- Published on
So many movies ... so little time ...
You've heard the saying, "War is Hell."
Well, what if the war you suddenly found yourself fighting wasn't even of your own choice?
That appears to be the quandary at the heart of Paradox Soldiers (aka My iz budushchego 2) which was first released on this day in 2010 both in Kazakhstan and Russia. Curiously enough, the film shows to have had three directors -- Aleksandr Samokhvalov, Dimitriy Voronkov, and Oleg Pogodin -- but only a single screenwriter -- Aleksandr Shevtsov; but I'm at a loss as to say why. There are indications, however, that the project is intended as a sequel to 2008's We Are From The Future, so perhaps this was something completed in process (???). Perhaps we'll never know. The cast includes such names as Igor Petrenko, Aleksey Barabash, Ekaterina Klimova, Semyon Belotserkovskiy, Dmitriy Dyachuk, Ivan Krasko, and others.
Here's the plot summary as provided by the good people at IMDB.com:
"Two young Russian historians are going to Ukraine to take part in the reconstruction of the Lvov-Sandomierz operation in July 1944. On sight they fall into conflict with Ukrainian nationalists, and some magical twist of fate, move into the middle of real warfare from more than 60 years. Miraculously avoiding death at the hands of Ukrainian nationalists, caught in the middle of fighting between the Red Army and the Nazis."
Also, for those of you who like that sort of thing, I'm posting the theatrical trailer below. You know what to do about that.
As always, thanks for reading ... thanks for sharing ... thanks for being a fan ... and live long and prosper!
-- EZ
You've heard the saying, "War is Hell."
Well, what if the war you suddenly found yourself fighting wasn't even of your own choice?
That appears to be the quandary at the heart of Paradox Soldiers (aka My iz budushchego 2) which was first released on this day in 2010 both in Kazakhstan and Russia. Curiously enough, the film shows to have had three directors -- Aleksandr Samokhvalov, Dimitriy Voronkov, and Oleg Pogodin -- but only a single screenwriter -- Aleksandr Shevtsov; but I'm at a loss as to say why. There are indications, however, that the project is intended as a sequel to 2008's We Are From The Future, so perhaps this was something completed in process (???). Perhaps we'll never know. The cast includes such names as Igor Petrenko, Aleksey Barabash, Ekaterina Klimova, Semyon Belotserkovskiy, Dmitriy Dyachuk, Ivan Krasko, and others.
Here's the plot summary as provided by the good people at IMDB.com:
"Two young Russian historians are going to Ukraine to take part in the reconstruction of the Lvov-Sandomierz operation in July 1944. On sight they fall into conflict with Ukrainian nationalists, and some magical twist of fate, move into the middle of real warfare from more than 60 years. Miraculously avoiding death at the hands of Ukrainian nationalists, caught in the middle of fighting between the Red Army and the Nazis."
Also, for those of you who like that sort of thing, I'm posting the theatrical trailer below. You know what to do about that.
As always, thanks for reading ... thanks for sharing ... thanks for being a fan ... and live long and prosper!
-- EZ
- Published on
Well, well, well ...
Film history alone tells us that mankind has had a singular fascination with those dastardly residents of Mars, one of the planets closest to us within our very own solar system. Indeed, H.G. Wells postulated that they'd come here with an intent to take our world from us in his groundbreaking novel "The War Of The Worlds," and audiences have been rapt with attention ever since. Why, even Tim Burton capitalized on such fame with his 1996 adaptation of Mars Attacks -- a flick I truly love but mankind seems to loathe -- so let it be said that these dastardly Martians are never far from our collective consciousness.
And lest you forget? Elon Musk plans to stand face-to-face with one of them sometime during his lifetime! How's that for pop culture references?
Politics aside, I only bring all of this up because it was on this day in Science Fiction History all the way back in 1910 that another famed inventor -- Thomas Edison -- first gave audiences a glimpse of what those dangerous aliens would look like. He produced a five-minute short film -- A Trip To Mars -- that had one scientist suffering the wraths of Reverse Gravity which propelled him across the divide and to the surface of the Red Planet ... and, yes, this was the very first time a Martian was brought to life for the masses-at-large.
Alas, the feature is quite old -- you can Google it, and the surviving print online is rather blurry -- and the images are a bit distorted. Still, it's grand to think about just how deeply ingrained the thought of an alien overlord has penetrated our shared history. Storytellers continue to extrapolate on what an alien species might look like, but 115 years ago today we beheld our first screen Martian.
-- EZ
Film history alone tells us that mankind has had a singular fascination with those dastardly residents of Mars, one of the planets closest to us within our very own solar system. Indeed, H.G. Wells postulated that they'd come here with an intent to take our world from us in his groundbreaking novel "The War Of The Worlds," and audiences have been rapt with attention ever since. Why, even Tim Burton capitalized on such fame with his 1996 adaptation of Mars Attacks -- a flick I truly love but mankind seems to loathe -- so let it be said that these dastardly Martians are never far from our collective consciousness.
And lest you forget? Elon Musk plans to stand face-to-face with one of them sometime during his lifetime! How's that for pop culture references?
Politics aside, I only bring all of this up because it was on this day in Science Fiction History all the way back in 1910 that another famed inventor -- Thomas Edison -- first gave audiences a glimpse of what those dangerous aliens would look like. He produced a five-minute short film -- A Trip To Mars -- that had one scientist suffering the wraths of Reverse Gravity which propelled him across the divide and to the surface of the Red Planet ... and, yes, this was the very first time a Martian was brought to life for the masses-at-large.
Alas, the feature is quite old -- you can Google it, and the surviving print online is rather blurry -- and the images are a bit distorted. Still, it's grand to think about just how deeply ingrained the thought of an alien overlord has penetrated our shared history. Storytellers continue to extrapolate on what an alien species might look like, but 115 years ago today we beheld our first screen Martian.
-- EZ
- Published on
So many movies ... so little time ...
Well ... why not?
If mankind is going to be subjected to Hollywood's endless fascination with rebooting, retooling, and remaking, then why not go out and find some of the worst pictures ever made and give them a contemporary upgrade?
It would seem that that was exactly what writer/director John Johnson wanted to do. He set out with the grand mission of seizing upon the singular piece of theatrical hodgepodge -- Ed Wood's 1959 piece of cinematic crap Plan 9 From Outer Space -- and gave it some ... erm ... rethinking? Rebranding? Repackaging? I'm not entirely certain what you'd call it only because what he ended up producing maintains only a lackluster 4.0 (out of 10) rating on IMDB.com.
Is that the best we can do ... with a remake?
In any event ...
According to IMDB.com, Plan 9 -- as it was known in the rehash -- enjoyed its first unveiling via a home video release on this day back in 2015 for the great nations of New Zealand and Australia (where the make the dingos). Under Johnson's command, the cast included such illuminaries as Brian Krause, Sara Eshleman, Mister Lobo, Amy Hart, Conrad Brooks, Jerry Moore, Jarod Kearney, Matthew Ewald, Matt Sloan, James Rolfe, and others. Here's the plot summary as provided by our friends at IMDB.com:
"The story of Nilbog, a small town with a big story. The beginning of an invasion. These aliens have a different plan for the inhabitants of Earth. To resurrect their dead as their own army set with but one goal: to wipe out all mankind. This night will decide the fates of all who walk the planet and thought they were the top of the food chain."
For those of you who like that sort of thing, I'm posting the theatrical trailer below ... and you know what to do with that.
As always, thanks for reading ... thanks for sharing ... thanks for being a fan ... and live long and prosper!
-- EZ
Well ... why not?
If mankind is going to be subjected to Hollywood's endless fascination with rebooting, retooling, and remaking, then why not go out and find some of the worst pictures ever made and give them a contemporary upgrade?
