- Published on
As an institution within the greater comic book community, The Batman is a force to be reckoned with.
While his story began with the publication of Detective Comics #27 all the way back on March 30, 1939, there are many who insist that – as a character – the caped crusader truly didn’t come into his own until the 1980’s: Frank Miller’s The Dark Knight Returns presented readers with an older Bruce Wayne who comes out of retirement to once more set things right in both Gotham City and the world-at-large. The miniseries was a sensation that arguably spread well beyond its published pages; and it essentially paved the way for Tim Burton’s gothic-inspired take on the seminal vigilante with 1989’s Batman from Warner Bros. The world’s greatest detective had truly come of age in pop culture, and creators within the publishing industry set about trying to capitalize on the Dark Knight’s success by launching their own titles to compete in an exploding marketplace.
However, what a great many of these storytellers kinda/sorta got wrong in the process is they introduced their heroes and anti-heroes with a greater reliance on action over acumen. Their colorful creations more quickly resorted to fisticuffs and gunplay and increasingly over-the-top physical match-ups in order to draw potential readers into the fold. As several titles successfully incorporated such visceral bravado into their monthly and/or semi-monthly issues, DC Comics was suddenly being pressed to do much of the same with their assorted Batman lines (there were several at the time); and yet longtime editors and contributors to the Bat-family knew all too well that the very best Bat-stories used violence only as a catalyst – a backdrop, if you will – for a good cracking yarn. Batman was never about a beatdown: rather, a beatdown paved the way to a character-driven story, so DC was at odds with the marketplace’s request.
Eventually, Batman editor Dennis O’Neil and his stable of reliable talent came up with an idea that they felt could appropriately address the readership’s growing expectation of violence whilst leaving the necessary room for actual characters and commentary on such a development. The premise – dubbed Knightfall – saw a physically and psychologically exhausted Batman literally broken at the hands of an all-new adversary named Bane. In order to begin the healing process, the injured Bruce Wayne hands the mantle of the Bat over to a successor, a troubled but promising young man named Jean-Paul Valley. Over the course of roughly two years, Knightfall unfolded – its set-up, execution, and eventual resolution – and its vast presentation effectively delivered on the audience’s hunger for action of greater consequence while equally instructing readers to be careful about what they wished for.
Finally, someone in DC has greenlight Knightfall into what looks to be a full and faithful adaptation. Batman: Knightfall – Part One: Knightfall is the first installment in the promised trilogy; and I’ve been provided a copy for review purposes from distributors. As the Knightfall Saga remains a personal favorite of mine over three decades after its publication, I’m thrilled for this opportunity to sound off on its significance.
(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 the mysterious behemoth known only as Bane frees Batman's entire rogue's gallery from Arkham Asylum, the Caped Crusader is pushed to his mental and physical breaking point.”
First up, let me be perfectly blunt: there is no need to a point-by-point adaptation of the entire Knightfall Saga. (If you want that, go back and read it.) The story being what it is – hundreds of issues that span a few years – is definitely worth the time and investment to those who’d like to experience it fully; and its (roughly) three volumes – Knightfall, Knightquest, and Knightsend – are affordably priced tomes that deserve to be in any serious Batfan’s library. Yes, it involves just about any player who has every featured prominently in the Dark Knight’s life; and just about everyone has a role – big or small – to play in it. I give the books my highest recommendation.
Understandably, Part 1 – Knightfall has to take some pretty significant liberties with the source material in order to get one central story into a workable form for film. A great deal of background involving the introduction of Jean-Paul Valley (as himself and his alter-ego Azrael) gets truncated into a few scenes – as does the Bane’s origin in his journey from child to adult – and screenwriter Jeremy Adams does a pretty good job in translating key moments from the books into something relatable on the small screen. A great deal more gets quickly summarized in fleeting montages. Mind you: it ain’t perfect because an incredible amount of context is minimized to the point of simplicity … but, as they say, one has to start somewhere, and that’s what Part 1 does very well. It positions Batman, Bruce Wayne, Robin, and the whole cast of characters in their proper place and time the way a first chapter (of three) should. In that regard, what survives – though heavily altered – achieves the desired result.
