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

Well, well, well ...

If you're a bit of a Science Fiction and Fantasy pundit -- much like I consider myself to be -- then you've no doubt not only heard the news of Doctor Who's cancellation but also been inundated with folks asking what you think of it.  At least, that's what I'm dealing with this morning, as I've received several email requests wondering what my opinion of this breaking news is; and rather than spend an inordinate amount of time writing several responses and/or copying and pasting them for inquiring minds let me put up a few quick thoughts in this space.

For the record: it is my understanding that Doctor Who has not, in fact, been cancelled.

Now, I'm reading the same thing each and every one of you are; and I do understand that perhaps this announcement has rather quickly morphed into that rumor game of long ago.  Person A starts a rumor, Person B picks it up, Person C changes it a bit for posterity, Person D wants his/her own spin on it, Person E couldn't care less so he/she alters the context a bit to make it a bit more salacious, etc., etc., etc.  This tends to be the norm as it applies to 'news scoops,' and it's easy to see how what was released in the press has found legs elsewhere, albeit in slightly different shape.

So far as I've been able to ascertain, it's only the customary Doctor Who holiday special that's been cancelled.  That's all.  Well ... that and the fact that showrunner Russell T. Davies and the production company Bad Wolf have parted ways.  That is what I believe has been stated as fact; and -- being humans -- I understand perfectly well that each of us is entitled to read into that what we may.  Such is life; and I firmly believe that's what's taking place across the Information Superhighway this morning.

​Of course, one can go about making any number of assumptions based on the reportage.  Yes, perhaps the BBC was unhappy with the show's ratings; but knowing what little I know of that august organization I suspect they had no qualms with the stories -- or what served as stories -- through the Jodie Whittaker and Ncuti Gatwa tenures were like.  Nor do I think that the BBC had any problem with RTD's and Gatwa's kinda/sorta mean-spirited attacks on the show's critics many of us were forced to watch unfold.  Think what you may, but -- ahem -- spitting in the eye of someone who was simply trying to offer up some honest, reflective, and constructive commentary is never a good look; but -- the web being what it is -- context rarely matters when stars and creators are more attached to perception than they are reality.

Ultimately, none of this truly matters in the scheme of things. 

​Throughout entertainment history, shows -- including Doctor Who -- have experienced creative, commercial, and cultural highs and lows.  Frankly, there's ample room for some truly investigative analysis on how societal changes across franchises like Star Trek, Star Wars, and Doctor Who may have impacted the show (and/or vice versa); and I applaud any genius who's willing to put in the time and effort to offer up such a work.  Many of us enjoy examining entertainment -- indeed, just look at what a cottage industry YouTube.com has become with pop culture experts doing what they do with each subsequent entry; and this will likely be the case for decades if not centuries ahead.  Opinions differ as much as they matter, and who among us doesn't like sounding off on the latest craze?  We're human, and it shows.  As we change, so does our programming.

​Still, there are fundamental reasons that we're drawn over and over and over again to a few select properties, like the aforementioned Star Wars, Star Trek, and Doctor Who.  As much as it might be familiarity or nostalgia, I've often argued that these three enterprises -- unlike many others -- haven't had to seriously invest greatly in the long-form storytelling so many franchises embrace these days.  Yes, there may be core mythology elements to each; but the point is the vast, vast, vast majority of these IPs remain centered on stand-alone stories.  These individual tales often are tied closely to some central moral -- something code of conduct we likely support but rarely talk about -- and it's the journey to see that moral properly elucidated that makes the destination worthwhile.  Granted -- as I've said -- this isn't always the case -- and, yet, here these projects are -- decades into their respective lives -- and that same narrative formula remains part of their cores.

This is why I've always often stated that there will always be a market for good stories but not necessarily good storytelling.  Good stories bring us together: good storytelling is the technique by which these stories are told.  We can like the storytelling elements -- the performances, the direction, the effects, the sets, etc. -- even if the story itself winds up being uninspired or derivative.  But we'll always return to good stories.  Always.  Personally, I think we're living at a time wherein many who are telling these stories have confused the two -- stories and storytelling -- and that's been a huge, huge, huge detriment to the entertainment industry.  You can have one without the other; but you can't have good stories without good stories.

It's easy to conclude that Star Wars, Star Trek, Marvel, and Doctor Who are now reaping the sad benefits of investing in storytelling as opposed to good stories.  You can't blow through, say, $100 million that allegedly the Walt Disney Company invested in Doctor Who and only find cause to celebrate the storytelling.  When the stories don't resonate with viewers -- when they don't bring us back again and again and again -- then there will be little return on that investment.  Essentially, that's what's been learned in this process -- one big damn expensive lesson -- while you and I could've told them this going in.

