​One of the most notorious and controversial horror films ever made, here is the cult classic that surpasses its reputation as a shot-gun blast to the senses...

Legendary director Ruggero Deodato's CANNIBAL HOLOCAUST presents the "found footage" of a group of four documentary filmmakers who experience brutal death at the hands of a savage South American tribe of flesh-eaters. This footage is so intense, so graphic and so unflinching in its realism that the filmmakers of CANNIBAL HOLOCAUST were arrested upon its original release and the film seized!

Nothing you have seen before will prepare you for this uncompromising masterpiece of cinematic nihilism. 

Bonus Materials

• 6-Disc Deluxe Edition! Includes 1 UHD, 4 Blu-rays PLUS a soundtrack CD!
• Spectacular new 4K restoration from the original 35mm and 16mm camera negatives presented in Dolby Vision UHD
• 3 different versions - original UNCENSORED theatrical version - new SPECIAL EDITION (the GREEN INFERNO documentary footage presented from the original 16mm camera negative in 1.37:1 for the very first time ) - and never-before-released 'unseen' version
• Animal cruelty-free viewing option
• Archival stereo DTS-HD Master Audio re-mix and original mono mix
• 2 feature-length commentary tracks - with director Ruggero Deodato and star Robert Kerman, and with stars Carl Yorke and Francesca Ciardi
• SEARCHING FOR CANNIBAL HOLOCAUST - new feature-length documentary by Calum Waddell
• IN THE JUNGLE - The Making of CANNIBAL HOLOCAUST - directed by Michele De Angelis
• In-depth interviews with director Ruggero Deodato, director of photography Sergio D'Offizi, production designer Massimo Antonello Geleng, camera operator Roberto Forges Davanzati, composer Riz Ortolani, and assistant director/co-star Salvatore Basile
• In-depth interviews with stars Robert Kerman, Carl Yorke, Francesca Ciardi and Luca Barbareschi
• Extensive still galleries and theatrical trailers
• 100 page book by Euro-horror expert Martin Beine
• BONUS CD – soundtrack album by Riz Ortolani, remastered and expanded with ten additional tracks, including three never-before-released cues
• Super-deluxe rigid slipcover with banned artwork from the original 42nd Street release by Marcus Boas
• Inner cover featuring beautiful, specially-commissioned painting by NYC underground artist Winter Anders Fiddes, printed on Japanese art paper
• PLUS – over TWO and a half HOURS of incredibly entertaining EASTER EGGS scattered throughout!
• AND OTHER SURPRISES!

On this day in 2006 (in the U.S.), Dark Ride enjoyed its first trip to the silver screen when it played for audiences of the Hollywood Film Festival.  Written (in part) and directed by Craig Singer, the film starred Jamie-Lynn Sigler, Patrick Renna, David Clayton Rogers, and others. 

​According to our friends at IMDB.com, here's the plot summary:

"A group of six friends on a road trip stop off at an amusement park attraction named 'Dark Ride', unaware that a psychopath who brutally murdered two girls, has just escaped a mental institution and is seeking refuge there."

-- EZ

From Google.com:

• The Title is a Misnomer (No Rides Involved): Despite being titled Dark Ride—a term reserved exclusively for amusement park attractions where patrons sit in a cart or buggy that travels along a track—the movie actually takes place entirely inside a walk-through "Fun House" style attraction. There are no passenger carts, tracks, or ride vehicles present anywhere in the building during the film.​  

​

• Universal Studios Staged a Fake New Jersey: While the movie's plot takes place at a fictionalized version of an amusement park in Asbury Park, New Jersey, the film wasn't shot there. Director Craig Singer utilized his past connections working for Universal Studios to shoot the film on the Universal Studios backlot in California. Production designer Fred Andrews heavily modified the backlot sets to transform the artificial environment into an abandoned, gritty boardwalk attraction.

 

• Part of the Original "8 Films to Die For": Dark Ride was distributed by Lionsgate and After Dark Films as one of the very first selections for the inaugural After Dark Horrorfest in November 2006. It was marketed under the "8 Films to Die For" brand, an annual theatrical festival dedicated to independent horror movies that were deemed too intense or disturbing for standard wide studio releases.

​On November 17, the mythological world explodes when the original Clash of the Titans from 1981 makes its worldwide premiere on 4K UHD. Special effects wizard Ray Harryhausen used his Dynamation techniques to bring the Greek myth of Perseus to the silver screen in one of his most celebrated fantasy adventures. The Limited Edition release features a brand-new 4K restoration from the original 35mm negative by Arrow Films. A Limited Edition Blu-ray release will also be available.