What is missing and might cause some viewers new to this material to question is Batman’s establishing motivation to both forgive Jean-Paul Valley for his violent transgressions as the avenging angel Azrael as well as the Dark Knight’s commitment to re-training the anti-hero in the hopes to suppress the year’s of psychological programming to dispense a bloody form of justice.
The film opens on a shot of a statue of Lady Justice – blindfolded and holding those mythical scales to weigh right from wrong – so there is an establishing hint briefly about how far Azrael has strayed from the cultural norm; but it’s handled so quickly that I suspect casual viewers won’t even catch its significance. In any event, Knightfall here more strongly suggests that Bruce has surrendered the bulk of these responsibilities to Tim Drake (aka Robin); while that, too, happens in the comics, there’s still no fundamental statement as to the value the dynamic duo initial saw in Valley, and I do think that’s a miss. Given the fact that audiences immediately see a Batman who’d seemingly rather work solo here, the justification to train a potential ally when none are desired is a bit of a plot hole.
Additionally, the introduction of Dr. Shondra Kinsolving – a holistic practitioner Bruce Wayne sought out to help in his mental exhaustion – is a bit ham-handed. The comics took great care to balance the billionaire’s hesitancy and willingness to invest in a bit of personal care; but – in somewhat typical movie fashion – Kinsolving is largely reduced to a ‘caring voice’ and even ‘a shoulder to lean on’ when she arguably performed in a wider capacity on the written page. Merely getting Bruce to the point wherein he needed some counseling feels more like trying to establish a romantic entanglement here; and I think that, too, cheapens the depth of their connection more than was absolutely necessary. Perhaps a scene or two more might’ve alleviated this nitpick – or perhaps even one longer sequence showing some kind of positive progress – but there wasn’t enough to justify Wayne’s faith in her work for me.
Of course, no true drama is ever complete without the introduction of its villain; and in that respect both screenwriter Adams and director Jeff Wamester get high marks. Though I’ve stated above that the outlaw’s beginnings were tweaked in minor ways, what remains is that core foundation of a man on a mission that will inevitably bring him into serious conflict with his mortal adversary, this being Gotham’s chief protector. Knowing what I know (from the books) about Bane’s inevitable developments, I suspect that a good deal more will likely need changing – the comics saw him essentially taking over all criminal activity in the city but there’s little motivation for that here as his goal seems more aligned to eliminating the source of the Rogue’s Gallery (Batman), so why would he now step in to control them if he wants them gone? This might prove the storytellers biggest challenge, but Bane is still brought to life here as about as big as life a comic book character can be.
The biggest disappointment in this adaptation is with actor Anson Mount. He provides the vocals for both Batman and Bruce Wayne; and, sadly, he just brings nothing all that interesting to either performance. Of course, some of this could be owed to the fact that Wayne is understandably tired and/or fatigued a goodly portion of the time; and that might be a condition that isn’t all that interesting vocally. But it wasn’t until Batman came face-to-face with Bane in their big showdown that Mount truly showed up and delivered some work worthy of note. I know, I know, I know: the story is really just beginning. I’m certainly willing to give him some time to find those nuggets worth stepping up his game; but, at present, I can only react to what I’ve been given. Like you, I’m willing to keep my fingers crossed.
Batman: Knightfall – Part 1: Knightfall was produced by DC Studios and Warner Bros. Animation. DVD distribution (for this particular release) has been handled by the fine folks at Warner Bros. Home 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 exceptional throughout. Lastly, if you’re looking for special features? Well, there are two short ones – a focus on Robin’s role in this saga along with something that’s more of a bloated promotional film – but I honestly expected a bit more, especially given the importance of this story to so many in fandom. Hopefully there will be more to come in forthcoming installments.
Strongly Recommended.
Many folks far more learned than I credit the 80’s tale – The Dark Knight Returns – as bringing Batman into the modern era, but in my humble opinion the Knightfall story was just far more impressive. Granted, it was significantly longer, but it also underscored that being the Batman was far more than simply putting on the suit, having the smarts of criminal detection, and living with endless financial resources. There was a core morality that made one man into the world’s greatest detective; and that will always be more interesting than wild fisticuffs, car chases, and wacky supervillains. The first installment feels a bit rushed in spots – yes, I know there was a lot of ground to cover – but it still manages to retain enough purity from the source material to make for an incredible set-up for what’s to come. Buckle up, kiddies. This one’s just gettin’ started.