This isn't superhero fatigue.  This isn't one of the unintended consequences of COVID still hindering a studio's ability to give audiences what they want.  This isn't even a rejection of Hollywood's cursed insistence on "fixing everything in post" with endless CGI-laden sequences that mean little to nothing to the casual watcher.  Spectacles will always be spectacles ... even if no one shows up to watch them.  (Hello, The Mandalorian And Grogu!)  When what's missing is a good story, it's been my experience that watchers can smell that stink a mile away; and they've grown smart by learning what to avoid.  Doctor Who has just jumped into that well along with a growing number of IPs which may or may not recover.

Regardless, Doctor Who is far from dead.  It has the same potential it had -- if not more -- when it was created back in the early 60's.  What it needs is for someone who both understands what that is and demonstrates an innate ability to spin good yarns -- to craft good stories -- for audiences hungry to celebrate them once more.

​-- EZ

Under SciFiHistory.Net’s ‘Monsters Of A Sort’ category, I take a look at more conventional productions that kinda/sorta dabble in sensibilities very close to (if not downright demonstrative of) Film Noir and/or the silver screen mystery.  Despite maintaining a heavy (and near constant) diet of genre projects, I’m not always satiated by just SciFi, Fantasy, and Horror; so I do like – from time-to-time – to add a little substance from these other realms.  It helps widen my perspective.  It helps cleanse my palate.  It keeps me fresh … and a ‘fresh me’ is good for all of you, my faithful readers.
 
Today’s distraction is 1949’s Follow Me Quietly. 
 
The film was directed by Richard Fleischer from a screenplay attributed to Lillie Hayward, Anthony Mann, and Francis Rosenwald.  I’d come across Hayward’s name before in my reading on such genre entries as The Walking Dead (1936), The Undying Monster (1942), and The Shaggy Dog (1959); while I can’t say all that much else about her overall career, I can say a quick glance at her resume suggests she at some point developed a fondness for spinning yarns with animals featured prominently in them.  Rosenwald shows attached (via IMDB.com) to such properties as an episode of Rocky Jones Space Ranger, The Magnetic Moon (1956), a few episodes of Men Into Space, and The Leech Woman (1960).  Though Mann’s profile shows a few writing credits, his real background was in directing; and – unless I’m confused – he had a rather storied time bringing some of the better black-and-white crime B-Movies to life.  Follow Me Quietly starred William Lundigan, Dorothy Patrick, Jeff Corey, Nestor Paiva, Charles D. Brown, and others.
 
As per my usual format, the film’s synopsis appears below.  My two cents on its construction follows.
 
(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:
“An obsessed cop tracks an elusive serial killer who strangles his victims on rainy nights.”
​
On the DVD slipcase for Follow Me Quietly, director Fleischer admits that this film – not his theatrical debut but definitely one of his earliest efforts – taught him the foundation of how to go about constructing screen stories.  Having now watched it and knowing full well that his talent is associated with a great number of prominent genre flicks throughout storied time in the business, I’ve no doubt of the skills he tapped here.  Follow moves with an incredible efficiency, some of which could be argued is owed to its lean and meaning running length (59 minutes).  Montages are meaningful and brisk, and scenes capably focus on key players without ignoring that bit of flavor present in the background to give a location its required authenticity.  Sequences flow organically one to the next throughout the picture, so much so that he likely saw little need to pack in anything that might’ve hijacked or slowed the venture.
 
Essentially, the sterling mecca of New York City, New York is being terrorized by a self-made serial killer who calls himself ‘The Judge.’  The only link between these various murders is the fact that The Judge apparently likes to conduct his nasty business on days when its raining, so the police – namely Lt. Harry Grant (played by William Lundigan) – has few leads.  Crack reporter Ann Gorman (Dorothy Patrick) has been assigned by her magazine to shine a little light on the campaign of horror for the readers, so she finagles a way into Grant’s inner circle by eventually pointing out that the assassin might very well have a fondness for previously published pulp-style magazines and may be perusing them for prospective targets.  In somewhat predictable fashion, this is the clue the officer has been searching for; and – before all is said and done – he’ll nab not only the guilty culprit but the heart of the comely journalist as well.
 
In case you missed it, Follow isn’t all that deep as screen stories go; and neither are any of its characters.  The serial killer Charlie Roy (Edwin Max) elaborates upon no major manifesto as to why he’s taken it upon himself to clean up what he sees as New York’s dirty streets, nor do the police assigned to the case offer up any compelling theories as to why they believe the man may’ve descended into this campaign of bloody retribution (if that’s what it is).  In typical whodunnit fashion, the cops discover a few ominous notes written with cut-out letters; but not even this amounts to much more than a gimmick put to respectable use.  In fact, Grant and his fellow lawmen spend the bulk of the investigation without any usable description of the culprit, a fact that has them assembling a faceless, life-sized dummy to – ahem – use in line-ups and the like.  It’s all a bit contrived – not in a good way – but it does give these LEOs something with which to fill their time waiting for the next big break.
 
