Readers, I've pointed out before that it sads when I see so many of the faces of both television and movie projects of my youth having to say good-bye; but this is -- as they say -- life.

I noticed information on the World Wide Web just this afternoon regarding the passage of actor William Smithers.  By all accounts, it actually looks like he may've passed in May, 2026; but the news is only just getting out via the Information Superhighway.

As are so many of the talents featured on SciFiHistory.Net, he certainly wasn't a household name.  It looks as though his was a career of small standouts, seizing opportunity whenever it came by way of supporting and more character-driven roles than it was the big marquee lead.  Genre fans might recognize the fellow from, chiefly, his role aboard "Bread And Circuses," a second season outing of the classic Star Trek; but the man had a few more deserving of mention.

​IMDB.com reports that the actor's first genre project was none other than the 1954 telefilm version of the pulp character The Shadow.  I believe this was one of those pilots shot for a series that was never picked up; and that's a crying shame as The Shadow remains one of my all-time personal favorite properties.  I wish it would get a good big screen or small screen treatment, but methinks that's not likely to happen.

​Over a decade later, Smithers proved he wasn't afraid to go back into the water with the guest appearance aboard the Irwin Allen series, Voyage To The Bottom Of The Sean.  Then, in 1967, he played a part aboard a Tarzan series.

Also in 1967, he guest-starred on The Invaders, a property he saw once more in a role in 1968.  For those wondering, these were two different characters that Smithers played as it wasn't all that uncommon for actors and actresses to get cast as different faces in subsequent seasons.

Over the years, other stops included such enterprises as Mission: Impossible, Call To Danger (1973), Scorpio (1973), The Six Million Dollar Man, The Amazing Spider-Man, and Lucan.

Our warmest prayers are extended to the family, friends, and fans of William Smithers.

May he rest in peace.

-- 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 three 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:
“Mikey's night terrors become reality when his mother begins showing signs of demonic possession. What he's about to experience will haunt him for the rest of his life and claim countless lives across generations.”
 
I couldn’t say when exactly but someone along the way into the evolution of screen Horror storytellers rather suddenly doubled down on the whole out-of-chronology format.
 
Think what you may, Horror – as a style – hadn’t seriously invested in such narrative trickery before.  Of course, there were the usual culprits explored via flashbacks and the like; but the best I’ve been able to track it back to was 2022’s unanticipated box office success with Zach Cregger’s Barbarian that set this new trend in motion.  Spinning such wild and bloody fantasies within jumping timeframes seemed to a device Cregger employed specifically – he certainly tripled-down on it in 2025’s popular Weapons – and now it would seem that others have hopped aboard that out-of-control train.
 
2024’s Traumatika arguably tried to do something similar.  Written (in part) and directed by Pierre Tsigaridis, the picture kinda/sorta examines what happens when a possessive dark spirit gets released – ala a genie in a lamp – from an iron receptacle unearthed in Africa circa 1910 and brought to America decades later (though with no explanation how).  John Reed (played by Sean O’Bryan) has somehow come into possession of the artifact; and – despite insistent warnings from Steve (Sean Whalen) to keep it safe from children – John just can’t quite help himself.  He’s an incestuous pedophile, you see, and he’s smitten with his eldest daughter, Abigail (Rebekah Kennedy).  So it’s only natural (from all I can tell here) that the villain pries open the vase and inadvertently sicks the resident demon after the young woman.
 
Having an anti-hero turn out to be a recipient of a haunted bauble isn’t enough to interest audiences any longer, so Tsigaridis kinda/sorta plays fast and loose with developing a mythology in-progress while the events unfold.  About the time when viewers accept that Abby is now the evildoer they’re treated to the sight of the actual demon: it would seem that the ugly critter now has his sights on a male child, and Abby is somehow all-too-happy to abduct a few.  As I said, the why and how all this works – what with the woman sometimes being possessed and others times (apparently) being a victim of said demon – is never important enough to get in the way of delivered endless jump scares.  Once the director exhausts that trick, however, it’s time for another leap forward in time, this one involving Abby’s now adult sister Alice (Emily Goss) who is (or isn’t) trying to capitalize on her dead sibling’s story with a celebrity book tour.  By the point that opportunistic video journalist Karen Novak (Susan Gayle Watts) shows up to hijack Alice’s notoriety for her own purposes, I’d imagine most folks will have tired of the gimmickry and just hope the demon shows up once more to kill everyone else.
 
Now, it isn’t that Traumatika is a bad film: it is a bad story, one that lacks the bones because Tsigaridis was only interested in the blood and guts.  Its screen talent employs a handful of familiar faces – a few even known to the genre – and that generally bodes well for projects big and small.  Kennedy, for instance, I’ve enjoyed in a good handful of projects – a few relatively obscure – but her good work here never quite amounts to more than behaviors with sketchy motivations.  Was she of her own mind and body?  Did this demon truly manipulate her into all of this in spite of what she’d already endured at the hands of a lustful father?  It was never perfectly clear, and it should’ve been.
 
As I said, the jumping around in time grows tiresome – I think it spans three eras within the first 30 minutes – and almost comical.  Because the narrative propels the audience elsewhere a bit too conveniently, there’s rarely any time spent to understand and appreciate the characters much less the slim pickings of a mythology necessary for all of this spiritual possessing to take place.  Another rough draft (or two) might’ve helped bring enough of the disparate elements here into tighter focus; but – as I’ve also tried to be clear – the pieces seem only relevant enough to serve as props setting up jump scares.  That alone will never be enough for his hardened purveyor of Horror, and I’ll have to leave it all at that.
 
Traumatika (2024) was produced by Saban Films and the Rancon Company.  DVD distribution (for this particular release) has been handled by the fine folks at Well Go USA Entertainment.  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: however, be warned that there’s a fair amount of herky-jerky cinematography – at times not unlike ‘found footage’ flicks – in Traumatika’s various sequences.  It could’ve been minimized a bit more (for my tastes), but it is what it is.  Lastly, if you’re looking for special features?  Well, the only bit of extras on here were some theatrical trailers of (mostly) like-minded fare.
 
Alas … only Mildly Recommended.
 
2024’s Traumatika’s biggest problem is that – aside from some effective scares – it really doesn’t have any compelling central story to tell.  Writer/director Tsigaridis’ intent seems to both meander and time-jump through a loose stream of consciousness, deciding along the way where to go next instead of cleanly and clearly plotting out one horrific adventure from start to finish.  As such, viewers have little thread with which to grasp on to and know what it’s all about: instead, they’re pushed from one scary scene to another.  While there is some connective tissue, there isn’t any foundation upon which all of it stems.  Stylistic flourishes aside, Traumatika might require counseling just to get through it.
 
In the interests of fairness, I’m pleased to disclose that the fine folks at Well Go USA Entertainment (via Allied Vaughn) provided me with a complimentary Blu-ray of Traumatika (2024) 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

Funny story here.  Well ... at least I think it's a bit funny.

I tend to 'raz' actors and actresses every now and then not because I'm prone to pick on others but because -- it's been my experience -- that they do live in a bit of a bubble.  This isn't to suggest that they're less informed (necessarily) than any of us; but it is meant to clarify that ... well ... there are times they might miss the forest for the trees.  Any of us can do this, and I find it refreshing when one of our 'cultural betters' kinda/sorta "misses the boat," if you know what I mean.

A few years back, I had done one of my usual Twitter/X birthday shout-outs to a rather prominent actor who -- interestingly enough -- actually took the time to read both my post as well as what little blurb I'd written about him on SciFiHistory.Net.  (Miracles can happen, am I right?)  Anyway, I had listed the fellow's expansive resume -- seriously, the guy has been around the block -- and he obviously noted each and every genre citation I listed under his bio.  Well ... he actually reached out to me -- in a good-natured swipe -- because I'd listed his appearance in TV's long-running ALF franchise.  Apparently, this confused him greatly because his position was that he couldn't -- for the life of him -- understand how a website dedicated to Science Fiction and Fantasy would recognize a guest spot aboard a show like ALF.