In the interest of fairness, I’m pleased to disclose that the fine folks at Warner Bros. provided me with a complimentary Blu-ray of Batman: Knightfall – Part 1: Knighfall (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
While his story began with the publication of Detective Comics #27 all the way back on March 30, 1939, there are many who insist that – as a character – the caped crusader truly didn’t come into his own until the 1980’s: Frank Miller’s The Dark Knight Returns presented readers with an older Bruce Wayne who comes out of retirement to once more set things right in both Gotham City and the world-at-large. The miniseries was a sensation that arguably spread well beyond its published pages; and it essentially paved the way for Tim Burton’s gothic-inspired take on the seminal vigilante with 1989’s Batman from Warner Bros. The world’s greatest detective had truly come of age in pop culture, and creators within the publishing industry set about trying to capitalize on the Dark Knight’s success by launching their own titles to compete in an exploding marketplace.
However, what a great many of these storytellers kinda/sorta got wrong in the process is they introduced their heroes and anti-heroes with a greater reliance on action over acumen. Their colorful creations more quickly resorted to fisticuffs and gunplay and increasingly over-the-top physical match-ups in order to draw potential readers into the fold. As several titles successfully incorporated such visceral bravado into their monthly and/or semi-monthly issues, DC Comics was suddenly being pressed to do much of the same with their assorted Batman lines (there were several at the time); and yet longtime editors and contributors to the Bat-family knew all too well that the very best Bat-stories used violence only as a catalyst – a backdrop, if you will – for a good cracking yarn. Batman was never about a beatdown: rather, a beatdown paved the way to a character-driven story, so DC was at odds with the marketplace’s request.
Eventually, Batman editor Dennis O’Neil and his stable of reliable talent came up with an idea that they felt could appropriately address the readership’s growing expectation of violence whilst leaving the necessary room for actual characters and commentary on such a development. The premise – dubbed Knightfall – saw a physically and psychologically exhausted Batman literally broken at the hands of an all-new adversary named Bane. In order to begin the healing process, the injured Bruce Wayne hands the mantle of the Bat over to a successor, a troubled but promising young man named Jean-Paul Valley. Over the course of roughly two years, Knightfall unfolded – its set-up, execution, and eventual resolution – and its vast presentation effectively delivered on the audience’s hunger for action of greater consequence while equally instructing readers to be careful about what they wished for.
Finally, someone in DC has greenlight Knightfall into what looks to be a full and faithful adaptation. Batman: Knightfall – Part One: Knightfall is the first installment in the promised trilogy; and I’ve been provided a copy for review purposes from distributors. As the Knightfall Saga remains a personal favorite of mine over three decades after its publication, I’m thrilled for this opportunity to sound off on its significance.
(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 the mysterious behemoth known only as Bane frees Batman's entire rogue's gallery from Arkham Asylum, the Caped Crusader is pushed to his mental and physical breaking point.”
First up, let me be perfectly blunt: there is no need to a point-by-point adaptation of the entire Knightfall Saga. (If you want that, go back and read it.) The story being what it is – hundreds of issues that span a few years – is definitely worth the time and investment to those who’d like to experience it fully; and its (roughly) three volumes – Knightfall, Knightquest, and Knightsend – are affordably priced tomes that deserve to be in any serious Batfan’s library. Yes, it involves just about any player who has every featured prominently in the Dark Knight’s life; and just about everyone has a role – big or small – to play in it. I give the books my highest recommendation.
Understandably, Part 1 – Knightfall has to take some pretty significant liberties with the source material in order to get one central story into a workable form for film. A great deal of background involving the introduction of Jean-Paul Valley (as himself and his alter-ego Azrael) gets truncated into a few scenes – as does the Bane’s origin in his journey from child to adult – and screenwriter Jeremy Adams does a pretty good job in translating key moments from the books into something relatable on the small screen. A great deal more gets quickly summarized in fleeting montages. Mind you: it ain’t perfect because an incredible amount of context is minimized to the point of simplicity … but, as they say, one has to start somewhere, and that’s what Part 1 does very well. It positions Batman, Bruce Wayne, Robin, and the whole cast of characters in their proper place and time the way a first chapter (of three) should. In that regard, what survives – though heavily altered – achieves the desired result.