That bit of lunacy aside, the only other thing missing from Follow are characters that stretch beyond stock players.  Lundigan plays the prototypical hunky cop like a ladies’ man when it’s needed; and Gorman is obviously smitten with him as a prospective mate from the get-go.  Their eventual pairing in the closing scenes is the kind of moment 1940’s features threw in to suggest love was written in the stars; and, yes, it mostly cheapens an otherwise pedestrian caper.  Even actor Jeff Corey as Sergeant Art Collins never amounts to anything greater than the other half of an amiable ‘buddy cop’ feature, though the man manages to rather effortlessly rise above what little characterization the script affords.
 
Follow Me Quietly (1949) was produced by RKO Radio Pictures.  DVD distribution (for this particular release) has been coordinated by the fine folks at 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 likely the best they’ll ever be; and, yes, Follow has some good visuals but what it gets pitch perfect is the effective seamlessly across the entire affair.  Some older flicks are a bit choppily editing: this one isn’t, and it’s a fabulous demonstration of film editing done right.  Lastly, if you’re looking for special features?  Sigh.  Well, there are a few theatrical shorts common to the era and the theatrical trailer, but that’s all there is.  Disappointing.
 
Recommended.
 
As a Film Noir, Follow Me Quietly really only resonates in a few spots, with director Fleischer really choosing a more conventional cinematographically approach to the classic screen whodunnit.  (Mind you: there’s no way to solve this while watching, so its mystery elements are also a bit light.)  With a run-time of a mere 59 minutes (gasp!), one might question whether or not there’s enough story in here … and, yet, it actually all works quite swimmingly from start-to-finish.  What’s missing – to any measurable degree – is any character development: the cast is basically ‘what you see is what you get,’ and – especially with Noirs – I do like a bit more.  This one won’t be any favorites, but it’s still quite good.
 
In the interests of fairness, I’m pleased to disclose that the fine folks at the Warner Archive (via Allied Vaughn) provided me with a complimentary Blu-ray of Follow Me Quietly (1949) 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

Cleopatra Venom announces the July 28th release of the new horror film The Withering on Digital Video. 

Judith, an embittered woman in her seventies facing a terminal cancer diagnosis, becomes obsessed with a strange amulet she acquires at an estate sale--an ancient artifact that rejuvenates her body by siphoning vitality from the surrounding town. As Judith grows younger, stronger, and more violent, the community around her rapidly deteriorates, with illness, decay, and death spreading among its youngest residents. Haley, Judith's compassionate caregiver, begins to suspect the truth just as she is cast aside and left alone in a dying town, her only ally her troubled sister who senses the amulet's dark pull. When Judith's hunger escalates from passive draining to brutal murder, Haley races to destroy the artifact before it consumes everyone.
​

On this day in 2021 (in a whole host of countries around the world), it was the end of the world as we know it yet again -- well, cinematically, that is -- when Awake was unleashed via the Information Superhighway.  Written (in part) and directed by Mark Raso, the film starred Gina Rodriguez, Ariana Greenblatt, Jennifer Jason Leigh, and others. 

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

"After a devastating global event wiped out all electronics and eliminated people's ability to sleep, a former soldier may have found a solution with her daughter."

-- EZ

On this day in 2012 (in the U.S.), audiences in attendance of the Seattle International Film Festival were treated to the theatrical debut of Easton's Article (aka Black Web).  Written and directed by Tim Connery, the film starred Chad Meyer, Kristina Johnson, Dan Flannery, and others. 

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

"After receiving his future obituary via a cryptic Internet file, Easton Denning is forced to confront his troubled past in order to prevent his predicted demise."
​
-- EZ
​

On this day in 1998 (in the U.S.), Feeders 2: Slay Bells rang in the holiday season with a general release on home video.  Written and directed (in part) by Mark Polonia, the film starred Polonia alongside Maria Davis, Courtney Polonia, Anthony Polonia, and others. 

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

"Aliens invade Earth over the Christmas holidays, and it's up to Santa Claus and his elves to save the world."

-- EZ

On this day in 2020 (in Japan), Beyond The Infinite Two Minutes delivered a single-camera take on the mindblowing possibilities of time travel.  Directed by Yunta Yamaguchi from a story by Makoto Ueda, the film starred Kazunari Tosa, Riko Fujitani, Masashi Suwa, and others. 

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

"A cafe owner discovers that the TV in his cafe suddenly shows images from the future, but only two minutes into the future."

For the record:
To the film's credit, Beyond The Infinite Two Minutes stirred up a good bit of praise from screenings on the film festival circuit.

ExtraExtra Alert:
In 2022, I was provided complimentary streaming access to Beyond The Infinite Two Minutes (2020) from a distributor in exchange for review coverage on SciFiHistory.Net.  Interested readers can find my review right here.

-- EZ
​