Now, this is where it gets a little confusing.  We did a few back-and-forth Tweets as I was trying to understand his position.  Basically, what it came down to was that it was his opinion that ALF was nothing more than a kid's show featuring a comical puppet.  At this point, I stated that ALF was an alien, to which he kinda/sorta pushed back a bit, implying that that wasn't the case, that he was just some Earth creature who lived in a sitcom existence.  So ... when I explained that the character's name LITERALLY stood for Alien Life Form -- A.L.F. -- he was a bit flummoxed, apparently not understanding that he had made an appearance on a television program about an alien living amongst us.

I wish I'd brought all of this up under better circumstances; but the truth of the matter is that I saw the news this morning regarding the passing of actress Anne Schedeen, one of the regulars aboard ALF.  This lovely lady also enjoyed guest spots aboard such other genre entries as The Six Million Dollar Man, The Bionic Woman, Embryo (1976), Exo-Man (1977), Project UFO, and The Incredible Hulk.

Our warmest prayers are extended to the family, friends, and fans of Anne Schedeen.

May she rest in peace ...

-- EZ

On October 25th back in 2013 (in the United Kingdom), audiences in attendance of the Bram Stoker International Film Festival were treated to the theatrical premiere of Lord Of Tears.  Directed by Lawrie Brewster from a story by Sarah Daly, the film starred David Schofield, Alexandra Hulme, Euan Douglas, and others. 

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

"When a school teacher is plagued by recurring nightmares of a mysterious entity, he travels to his childhood home because he suspects a link to a dark incident in his past."

-- 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:
“When a family matriarch falls seriously ill, relatives gather and discover their shared ancestral ties bind them in unexpected ways.”
 
Succinctly, 2026’s The Voices Of Our Mother is the kind of film that superficially might seem a bit more transcendental than it is.
 
Written by, directed by, and starring Mark O’Brien, the picture explores the lowest of lows when it comes to family relationships: four siblings – twins William (played by O’Brien) and Therese (Carolina Bartcazk) along with Martin Alex Ozerov-Meyer) and Annika (Georgina Reilly) – are called back home after the death of their grandmother Johanna (Anna Ferguson) leaves their seriously incapacitated mother Harriet (Sheila McCarthy) requiring some assistance.  Haunted by the fractured relationship with an abusive father (never seen), the children as adults have all gone their separate ways but now must regroup as a unit to see their mother’s affairs are properly tended to; but their bitter resentments and shared secrets all turn out to be actually owed to the fact that Mommie Dearest was – decades before – infected by some intangible spirit when grandma kinda/sorta welched on an agreement with Satan himself.  Now, they’ve no choices but to face their demons (snicker snicker) as mom begins vacillating wildly between dementia, catatonia, and possession.
 
Where the script earns a bit of praise is that O’Brien not only employs the GirlBoss mentality by presenting the meek little Annika with the opportunity to save life as we know it but also embodies the central baddie in an equally meek but vulnerable elderly woman, Harriet.  Though the older woman sometimes speaks in a threatening voice which sounds more masculine than feminine, there’s never any attempt to visual escape the reality: by all appearances, Harriet to too old, too confused, and too frail to manifest the level of threat that McCarthy manages to present here.  In rather stereotypical fashion, the males are mostly feckless – the entertainment industry continues to take stands against masculinity of any type, and the trend in Horror pretty much follows suit – but it is … well … kinda cool to see even Father Roslovic (Shawn Doyle) reduced to taking a pull or two on a silver flask to fortify his spiritual courage for what’s likely coming next.  Clearing the way for the two timid representatives of the fairer sex makes Voices seem equally feminist and (closeted) chauvinist at the same time; so here’s to levelling the playing field in unexpected ways.
 