What is missing and might cause some viewers new to this material to question is Batman’s establishing motivation to both forgive Jean-Paul Valley for his violent transgressions as the avenging angel Azrael as well as the Dark Knight’s commitment to re-training the anti-hero in the hopes to suppress the year’s of psychological programming to dispense a bloody form of justice.
The film opens on a shot of a statue of Lady Justice – blindfolded and holding those mythical scales to weigh right from wrong – so there is an establishing hint briefly about how far Azrael has strayed from the cultural norm; but it’s handled so quickly that I suspect casual viewers won’t even catch its significance. In any event, Knightfall here more strongly suggests that Bruce has surrendered the bulk of these responsibilities to Tim Drake (aka Robin); while that, too, happens in the comics, there’s still no fundamental statement as to the value the dynamic duo initial saw in Valley, and I do think that’s a miss. Given the fact that audiences immediately see a Batman who’d seemingly rather work solo here, the justification to train a potential ally when none are desired is a bit of a plot hole.
Additionally, the introduction of Dr. Shondra Kinsolving – a holistic practitioner Bruce Wayne sought out to help in his mental exhaustion – is a bit ham-handed. The comics took great care to balance the billionaire’s hesitancy and willingness to invest in a bit of personal care; but – in somewhat typical movie fashion – Kinsolving is largely reduced to a ‘caring voice’ and even ‘a shoulder to lean on’ when she arguably performed in a wider capacity on the written page. Merely getting Bruce to the point wherein he needed some counseling feels more like trying to establish a romantic entanglement here; and I think that, too, cheapens the depth of their connection more than was absolutely necessary. Perhaps a scene or two more might’ve alleviated this nitpick – or perhaps even one longer sequence showing some kind of positive progress – but there wasn’t enough to justify Wayne’s faith in her work for me.
Of course, no true drama is ever complete without the introduction of its villain; and in that respect both screenwriter Adams and director Jeff Wamester get high marks. Though I’ve stated above that the outlaw’s beginnings were tweaked in minor ways, what remains is that core foundation of a man on a mission that will inevitably bring him into serious conflict with his mortal adversary, this being Gotham’s chief protector. Knowing what I know (from the books) about Bane’s inevitable developments, I suspect that a good deal more will likely need changing – the comics saw him essentially taking over all criminal activity in the city but there’s little motivation for that here as his goal seems more aligned to eliminating the source of the Rogue’s Gallery (Batman), so why would he now step in to control them if he wants them gone? This might prove the storytellers biggest challenge, but Bane is still brought to life here as about as big as life a comic book character can be.
The biggest disappointment in this adaptation is with actor Anson Mount. He provides the vocals for both Batman and Bruce Wayne; and, sadly, he just brings nothing all that interesting to either performance. Of course, some of this could be owed to the fact that Wayne is understandably tired and/or fatigued a goodly portion of the time; and that might be a condition that isn’t all that interesting vocally. But it wasn’t until Batman came face-to-face with Bane in their big showdown that Mount truly showed up and delivered some work worthy of note. I know, I know, I know: the story is really just beginning. I’m certainly willing to give him some time to find those nuggets worth stepping up his game; but, at present, I can only react to what I’ve been given. Like you, I’m willing to keep my fingers crossed.
Batman: Knightfall – Part 1: Knightfall was produced by DC Studios and Warner Bros. Animation. DVD distribution (for this particular release) has been handled by the fine folks at Warner Bros. Home 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 exceptional throughout. Lastly, if you’re looking for special features? Well, there are two short ones – a focus on Robin’s role in this saga along with something that’s more of a bloated promotional film – but I honestly expected a bit more, especially given the importance of this story to so many in fandom. Hopefully there will be more to come in forthcoming installments.
Strongly Recommended.
Many folks far more learned than I credit the 80’s tale – The Dark Knight Returns – as bringing Batman into the modern era, but in my humble opinion the Knightfall story was just far more impressive. Granted, it was significantly longer, but it also underscored that being the Batman was far more than simply putting on the suit, having the smarts of criminal detection, and living with endless financial resources. There was a core morality that made one man into the world’s greatest detective; and that will always be more interesting than wild fisticuffs, car chases, and wacky supervillains. The first installment feels a bit rushed in spots – yes, I know there was a lot of ground to cover – but it still manages to retain enough purity from the source material to make for an incredible set-up for what’s to come. Buckle up, kiddies. This one’s just gettin’ started.
