews of this film. Compared to all of the other occult horror of the period, this one stands up a lot better than most of the rest, avoiding exploitation elements in favor of something a little more subtle. There's some blood and some sex, but it is muted and serves the plot.

This is not Citizen Kane. You have to suspend a few critical faculties for this.

But for what it is, you can do a whole lot worse.

Also: if any woman ever starts telling you a story about the Southern Tribes, my suggestion is to head for the exit immediately.
14 out of 18 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
An unsettling, private supernatural occurrence.
9 April 2018
Well I could have told you that this was not for everyone right from the outset, but this was really original.

First of all, there are two types of acting - the first and most common is cinematic acting in which the camera is in cahoots with the actor. There is nothing particularly authentic about it in terms of how actual people speak or act, though through the medium of film it can nonetheless communicate truth in a sort of heightened reality way.

The second and far more uncommon is the sort of naturalistic performances you find here, which - save for the moments of supernatural or psychological abormalcy - approximate how people tend to speak and talk. It is always amusing to find this in movies (almost always independent ones) and people to criticize the acting because they're not getting the acting school diction and perfectly clean dialogue you're used to in Hollywood films. Here, as in real life, people occasionally trip over a word, or insert "likes" in the irritating but actual way people do in real life.

But we're in not in Hollywood. We're in New Orleans, and the really commendable thing that happens here is the filmmakers allow New Orleans to be as it is today. Most films that take place in New Orleans either visit the city's past, or blot out what defines its present: tourists, modern buildings, modern cars. The choice to approach things this way was either conscious or a matter of budget, but in any case it actually works to further the film's atmospheric goals: we exit cinematic space and feel like we're watching all of this business happen to actual people. I kept feeling like there was something eternal and percolating under the modernity that transforms locales as the times change: sure every trapping of modern life is there, but then, so is the New Orleans of our imaginations. And which is stronger, and which will outlast the other?

The movie stops being "fun horror" and starts being genuinely hostile to the audience as it rolls on, and I mean that in the best way.

The camera is often slightly unsteady - no tripod for much of it, and instead mostly hand-held (and notably, not always - steady shots and slow zooms are interspersed as scenes require). The camera work here really amplifies what is happening in a way which is difficult to describe.

The effect is that as the audience, I felt like a ghost watching this bizarre tale happen to complete strangers - you feel invisible, but present. The camera is pushed up way into the action as if we're a few feet away for most of it. It feels voyeuristic sometimes and even kind of invasive.

There aren't any jump scares here. There's no horror movie pattern to latch on to; something inscrutably terrible is happening, and we are right there in these rooms and beds watching it in a way which feels fairly illicit.

Definitely not for everyone but as far as I am concerned a very effective and even anti-Hollywood piece of independent horror. There is no way they'd get away with this in the mainstream.

I liked it a lot.
8 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Not really a horror film. Or a film about alchemy.
10 February 2018
Warning: Spoilers
Alchemy is, at its essence, the use of natural laws to transmute a thing from a lower state to a higher one. In the popular imagination, this involves transmuting the common base metal lead into the rare metal gold, but the principles of transmutation apply via correspondence on several other levels: the transmutation of mortal flesh to immortal flesh, the transmutation of deindividuated/fractured consciousness into an individuated or whole one, or, most tantalizingly, transmutation of the soul.

One wonders whether in the lore about alchemy whether or not the result you got was based on your intentions. Here, an insane young man in the apparent middle of the Michigan woods in a trailer (there's your Raimi), is seeking what appears to be metallic gold to buy himself a mansion.

The transmutation goes exactly in the wrong direction.

The Jarmusch element is, of course, the fish-out-of-water-and-time aspect of a guy in a Minor Threat tee shirt in the modern age with conceits of being an alchemist, not dissimilar to Ghost Dog who imagines himself a Samurai and is, like Ghost Dog, not completely sane.

Well, that's an understatement.

The film feels like a horror film but is really about madness. Although our lead does not narrate the film, he carries it, and we wind up with a classic unreliable narrator problem: is anything we're seeing real, or are we looking at events through the delusion of a mentally ill man who has stopped taking his pills?

What I suppose is interesting here is the examination of one specific manifestation of insanity - in this case, one that is tied into the occult.

We see things in the woods we aren't sure is really there. Fire flares up and we're not sure if that's really happening. We're not 100% sure what happens to the likable and hilarious Cortez (but we can make an educated guess that it has nothing actually to do with demons.)

The titles and marketing for this film combine two of my interests - alchemy (and fellow students of alchemy, this is not the film you're looking for), with the lettering from the infamous Anarchist Cookbook -- an apt combination of things. As with the Anarchist Cookbook which is full of recipes which are reputed to be unsafe or may blow up in your face, so too alchemy here with its noxious fumes, debts to demons, and so forth.

Part of the problem with marketing this film is there's no way to classify it. The "horror" bucket is what you settle on because it doesn't fit anywhere else, but a serious horror fan is likely to be annoyed by this mostly plotless film. Any verbal description isn't going to match the reality of the film, which is a patient (or slow, depending on how you look at it) study of a man who thinks he's bargaining with demons for gold, but is, in fact, schizophrenic.

All the fixin's are there: paranoia, hallucinations, fear, and self-abuse.

I liked it a lot. I actually thought the two leads did a fantastic job with a script which must have been puzzling when they first encountered it.

But alas, as someone who is waiting for something like a film version of The Chymical Wedding of Christian Rosenkreutz, it looks like I'm going to be waiting for something about alchemy which isn't so full of darkness.

Still, gutsy, original independent film and one thing it isn't, is derivative.

Just know going in that this is an exploration of broken psychology, and not a horror film in the classic sense of that term.
12 out of 19 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Well I found it funny.
10 September 2016
Fans of Eastbound and Down might well recognize our protagonist as a distant relative of Kenny Powers, a television "survivalist" who is put to the test and found wanting in a vast nature preserve.

My favorite parts of this are the monologues to his editor, "Amanda," who he implores not to make him look stupid. Of course, the character is the definition of stupid, who, even weeks in, cannot bear nighttime because of "ghosts."

One of the unexpected virtues of this yukfest are some honestly beautiful shots of the forest in midwinter.

This is not Citizen Kane, but frankly you were foolish if you thought from the description that it was.

Well, I laughed, quite a lot.
7 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed