I've made it pretty clear that I'm no fan of what most folks have christened NuTrek, but for those who may've only recently discovered the pages of SciFiHistory.Net let me offer a bit of clarity.

I don't hate anything.  Simply put, there are just some programs that never do anything for me.  Do I watch them?  Well, yes, from time-to-time I might decide to visit them in my ripe old age.  I did that for Babylon 5, a show I just never got the bug for during its original run in TV syndication: I visited the entire series run (not the telefilms or Crusade) on home video.  Did my opinion change?  Not really.  I thought it was interesting.  I thought it had a fabulous cast.  But for whatever reason it just never struck a chord with me.  Each of us is different, and sometimes that's all it boils down to critically or commercially: if it doesn't 'touch' me, I just tune it out.

NuTrek -- Star Trek: Discovery, Star Trek: Picard, and anything else that's rolled out behind Paramount's pay wall (which I'm not fond of) -- is an animal all its own.  I do find it vastly different from the Treks of old (not in a bad way) that I've tried to explain as follows: while classic Trek was about "ideas," NuTrek seems to be about "ideology."  While ideas don't tend to divide people, ideologies do; thus, I just don't see the shows as crafted or produced with the same motivation behind these stories and characters, so likewise I've tuned it out.

Now, as I said above, I don't hate it.  I don't hate anything.  I don't wish it ill.  I hope it can be around for as long as the original series and maybe even longer (if that's somehow possible).  It certainly speaks to its audience, and there's absolutely nothing wrong with that.  I just don't consider myself part of its audience.  So be it.  We part company as friends, and I've even engaged some of its talent online when given the opportunity (and they respond).

I did purchase Star Trek: Picard on DVD and watched it with the wifey.  Erm ... without going into any great lengths, I was disappointed with it for a lot of small reasons.  Sure, it's great to see Patrick Stewart back, but I didn't see this modern version of Capt. Picard as being the same as Picard of old.  Some of that relates to the way the writers crafted this particular story; I don't think any of us relish the premise of our heroes getting old and/or infirm, and -- given that was the reality of this particular show -- I thought there were ways that could've been handled responsibly and respectfully ... but that wasn't the case.

Again, that's just my two cents.  I never ask for anyone to agree, nor do I expect to agree with all of you.  My thoughts are my thoughts, and I'm as entitled to them as you are to yours.

In any event, there's a trailer for the second season of Star Trek: Picard that was released just today (I believe); and it definitely looks like it could be a bit more of a story aligned thematically with the days of The Next Generation.  While trailers can be deceptive, this one appears to kinda/sorta retread some of the ideas always tinkered with in the shows as well as the movies; but I'll leave it at that for those who want to check it out.  It'll be posted below, you know what to do, and that's all I have to say about that.

As always, thanks for reading ... and live long and prosper!

-- EZ
​

Argh.  Some days it just doesn't pay to have to wake up and read the news.  That's how I felt this morning.

Honestly, I'm not one of Meatloaf's biggest fans, but I did have an incredible amount of respect for the talented musician because of his long partnership with songwriter Jim Steinman.  On his own, Meatloaf's work was middleground stuff so far as I'm concerned (no, haters, I'm not a music critic in any estimation of the word), but when the two of these minds paired up they produced some incredibly magical stuff.  The Bat Out Of Hell albums are phenomenal listening experiences; and I'd argue whether or not you're into this style of rock there's some showmanship that deserves to be explored at least with a single listen.

Not all that long ago, I think Meatloaf appeared on one of those 'Songwriter' specials (VH1? MTV?), and the wifey and I watched it on video.  Much like the music he performed, Meatloaf knew how to tell a great story; and he recounted some fabulous tales regarding his career and compositions.  Fans of the man are also encouraged to check it out (I suspect it's probably available either for purchase or streaming somewheres), and I think you'll find some of what he shared especially bittersweet now that he's gone.