Born into a world ruled by gods, monsters and fate, Perseus (Harry Hamlin, Mad Men) is unaware that his real father is Zeus (Laurence Olivier, Marathon Man). When the goddess Thetis transports him to the city of Joppa, Perseus falls in love with the beautiful Princess Andromeda (Judi Bowker, The Shooting Party). Winning her hand won’t be easy. He must first overcome her former suitor Calibos (Neil McCarthy, Time Bandits), the son of Thetis (Maggie Smith, Downton Abbey), who still holds power over Andromeda after being transformed into a monstrous creature by Zeus. Perseus must ultimately face giant scorpions, the Gorgon Medusa and the fearsome Kraken to save the princess. Burgess Meredith (Rocky), Ursula Andress (Dr. No) and Claire Bloom (The King’s Speech) are among the cast of gods and mortals.

Special features include a 4K (2160p) Ultra HD Blu-ray presentation in Dolby Vision (HDR10 compatible), restored original lossless stereo and new Dolby Atmos audio options, optional English subtitles for the deaf and hard of hearing, an archival audio interview conducted with Ray Harryhausen at the BFI in 1981, an archival audio interview with Ray Harryhausen and longtime producer Charles Schneer at the BFI, Courage & Imagination: Ray Harryhausen’s Mythic Adventure, a brand-new feature-length documentary celebrating Clash of the Titans and the work of Ray Harryhausen, Ray Harryhausen discusses the film and the main creatures, theatrical trailers, image galleries, a double-sided foldout poster, and a collectors’ perfect-bound booklet.
​

On this day in 1953 (in the former Soviet Union), Silver Dust (aka Serebristaya pyl) enjoyed its theatrical release.  Directed by Abram Room from a story by Aleksandr Filimonov and August Jakobson, the SciFi/Drama starred Mikhail Bolduman, Sofya Stanislavovna Pilyavskaya, Valentina Ushakova, and others. 

​According to our friends at IMDB.com, here's the plot summary:

"An American scientist invents a new weapon of mass destruction - silver dust. Corporate war breaks out between two military industry giants to own the weapon. The scientist dies and his son makes the discovery public with more consequences."

​-- EZ

By their very nature, Science Fiction and Fantasy require world-building.
 
Characters need not be entirely real – at least, not so much that viewers relate to them – and yet the entire story falls apart if the audiences minimally doesn’t understand them and how they fit into this complex or simple environment.  Settings and circumstances need to be invented as many of them don’t exist in our frame of reality; and – for this reason alone – all of the pieces must be seamlessly attached to one another in ways that draw watchers in as opposed to shutting them out.  Naturally, there can be even a delicate balance between the script’s ideas and even the wayward props and costumes which are used to breath life into a fictional universe; but regardless of the lengths a talented storyteller may go very little of it works without engaging those in the audience with a shared comprehendible foundation.  The bizarre and extraordinary are novel, but without a means to place everything into the proper context they’re still just bizarre, extraordinary, and confusing.
 
This is where films like Hot Spot (2026) struggle to get beyond the nexus.  Director Angieszka Smoczynska and Robert Bolesto have clearly gone to great lengths to show us a dark and dry world of the Dystopian future.  It’s a place where one supreme government has seized control of what sparse resources remain, a curious environment wherein even bodily fluids might make the difference between survival and extinction.  In order to maintain control over even the thinning populace, every man, woman, and child are required to submit to a cybernetic hive mind – one that means Big Brother can not only be watching while you sleep but also share whatever you’re seeing with others – and refusal to abide by martial law means execution by the State … with your organs and human juices harvested for those lawfully obedient.
 
But bringing this dire tomorrow to life kinda/sorta comes apart at the seams when far too many of the required details for that shared understanding explained above remain little more than set dressing, intellectual gibberish, and fleeting food for thought.
 
(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:
“As a private eye investigates a murder in a future world of sentient A.I., his identity and marriage suffer a hypnotic meltdown.”
 
As I’ve often insisted, even bad films can have good ideas.  Even poorly executed storytelling can have nuggets of a nice performance or a relevant message.  Even the most prescient piece of theatrical fiction can be anchored by bad choices.  Rarely do these all converge in a single experience, and yet it’s been known to happen.
 
Succinctly, all of these come into play at some point in Hot Spot.
 
The film’s biggest problem is the fact that it never quite defines what its central story is.  Though the plotline which gets the most attention involves Djonny (played by Andrzej Konopka) investigating a violent murder in a government-controlled refugee camp along with the crime’s ties to the immigrant’s leader Rana (Noomi Rapace), that puzzle gets solved fairly quickly in Spot’s 100-minute run-time.  Thankfully, this is noir – or neo-noir as it would more appropriately be dubbed – so once that MacGuffin is dispatched we learn that the real premise might be a CyberWitch’s secret plot to both infiltrate the State’s sentient A.I. and toppled civilization itself.
 
Now … if you’re anything like me … then the first question needing to be clarified is why.  Why does Rana – if she is the film’s villain – want to bring the authoritarian lifestyle to its close?  Of course, it’s easy to answer that reasonable: though everyone is shown happy (well, except for the refugees), there’s that unmistakable fact that individuality has been sacrificed in order for mankind to continue on God’s formerly-green Earth.  While we as viewers are never shown specifically any of the ill effects of living under this particular brand of subservience, we’ve all been raised to know that personality matters, so we do minimally get the idea.  But Bolesto’s script ignores giving voice to any of Spot’s villains – there are more than one – and that gives the film an obvious vagueness which permeates just about everything else in here.
 
Stylistically, Smoczynska gives the audience plenty of distraction.  What remains of the world is presented as mostly bleak: landscapes are expansive, bright, and dry, showing the long-term effects that a global drought has left on the environment.  There’s a brief moment where rain falls for perhaps a matter of seconds, and it brings a wonderful moment of surprise and elation – even applause – from those caught up in it.  Djonny, his wife Anka (Reika Kirishima), and son Zen (George Aurimas Cris) share some inspiring family moments via the shared-consciousness link – referred to here simply as ‘the Head’ – that bring a bit of needed connection between them and us; and yet there’s just not enough explanation as to the why’s and how’s of where they’re still fractured apart in the landscape as presented.  Anka’s clearly struggling through a cancer-like condition; and Zen seems to lack the ability to remain connected to the city’s mind-hive – a condition that appears equally terminal – but Bolesto’s unwilling to fill in the details leaves me with far more questions than I had interest to answer.
 
Mind you, there’s a great deal more to Hot Spot than a single review could ever effectively touch upon. 
 
In order to remain fully connected to A.I., citizens daily eat a ‘jellybean’ dispensed via some very official-looking mechanism in the home; and yet there’s never any explanation for how and why it works.  What does get demonstrated – I assume – is that a recipient’s head violently explodes if he skips his daily medication.  (???)  There’s a character – a somewhat police partner for Djonny – named Maria (Filippa Kaye) who appears only in scenes at the refugee camp; and for no reason given whatsoever she’s dressed in somewhat elf attire, even sporting prominently pointed elf ears.  There’s even a point in the film wherein I wondered if director Smoczynska was subversively implying that none of this was real – everything which remained was entirely a computer construct – when the faces of main characters glossed over with what resembled fuzzy white lines, mirroring an old-style television set trying to focus on images.
 
Still, there’s just no escaping the problem that so many of these added extras – including Djonny literally morphing into a full-blown feral tiger in the closing real – happen with no context.  It’s almost as if everyone involved were daring watchers to make of their project what they will – an inventive film school exercise that likely scored a good grade.  While I’ll concede everything here was interesting, I’ll also insist that the almost brazen lack of context makes it exhausting at times; and I’m more than a bit befuddled that it secured release in this fashion.  It flirts so openly with incoherence that I’ve no idea of what to make of it.
 
Hot Spot (2026) was produced by Canal+ Polska, Faliro House Productions, Film I Vast, Madants, Moderator Inwetycje, Neda Film, and Zentropa.  DVD release (for this particular release) has been coordinated by the fine folks at Universal Pictures Home Entertainment.  As for the technical specifications?  While I’m no trained video expert, I can still assure readers that the film looks and sounds fabulous.  There’s a dreamlike quality to some of the cinematography, and occasionally the director slips in some truly magical transitions.  Lastly, if you’re looking for special features?  Well … there are a handful of deleted scenes and alternate takes – one or two of them are even a bit more confusing, frankly – but that’s all you get when you risk it as a purchase.
 
Alas … only Mildly Recommended.
 
It would be impolite to suggest that I didn’t like Hot Spot (2026) because – as a huge Science Fiction junkie – there was a lot to enjoy in it.  My dissatisfaction with it is that there was so much in here – from performances to circumstances to even characters and motivations – that I just can’t understand what (if anything) I’m to make of it.  The picture of an authoritarian overlord is exceedingly interesting – and maybe even the best stuff in here – but absent any characters to connect with I’m left with a good-looking meal that wound up tasting fairly bland.  A disappointment.
 
In the interest of fairness, I’m pleased to disclose that the fine folks at Universal Home Entertainment (via Allied Vaughn) provided me with a complimentary Blu-ray of Hot Spot (2026) 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

Cinephobia Releasing announced today that it has acquired North American and UK Rights to director Marcel Walz’s (“Brute 1976”, “Anathema”) and writer Joe Knetter’s (“Twilight of the Dead”, “The Caretaker”) latest feature “Brute 1986”, the highly anticipated sequel to last summer’s cult hit “Brute 1976”. Cinephobia Releasing acquired rights to the film in a deal negotiated between Cinephobia President Raymond Murray, and Executive Producers Tobias Schuermann and Dirk Schuermann. The film is set to hold its World Premiere at Tubi FrightFest Halloween this October 31st.
 
While “Brute 1976” was an homage to ‘70s horror cult classics “The Texas Chainsaw Massacre” and “The Hills Have Eyes”, “Brute 1986” honors the new decade’s beloved exploitation slashers like “Friday the 13th”and “Maniac” all set to a glam rock soundtrack including original music by CRAZY LIXX . 
 
“The horrific killings by an especially deranged family continues in this deliriously crazed follow-up to “Brute 1976””, said Ray Murray, President of Cinephobia Releasing. “Director Marcel Walz, writer Joe Knetter and their team have done it again by delivering a delirious hatchet-wielding, blood spurting, breast bared, glam rock spattering feast of horror. After watching “Brute 1986”, I couldn’t look at my spandex pants, leather jacket and vials of glitter the same way again.”
 
Following the shocking events of “Brute 1976”, “Brute 1986” picks up one decade later with Leather Kobra, a glam metal band, who are set to begin filming their latest music video in an abandoned Western town. Unfortunately for the band and their crew, the ultra-violent Birdy family has taken up residence nearby. When their paths cross, their video shoot devolves into a night of terror and bloodshed.
 
“I'm an '80s baby- actually, a 1986 baby”, said Walz. “I grew up obsessed with '80s horror classics like Halloween IlI, Friday the 13th Part VI, Sleepaway Camp II, The Burning, A Nightmare on Elm Street 4, and so many more. It's my favorite decade (alongside the '90s), and when we decided to make this movie, I knew we had to go all in.
 
“I grew up loving the films and music of the 80s so getting an opportunity to create something that fits in that space has been an amazing experience”, said Knetter. “We had so much fun with this one and think the audience will see that on screen. Hair metal and gore... what could be better?”
 
Returning from the previous film, “Brute 1986” stars Dazelle Yvette (“Brute 1976”), Sarah French (“Garden of Eden”), and Gigi Gustin (“Stiletto”). They are joined by Tokio Hotel’s Bill Kaulitz (Netflix’s “Kaulitz & Kaulitz”), Pancho Moler ("3 From Hell"), Sarah Kaplan ("Slasher.com"), Heather Grace Hancock ("Wicked City") and Lew Temple (“The Devil’s Rejects”). Rounding out the cast are Jed Rowen, Joey Jupiter- Levin, Mark Justice, Matt Wiggins, Ryan James, Ramiro Leal, James Preston, Scotch Hopkins and Bishop Stevens.
​

(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:
“When Jonathan Harker rouses the ire of Count Dracula for accepting a job at the vampire's castle under false pretenses, his friend Dr. Van Helsing pursues the predatory villain.”
 
As I often opine in this space on SciFiHistory.Net, it’s sometimes important that we highlight ‘film firsts’ to help set the context regarding a particular film’s reputation.
 
In the case of 1958’s Dracula (aka Horror Of Dracula) from Hammer Studios, it’s important to underscore that this was the very first time on film that the seminal romantic bloodsucker from Transylvania – the dastardly mute from the Bram Stoker novel – was presented in color.  Given the fact that many in today’s audience have grown to see the use of black-and-white cinematography as mostly an artistic choice by a storyteller, that certainly wasn’t the cast so many decades ago.  As such, the studio’s choice back then to render its version of the seminal vampire of legend in brilliant and vivid technicolor was a calculated but perhaps necessary risk to bring the revered count out of the shadows and thrust him and his wicked affairs into the future.
 
The result?
 
The Terence Fisher directed project was an incredible sensation for the studio.  While these numbers might mean little in today’s metrics, Google.com reports that Dracula was shot on a budget of approximately $81,000 but went on to gross an astonishing $3.5 million in worldwide receipts.  For those of you math experts out there, that’s an absolutely incredible over 4,000% return on the investment, meaning that both Hammer Studios and Universal Pictures – the rights holder for the character – were likely thrilled beyond measure.  Though Hollywood accounting will always obscure precisely how well any individual studio did with one title, reportage exists on the Information Superhighway that strongly suggests that Dracula’s performance salvaged Universal Pictures after a series of expensive theatrical flops.
 
But … how is the picture?
 
Again, I think it’s important to place the film in its proper historical context to understand why audiences of the day were so enchanted.  Because the use of color truly opened the door to some impressive aesthetic choices, red blood and the blazing white fangs of the feature’s several Nosferatus harkened in an era of imagery that storytellers likely never saw coming.  Because the Count’s previous iterations relied heavily on Gothic shadows, designer Bernard Robinson incorporated an immense palate of colors to bring to life not only the central castle but also a handful of residences tied to the characters of this tale of risk and revenge.  The sets come to life in ways viewers hadn’t seen before in Horror, and that’s just one more reason why the production deserves a measure of consideration when popping the disc into one of today’s machines: everything taken for granted in the modern era was damn near a first back then.
 
Furthermore, screenwriter Jimmy Sangster adapted the Stoker novel in a way that also attempted to bring an old yarn to viewers in a fresh, inventive, and even kinetic way.  Doctor Van Helsing (played by Peter Cushing) is transformed from a somewhat elderly scholar of those older adaptations into a modestly younger man-of-action, one with a heavy interest in scientific discovery that has put him in pursuit of his adversary.  Dracula (Christopher Lee) also appears significantly younger here – albeit still centuries old (snicker snicker) in context – and gets ample opportunity to move about the countryside in pursuit of lovely maidens to transform into his personal slaves.  Because both men are free to move about and engage in greater action, the film quickly develops an artistic energy which separates it from so much of the reserved staging of imposing stances and threatening glares of the Universal Pictures.  That’s not a complaint but rather a clarification of creative, stylistic, and narrative differences.
 
Because of these structural changes, this Dracula doesn’t spend a great deal of time exploring supporting characters.  While there is still a good degree of traditional melodrama involved with Jonathan Harker (John Van Eyssen), his eventual demise, and his fiancé and her family, what remains is a bit of an intellectual match-up between the Count and Van Helsing; and this gives the already timeless legend a readily identifiable showdown – complete with two easily distinguishable faces – that endures to this day.  Despite any measure of tragedy, Dracula is the personification of evil; and – regardless of whatever steps he may need take – Van Helsing aligns with the force of good.  Simplicity works best whenever it’s tried.
 
Still, there’s even more to Dracula that helped usher the figure into the 20th century: this English production was entirely free of the restrictions previously placed on American adaptations, giving director Fisher, actor Lee, and a handful of involved actresses to explore the eroticism of the count’s seduction of the innocents.  Culturally, filmdom – as a whole – had begun moving away from traditions; and notable productions had begun cracking open some subjects – lust, desire, manipulation, duplicitousness, etc. – that had long been taboo.  These moral changes meant that this Dracula needn’t merely glamour a woman from a distance into doing his will; and the film – in what some might say was typical Hammer fashion – dabbled healthily in the temptation posed with closely-placed lips, exposed necklines, and subtle facial expressions suggesting consent and violation.  Sexual attraction was no longer a thing experienced in the privacy of one’s own home: it was now out and about on the silver screen, and even Dracula lunged into this strange new world with a welcome bite.
 
I’ve read that both Lee and Cushing – who both made careers out of work in Horror for Hammer Films and beyond – lent their respective opinions to their characterizations here, implying that perhaps on some level they fully knew they were achieving something special for audiences that they hadn’t quite seen before.  Indeed, many in intelligentsia suggest that Dracula is the undisputed classic that shows the studio’s promise; and – for what it’s worth – I’ve seen a good handful of efforts from them and am inclined to agree.  Undoubtedly, the film played a major influence on storytellers to come, and the project continues to resonate today, especially with this all-new upgrade breathing new life into one of the definite tales of the undead.
 
Dracula (aka Horror Of Dracula) (1958) was produced by Hammer Films.  DVD distribution (for this particular release) has been handled by the fine folks at the Warner Archive.  As for the technical specifications?  While I’m no trained video expert, I can still assure readers that the film both looks and sounds incredible here.  Lastly, if you’re looking for special features?  This two-disc set includes nearly three hours of additional content (according to the product packaging), including multiple versions of the film (some sequences were understandably censored at the time owed to the implied sexuality), some great featurettes on both Lee and Fisher, some interesting 8mm cutdowns, and four – did you read that? FOUR!!! – brand new audio commentaries.  Serious fans couldn’t ask for anything more.
 
Strongly Recommended.
 
Honestly, I’ve never quite made up my own mind on what the definite theatrical version of Dracula is; and that’s mostly owed to the fact that I do so very much enjoy the old black-and-white original.  However, Dracula (1958) is the production which I see mostly referenced back to artistically in the decades since its original release; and I think that fact alone testifies to its epic appeal.  Cushing and Lee are in top form – along with some stunning production detail – and I’d be a fool if I failed to mention that the effort justly received a 1959 Hugo Awards nomination in the category of ‘Best Dramatic Presentation.’  I encourage everyone to watch it and tell me you don’t see its influence in some of the more elegant vampire films that have been produced in its wake.  This is the true original from which that river sprang; and it deserved a place in every Horror fans’ library.
 
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 Horror Of Dracula (aka Dracula) (1958) 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

(NOTE: The following review will contain minor spoilers necessary solely for the discussion of plot and/or characters.  If you’re the kind 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:
“Follows Sophie, who is admitted to an elite tennis academy hidden in the South of Europe, where she must contend with fierce competition and the school's increasingly sinister undercurrents.”
 
If the title alone – namely Bloody Tennis (2026) – doesn’t give you a fairly solid idea of what’s in store for you, then perhaps you shouldn’t be taxed with picking out the next movie choice for your Friday night viewing pleasure.  It isn’t as writer/director Nikias Chryssos is going for high art here – even though some might be drawn to its respectably efficient cinematography, staging, and sound editing – but the truth is this thing should have tongue-in-cheek exploitation written all over it.  About the time that the exclusive training academy’s director announces to an initiate in the preview, “I’m your daddy now,” it should be crystal clear that this is not your father’s Wimbledon.
 
Though the film isn’t quite what one might call a black comedy, there are moments of tension definitely relieved with some gallows humor.  The bulk of the story functions on a fairly traditional track – you’ll likely see similarities to just about any film exploring the plight of athletes – and I’ve no doubt all of that is by design.  Just how much of this world and the circumstance one chooses to see as authentic will likely vary, but the central thread – that of a spirited competitor needing to find the motivation necessary to elevate her game – gives Chryssos’ effort the foundation it needs and exploits for entertainment value.
 
Furthermore, it isn’t as if – ahem – the German people haven’t historically demonstrated an affinity for breaking the human spirit.  Why wouldn’t taskmaster Mary Tyrone (played by Elina Löwensohn) – she’s no Frau Blücher – have these young women digging deep into their recesses of their own bodies and psyches to find the ultimate athlete hidden beneath?  Indeed, this is a story audiences have seen in practically every sports-based film that’s ever hit the marketplace; and yet I dare you to show me another movie that’s unabashedly capitalized in darkly satiric fashion on what lengths elites will explore to become champions.  It’s here where Bloody Tennis is truly centered on unleashing only the very best on an unsuspecting world.  When the motto is “Grow, Win, and Transcend,” there isn’t any room for second place … much less ‘seconds.’
 
(Trust me: you’ll get that joke when you see the film.  And just what the hell was in all of those breakfast smoothies?)
 
As the daughter of a former superstar athlete, Sophie (Sandra Guldberg Kampp) has been struggling to grow, win, and transcend all on her own; so when she finally gets that phone call from the exclusive Mary Tyrone Tennis Academy she’ll stop at nothing to take the open spot that’s been recently vacated over some unexplained accident.  (Mind you: there are an awful lot of accidents under Mary Tyrone’s roof, including the one you get to see in the preamble.)  But it doesn’t take long for the budding protégé to recognize that the almost Satanically grueling regimen isn’t the only thing not truly listed on the brochure, and why (oh why) is it that the authorities have never looked into just why (oh why) so many of the premiere women’s tennis up’n’comers never seem to resurface after a semester there?  Well, the answer might be a bit hard to … digest.
 
(Again: trust me, you’ll get it!)
 