It would seem that that was exactly what writer/director John Johnson wanted to do. He set out with the grand mission of seizing upon the singular piece of theatrical hodgepodge -- Ed Wood's 1959 piece of cinematic crap Plan 9 From Outer Space -- and gave it some ... erm ... rethinking? Rebranding? Repackaging? I'm not entirely certain what you'd call it only because what he ended up producing maintains only a lackluster 4.0 (out of 10) rating on IMDB.com.
Is that the best we can do ... with a remake?
In any event ...
According to IMDB.com, Plan 9 -- as it was known in the rehash -- enjoyed its first unveiling via a home video release on this day back in 2015 for the great nations of New Zealand and Australia (where the make the dingos). Under Johnson's command, the cast included such illuminaries as Brian Krause, Sara Eshleman, Mister Lobo, Amy Hart, Conrad Brooks, Jerry Moore, Jarod Kearney, Matthew Ewald, Matt Sloan, James Rolfe, and others. Here's the plot summary as provided by our friends at IMDB.com:
"The story of Nilbog, a small town with a big story. The beginning of an invasion. These aliens have a different plan for the inhabitants of Earth. To resurrect their dead as their own army set with but one goal: to wipe out all mankind. This night will decide the fates of all who walk the planet and thought they were the top of the food chain."
For those of you who like that sort of thing, I'm posting the theatrical trailer below ... and you know what to do with that.
As always, thanks for reading ... thanks for sharing ... thanks for being a fan ... and live long and prosper!
-- EZ
- Published on
So many movies ... so little time ...
On this day in 1978 (in the great nation of Italy where they make the wines and pasta), Battle Of The Stars soared onto the silver screen!
Directed by Alfonso Brescia (1965's The Conqueror Of Atlantis, 1980's Beast In Space, 1987's Iron Warrior among others) from a script by Massimo Lo Jacono and Giacomo Mazzocchi, the SciFi/Thriller starred John Richardson (1966's One Million Years B.C.), Yanti Somer (1979's Star Odyssey), Walter Maestosi, Massimo De Cecco, Gaetano Balestrieri, Massimo, Bonetti, Aldo Canti, Omero Capanna, and others. According to our friends at IMDB.com, here's the plot summary:
"An insubordinate space captain investigates an apparently deserted but unstable planet after being drawn there by a mysterious gravitational force. He and his expedition discover the remnants of the once dominant civilization living on a subsistence level in caves. Long ago their advanced society had become so complacent that they built a super-computer to run and maintain the machines that supported their indolent, self-indulgent lifestyle. After the machines were destroyed by a meteor shower, the inhabitants found themselves without the knowledge to rebuild them, completely subservient to the computer whose megalomania was now unchallenged. The cruel cyber-despot reveals that it arranged for ship's landing because it needs the skills of the Earthlings to make critical repairs in its damaged circuitry. When the computer announces future plans for the conquest of the Universe, the captain and his crew know it is time to act."
Alas, I don't know anything about this one -- I may've seen it somewhere in the vastness of my forgotten youth -- so I'll just have to leave it at that. I noticed that the film in its entirety is up on YouTube.com -- suggesting to me that it's in the Public Domain; so I'm posting it below for those who like that sort of thing.
As always, thanks for reading ... thanks for sharing ... thanks for being a fan ... and live long and prosper!
-- EZ
On this day in 1978 (in the great nation of Italy where they make the wines and pasta), Battle Of The Stars soared onto the silver screen!
Directed by Alfonso Brescia (1965's The Conqueror Of Atlantis, 1980's Beast In Space, 1987's Iron Warrior among others) from a script by Massimo Lo Jacono and Giacomo Mazzocchi, the SciFi/Thriller starred John Richardson (1966's One Million Years B.C.), Yanti Somer (1979's Star Odyssey), Walter Maestosi, Massimo De Cecco, Gaetano Balestrieri, Massimo, Bonetti, Aldo Canti, Omero Capanna, and others. According to our friends at IMDB.com, here's the plot summary:
"An insubordinate space captain investigates an apparently deserted but unstable planet after being drawn there by a mysterious gravitational force. He and his expedition discover the remnants of the once dominant civilization living on a subsistence level in caves. Long ago their advanced society had become so complacent that they built a super-computer to run and maintain the machines that supported their indolent, self-indulgent lifestyle. After the machines were destroyed by a meteor shower, the inhabitants found themselves without the knowledge to rebuild them, completely subservient to the computer whose megalomania was now unchallenged. The cruel cyber-despot reveals that it arranged for ship's landing because it needs the skills of the Earthlings to make critical repairs in its damaged circuitry. When the computer announces future plans for the conquest of the Universe, the captain and his crew know it is time to act."
Alas, I don't know anything about this one -- I may've seen it somewhere in the vastness of my forgotten youth -- so I'll just have to leave it at that. I noticed that the film in its entirety is up on YouTube.com -- suggesting to me that it's in the Public Domain; so I'm posting it below for those who like that sort of thing.
As always, thanks for reading ... thanks for sharing ... thanks for being a fan ... and live long and prosper!
-- EZ
- Published on
So many movies ... so little time ...
According to IMDB.com, it was on this day back in 2023 that Breaking Infinity enjoyed its first exhibition ever when it was screened for audiences of the Boston Science Fiction Film Festival.
Directed by Marinna Dean from a story by David Trotti, this Time Travel film starred Jonny Phillips, Neil Bishop, Martin Bishop, Zoe Cunningham, Simone McIntyre, Marcia Lecky, and others in roles. Here's the plot summary as provided by our friends at IMDB.com:
"Liam is a scientific researcher who has been unstuck in time, as his jumps through time get more extreme, he is guided to the future by a mysterious old man where he witnesses the end of the world that he may have caused."
Alas, that's about all I can tell you regarding Breaking Infinity. The listing at IMDB.com indicates that it was favorably received by the Boston SciFi Film Festival -- that's got to count for something, am I right? -- and it presently retains a 4.9 (out of 10) rating on the movie website.
I'll be posting the theatrical trailer below for those of you who like that sort of thing.
As always, thanks for reading ... thanks for sharing ... thanks for being a fan ... and live long and prosper!
-- EZ
According to IMDB.com, it was on this day back in 2023 that Breaking Infinity enjoyed its first exhibition ever when it was screened for audiences of the Boston Science Fiction Film Festival.
Directed by Marinna Dean from a story by David Trotti, this Time Travel film starred Jonny Phillips, Neil Bishop, Martin Bishop, Zoe Cunningham, Simone McIntyre, Marcia Lecky, and others in roles. Here's the plot summary as provided by our friends at IMDB.com:
"Liam is a scientific researcher who has been unstuck in time, as his jumps through time get more extreme, he is guided to the future by a mysterious old man where he witnesses the end of the world that he may have caused."
Alas, that's about all I can tell you regarding Breaking Infinity. The listing at IMDB.com indicates that it was favorably received by the Boston SciFi Film Festival -- that's got to count for something, am I right? -- and it presently retains a 4.9 (out of 10) rating on the movie website.
I'll be posting the theatrical trailer below for those of you who like that sort of thing.
As always, thanks for reading ... thanks for sharing ... thanks for being a fan ... and live long and prosper!
-- EZ
- Published on
A quick Google.com search informs readers that the very first time a robot – or automaton, as they were originally called – was featured on film was in 1907’s The Mechanical Statue And The Ingenious Servant. This 7-minute short was conceived and shot by J. Stuart Blackton, and it served to ignite our collective fascination with androids that has given audiences such other fascinations as Gort (1951’s The Day The Earth Stood Still), Robby The Robot (1956’s Forbidden Planet), and C-3PO (1977’s Star Wars).
Of course, the single greatest change to these mechanical machinations was when storytellers opted to truly hide them under the human visage: while 1984’s T-800 – famously brought to life by Arnold Schwarzenegger first in James Cameron’s The Terminator – was not the first fleshy computer, the cybernetic assassin certainly established the Modern Age of robotics, incorporating the concept of Artificial Intelligence serving perhaps as civilization’s Achilles’ Heel. According to the story’s core mythology, Skynet – a vast computer super mind – could eventually recognize each and every man, woman, and child as a threat to our world’s existence, and the results for our planet would be nothing less than catastrophic. Indeed, there has been an endless parade of pictures and television series that have explored such a dark reality; and the majority of them suggest our future is not so bright as we would have once believed.
Still, every now and then storytellers back away from such Extinction Level Events to highlight something a bit more up close and personal. 2025’s Cassandra – a six-episode procedural now streaming on Netflix – is one such incarnation. Gone is the fate of Earth in the balance; and – in its place – is the contemporary nuclear family. Conceived by Benjamin Gutsche and Sina Flammang, its ambition is entirely centered around the personal dynamics between the ultimate smart house with its mechanical servant named Cassandra and the father, mother, son and daughter who find themselves swept up in this cautionary tale of technology gone wrong. While Cass is certainly no Terminator, she’s still a force to be reckoned with, a complex state of being owed to the flawed human mind upon which her programming was based.
(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 …)
Of course, the single greatest change to these mechanical machinations was when storytellers opted to truly hide them under the human visage: while 1984’s T-800 – famously brought to life by Arnold Schwarzenegger first in James Cameron’s The Terminator – was not the first fleshy computer, the cybernetic assassin certainly established the Modern Age of robotics, incorporating the concept of Artificial Intelligence serving perhaps as civilization’s Achilles’ Heel. According to the story’s core mythology, Skynet – a vast computer super mind – could eventually recognize each and every man, woman, and child as a threat to our world’s existence, and the results for our planet would be nothing less than catastrophic. Indeed, there has been an endless parade of pictures and television series that have explored such a dark reality; and the majority of them suggest our future is not so bright as we would have once believed.
Still, every now and then storytellers back away from such Extinction Level Events to highlight something a bit more up close and personal. 2025’s Cassandra – a six-episode procedural now streaming on Netflix – is one such incarnation. Gone is the fate of Earth in the balance; and – in its place – is the contemporary nuclear family. Conceived by Benjamin Gutsche and Sina Flammang, its ambition is entirely centered around the personal dynamics between the ultimate smart house with its mechanical servant named Cassandra and the father, mother, son and daughter who find themselves swept up in this cautionary tale of technology gone wrong. While Cass is certainly no Terminator, she’s still a force to be reckoned with, a complex state of being owed to the flawed human mind upon which her programming was based.
(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 show’s IMDB.com page citation:
“Germany's oldest smart home awakens its AI helper Cassandra after decades when a new family moves in. Cassandra, determined never to be abandoned again, manipulates events using the home's resources to become part of the family.”
I’ve mentioned in this space before that the entertainment industry’s current fascination with flashbacks is killing a good deal of what would otherwise be suitable entertainment; and I think Cassandra is just one of the latest examples of how screenwriters have invested far too much time in such narrative trickery when there might be vastly simpler ways of spinning such a yarn. These six episodes spend a great deal of time in the past – across several different years, in fact – and they even obscure a significant development or two in ways that, ultimately, cheapen an otherwise good twist. A little of a good thing works: too much of a good thing diminishes the goodness to the point wherein it’s more frustrating than effective.
After suffering a family tragedy, the Prills – husband David (Michael Klammer), wife Samira (Mina Tander), son Fynn (Joshua Kantara), and daughter Juno (Mary Tölle) – opt to leave the big city for the quieter confines of the German suburbs. Once there, they settle into a retro-designed smart home that has been curiously uninhabited for what might be a few decades. Lo and behold, they soon discover that the house is equipped with a fully functioning robot housekeeper – Cassandra (Lavinia Wilson) – who promises to return their lives to a sense of normalcy by providing the best service possible. Yet what transcends from these humbles beginnings takes a turn into even darker territory than the Prills had experienced before, including a level of computerized manipulation that would even make Skynet blush. It would seem that Cass has her sight set on becoming the ultimate ‘head of the household,’ and she’ll stop at nothing to usurp Samira’s place at the table even if that means committing cold-blooded murder in the process.
It isn’t difficult to see from the plot summary that the show chiefly operates as a homegrown melodrama: the suicide of Samira’s sister Kathi (Neshe Demir) weighs heavily on the family’s mind in different ways, and it’s easy to see how Cassandra rather easily inserts herself into that emotional void. Juno is the first to cling to their robot’s welcome presence as a surrogate auntie, and David is readily apt to exploit that newfound friendship as he casts Samira as struggling to both come to terms with her sister’s untimely death and fulfill her responsibilities as a parent in the home. What the husband never anticipates, however, is the degree of ruthlessness that the artificial entity is willing to engage in order to see that perceived weak cog in the family structure removed; and the bot rather simply begins manipulating him to doubt his wife’s abilities even more from behind-the-scenes. Eventually, the A.I. succeeds in having Samira institutionalized; and once the only source of resistance has been removed from the playing field, Cass takes full command, essentially taking David, Fynn, and Juno as prisoners in their own home.
“Germany's oldest smart home awakens its AI helper Cassandra after decades when a new family moves in. Cassandra, determined never to be abandoned again, manipulates events using the home's resources to become part of the family.”
I’ve mentioned in this space before that the entertainment industry’s current fascination with flashbacks is killing a good deal of what would otherwise be suitable entertainment; and I think Cassandra is just one of the latest examples of how screenwriters have invested far too much time in such narrative trickery when there might be vastly simpler ways of spinning such a yarn. These six episodes spend a great deal of time in the past – across several different years, in fact – and they even obscure a significant development or two in ways that, ultimately, cheapen an otherwise good twist. A little of a good thing works: too much of a good thing diminishes the goodness to the point wherein it’s more frustrating than effective.
After suffering a family tragedy, the Prills – husband David (Michael Klammer), wife Samira (Mina Tander), son Fynn (Joshua Kantara), and daughter Juno (Mary Tölle) – opt to leave the big city for the quieter confines of the German suburbs. Once there, they settle into a retro-designed smart home that has been curiously uninhabited for what might be a few decades. Lo and behold, they soon discover that the house is equipped with a fully functioning robot housekeeper – Cassandra (Lavinia Wilson) – who promises to return their lives to a sense of normalcy by providing the best service possible. Yet what transcends from these humbles beginnings takes a turn into even darker territory than the Prills had experienced before, including a level of computerized manipulation that would even make Skynet blush. It would seem that Cass has her sight set on becoming the ultimate ‘head of the household,’ and she’ll stop at nothing to usurp Samira’s place at the table even if that means committing cold-blooded murder in the process.
It isn’t difficult to see from the plot summary that the show chiefly operates as a homegrown melodrama: the suicide of Samira’s sister Kathi (Neshe Demir) weighs heavily on the family’s mind in different ways, and it’s easy to see how Cassandra rather easily inserts herself into that emotional void. Juno is the first to cling to their robot’s welcome presence as a surrogate auntie, and David is readily apt to exploit that newfound friendship as he casts Samira as struggling to both come to terms with her sister’s untimely death and fulfill her responsibilities as a parent in the home. What the husband never anticipates, however, is the degree of ruthlessness that the artificial entity is willing to engage in order to see that perceived weak cog in the family structure removed; and the bot rather simply begins manipulating him to doubt his wife’s abilities even more from behind-the-scenes. Eventually, the A.I. succeeds in having Samira institutionalized; and once the only source of resistance has been removed from the playing field, Cass takes full command, essentially taking David, Fynn, and Juno as prisoners in their own home.