However, the narrative still never quite found what footing it wanted to come down on with issues of faith and family.  It’s Father Roslovic who finally puts together enough of the pieces to argue that – ahem – love triumphs faith, meaning only one who truly loved Harriet can put the unmitigated beast back in its proverbial cage.  Then, what act is necessary to force the demon back into the shadows of the old woman’s mind?  Well, that would be … a prayer.  Prayers – for those of you unaware – are intended to be representations of faith.  Even Google.com clarifies them as demonstrations of religious observances; but O’Brien’s script rather conveniently omits such claptrap by underscoring, basically, “love is all you need.”  Erm … didn’t each of these characters already go on record saying that they couldn’t and wouldn’t love their mother for her unwillingness to defend them against dear old dad?  So … how is this inconsistency shored up, exactly?
 
It isn’t; and it’s this wide-open-space many might see as an inconvenient plot hole needing to be filled with something for Voices to make any narrative sense in the final reel.  If all that’s required is the saying of a prayer – but not the spiritual intent and/or meaning – then why must it be said by someone who loved the possessed?  Does the prayer symbolize anything other than love?  If so, then doesn’t it stand to reason that anyone could’ve recited it, even perhaps someone who was just casually fond of the woman?  How can the entity distinguish between the prayer and the love?  There’s no explanation – and, mind you, Voices is full to the brim with exposition far too often – so more was needed in order to support this conclusion.
 
Ultimately, Voices kinda/sorta succumbs to its own central construct: when no one in the ensemble is a hero, then the audience likely won’t attach much value to anything virtuously done to ‘save the day’ nor invest in whether or not anyone survives.  When even a nun seems to embrace her own flaws instead of achieving a sanctified life, then what are we – the desperate, sinful, and unanointed – going to show for yourselves when we’re tasked to step up and do right by our fellow man?  Crises of faith are certainly no strange thing when it comes to theatrical storytelling – indeed, Hollywood loves it when believers are served tragedies ultimately of their own making – but how are we to resolve these matters of the heart without someone who has lived a life showing us the way forward?  It’s all just too damn muddled here, and audiences deserve better.
 
The Voices Of Our Mother (2026) was produced by Vortex Productions.  According to the film’s advance publicity materials, Voices will be streaming on Shudder on June 19th, 2026.  As for the technical specifications?  While I’m no trained video expert, I can still assure readers that the provided sights and sounds are mostly very good: I had some difficulty hearing what was being said during a few of the monstrously-augmented bits, and a few of the special effects sequences in the finale were a bit – ahem – undercooked.  Lastly, if you’re looking for special features?  As I viewed the film via streaming, there were no special features to consider.
 
Alas … only Mildly Recommended.
 
2026’s The Voices Of Our Mother had some strong potential: while many might feel a bit cheated over the way O’Brien’s script squanders an otherwise adept possession story in favor of (instead) a rather dark family melodrama, the end result is that the only elements that truly work thematically and cinematically are the Horror bits.  (It really doesn’t get spooky until the midpoint, another indication that not all is at it seems.)  Given that this family dynamic is top-heavy with evildoers and the real villainous culprit is rather advanced in age, the storyteller switches to some visual trickery in order to deliver a no-holds-barred finale, all of which is a bit murkily rendered with some rather obvious special effects work.  Though I didn’t dislike what was delivered, it nonetheless felt a bit contrived if not downright forgettable because – in somewhat predictable fashion – everyone had to be a ‘bad guy’ until they weren’t.
 
In the interest of fairness, I’m pleased to disclose that the fine folks at Shudder provided me with complimentary streaming access to The Voices Of Our Mother (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

(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:
“At the behest of Mexican revolutionaries, a mercenary enlists an acrobat, a strongman, a dynamiter and a swordsman to help him rob an army train carrying $500,000 in gold.”
 
Now, with that kind of synopsis, one might go into The 5-Man Army expecting a bit more of these characters, am I right?
 
Hear me out.
 