In the interest of fairness, I’m pleased to disclose that the fine folks at Warner Bros. provided me with a complimentary Blu-ray of Batman: Knightfall – Part 1: Knighfall (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
- Published on
(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:
“A mysterious discovery is made on the outskirts of the remote harbor town. The residents find themselves in a desperate fight for survival against something they have never encountered before.”
By their very nature, monster movies require a suspension of disbelief.
In reality, we don’t have vampires. We don’t have werewolves. Frankensteins aren’t lying in wait around every corner. There isn’t an authentic Godzilla. Jason Voorhees is entirely a fictional creation. So on and so forth. Oh, I know what you’re thinking: we do have plenty of them metaphorically, and that’s true. Yet, we don’t have any in their original skins (which says a lot for Leatherface). Because their stories – as bold or as vivid as they might be – require the audience to accept that they are possible, storytellers do have to put serious effort into ensuring that as little as possible gets in the way of all the corresponding bits and pieces – the tissue holding it all together – unless they’re willing to have this world all come crashing down around them like a house of cards.
Celebrated director Na Hong-jin knows precisely what I’m talking about what with his latest monster opus Hope (2026) hitting U.S. screens this past weekend; and yet it would seem as if he’s content ignoring structure in favor of spectacle. Most assuredly, Hope is a sight to behold with its sometimes frenetic action sequences and heart-stopping tension pushing viewers to the limits of what they can endure; and it’s a flick that’s also surprisingly funny at the right time and even questions what some might do to protect their lives and livelihoods from senseless victimhood status. In fact, I’d argue that Hope throughout its first hour is about as perfect as any monster movie can or ever will be, and I’ve only said that about a handful of features.
However …
The problem began when I realized that there was entirely no way that everything in Hope was going to tie up in its bloated 160-minutes run-time. In fact, the picture ends on a massive unresolved cliffhanger with a late-breaking development that almost – almost – comes out of nowhere, meaning that not even its central story of one small town’s devastation at the hands of these creatures is far from over. In this case, you’re expected to come back for another helping entirely – assuming that it gets made – in order to see these events brought to any kind of acceptable closure. I’ve read that Hong-jin actually intends there to be a trilogy, but he’s only completed a script for a direct sequel and as of yet has not scheduled its shooting. Furthermore, he’s even hinted online that the planned middle film focuses entirely on Hope’s alien civilization – who they are, how they got here, their society’s internal conflicts, etc. – implying that it’ll do little to nothing to address much from Part One.
With Peter Jackson’s The Lord Of The Rings, audiences went in with the knowledge that future installments were coming. The fact that the pictures were being distributed in such a manner was part of the studio’s marketing. To a degree, this perception softened the blow of the screen fading to black and the credits starting to role on Part One: unless you were born on an island, you were fully understanding that any single picture was only a single investment on a huge creative undertaking. Yes, it was still a huge, calculated gamble; but, minimally, that awareness helped viewers to temper their expectations. That isn’t the case here – there are only loose commitments made, with no mention of this picture needed a sequel, and I had to search online to learn more (something the casual moviegoer is not likely to do) – so ‘word of mouth’ will be sorely needed to prop up Hope and its entirely unresolved reality.
Of course, I’m all in favor of any storyteller setting ambitious goals. Hong-jin definitely has a track record suggesting that he’s capable of delivering big films with even bigger ideas. Regardless, the second half of Hope is a bit of a jumbled mess, never quite finding a comfortable pace shifting between its multiple locations and the world-building required to make any of the alien society palatable. There’s a welcome quirkiness to most of it – small towns breed unlikely heroes but they’re easy to embrace – but there’s no escaping the fact that after the two-hour mark this thing lost a lot of the magic that made its first hour an unstoppable and unforgettable experience. Roughly, its last forty minutes almost becomes a parody of itself, leaving me to question whether or not I’d been duped by Hong-jin and needed to reevaluate the strength of his film’s incredible set-up.