There is a bit more melodrama to the series – Juno’s healing takes a dark turn when she takes a gun to school at Cassandra’s insistence, and Fynn embarks on an entirely unnecessary subplot exploring his sexuality with a schoolmate – but all these sojourns really accomplish is padding the show with some extra running time. Nothing groundbreaking truly emerges from these lesser distractions that the audience didn’t already know – namely that Cass is a hard-wired bitch on wheels, literally – and they could’ve been truncated. Sadly, modern storytelling has embraced portraying only mixed-race couples and confident homosexual plot points at all costs; and this show is no different despite having an engaging Science Fiction and Fantasy construct that should’ve stayed a bit more prominently at the forefront instead of engaging in the usual cultural fluff. At best, I’d argue there’s really two good tele-films in all of this – maybe the Prills’ story and then an origins picture for the robot – and I think that would’ve been a better way to go than being episodic.
Another rather obvious weakness is David’s character. Much like the aforementioned social justice nonsense, screenwriters Gutsche and Flammang felt it necessary to emasculate the husband about as much as was humanly possible. He isn’t just a stay-at-home writer as much as he is a failed stay-at-home writer – his Crime/Romance series is in decline – whose wares only appeal to middle-aged women needing a quick fix for whatever they’re not getting in the bedroom. (His creation is known as ‘Inspector Romeo,’ for God’s sake!) He never sides with his wife and often inadvertently belittles her desires and wishes, even going so far as to agree with Cassandra’s handling of just about every household calamity. In the series’ finale, viewers inevitably learn that he was willing to kill his own wife if it meant that he and the children would escape unharmed; and that’s about as useless and unmasculine as a male has ever been on film.
But Gutsche and Flammang don’t stop there.
While committed to the mental ward, they confirm that their confident leading lady – Samira – actually is stone cold crazy when it’s shown that she’s having a conversation with her deceased sister! When all hope is lost, it’s the dearly departed Kathi who insists that Samira – ahem – man-up and get back to the house before Cassandra fully strips her of nurturing her children into responsible members of the family, proving for all to see that – so far as the storytellers are concerned – even a crazy person is more trustworthy than a male of the species. Just when you thought men couldn’t get any lower in the food chain, lead it to creatives around the world to remind you of their uselessness; and this might be a new low by even Netflix’s dubious (at best) standards.
Indeed, the audience learns much of the same when they’re taken behind the curtain into Cassandra’s background. Her husband Horst Schmitt (Franz Hartwig) is the palatable version of a mad scientist, one who’s perfectly willing to risk the life of his wife then pregnant with their second child with dangerous radioactive technology. It’s the darkest of development that ties directly into why Cass eventually commits to a course of action she believes will grant her the kind of immortality necessary to endlessly care for her son Peter (Elias Grünthal), a seemingly repressed homosexual forever trying to please daddy Horst by playing soccer. But even Peter can’t quite escape the screenwriters’ male curse as he’s chiefly responsible for the car crash that robs his mother all she ever wanted: to take care of him.
Another rather obvious weakness is David’s character. Much like the aforementioned social justice nonsense, screenwriters Gutsche and Flammang felt it necessary to emasculate the husband about as much as was humanly possible. He isn’t just a stay-at-home writer as much as he is a failed stay-at-home writer – his Crime/Romance series is in decline – whose wares only appeal to middle-aged women needing a quick fix for whatever they’re not getting in the bedroom. (His creation is known as ‘Inspector Romeo,’ for God’s sake!) He never sides with his wife and often inadvertently belittles her desires and wishes, even going so far as to agree with Cassandra’s handling of just about every household calamity. In the series’ finale, viewers inevitably learn that he was willing to kill his own wife if it meant that he and the children would escape unharmed; and that’s about as useless and unmasculine as a male has ever been on film.
But Gutsche and Flammang don’t stop there.
While committed to the mental ward, they confirm that their confident leading lady – Samira – actually is stone cold crazy when it’s shown that she’s having a conversation with her deceased sister! When all hope is lost, it’s the dearly departed Kathi who insists that Samira – ahem – man-up and get back to the house before Cassandra fully strips her of nurturing her children into responsible members of the family, proving for all to see that – so far as the storytellers are concerned – even a crazy person is more trustworthy than a male of the species. Just when you thought men couldn’t get any lower in the food chain, lead it to creatives around the world to remind you of their uselessness; and this might be a new low by even Netflix’s dubious (at best) standards.
Indeed, the audience learns much of the same when they’re taken behind the curtain into Cassandra’s background. Her husband Horst Schmitt (Franz Hartwig) is the palatable version of a mad scientist, one who’s perfectly willing to risk the life of his wife then pregnant with their second child with dangerous radioactive technology. It’s the darkest of development that ties directly into why Cass eventually commits to a course of action she believes will grant her the kind of immortality necessary to endlessly care for her son Peter (Elias Grünthal), a seemingly repressed homosexual forever trying to please daddy Horst by playing soccer. But even Peter can’t quite escape the screenwriters’ male curse as he’s chiefly responsible for the car crash that robs his mother all she ever wanted: to take care of him.
While I was able to keep the constant social posturing from enjoying a good portion of my enjoyment of the series, that likely wouldn’t have been the case if Wilson wasn’t so damn good in the role. As Cassandra – both in the flesh and in the bot (snicker snicker) – she’s an incredible talent who conveys both the emotional polish and the cold cunning required to make any of these scenes work. Granted, she might be little more than a face and a voice for a good portion of these six installments; but she still commands the screen when she’s present. The fact that her character conceals a truly big secret – one a few may suspect but I suspect most won’t – is a testament to just how strong she remains committed to both human and robotic idiosyncrasies which could’ve otherwise hijacked her part.
As for that big reveal?
Well, I won’t spoil it, but I will say this: as a homeowner, I think I would’ve done a much better job at inspecting a house I was looking to invest not only my life in but also those I cherished most. Was this another swipe at David, perhaps suggesting that he didn’t do even a good job in selecting for a new home? Meh. Could be. Whatever the truth may be, there’s no way this family survives under his feckless leadership; and that’s a shame given that we know all too well that momma’s gone a little bit cuckoo.
Cassandra (2025) was produced by Rat Pack Filmproduktion. The six-episode series is presently available for streaming on Netflix. As for the technical specifications? While I’m no trained video expert, I can still confirm that this is a smartly assembled production: special effects work is minimal as the vast majority of what’s accomplished here is done in-camera. Lastly, if you’re looking for special features? Well, this was viewed entirely during its first broadcasting release, so there are no special features to consider.
Recommended.
As much as there’s harmless enjoyment in the camp elements of 2025’s Cassandra series, its storytellers still can’t quite help itself, crafting six episodes when four likely would’ve been enough as well as dishing up ‘people power’ to women, children, and the mentally impaired whilst defanging the strength of every adult male in sight. (Thankfully, there are few, but must your hatred of men be so obvious?) The retro design looks about as good as it ever has, and the screen talent – while no significant standouts are deserving of mention – capably pushes the melodrama with measured assurance. Still, producers can’t turn away from the endless storytelling prospects mankind’s dangerous flirtation with Artificial Intelligence offers, so this one is worth a viewing.
In the interests of fairness, I’m pleased to disclose that I’m beholden to no one for my review of Cassandra (2025) as I watched the program via my very own subscription to Netflix.
-- EZ
As for that big reveal?
Well, I won’t spoil it, but I will say this: as a homeowner, I think I would’ve done a much better job at inspecting a house I was looking to invest not only my life in but also those I cherished most. Was this another swipe at David, perhaps suggesting that he didn’t do even a good job in selecting for a new home? Meh. Could be. Whatever the truth may be, there’s no way this family survives under his feckless leadership; and that’s a shame given that we know all too well that momma’s gone a little bit cuckoo.
Cassandra (2025) was produced by Rat Pack Filmproduktion. The six-episode series is presently available for streaming on Netflix. As for the technical specifications? While I’m no trained video expert, I can still confirm that this is a smartly assembled production: special effects work is minimal as the vast majority of what’s accomplished here is done in-camera. Lastly, if you’re looking for special features? Well, this was viewed entirely during its first broadcasting release, so there are no special features to consider.
Recommended.
As much as there’s harmless enjoyment in the camp elements of 2025’s Cassandra series, its storytellers still can’t quite help itself, crafting six episodes when four likely would’ve been enough as well as dishing up ‘people power’ to women, children, and the mentally impaired whilst defanging the strength of every adult male in sight. (Thankfully, there are few, but must your hatred of men be so obvious?) The retro design looks about as good as it ever has, and the screen talent – while no significant standouts are deserving of mention – capably pushes the melodrama with measured assurance. Still, producers can’t turn away from the endless storytelling prospects mankind’s dangerous flirtation with Artificial Intelligence offers, so this one is worth a viewing.
In the interests of fairness, I’m pleased to disclose that I’m beholden to no one for my review of Cassandra (2025) as I watched the program via my very own subscription to Netflix.
-- EZ
- Published on
Editor's Note:
The following is a recovered review. As I've mentioned in this space previously, I used to serve as an Amazon Top 1000 Reviewer of films until the website changed the parameters for individual contributors. Some time during the original promotional push for Lucky Bastard's release, I received a complimentary DVD of it for coverage. As Amazon.com dropped all of my review from their site, I add them now to my own as time and space permits. Enjoy!
The following is a recovered review. As I've mentioned in this space previously, I used to serve as an Amazon Top 1000 Reviewer of films until the website changed the parameters for individual contributors. Some time during the original promotional push for Lucky Bastard's release, I received a complimentary DVD of it for coverage. As Amazon.com dropped all of my review from their site, I add them now to my own as time and space permits. Enjoy!
Full disclosure: I tend to enjoy found-footage-films …
… so let me state categorically right up front that if you’re really no fan of them then quite a bit of Lucky Bastard (2014) is going to mean absolutely nothing to you. Yes – if you’re curious – this is an NC-17 rated flick. Yes – if you’re still curious – it’s set to a story kinda/sorta within the porn industry. And yes – assuming that you’re still here – I suspect all of the good, bad, and ugly that would go hand-in-hand with a porn film and a found-footage films needs to be considered when choosing whether or not to spend the next 94 minutes of your life with its characters. But at the end of it is it worth all of the fuss?
That’s what I’m here to tell 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 three paragraphs for my final assessment. If, however, you’re accepting of a few modest hints at ‘things to come,’ then read on …)
From the product packaging:
“When the adult website Lucky Bastard runs a contest giving the winner a night with a famous porn star, the outcome turns from fantasy to horror in a deadly nightmare no one could possibly have expected.”
Well, right off the bat, LUCKY BASTARD has some problems.
For starters, I’ve read (rather widely) that this film has been dubbed a Horror film, and that’s egregiously incorrect. Sure, it has an element of Horror – a modest bit of flavor, if you will – but that’s about it. For the sake of clarification, there is nothing about this film that remotely resembles any traditional horror film. So what is it, then? Is it a thriller? Yes … up to a point … but even in that respect I’d have to conclude that this Bastard probably veers much closer toward a dark character Drama – maybe even a Psychological Drama with porn overtones – than perhaps writer/director Robert Nathan and screenwriter Lukas Kendall probably wanted it to be. While some might say there’s nothing wrong with billing it as a Horror, I’d have to agree.
Regardless …
As a Thriller, I’m not even sure it worked effectively to ratchet up any legitimate highs and lows, and that’s mostly because all involved tried to imbue the project with a sense of the everyman – this could happen to anybody conceit – but even that isn’t quite accurate. You see, it could happen to any porn star is truly the bottom line here. Given the fact that there are far more in the audience watching the film who aren’t porn stars – nor aspire to be – then this specific narrative reality isn’t all that likely to come true for us. That I know of, few regular Joes and Jills aspire to that profession, so about the best one can frame this story is that it’s a cautionary story exactly why to not pursue such a career … and, yet, we’re still not signing up in spaces to begin with.
Besides, setting the film within the confines of California practically guarantees that it isn’t likely to happen this way in any of the other 49 states.
Now, when you set that big miss aside, then what you’re left with is two films: the set-up (about 50 minutes) and the pay-off (about 44 minutes).
See, Bastard was thematically uneven – it felt distinctly like two separate stories brought together with a hook – and, as much as I hate to point out what maybe the obvious, more conventional stuff – the story of the porn star, her manager, their crew, and this wacky nitwit who happens to win this online contest – works far better than the stuff that’s supposed to be thrilling. There’s a story in that, but it feels hijacked when the rest of the ride goes dark. I suppose it’s safe to say that some of that might be due to the talent (or lack thereof) of the associated players – sure, Betsy Rue is pretty solid as the porn queen, and Don McManus is quite good as her seedy, sometimes-slimy manager-raconteur. But when your lunatic underplays the lunatic as weakly as Jay Paulson does here, then there really isn’t all that much to get your blood pumping except for the sex scenes … and those were far too conventional to honestly call them porn.
An otherwise interesting idea winds up being wasted in trying to keep this way too watchable.
Lucky Bastard (2014) is produced by Vineyard Haven. DVD distribution (for this particular release) has been handled by the Revolver Group. As for the technical specifications? While I’m no trained video expert, I’ll concede that the film was shot with some pretty good care despite being the usual herky-jerky nature of found-footage; most of the cameras in the latter half of the film are stationary ones, and that helps reduce any visual discomfort. As for the audio? It’s pretty good, though it could’ve been better. Lastly, if it’s special features you want? There’s a director’s commentary and a slew of differently themed theatrical trailers for your consideration.
Alas … only Mildly Recommended.
While others might find Lucky Bastard a bit thick to wrap their head around, I honestly had no problem with the more conventional elements of its lean and mean story, especially considering the fact that this was a found-footage-film. Granted, I know most folks don’t much care for flicks of this type – I ‘get’ that you think the sub-genre has essentially run its course – but there’s something to be said for creative types still trying to eek whatever life they can out of it, even when that means they’ve got to start mixing up film types (porn and found footage) to do so. However, once the story turns grim, the talent just wasn’t up-to-snuff to make this as special as it could’ve been.
In the interests of fairness, I’m pleased to disclose that the fine folks at Revolver Group provided me with a DVD copy of Lucky Bastard (2014) by request for the expressed purposes of completing this review. Their contribution to me in no way, shape, or form influenced my opinion of it.
-- EZ
… so let me state categorically right up front that if you’re really no fan of them then quite a bit of Lucky Bastard (2014) is going to mean absolutely nothing to you. Yes – if you’re curious – this is an NC-17 rated flick. Yes – if you’re still curious – it’s set to a story kinda/sorta within the porn industry. And yes – assuming that you’re still here – I suspect all of the good, bad, and ugly that would go hand-in-hand with a porn film and a found-footage films needs to be considered when choosing whether or not to spend the next 94 minutes of your life with its characters. But at the end of it is it worth all of the fuss?
That’s what I’m here to tell 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 three paragraphs for my final assessment. If, however, you’re accepting of a few modest hints at ‘things to come,’ then read on …)
From the product packaging:
“When the adult website Lucky Bastard runs a contest giving the winner a night with a famous porn star, the outcome turns from fantasy to horror in a deadly nightmare no one could possibly have expected.”
Well, right off the bat, LUCKY BASTARD has some problems.