Though some might look no further than Chryssos’ fascination with both angry lesbians and/or fine young cannibals, the fact of the matter is that Bloody Tennis – while somewhat incisive about the dog-eat-dog world of professional sports – is clearly intended to taken with a full shaker of salt.  The entire construct is real enough, but there’s likely nothing like this Tyrone business out there offering franchises.  While I don’t doubt the pervasiveness of ruthless, unbearable coaches and equally dishonest competitors in any field (stereotypes don’t get started in a vacuum, folks), I pretty much realized reality had left the building once I was introduced to Fred (Vincent Romeo), the sport’s academy’s errand-boy-slash-caretaker who looked very much like the kid brother to Jim Carrey’s Lloyd Christmas from 1994’s Dumb And Dumber.
 
Now, in fairness, Bloody Tennis is the kind of flick that I could go on and on and on about, mostly because it’s the kind of product that hits as many balls as it misses.
 
Tonally, it stays pretty grim throughout; and I’m not entirely certain that was the best choice.  Such an aesthetic forces watchers to occasionally forget this likely more Fantasy than literal, and I suspect that might be the cause for so many negative reviews (at least from what I’ve read online).  Seeing it more as a subversive satire might alleviate a bit of discomfort because otherwise one might deduce that what Sophie and the girls endure is some elaborate plot to eliminate the competition in the world of women’s tennis.  Humor – especially black humor (like eating Chinese food the day after their Chinese teammate goes missing) – isn’t always easily accessible, so perhaps a bit more care could’ve been taken with the script.  Accents also are very, very thick in spots, making it difficult to understand what’s been said; and I think some resulting confusion may also have done the picture no favors.
 
Bloody Tennis (2026) was produced by Augenschein Filmproduktion, Port au Prince Film & Kultur Produktion, and Zweites Deutsches Fernsehen (ZDF).  The film is presently available for viewing on Shudder.  As for the technical specification?  While I’m no trained video expert, I can assure readers that the provided sights-and-sounds are quite good throughout.  Lastly, if you’re looking for special features?  Alas, this one was screened via streaming, so there were no special features under consideration.
 
Recommended.
 
Come the big ending, methinks audiences will know without a doubt not to have taken anything all that seriously in Bloody Tennis (2026): though the premise works well enough throughout to hint at some movie-logic measure of logic, Sophie’s sudden death match-up and her resulting celebratory dinner turn the entire procedure on its head, almost lampooning the yarn and anyone who may’ve seen some theatrical value in any of it.  Still, the film is expertly made – a few goofy performances aside – and it likely has enough cult sensibilities to be a modest success amongst those who appreciate something different.
 
In the interests of fairness, I’m pleased to disclose that the fine folks at Shudder provided me with complimentary streaming access to Bloody Tennis 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

(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:
“In a near-future world, a lonely, physically challenged man purchases a companion robot to escape his isolation, but his own insecurities and a jealous brother threaten his chances of ever finding love.”
 
I’ve written many, many times on SciFiHistory.Net regarding how much I personally enjoy stories involving humans and synthetic people interacting.
 
Though a great many readers firmly believe I’m talking about 1984’s The Terminator – which is a very good film – that Cameron vehicle is a bit too overly invested in menacing robotics to truly tickle my fancy.  Instead, I much more prefer things like the AMC and BBC co-production of Humans (2015-2018) and even its Swedish original Real Humans (2012-2014).  Not to be left out, Russian television also got into the act with a bit more melodramatic and somewhat more salacious incarnation – Better Than Us (2018-2019) – that also showed what life between man, woman, and the average artificial person might look like.
 
Because I’ve seen so many of these series and movies, I can say with great assurance that 2025’s Personhood (aka The Perfect Lover) really isn’t breaking any significant new ground.  While it’s well-written and pretty well-acted, it’s still little more than a modern day variety on the original “boy meets girl” formula.  What it does insert a bit new to the recipe is it focuses on a main character – Waylen (as played by Elliot Harris) – whose lifelong spinal condition has given him a decidedly different exterior: somewhat hunched and awkwardly shaped (again, owed to the actor’s curved spine from what I’ve read), he’s a far cry from William Shakespeare’s Romeo and much closer to Victor Hugo’s Quasimodo.  Most definitely, he not the usual romantic lead, and that is compelling.  Mind you: both the man and this character are perfectly capable of living a full life in spite of the obstacles presented to him, but there’s no escaping the reality that some might at first glance consider him more of a work-in-progress as opposed to work-of-art.
 