But music wasn't his only passion.  Though I'd argue Meatloaf was no accomplished actor, he's enjoyed a somewhat prolific career as a guest star to such programs as Monsters, Tales From The Crypt, The Outer Limits, and Ghost Wars (so far as genre-specific titles are concerned).  I think it's safe to suggest that singers know more than a thing or two about living larger-than-life, and he could bring some of the required sensibilities to acting as a side gig.

Alas, no one lasts forever, and he's shaken off his mortal coil as of yesterday.  Though it's sad to see him go, I find comfort in knowing that his powerful voice will sing on so that others may continue to find and appreciate what a gift he was while turning out hit-after-hit when the inspiration moved him.

Prayers to the man's friends and family in their time of need.

​-- EZ

Like many who've been on this journey with TV's The Walking Dead since it started I suppose it's safe to say that I have a love/hate relationship with the show.

Now, when I say hate, I don't really hate it, per se.  Honestly, I don't really hate anything, not even shows I don't watch or understand.  I attribute the hate to a measure of frustration I might have with subplots that have served to anchor the show down when they instead should've challenged it to achieve more from, arguably, one of the most talented casts to ever grace a primetime show.  Yes, the problem gets a bit shoddy from time-to-time; and the writers try to eke a bit too much emotion out of some elements of the narrative.  But, again, I don't hate it ... certainly not the way some who write about media online do these days.

I've loved most of the journey.  As I said, the cast has been mostly phenomenal; and I think it many ways the franchise -- unlike some others -- has actually been very good for fandom.  For example, Star Trek and its crew of ideologically-driven writers seem to be content on dividing fandom into its respective segments.  It seems Star Trek: Discovery and Star Trek: Picard would rather shun long-established fans in favor of propping up what they perceived as -- erm -- tomorrow's members of the Federation.  They see themselves as trailblazing authors welcoming in a new era of social justice, and I see them as just trying to beat a dead horse in a new way in order to prop up an enterprise that was never about dispiriting people but elevating all of mankind.

By comparison, The Walking Dead has stayed true to doing what it does best: put good people in dire circumstances and let 'em figure out how to survive.  Some of their humanity may've been lost in the process, but isn't that part and parcel about what we want our storytellers to do with characters?  Put them through their paces so that we can see what they look like on the other side?  When Trek has taken to preaching its weekly sermons, Dead is more about surviving than Trek ever was.

I don't mean to wax on, and I won't belabor the point any longer: all I really wanted to point out was that the trailer for the second third of episodes for Dead's swan season is here.  Be warned: it's a bit jumbled (for my tastes), not quite presenting a clear picture of what to expect when the show returns to the airwaves in late February on AMC but rather just an assortment of fast-moving sequences pitting character against character ... with very few walkers.  Call me old-fashioned, but I do prefer we keep our focus on the real enemy -- that being the undead.

In any event, I'll put it below so you can check it out if you're so inclined.  As always, thanks for reading ... and live long and prosper!

​-- EZ

Reviewing television programming is always a risky proposition.
 
Essentially, a critic is left to react sometimes to very few developments.  The nature of episodic storytelling is that some installments feel a bit more like filler between better hours.  Getting from Point A to Point B takes a catalyst, and the stuffing of lesser moments, secondary reveals, and narrative exposition can leave one with little to ruminate over … and such is the case with Chapter 4: The Gathering Storm.  In fact, the name alone implies that this might just be the calm before the storm, an assessment not all that far off the mark.
 
What Storm did have was a flashback exploring just how Fett and Fennec Shand found themselves in their unlikely partnership.
 
As had been previously seen on The Mandalorian, Shand herself was left seriously injured on the sands of Tatooine.  Indeed, it looked very much like the mercenary had shaken off her mortal coil, an ending somewhat surprising when she showed up episodes later in the same show.  The Book Of Boba Fett picked up with Fett’s discovery of her fallen body.  Discovering that she hadn’t expired, he took her to a ‘modification clinic’ where the somewhat Borgified tech mended her wounds – essentially rebuilding her destroyed abdomen with bionics.  Once she had awakened, Fett then solicited her cooperation in raiding Jabba’s palace to recover his signature spacecraft (no longer named Slave I thanks to our modern age’s political sensibilities), and a new partnership was born.
 