Naturally, there are smaller things that I could dissect if I felt the need. Some of Hope’s CGI feels a bit amateurish – especially in comparison to other sequences which work much better when shaded in a bit of darkness – and a character or two seem to be rather convenient creations one can see living in a bit city as opposed to taking up residence in some boarder town. Once you do see the monsters, you might even wonder how a thing of its relative size accomplished some of the devastation depicted as the scale of destruction doesn’t quite match up. A death or two might seem a bit gratuitous when compared to what Hong-jin accomplishes through suggestion as opposed to outright display, so there’s always something valuable to be gained through nuance instead of exploitation. Hope raises far more questions than it could answer – even in its exhaustive run-time – but its second half opted to even ask more when it should’ve been minimally invested in tying some of the mysteries up as a reward for the audience’s patience. None arrives … and, yes, some – some like me – will likely feel cheated in the process.
Alas … only Mildly Recommended (in its current form).
Hope (2026) is the kind of film that showcases both the perfection and imperfection of visual storytelling: if you begin with a product that cannot ultimately stand on its own then you also own the risk of infuriating viewers with your ending. I walked out with far more asks than I had answers; and, personally, I’m disappointed with how little I learned, even more so when considering how long the film is. I’m half inclined to tell readers to get up and walk out once its action fully shifts fully into the forests surrounding the waterside community because then you’ll have left with a near-perfect monster movie albeit with a central explanation to know why it all took place. (Don’t do it, but I had to be honest.) The problems lie entirely with overambition of the main story, and I wonder if this might have been better conceived and executed as a long-form ten-episode streaming project instead of the intended trilogy.
In the interest of fairness, I’m beholden to no one for this review of Hope (2026) as I watched it entirely on my own dime at the local theater.
-- EZ
From the film’s IMDB.com page citation:
“A mysterious discovery is made on the outskirts of the remote harbor town. The residents find themselves in a desperate fight for survival against something they have never encountered before.”
By their very nature, monster movies require a suspension of disbelief.
In reality, we don’t have vampires. We don’t have werewolves. Frankensteins aren’t lying in wait around every corner. There isn’t an authentic Godzilla. Jason Voorhees is entirely a fictional creation. So on and so forth. Oh, I know what you’re thinking: we do have plenty of them metaphorically, and that’s true. Yet, we don’t have any in their original skins (which says a lot for Leatherface). Because their stories – as bold or as vivid as they might be – require the audience to accept that they are possible, storytellers do have to put serious effort into ensuring that as little as possible gets in the way of all the corresponding bits and pieces – the tissue holding it all together – unless they’re willing to have this world all come crashing down around them like a house of cards.
Celebrated director Na Hong-jin knows precisely what I’m talking about what with his latest monster opus Hope (2026) hitting U.S. screens this past weekend; and yet it would seem as if he’s content ignoring structure in favor of spectacle. Most assuredly, Hope is a sight to behold with its sometimes frenetic action sequences and heart-stopping tension pushing viewers to the limits of what they can endure; and it’s a flick that’s also surprisingly funny at the right time and even questions what some might do to protect their lives and livelihoods from senseless victimhood status. In fact, I’d argue that Hope throughout its first hour is about as perfect as any monster movie can or ever will be, and I’ve only said that about a handful of features.
However …
The problem began when I realized that there was entirely no way that everything in Hope was going to tie up in its bloated 160-minutes run-time. In fact, the picture ends on a massive unresolved cliffhanger with a late-breaking development that almost – almost – comes out of nowhere, meaning that not even its central story of one small town’s devastation at the hands of these creatures is far from over. In this case, you’re expected to come back for another helping entirely – assuming that it gets made – in order to see these events brought to any kind of acceptable closure. I’ve read that Hong-jin actually intends there to be a trilogy, but he’s only completed a script for a direct sequel and as of yet has not scheduled its shooting. Furthermore, he’s even hinted online that the planned middle film focuses entirely on Hope’s alien civilization – who they are, how they got here, their society’s internal conflicts, etc. – implying that it’ll do little to nothing to address much from Part One.
With Peter Jackson’s The Lord Of The Rings, audiences went in with the knowledge that future installments were coming. The fact that the pictures were being distributed in such a manner was part of the studio’s marketing. To a degree, this perception softened the blow of the screen fading to black and the credits starting to role on Part One: unless you were born on an island, you were fully understanding that any single picture was only a single investment on a huge creative undertaking. Yes, it was still a huge, calculated gamble; but, minimally, that awareness helped viewers to temper their expectations. That isn’t the case here – there are only loose commitments made, with no mention of this picture needed a sequel, and I had to search online to learn more (something the casual moviegoer is not likely to do) – so ‘word of mouth’ will be sorely needed to prop up Hope and its entirely unresolved reality.