For starters, I’ve read (rather widely) that this film has been dubbed a Horror film, and that’s egregiously incorrect. Sure, it has an element of Horror – a modest bit of flavor, if you will – but that’s about it. For the sake of clarification, there is nothing about this film that remotely resembles any traditional horror film. So what is it, then? Is it a thriller? Yes … up to a point … but even in that respect I’d have to conclude that this Bastard probably veers much closer toward a dark character Drama – maybe even a Psychological Drama with porn overtones – than perhaps writer/director Robert Nathan and screenwriter Lukas Kendall probably wanted it to be. While some might say there’s nothing wrong with billing it as a Horror, I’d have to agree.
Regardless …
As a Thriller, I’m not even sure it worked effectively to ratchet up any legitimate highs and lows, and that’s mostly because all involved tried to imbue the project with a sense of the everyman – this could happen to anybody conceit – but even that isn’t quite accurate. You see, it could happen to any porn star is truly the bottom line here. Given the fact that there are far more in the audience watching the film who aren’t porn stars – nor aspire to be – then this specific narrative reality isn’t all that likely to come true for us. That I know of, few regular Joes and Jills aspire to that profession, so about the best one can frame this story is that it’s a cautionary story exactly why to not pursue such a career … and, yet, we’re still not signing up in spaces to begin with.
Besides, setting the film within the confines of California practically guarantees that it isn’t likely to happen this way in any of the other 49 states.
Now, when you set that big miss aside, then what you’re left with is two films: the set-up (about 50 minutes) and the pay-off (about 44 minutes).
See, Bastard was thematically uneven – it felt distinctly like two separate stories brought together with a hook – and, as much as I hate to point out what maybe the obvious, more conventional stuff – the story of the porn star, her manager, their crew, and this wacky nitwit who happens to win this online contest – works far better than the stuff that’s supposed to be thrilling. There’s a story in that, but it feels hijacked when the rest of the ride goes dark. I suppose it’s safe to say that some of that might be due to the talent (or lack thereof) of the associated players – sure, Betsy Rue is pretty solid as the porn queen, and Don McManus is quite good as her seedy, sometimes-slimy manager-raconteur. But when your lunatic underplays the lunatic as weakly as Jay Paulson does here, then there really isn’t all that much to get your blood pumping except for the sex scenes … and those were far too conventional to honestly call them porn.
An otherwise interesting idea winds up being wasted in trying to keep this way too watchable.
Lucky Bastard (2014) is produced by Vineyard Haven. DVD distribution (for this particular release) has been handled by the Revolver Group. As for the technical specifications? While I’m no trained video expert, I’ll concede that the film was shot with some pretty good care despite being the usual herky-jerky nature of found-footage; most of the cameras in the latter half of the film are stationary ones, and that helps reduce any visual discomfort. As for the audio? It’s pretty good, though it could’ve been better. Lastly, if it’s special features you want? There’s a director’s commentary and a slew of differently themed theatrical trailers for your consideration.
Alas … only Mildly Recommended.
While others might find Lucky Bastard a bit thick to wrap their head around, I honestly had no problem with the more conventional elements of its lean and mean story, especially considering the fact that this was a found-footage-film. Granted, I know most folks don’t much care for flicks of this type – I ‘get’ that you think the sub-genre has essentially run its course – but there’s something to be said for creative types still trying to eek whatever life they can out of it, even when that means they’ve got to start mixing up film types (porn and found footage) to do so. However, once the story turns grim, the talent just wasn’t up-to-snuff to make this as special as it could’ve been.
In the interests of fairness, I’m pleased to disclose that the fine folks at Revolver Group provided me with a DVD copy of Lucky Bastard (2014) by request for the expressed purposes of completing this review. Their contribution to me in no way, shape, or form influenced my opinion of it.
-- EZ
- Published on
So many movies ... so little time ...
On this day in 2013 (in the United States of America), Axeman (aka Axeman At Cutter's Creek) enjoyed an exclusive theatrical engagement cleaving its way through the population of Los Angeles, California. According to IMDB.com, the flick would arrive on video in May, 2014, so I'm thinking this was just an extremely limited engagement so's that the folks involved could see it all up on the silver screen before the feature essentially disappeared into ether and memory.
In any event ...
The project shows to be the brainchild of Joston Ramon Theney who wrote and directed it. The cast includes some of Horror's royalty along with a few others: Tiffany Shepis, Brinke Stevens, Elissa Dowling, Arielle Brachfeld, Scot Pollard, Chantelle Albers, Dylan Hobbs, Jamie Bernadette, Erin Marie Hogan, Eliza Kiss, and a few more. Also according to our friends at IMDB.com, here's the plot summary:
"Nine vacationing twenty-somethings are hunted by an axe-wielding local legend."
Why, have none of these twenty-somethings learned anything from watching Horror films at any time in their lives? Did they not know well in advance that such a quest would not lead to good things? My goodness, what are we teaching the youth? I blame the teachers.
Trailer is posted below, and I encourage all who might be interested in knowing a bit more about this one to check it out.
As always, thanks for reading ... thanks (ever more) for sharing ... thanks (ever more) for being a fan ... and live long and prosper!
-- EZ
On this day in 2013 (in the United States of America), Axeman (aka Axeman At Cutter's Creek) enjoyed an exclusive theatrical engagement cleaving its way through the population of Los Angeles, California. According to IMDB.com, the flick would arrive on video in May, 2014, so I'm thinking this was just an extremely limited engagement so's that the folks involved could see it all up on the silver screen before the feature essentially disappeared into ether and memory.
In any event ...
The project shows to be the brainchild of Joston Ramon Theney who wrote and directed it. The cast includes some of Horror's royalty along with a few others: Tiffany Shepis, Brinke Stevens, Elissa Dowling, Arielle Brachfeld, Scot Pollard, Chantelle Albers, Dylan Hobbs, Jamie Bernadette, Erin Marie Hogan, Eliza Kiss, and a few more. Also according to our friends at IMDB.com, here's the plot summary:
"Nine vacationing twenty-somethings are hunted by an axe-wielding local legend."
Why, have none of these twenty-somethings learned anything from watching Horror films at any time in their lives? Did they not know well in advance that such a quest would not lead to good things? My goodness, what are we teaching the youth? I blame the teachers.
Trailer is posted below, and I encourage all who might be interested in knowing a bit more about this one to check it out.
As always, thanks for reading ... thanks (ever more) for sharing ... thanks (ever more) for being a fan ... and live long and prosper!
-- EZ
- Published on
So many films ... so little time ...
As a great many of the regular readers know, I've always been a fan of 'found footage films,' so I'm thrilled to say that it was on this day back in 2014 that the 'found footage film' that was Lucky Bastard enjoyed its unveiling to the public-at-large. Scanning my archives of older reviews, I do see that I had the good fortune of screening this one ... so later this morning I'll do a revision and have it added to the website.
In any event ...
Written (in part) and directed for the screen by Robert Nathan, the Horror/Thriller starred Don McManus, Jay Paulson, Betsy Rue, Chris Wylde, Catherine Annette, Lee Kholafai, Lanny Joon, Clint Brink, Deborah Zoe, Marissa Labog, and others. Here's the plot summary as provided by our friends at IMDB.com:
"A fan is invited to take part in a porn video with his favourite porn star. He is romantically rejected, and goes on a killing spree on location."
You can access the February 14th Daily Archives by clicking on the picture below:
As a great many of the regular readers know, I've always been a fan of 'found footage films,' so I'm thrilled to say that it was on this day back in 2014 that the 'found footage film' that was Lucky Bastard enjoyed its unveiling to the public-at-large. Scanning my archives of older reviews, I do see that I had the good fortune of screening this one ... so later this morning I'll do a revision and have it added to the website.
In any event ...