As far as plot points, there’s a bit more than happens.  Fett extracts a revenge on behalf of his slain Tusken Raiders, and the new partners go in pursuit of the bounty hunter’s lost armor.  But still most of Storm felt like a bit of this and a bit of that thrown together to help position the season’s central arc – Fett’s establishment of a ruling criminal dynasty on Tatooine – get from the aforementioned Point A to Point B.  The biggest scene in this regard comes at the end when they confront the heads of the modern crime families at a meal within Jabba’s Palace, wherein these leaders come face-to-face with the reality that Fett has acquired another Rancor … perhaps no greater indication that, as a ruler, this hunter means business.  It was a great reveal, handled with a bit of humor, and thankfully the episode felt like scribe Jon Favreau was trying to right the course (just a bit) away from last episode’s Power Rangers-like additions.  (FYI: they were entirely absent from this adventure.  Good choice.)
 
Because the chapter really was a series of chess moves meant to set-up where we’re likely heading, there isn’t much associated commentary.  As a character, Fett is further established as a character who’s through his crossroads, and now – like the Mandalorian – perhaps he’s seen just as a man trying to man his way across the galaxy.  The significant difference here Fett’s only one step further along in his journey with a deliberate destination whereas no one quite knows where Mando will end up next.  This bounty hunter turned leader has a vision for his future, one that involves management skills he’s only beginning to grasp, so the conflict continues to evolve.  By contrast, Shand looks more like a mover and shaker willing to truly get her hands dirty in their quest to establish their own law and order; though she’s not much with motivating others, she’s willing to use the business end of a blaster to see her respective objectives achieved.  Their clash of styles might be leading us somewhere dark, but we’ll have to wait and watch.
 
In perhaps the best sequence of the new series so far, the audience is treated to old school Fett: in a brilliant scene, the hunter flies his gunship down over the Tatooine landscape in pursuit of the speed bikers who executed his tribe of Sandpeople, and he razes the flock with blaster fire.  One-by-one, they’re shot down in the tracks; the obvious carnage isn’t shown – this is Disney, after all – but it’s hard to imagine any of these malcontents escaped with their lives fully intact … and, dare I say, that’s the Boba Fett most of us have been waiting to see from a show that even bears his name in the credits.  While I get that the character may need to grow and change a bit for a serial drama, it’s still nice to enjoy a side of red meat with a meal this delicious.
 
Happy hunting.

-- EZ

Someone had asked me just this morning if I'd seen the second trailer that recently dropped regarding HBO/Max's Raised By Wolves, and I had to admit that I had, meant to share it in this space, got sidetracked, and here we are.

I don't recall (at this point) if I've written a review regarding the show's first season -- though I know I've referenced it on a few occasions -- but it was one of the most pleasant surprises in the last year or so for me.  The show's promotional materials (for season 1) were not very impressive -- in all honesty -- so it was a jaunt I wasn't all that interested in taking.  I read a few reviews after it released, and even those weren't all that complimentary.  I don't remember what put those folks off about the show, but I seem to recall some taking issue with the story's ideology.  (Like so many, I'm disappointed when storytellers infuse political messages into their dramas.)  As the season wore on, it seemed as if more critics were enjoying it, so the wifey and I gave it a spin.  It was quite nice.

Yes, I'd confess that the story has a political undercurrent -- it would seem that we just can't help ourselves these days -- but I found it negligible.  Also, I didn't feel the Ridley Scott production really beat any drum (message) singularly: watchers could interpret some of the developments any way they liked, and perhaps I grew to appreciate that kinda/sorta open-ended political narrative more than themes that tell me what to think or caution me to think otherwise.  (Hello, Star Trek: Discovery!)  By the first season's end, I was more invested in the characters anyway, so the messages were easier to set aside.

There was a trailer release earlier, but now a second one fleshes out a bit more action for what's in store when the new episodes are available.  As this one was a pleasant surprise, I'll definitely be tuning in.

Trailer is below.  You folks know what to do. As always, thanks for reading ... and live long and prosper!

-- EZ
​

Huh.

With as much as I've read about programs and programming, you'd think I might've noticed that The Boys -- the popular Amazon Prime anti-superhero comedy -- forthcoming spin-off was going to be animated, but somehow that fact completely escaped me.  It seems that I do recall having read about the show being given a spin-off, but -- mmm -- how exactly is an animated spin-off going to bring the same kind of delivery?

Don't get me wrong: I'm all for expanding popular properties, especially when some time, care, effort, blood, sweat, and tears are being put to efficient use.  But The Boys is a live action show -- one built for a decidedly adult audience -- and this one looks to be a bit more juvenile.

And, sure, I get that Star Trek has undergone a recent growth in animation with both its Lower Decks and Star Trek: Prodigy entries, but Trek is -- thematically and tonally -- way different from the incessantly bloody and destructive tales at the core of The Boys' best diversions.  Again, not griping ... just trying to be honest ...

Whatever the case may be, I'll tune in for it, as I do kinda/sorta catch a Venture Bros. vibe in this latest video release.  Who knows?  Since that Cartoon Network highwater mark was disgracefully cancelled, maybe Diabolical will step in to fill the void.

Trailer is below.  You folks know what to do.

-- EZ
​

​Stories involving sleep – or perhaps, more importantly, what goes on in our heads while we’re asleep – have long fascinated audiences.
 
Dreaming is a universal experience.  Our dreams can be inspired, or they can scare the stuffing out of us.  Psychoanalysts have long insisted that dreams are a doorway to understanding what truly goes on in the deep recesses of our personalities, and many experts have written extrapolations over what certain symbols mean when evaluated by conscious minds.  I suppose the dark secret is that we’ll never truly know just where dreams come from, but they’ll always find a way to keep us up at night, the very antithesis of what a dream should be intended to do.
 
Filmmakers around the world have used the stuff of dreams to populate all kinds of interesting tales.  Douglas Trumball’s Brainstorm (1983) explored the dangers of bringing one’s own troubles along for the ride into another person’s subconscious.  Joseph Ruben’s Dreamscape (1984) spun a therapeutic twist on the idea of a specialist entering another’s dream for the sake of curing various phobias.  Christopher Nolan’s Inception (2010) played tricks with reality when it investigated the predicament of manipulating a subject’s frame-of-mind by inserting ideas into gray matter.  Still, an entire film series – Wes Craven’s Nightmare On Elm Street films – ratcheted up the sheer terror of having an evil villain inhabit the dreams of his victims solely for the sake of killing them in the vilest ways imaginable.
 
Make no mistake: Michael Venus’ Sleep (2020) is a horror film.  It touches on similar ideas from what’s come before in the landscape of dream pictures, but the storyteller also incorporates some heady ideas about how our past continues creeping into our present in much the same way the stuff of dreams affects our waking moments.  Though it’s occasionally unclear what all of this means to the characters he’s created, I found most of the flick refreshing enough that I could actively assign meaning where definition was a bit undercooked.
 
(NOTE: The following review will contain minor spoilers necessary solely for the discussion of plot and/or characters.  If you’re the type of reader who prefers a review entirely spoiler-free, then I’d encourage you to skip down to the last few paragraphs for the final assessment.  If, however, you’re accepting of a few modest hints at ‘things to come,’ then read on …)
 
From the product packaging:
“Tormented by recurring nightmares of a place where she has never been, Marlene cannot help but investigate when she discovers the place is real.  Once there, she suffers a breakdown and is admitted to a psychiatric ward.  Determined to discover what happened to her, Mona, her daughter, follows and finds herself in Stainbach, an idyllic village with a dark history.  What is it that so tormented her mother, and the people of Stainbach?  What is the source of the nightmares she suffers?  And who is the mysterious Trude that lives in the forest?”
 