Essentially, the premise gives away the Golden Goose here by making it perfectly clear that – instead of a conventional Western – audiences are promised something a bit extra.  You don’t draw together a small band of ‘specialists’ of this type without having some very, very, very specific requirements for their particular sets of skills; and that’s where you’d be disappointed with the outcome.  Although one could easily see the need for a strongman in any conceivable plot and perhaps even a dynamiter, how specifically are an acrobat and a Samurai swordsman going to figure into the whole affair?
 
This is where Army fails to muster anything special.  Naturally, the strongman – Mesito (played Bud Spencer) – and the munitions fellow – Augustus (James Daly) – do have shoes to fill in the resulting caper; but they’re still rather pale by comparison to the promise of the premise.  What the mastermind Dutchman (Peter Graves) assembles as his crack special ops team resembles just about anything else that’s come down in like-minded cinema, leaving not much room for Luis (Nino Castelnuovo) and Samurai (Tetsurō Tanba) for add much flavor to the action.  Furthermore, the fact that the actual caper itself never really shows until after the midpoint and at the start of the second act, there’s never any real doubt that the plan will come together even though most of the elements were never quite spelled out clearly enough for audiences to anticipate what was coming.
 
Now, an argument could be made that concealing some of the Dutchman’s game plan was a necessity, the kind which is crafted to keep audiences glued to their screens with what’s happening in real time.  While that’s true, directors Don Taylor and Italo Zingarelli – Zingarelli being attached mostly for funding and tax issues, from what I’ve read – don’t stage the high stakes with any sense of urgency with the sole exception of sequence involving the Samurai falling off and needing to get back aboard the train.  However, that vignette is laughable largely because it’s not handled with any measure of believability: the swordsman gets back on only since the heist required five men, not because screenwriters Marc Richards and Dario Argento found any compelling much less original means to make it happen.
 
As for the cast?
 
Well, Graves is largely wasted in a role that could’ve cast anyone as the lead.  Spencer attacks with great aplomb just about every scene he’s in, suitably demonstrating that he’s a soul with a healthy appetite for life.  Castelnuovo plays the upstart convincingly, but it might’ve been nice to give the character a bit more backstory than just being an acrobat.  As the munitions man, Daly really is the one teammate whose involvement seems critical; and the actor capably delivers with what little gravitas a rather flat script requires.  Tanba – as the mysterious man from the East – also could’ve been elevated with some more interesting background: while his skills with a blade are theatrically cool, there’s more to be said for the way the only true outsider in all of this might’ve encountered some discrimination and how he might’ve overcome it. 
 
Sigh. 
 
Let’s just accept that characterization – or any character development – was also firmly locked away as was the half-million in gold.  Come the big finish, a late-breaking twist with the Dutchman’s motivations becoming suspect really goes nowhere: though it leaves room for a bit of tension – along with modest action when the enemy soldiers finally reach the gang’s hideout – everyone inevitably joins hands with the rebels in the closing moments.  Were these hired hands really going to accept nothing in exchange for putting their lives at risk?  I’m young enough to remember when authentic Spaghetti Westerns were a bit more diabolical than what gets rendered here.
 
On the plus side, however, I’ll have to concede that it looks very much like the principal actors did a great deal of their own stunt work on the seminal train ride of the second half.  A great deal of the cinematography was accomplished with faces shown, and – from what I could tell – these men were made of different stuff, hanging and crawling and running across and from moving train cars much of the time.  Granted, not a great deal of it looked all that treacherous; and yet the fact that it was all captured with modest stunt intervention always speaks volumes with this reviewer.  While I’m sure no one was ever at risk, there’s still a shot or two which suggests they were ready to roll when Taylor called for action.
 
The 5-Man Army (1969) was produced by Tiger Film.  DVD distribution (for this particular release) has been handled by the Warner Archive Collection.  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: if anything, some of the cinematography could’ve been improved by making some of this less than squeaky-clean.  It lacks so much grain and character that I wondered at one point if it was a television production, meaning that it never feels gritty the way so many other Westerns of the era do.  Lastly, if you’re looking for special features?  Well, the best they could muster was the theatrical trailer.
 