Longing to make some kind of connection, Waylen purchases Gala (a stunning Agathe Levi), the dream woman embodiment that’s culturally been at the forefront for decades.  She’s blonde, perfectly fit, knows how to fill out whatever she slips into, and programmed to fulfill whatever wish he desires.  Still, Waylen – whose job appears to be remotely working in computer coding – struggles with identity issues not long after she shows up literally on his doorstep: he can’t relate to someone so perfect, and he’s at a loss to know how to communicate with something he initially views as a well-designed machine.  After he inadvertently ‘damages’ her briefly when he poses too complex a psychological construct for her to compute, Waylen slowly lets his guard down and begins to develop an attachment everyone knows will grow more than physical.  It does; and the two find a measure of happiness, though reality almost always has such promise fleeting.
 
It’s once Waylen’s abusive younger brother gets introduced into the mix – Anders (Alan Emrys) – that things begin to spiral.  Initially, the younger man is attracted to Gala, so much so that he starts hinting to Waylen and her that he’d like to spend more time together.  It’s innocuous at first, but that appears to be because he’s entirely unaware that Gala is a robot.  (Waylen and she agreed in advance to keep her manufacture a secret.)  Eventually, he stumbles onto the truth; and his fascination instead turns away from the sexual and grows even more destructively intimate … by wishing to destroy the healthy relationship those two share out of what looks to be nothing more than jealousy.
 
Curiously, writer/director Richard Jordan can’t quite stick the landing, and I can’t help but wonder if that was by design.
 
While he’s crafted an effort solid at putting all of these various plotlines into motion, his last reel grows a bit confusing, uneven, and rushed.  Rather than have our script’s villain carry out a step-by-step plan to divide and conquer the lovebirds, there’s a wayward swimming pool accident that instead allows the angry young man to carry out a scheme that would both grant Gala her own measure of independence and presumably turn her away from Waylen.  For no reason whatsoever given, Waylen cosmically predicts something like this is afoot; so he rushes home from his hospital bed and (a bit too conveniently) arrives just in time to see his worst fears being set into motion.  Then, Jordan has the feuding brothers reconcile (in a matter of seconds?) just outside the bedroom whilst Gala’s consciousness is being refit by Anders’ hacker/friend.
 
When everything else regarding Lover’s story was so well conceived and tightly plotted, this laziness of a hurried confrontation and the resulting coda – we learn, indeed, that Gala becomes her own woman, apparently doesn’t ‘want’ to be with Waylen, and runs off not only with his car but also his dog (???) – is a disappointment.  It smacks of invention instead of authenticity.  Instead, it almost feels like the whole tale was deliberately meant to have a vague but spiritual ending, one that could then help a speaker take meaningful questions from an inquisitive audience of a film festival.  A quick look at IMDB.com does show that Lover has performed favorably on the festival circuit (presently notching an impressive fourteen wins); while I personally have no issues with those events, it’s been my experience that the tastes of those who frequent such fare rarely agree with those of the ordinary viewing public.
 
Don’t get me wrong: because I like these kinds of films, I did enjoy a great deal of Lover.  It’s a film brilliant with subtle moments, and it’s definitely well cast and handled with surprising deft by Harris, Emrys, and Levi.  They make for a delicate ensemble, one of the best I’ve seen in an independent film in some time.  That needs to be said.
 
Still, I just didn’t care for where it ultimately arrived.
 
The Perfect Lover (aka Personhood) was produced by Lost Dog Films.  DVD distribution (for this particular release) has been coordinated by the fine folks at Vantage Films.  As for the technical specifications?  While I’m no trained video expert, I can still assure readers that the provided sights-and-sounds are quite good throughout: Jordan does make pretty good use of some limited staging choices with the chosen shooting locations, so there’s something to be said for keeping it all efficient.  Lastly, if you’re looking for special features?  Sadly, this is a bare bones release, meaning that if you want to know more then you’re going to have to look elsewhere.
 
Recommended.
 
Clearly, The Perfect Lover isn’t going to be for everyone.  As a Science Fiction film, writer/director Richard Jordan really only scratches the surface of what’s possible in the relationship between man and machine, especially given the budgetary limitations.  As a Noirish Thriller, it’s likely to be weighed and measured a bit lacking in its execution owed to the fact that it never quite goes far enough substantively to make a coherent whole.  Lastly, as a drama, it kinda/sorta reaches a conclusion wherein the tale stops, and one can almost hear your college film professor as the lights come up, “OK, what did everyone think about this?”  While I found it a noble effort – chiefly because I often enjoy minimalist SciFi – I still can’t quite answer the questions and motivations regarding two of the three principle characters, leaving me a bit underwhelmed with its nebulous closing.
 
In the interests of fairness, I’m pleased to disclose that the fine folks at Vantage Films (via Allied Vaughn) provided me with a complimentary Blu-ray of The Perfect Lover (aka Personhood) (2025) 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