I can’t say this from firsthand experience, but I’ve been told that schools these days don’t teach the real threat Nazi Socialism posed to all of mankind during World War II.  (I’ve got no reason to dispute that, either.)  I’ve even been told that some students today are told that the Nazis had some good ideas but executed them poorly (and I use that word “executed” lightly).  Back in my day when perhaps things were a bit more on track we were told about the horrors that Germany performed, and we were even enlightened about what danger a political party posed to the greater world-at-large.  Suffice it to say, the Nazis were some really bad dudes who’d stop at nothing to get what they wanted; and it’s this blinding fury that fuels only a portion of what’s explored in writer/director Michael Venus’ debut feature film, Sleep.  Though its characters are much removed from the 1930’s and 40’s, the overall theme here is about lingering influence; much in the same way our dreams impact both our sleeping and waking hours, there’s always a risk of past inspirations affecting subsequent generations.  This is why we’re told to learn our history; otherwise, we’re likely to repeat it.
​

In this world, Marlene (played by Sandra Huller), Mona (Gro Swantje Kohlhof), and Trude (Agata Buzek) represent a spiritual trinity joined in ways more than just dreams (I won’t spoil it): the mother, the daughter, and the unholy ghost.  Trude has used her otherworldly influence throughout all of Marlene’s life, but the woman’s eventual mental collapse forces the spirit to now redirect her vengeful desires onto Mona, who is necessarily drawn to the mountain town of Stainbach to investigate what happened with her mother.  It is here where these forces will converge at a time and a place wherein Otto Fahrmann (August Schmolzer) has risen to prominence in the community and is secretly attempting to bring back the Third Reich as a cultural norm.
 
There’s a bit more to the story (again, I won’t spoil it), and there’s an awful lot of symbolism the audience might choose to work through; but – at its core – Sleep juggles a handful of personal issues all the while staying mostly true to the classic revenge-from-beyond-the-grave format. Venus and Thomas Friedrich’s script creates a world within a world wherein characters are allowed to be a bit out-of-touch with reality mostly because supernatural influences have taken residence in their respective souls.  Mona has grown increasingly despondent, feeling that her mother’s psychological issues have seeped into her DNA.  Franzi (Martina Schone-Radunski) – one of Stainbach’s disaffected youth – discloses to Mona that even she has grown so obsessed with her dreams that she occasionally struggles in understanding when they’ve stopped.  Even Lore (Marion Kracht) – Otto’s wife – has fallen into a workday stupor wherein she goes about the routine of living, never quite grasping the greater circumstances at play were she to truly open her eyes.
 
Because evil never sleeps (and goodness takes effort), this collective slumber is the most dangerous place for all of these characters to intersect.  That’s where and when Sleep excels as a slow-burning chiller.  After all, no one’s truly aware of the danger they’re in until it’s too late.  In fact, sleep is exactly what Trude requires of the players in order for her to extract her nefarious rewards.  It was a sleeping nation that allowed Adolf Hitler to rise to power, and it’s the drowsy mountain folk of this resort city who might unbeknownst to them embrace that dark call once again.  Perhaps that is the warning to all who come to Stainbach: “Always be watchful.”
 
You can’t do that while you’re asleep.
 
Sleep (2020) is produced by Das Kleine Fernsehspiel (ZDF) and Junafilm.  DVD distribution (for this particular release) is being coordinated by Arrow Video.  As for the technical specifications?  The film looks and sounds extraordinary, and I might add that sound played a very role in constructing much of the true frights in here.  As for the special features?  Well, this is Arrow Video, after all, and they rarely disappoint!  The disc boasts an audio commentary, a visual essay, some intellectual discussion about dreams, deleted scenes, some making-of materials, various promotional materials, and a collector’s booklet with related essay.  It’s a fine, fine collection that should keep interested parties busy for quite some time.
 
Recommended.  Though I could argue that Sleep may’ve bitten off a bit more than it can chew (such can be the nature in an ambitious director’s first full-length feature), I’d be silly to deny that the film conjured up a beautiful yet nightmarish scenario wherein the past is clearly haunting everyone still alive.  Though some might scoff at the comparison, the feature also bears a strong resemblance to early adventures with Freddy Krueger in the popular Nightmare On Elm Street films: while Venus’ picture is decidedly more highbrow about it, the central trickery of a vengeful spirit who needs to inhabit those while asleep can’t be denied.  Still, not everything went down easily – I’m still trying to process some smaller moments and what they may’ve meant – but such vivid imagery promises what could be an impressive career for the new storyteller.
 