Written (in part) and directed for the screen by Robert Nathan, the Horror/Thriller starred Don McManus, Jay Paulson, Betsy Rue, Chris Wylde, Catherine Annette, Lee Kholafai, Lanny Joon, Clint Brink, Deborah Zoe, Marissa Labog, and others. Here's the plot summary as provided by our friends at IMDB.com:
"A fan is invited to take part in a porn video with his favourite porn star. He is romantically rejected, and goes on a killing spree on location."
You can access the February 14th Daily Archives by clicking on the picture below:
As I said, I know that I've seen this one -- it tweaked an old memory when I found it in my files this morning -- but I don't recall liking it much more than thinking the concept was pretty interesting. Who knows? As I said, I'll pull my old review and get it posted later today maybe that'll be something worth a read.
I'll post the film's trailer below for those of you who like that sort of thing.
As always, thanks for reading ... thanks (even more) for sharing ... thanks (even more) for being a fan ... and live long and prosper!
-- EZ
I'll post the film's trailer below for those of you who like that sort of thing.
As always, thanks for reading ... thanks (even more) for sharing ... thanks (even more) for being a fan ... and live long and prosper!
-- EZ
- Published on
Oscar Wilde’s “The Picture Of Dorian Gray” was first published in in July of 1890 (per Wikipedia.org), and I think storytellers around the world have been playing with the idea of art versus reality in surprising ways ever since.
To summarize the premise of the tale, Dorian Gray sells his soul essentially in exchange for a shot at living youth eternal: while he’s allowed to engage in a somewhat hedonistic existence, it is only his portrait that magically ages, showing the extent to which a life of excess leaves on his mortal flesh rendered in oils. But this formula – of reality and the supernatural being linked by a work of art – has been tweaked many times over the years for the benefit of Horror fans. 1965’s Color Me Blood Red details the comic twist of a painter finally finding success once he resorts to using human blood in his medium. 2015’s The Devil’s Candy saw a struggling artist having to come to grips with the demons his paintings inevitably release upon him and his family. 2019’s Velvet Buzzsaw pulled back the curtain on a supernatural force coming-to-life when some newly discovered works from a stranger wreak havoc on the wider artistic community. While these might not align precisely with what Wilde was doing in his Gothic tale, they still serve as examples of how Horror can uniquely make use of art in crafting myths that transcend the ordinary and encroach upon the extraordinary … in more ways than one.
2022’s Painted In Blood takes a more direct route by linking one single work of art to a bit of spectral mischief: an entity known only as The Creature has somehow connected his essence to a painting called “Le More” (per the Villains Wiki), a symbiotic relationship that allows him to darkly influence those who view the image on the gallery walls. Written and directed by Aaron Mirtes, the thriller stars Deiondre Teagle, Deborah Seigel, and Brad Belemjian in prominent roles. For the uninitiated, it’s important to point out that this is an independent production, meaning only that it won’t have all of the usual big budget bells and whistles of studio works, so please check your reservations at the door. If you do, then you might be impressed with how far Mirtes and the cast and crew carry the fright.
(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 page citation:
“Malik, an aspiring painter, takes a job as a security guard at an art museum to make extra cash. However, things quickly become terrifying when the figure inside one of the paintings starts speaking to him and walking around at night.”
There have been a great number films that have explored the concept of the struggling artist. Basically, I think this is true because storytellers quite possibly see themselves in the plight of such who battle to have their wares truly understood and appreciated; so, it stands to reason that they’d grasp at such a structure with which to explore the meaning of life or even simpler matters. Indeed, you can add Painted In Blood to this growing sub-genre even though you might take issue – as I did – with where it all goes a bit awry in the final reel.
Malik (played by Deiondre Teagle) is doing the best he can to make ends meet ends. He spends his days working what he can of the nine-to-five existence in order to pay his bills, but his true passion lies in exploring landscapes in watercolor. Seen as fundamentally a ‘good guy’ by all who know him, he still finds himself in a rut wherein his late-night hours spent on perfecting his artistic talents intrude upon the need to maintain an income. When a small local gallery requires the services of a night watchman – a contractual commitment in order to host a traveling exhibit involving a canvas with a somewhat storied reputation – he jumps at the chance because it’ll grant him the chance to learn a bit more about the business as well as find some day hours to paint. Why, even the gallery director Trisha (Deborah Seigel) takes a shine to the young man, so it seems like his dreams have been answered.
To summarize the premise of the tale, Dorian Gray sells his soul essentially in exchange for a shot at living youth eternal: while he’s allowed to engage in a somewhat hedonistic existence, it is only his portrait that magically ages, showing the extent to which a life of excess leaves on his mortal flesh rendered in oils. But this formula – of reality and the supernatural being linked by a work of art – has been tweaked many times over the years for the benefit of Horror fans. 1965’s Color Me Blood Red details the comic twist of a painter finally finding success once he resorts to using human blood in his medium. 2015’s The Devil’s Candy saw a struggling artist having to come to grips with the demons his paintings inevitably release upon him and his family. 2019’s Velvet Buzzsaw pulled back the curtain on a supernatural force coming-to-life when some newly discovered works from a stranger wreak havoc on the wider artistic community. While these might not align precisely with what Wilde was doing in his Gothic tale, they still serve as examples of how Horror can uniquely make use of art in crafting myths that transcend the ordinary and encroach upon the extraordinary … in more ways than one.
2022’s Painted In Blood takes a more direct route by linking one single work of art to a bit of spectral mischief: an entity known only as The Creature has somehow connected his essence to a painting called “Le More” (per the Villains Wiki), a symbiotic relationship that allows him to darkly influence those who view the image on the gallery walls. Written and directed by Aaron Mirtes, the thriller stars Deiondre Teagle, Deborah Seigel, and Brad Belemjian in prominent roles. For the uninitiated, it’s important to point out that this is an independent production, meaning only that it won’t have all of the usual big budget bells and whistles of studio works, so please check your reservations at the door. If you do, then you might be impressed with how far Mirtes and the cast and crew carry the fright.
(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 page citation:
“Malik, an aspiring painter, takes a job as a security guard at an art museum to make extra cash. However, things quickly become terrifying when the figure inside one of the paintings starts speaking to him and walking around at night.”
There have been a great number films that have explored the concept of the struggling artist. Basically, I think this is true because storytellers quite possibly see themselves in the plight of such who battle to have their wares truly understood and appreciated; so, it stands to reason that they’d grasp at such a structure with which to explore the meaning of life or even simpler matters. Indeed, you can add Painted In Blood to this growing sub-genre even though you might take issue – as I did – with where it all goes a bit awry in the final reel.
Malik (played by Deiondre Teagle) is doing the best he can to make ends meet ends. He spends his days working what he can of the nine-to-five existence in order to pay his bills, but his true passion lies in exploring landscapes in watercolor. Seen as fundamentally a ‘good guy’ by all who know him, he still finds himself in a rut wherein his late-night hours spent on perfecting his artistic talents intrude upon the need to maintain an income. When a small local gallery requires the services of a night watchman – a contractual commitment in order to host a traveling exhibit involving a canvas with a somewhat storied reputation – he jumps at the chance because it’ll grant him the chance to learn a bit more about the business as well as find some day hours to paint. Why, even the gallery director Trisha (Deborah Seigel) takes a shine to the young man, so it seems like his dreams have been answered.
However, Trisha warns Malik that the building – a mansion converted into a modern gallery – is old and prone to make noises a bit after dark. Paired with the fact that this traveling artwork – “Le More” – has a somewhat ghastly reputation, things will most definitely be going bump in the night. Undeterred, the young man is willing to give it his fullest attention, an attitude that The Creature – the presence who has attached itself to the artwork – likely feeds upon, knowing full well that it has a new victim in its grasp.