Alas … only Mildly Recommended.
 
In all honestly, I was chiefly drawn to The 5-Man Army (1969) owed to Argento’s association to it (as screenwriter); and – on that front – I’ll admit to some disappointment.  While I certainly didn’t expect the level of colorful violence the auteur eventually became known for, I was still a bit curious what breadcrumbs might’ve been dropped along the way, signaling the voice that would eventually emerge on the big screen.  Sadly, there really was nothing of any substance, and Army is more of a kinda/sorta heist flick than it is an authentic Western.  While I’ve read some suggesting that it’s a solid Spaghetti Western, I’d only agree that it fits the mold conventionally but still fails to offer up anything deserving of praise or memory.
 
In the interests of fairness, I’m pleased to disclose that the fine folks at Warner Archive (via Allied Vaughn) provided me with a complimentary Blu-ray of The 5-Man Army (1969) 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

From Google.com:

​Birdeater (2023) is a dark, Australian psychological thriller and drama film directed and written by Jack Clark and Jim Weir. The film explores the complexities of modern intimate relationships and toxic masculinity through a rural, co-ed bachelor party (or "bucks party") that spirals into a hallucinatory, feral nightmare. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]

Plot Overview

​Louie (Mackenzie Fearnley) is a groom-to-be planning his bachelor party in the remote Australian bush. Because his fiancée Irene (Shabana Azeez) suffers from crippling separation anxiety, Louie makes an unusual compromise and invites her to tag along. Accompanied by one of Louie's friends and another couple (Charlie and Grace), the group gathers at an isolated cabin. What starts as a weekend of drinking and catching up takes a chaotic, drug-fueled turn as home truths, emotional manipulation, and serious flaws in Louie and Irene's relationship are violently exposed. [2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 8]

Key Themes & Style
​

• Exploration of Masculinity: The film is primarily a subversion of "boys will be boys" tropes, stripping away the benign facades of the "good guys" to reveal deep-seated, often insidious, manipulation and misogyny. [5, 9]
• Lynchian & Hallucinatory: Reviewers frequently compare the film to the Australian classic Wake in Fright and Gaspar Noé’s Climax. As the night progresses, the film uses disorienting editing, surrealism, and drug-induced altered states to blur the lines between reality and nightmare. [2, 8, 10, 11, 12, 13]

Cast & Crew

• Directors / Writers: Jack Clark and Jim Weir (making their debut feature)
• Louie: Mackenzie Fearnley
• Irene: Shabana Azeez
• Dylan: Ben Hunter (notable for playing a particularly wild and complex friend)
• Charlie / Grace: Jack Bannister and Clementine Anderson [2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 13]

Reception

​Birdeater holds a positive critical reception, sitting at around a 74% approval rating on Rotten Tomatoes. Critics have praised its tension-building, stellar acting, and bold stylistic choices, with several outlets calling it a striking, uncompromising debut. However, it is an intentionally uncomfortable "sit," and some viewers have noted that its pacing drags in the middle and the narrative remains somewhat intentionally ambiguous. [2, 3, 4, 13, 14, 15, 16]

Availability

​The film premiered at the 2023 Sydney Film Festival (where it won the Audience Award), followed by an international run at SXSW and an official wide release. You can check out where it is available to stream or buy on platforms like IMDb or Letterboxd. [2, 4, 15, 17]

[1] https://letterboxd.com
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org
[3] https://notanotherfilmblog1.substack.com
[4] https://www.heavenofhorror.com
[5] https://collider.com
[6] https://www.imdb.com
[7] https://filmint.nu
[8] https://warped-perspective.com
[9] https://www.thecurb.com.au
[10] https://fillums.com.au
[11] https://projectedfigures.com
[12] https://thedarksidemagazine.com
[13] https://screenrant.com
[14] https://www.reddit.com
[15] https://letterboxd.com
[16] https://fictionmachine.com
[17] https://www.imdb.com