In the interests of fairness, I’m pleased to disclose that the fine folks at Arrow Video provided me with a complimentary Blu-ray of Sleep (2020) by request for the expressed purposes of completing this review; and their contribution to me in no way, shape, or form influenced my opinion of it.

​-- EZ

Honestly, I know very little about Moon Knight ... but, then again, I've always said I'm more of a DC Comics guy.

If I remember correctly, I picked up a few issues of something he appeared in back in the late 1980's or early 1990's.  Maybe it was even a graphic novel collection.  I was a fairly avid collector for a time, but as the rising costs of books became untenable I just gave it all up cold turkey.  Anyway, I don't remember being all that intrigued with the character, and maybe I was even a bit confused over what he could do, how he fit into the world as created, and what the limits of his abilities were.  (This wasn't an origins tale; that much I recall.)  So I didn't follow along with subsequent tales.  Such is the nature sometimes in being a fan.  But I will say this: if anyone out there who reads this space has a recommendation for a graphic novel involving the character, either leave it in the comments below or drop me a message through the 'contact' page at the site as I'd be interested in boning up my knowledge through a quality experience.

I will say that I'm glad Marvel is continuing a tradition it began with shows on Netflix of introducing some of the characters in its rich pantheon via their streaming series.  I think it's a fabulous platform to give some of these heroes a bit more face time than in the typical stand-alone two-hour origins flick that also has to develop a villain; I know I'm in the minority here, but there's something to be said for tales that truly focus on a superhero instead of split-screening a singular source of evil.  I get the whole protagonist/antagonist format is kinda/sorta a requirement; I guess I'm a bloke who appreciates more backstory as it helps me better understand individuals.

But I digress ...

I see that Moon Knight is getting some exposure via a streaming series on Disney+.  The trailer dropped, and I think it poses more questions than it does truly promote tuning in, especially for non-Marvel folks such as myself.  Who knows?  That might be because producers are leaving the really good stuff for the show, and they'd rather have you showing up blind as opposed to having a slim expectation.  Whatever the case, the two-minute promotion is here, and I'm happy to share it below.  You folks know what to do.

As always, thanks for reading ... and live long and prosper!

-- EZ
​

Every now and then, I stumble along a work that for whatever reason just doesn’t quite ‘click’ with me.
 
Generally speaking, I’ve found this happens when storytellers prefer some low-key political messaging.  I watch films not to figure out how I think about life but – like most – for escape.  If you want me to do something about lead in the water, then there’s a time and place for that.  I just don’t like it invading my downtime.  Still other times are when all involved in the production figure that they’re assembled with big, grand mystery; but it’s so obviously put together to obfuscate the central puzzle that viewers are deliberately watching for seams.  Lastly, I loathe films that espouse a limited ideology: trust your viewers to think for themselves, not to show up waiting for you to beat the drum for them, and you have a vastly healthier relationship between seller and consumer.  Call me quaint: it’s just how I am.
 
For all of its creative posturing, Nocturna: Side A – The Great Old Man’s Night felt like a combination of the above; and perhaps that’s why it failed to touch me in the way that it likely will others.  I like its characters.  I like its setting.  I like its story.  But the combination didn’t work, mostly because of its construction.  This doesn’t make it a bad film in any estimation; it’s just clear that it didn’t mean to me what it might to you.
 
(NOTE: The following review will contain minor spoilers necessary solely for the discussion of plot and/or characters.  If you’re the type of reader who prefers a review entirely spoiler-free, then I’d encourage you to skip down to the last few paragraphs for the final assessment.  If, however, you’re accepting of a few modest hints at ‘things to come,’ then read on …)
 
From the film’s IMDB.com citation:
“Ulysses is a hundred-year-old man, battling for redemption on his last night on earth.  Faced with imminent death, he is forced to rethink his past, his present and his take on reality.”
 