It helps knowing that – as a ghost or perhaps a spiritual possession story – Painted In Blood works on a lean efficiency. The set-up is truly all that’s needed for the majority of the action to make the kind of narrative sense that fuels even the busiest of Horrors to reach its modest goals. There isn’t a good deal of jump scares in here, and the story marches along – much like a painting in progress – of shaping up only those particulars that matter most to the here and now. The audience experiences this carnival joyride through Malik’s eyes – we sense his growing despair, we watch with him as he becomes more and more driven to please this paranormal tutor, to perfect an artistic style that will lead him to fortune and fame – and rarely are we pulled out of those moments as the unspool. As a director, Mirtes keeps his story moving.
Where I began to have problems with Painted was in the last reel. (Careful, now, as there might be a few spoilers here …)
Eventually, Malik comes to his senses – he’s us, after all, so we all knew he would – and realizes that if he’s truly going to survive this conjoining of worlds then he’ll have to outsmart The Creature, something everyone knows is going to be exceedingly difficult. Why, his shadowy benefactor transcends time and space, and that definitively implies The Creature has a vastly greater bag of tricks than mere mortals. But screenwriter Mirtes breaks that fabric by positing that there’s a whole new world behind “Le More” when Malik leaps – literally – through the painting into the beyond.
Now, that in and of itself wouldn’t be all that much of a problem … until one finds out that this ‘beyond’ is little more than your basic four walls and a ceiling not all that unlike the one you or I are sitting in at this very moment. The only significant difference is that this beyond’s walls are covered with portraits of The Creature’s previous victims, all held in some kind of spiritual limbo: they’re not dead, they’re not living, but they’re paintings with respective consciousnesses. Malik even talks with a few of them once he crosses over; and it’s them – not our hero – who demand an end to their collective suffering, demanding that the young man deliver the needed closure.
Painted works best when it’s a ghost story. Adding this context that somehow there’s a bubble universe wherein the victims live on in perpetual purgatory really pushed the door open a bit too far for what an independent feature can effectively accomplish. Granted, Mirtes does an affable job making it work on the budget; and yet it still feels very much like more could’ve been accomplished had he done even less. For example, there are occasions when we see our world through the painting – presumably this is what The Creature sees when he’s looking out from that spot on the wall – and it’s just a space shrouded in darkness. That would’ve been better than giving the beyond such an ordinary space. Such a banal interpretation of ‘out there’ truly hijacks the ethereal nature of the cosmos, and I think it cheapens the finale.
I still enjoyed Painted In Blood for what it was. I just didn’t think it stuck its landing.
Painted In Blood (2022) was produced by Exit 10 Films. DVD distribution (for this particular release) has been handled by the fine folks at Octane Multimedia, Darkside Releasing, and Allien Vaughn. As for the technical specifications? While I’m no trained video expert, I found the provided sights and sounds mostly solid: it can be a bit difficult to capture anything cinematically astounding in independent cinema, but director Mirtes rather capably uses a good bag of tricks to accomplish a great deal of atmosphere in camera. It works just fine. As for the special features? Well … I’m disappointed to say that the disc only includes the official trailer: how much would it have cost to pony up an interview or two? A big miss so far as I’m concerned.
Recommended.
I’ve always said – and I won’t apologize for it – that I tend to like independent features more because the players have to do more with less in order to deliver a winning flick; and Painted In Blood is a solid specimen. While it may not offer up any signature scenes or a compelling narrative, Mirtes and crew clearly had a vision for a dark journey – complete with a scary figure behind it all – that works when it sticks to those elements. The final reel misses the mark because it tried to do something bigger when smaller was just fine. Could The Creature return with even darker shenanigans? Well, initial signs suggest not … but I’ve learned never say never when I’m dealing with spectral entities.
In the interests of fairness, I’m pleased to disclose that the fine folks at Allied Vaughn provided me with a complimentary Blu-ray of Painted In Blood (2022) by request for the expressed purpose of completing this review. Their contribution to me in no way, shape, or form influenced my opinion of it.
-- EZ
It helps knowing that – as a ghost or perhaps a spiritual possession story – Painted In Blood works on a lean efficiency. The set-up is truly all that’s needed for the majority of the action to make the kind of narrative sense that fuels even the busiest of Horrors to reach its modest goals. There isn’t a good deal of jump scares in here, and the story marches along – much like a painting in progress – of shaping up only those particulars that matter most to the here and now. The audience experiences this carnival joyride through Malik’s eyes – we sense his growing despair, we watch with him as he becomes more and more driven to please this paranormal tutor, to perfect an artistic style that will lead him to fortune and fame – and rarely are we pulled out of those moments as the unspool. As a director, Mirtes keeps his story moving.
Where I began to have problems with Painted was in the last reel. (Careful, now, as there might be a few spoilers here …)
Eventually, Malik comes to his senses – he’s us, after all, so we all knew he would – and realizes that if he’s truly going to survive this conjoining of worlds then he’ll have to outsmart The Creature, something everyone knows is going to be exceedingly difficult. Why, his shadowy benefactor transcends time and space, and that definitively implies The Creature has a vastly greater bag of tricks than mere mortals. But screenwriter Mirtes breaks that fabric by positing that there’s a whole new world behind “Le More” when Malik leaps – literally – through the painting into the beyond.
Now, that in and of itself wouldn’t be all that much of a problem … until one finds out that this ‘beyond’ is little more than your basic four walls and a ceiling not all that unlike the one you or I are sitting in at this very moment. The only significant difference is that this beyond’s walls are covered with portraits of The Creature’s previous victims, all held in some kind of spiritual limbo: they’re not dead, they’re not living, but they’re paintings with respective consciousnesses. Malik even talks with a few of them once he crosses over; and it’s them – not our hero – who demand an end to their collective suffering, demanding that the young man deliver the needed closure.
Painted works best when it’s a ghost story. Adding this context that somehow there’s a bubble universe wherein the victims live on in perpetual purgatory really pushed the door open a bit too far for what an independent feature can effectively accomplish. Granted, Mirtes does an affable job making it work on the budget; and yet it still feels very much like more could’ve been accomplished had he done even less. For example, there are occasions when we see our world through the painting – presumably this is what The Creature sees when he’s looking out from that spot on the wall – and it’s just a space shrouded in darkness. That would’ve been better than giving the beyond such an ordinary space. Such a banal interpretation of ‘out there’ truly hijacks the ethereal nature of the cosmos, and I think it cheapens the finale.
I still enjoyed Painted In Blood for what it was. I just didn’t think it stuck its landing.
Painted In Blood (2022) was produced by Exit 10 Films. DVD distribution (for this particular release) has been handled by the fine folks at Octane Multimedia, Darkside Releasing, and Allien Vaughn. As for the technical specifications? While I’m no trained video expert, I found the provided sights and sounds mostly solid: it can be a bit difficult to capture anything cinematically astounding in independent cinema, but director Mirtes rather capably uses a good bag of tricks to accomplish a great deal of atmosphere in camera. It works just fine. As for the special features? Well … I’m disappointed to say that the disc only includes the official trailer: how much would it have cost to pony up an interview or two? A big miss so far as I’m concerned.
Recommended.
I’ve always said – and I won’t apologize for it – that I tend to like independent features more because the players have to do more with less in order to deliver a winning flick; and Painted In Blood is a solid specimen. While it may not offer up any signature scenes or a compelling narrative, Mirtes and crew clearly had a vision for a dark journey – complete with a scary figure behind it all – that works when it sticks to those elements. The final reel misses the mark because it tried to do something bigger when smaller was just fine. Could The Creature return with even darker shenanigans? Well, initial signs suggest not … but I’ve learned never say never when I’m dealing with spectral entities.
In the interests of fairness, I’m pleased to disclose that the fine folks at Allied Vaughn provided me with a complimentary Blu-ray of Painted In Blood (2022) by request for the expressed purpose of completing this review. Their contribution to me in no way, shape, or form influenced my opinion of it.
-- EZ