Trust me when I say that there’s no topic that should escape filmdom.  Everything should be on the table for cinematic discussion, and that means that even subjects that make us most uncomfortable are worthy of exploration.  The problem, however, is that there are good ways of going about it and less-than-good ways; and these lesser ways tend to create a bit of controversy amongst viewers about how well the end result was ultimately achieved.
 
Critically, it’s easy to see where a certain group of people will flock to praise a feature like Nocturna.  It’s well conceived and admirable performed; my quibbles with it lie almost exclusively with its assembly, and, in that respect, writer/director Gonzalo Calzada and I would likely never see eye-to-eye.  He packs his story with long sequences of this kindly old Ulysses (played to perfection by Pepe Soriano) mostly walking from room-to-room in his unusually expansive apartment or with him taking long, heartfelt stares at the possessions and events of his life and memory.  Clearly, this elderly man is at life’s ultimate crossroads, but Calzada wants to ensure that there’s absolutely no doubt, so much so that I occasionally felt my life slipping away while waiting for something to substantively happen.
 
Don’t get me wrong: there are plenty of positives to what was achieved here.  Ulysses’ life gets reviewed in flashbacks – some of which may or may not have been clouded over with failing memory – and there are some moments delivered that understandably tug on the audience’s heartstrings in exactly the way intended.  My issue here is the pacing of it all, and in that respect Nocturna is entirely too long given its ultimate destination … which everyone likely knows five minutes into this trip.
 
Nocturna: Side A – The Great Old Man’s Night is produced by Coruya Cine and La Puerta Cinematografica.
 
Mildly recommended.  Sorry, folks, if I’m being honest, then it’s hard to give Nocturna: Side A – The Great Old Man’s Night any ringing endorsement.  Conceding that it has a solid central performance from Pepe Soriano, there’s just little else that touches a chord with me.  The narrative attempts to achieve a measure of novelty with a premise that’s been done before, and the exceedingly long takes that could’ve easily been shortened do the overall pace of the motion picture no favors.  Critically, I’m in the minority with this opinion, but I’ve gotta be true to my word.  It doesn’t fail; it just doesn’t truly take me anywhere I haven’t been before.
 
In the interests of fairness, I’m pleased to disclose that the fine folks at Breaking Glass Pictures provided me with a complimentary streaming link of Nocturna: Side A – The Great Old Man’s Night by request for the expressed purposes of completing this review; and their contribution to me in no way, shape, or form influenced my opinion of it.

​-- EZ

Great gosh a'mighty, the 1980's had an awful lot of B-Movies!

I get panned a lot for saying this, but many of them really weren't very good.  By definition, they're lesser flicks to begin with; and whatever amount of moxie the cast and crew put into them can only cover up so many blemishes, goofs, and plotholes.  I think that the surge in exploitation pictures -- largely fueled by an unexpected growth in demand thanks for home video recorders -- really accounts for much of this shlock being given life; and the consequence of being introduced to some of this stuff by a young audience led to some incredible nostalgia which encourages us to look at the films again.

Either that, or we're all gluttons for punishment!

In any event, one of the crowning cinematic achievements of the 1980 film year remains Lewis Teague's Alligator.  It's basically "Jaws On Land," and it works out a lot of its kinks by way of shedding blood (by the bucket) at every opportunity.  Screenwriter John Sayles was nominated for the Saturn Award ('Best Writing'), so it isn't as if to say that the film doesn't warrant a second look ... and second looks is exactly what Scream Factory is hoping will delight mankind as they're re-releasing this for consumer consumption on February 22.  (That's right: not long after Valentine's Day, so you boys looking for that something special for your ladies ...)

I've read the promotional materials (they're up on Bluray.com), and I'll be copying and pasting them below to make readers aware.  It's a bit pricey by my estimation, but it is loaded to the gills with extras for those of us who like that kind of thing.  Those of you interested in preordering at Amazon.com are encouraged to follow the link right here.

As always, thanks for reading ... and live long and prosper!

-- EZ