Of course, I’m all in favor of any storyteller setting ambitious goals. Hong-jin definitely has a track record suggesting that he’s capable of delivering big films with even bigger ideas. Regardless, the second half of Hope is a bit of a jumbled mess, never quite finding a comfortable pace shifting between its multiple locations and the world-building required to make any of the alien society palatable. There’s a welcome quirkiness to most of it – small towns breed unlikely heroes but they’re easy to embrace – but there’s no escaping the fact that after the two-hour mark this thing lost a lot of the magic that made its first hour an unstoppable and unforgettable experience. Roughly, its last forty minutes almost becomes a parody of itself, leaving me to question whether or not I’d been duped by Hong-jin and needed to reevaluate the strength of his film’s incredible set-up.
Naturally, there are smaller things that I could dissect if I felt the need. Some of Hope’s CGI feels a bit amateurish – especially in comparison to other sequences which work much better when shaded in a bit of darkness – and a character or two seem to be rather convenient creations one can see living in a bit city as opposed to taking up residence in some boarder town. Once you do see the monsters, you might even wonder how a thing of its relative size accomplished some of the devastation depicted as the scale of destruction doesn’t quite match up. A death or two might seem a bit gratuitous when compared to what Hong-jin accomplishes through suggestion as opposed to outright display, so there’s always something valuable to be gained through nuance instead of exploitation. Hope raises far more questions than it could answer – even in its exhaustive run-time – but its second half opted to even ask more when it should’ve been minimally invested in tying some of the mysteries up as a reward for the audience’s patience. None arrives … and, yes, some – some like me – will likely feel cheated in the process.
Alas … only Mildly Recommended (in its current form).
Hope (2026) is the kind of film that showcases both the perfection and imperfection of visual storytelling: if you begin with a product that cannot ultimately stand on its own then you also own the risk of infuriating viewers with your ending. I walked out with far more asks than I had answers; and, personally, I’m disappointed with how little I learned, even more so when considering how long the film is. I’m half inclined to tell readers to get up and walk out once its action fully shifts fully into the forests surrounding the waterside community because then you’ll have left with a near-perfect monster movie albeit with a central explanation to know why it all took place. (Don’t do it, but I had to be honest.) The problems lie entirely with overambition of the main story, and I wonder if this might have been better conceived and executed as a long-form ten-episode streaming project instead of the intended trilogy.
In the interest of fairness, I’m beholden to no one for this review of Hope (2026) as I watched it entirely on my own dime at the local theater.
-- EZ
- Published on
Generally speaking, I’m not fond of remakes.
It isn’t as though allow no room for certain franchises to be revisited. Like any fan of genre entertainment, I get excited almost every time I hear about a new chapter in the continuing saga of blah-blah-blah – assuming that blah-blah-blah is a commodity that I’m fond of – and I, too, begin to wonder about what new angles a budding auteur might bring to the established mythology. On the other hand, I’ve sat through far too many inferior remakes which seem to almost coast on autopilot far too much of the time; and – in the final estimation – they bring nothing new to the table worth digestion. Yes, it might be more visually arresting, what with the development of new effects and cutting-edge technology; but – at the end of the day – is that all there is? No new characters? No new twists and turns to what’s come before? No breath of fresh, bloody air?
Complicating matters further is when some filmmaker sets out to reinvent a veritable cult classic, which Sam Raimi’s groundbreaking independent The Evil Dead (1981) arguably was. Hell, I’ve read commentary from respected historians that credit this little film that could – along with Raimi’s own mild re-interpretation (1981’s Evil Dead II) – as being one of the prime forces behind the original home video craze of the 1980’s. Literally, everyone who had a videotape player in those days has seen one or the other of them; and the word-of-mouth for this phenomenal one-two punch was absolutely gangbusters. Mind you: I’m not saying that I agree with everything that’s been written and/or said about the flicks, but there is no denying their staying power. Why else would anyone think three decades later that the original story was worth remaking if the films weren’t noteworthy?
Well, Fede Alvarez isn’t just any regular storyteller as the man’s track record certainly now attests. The Uruguayan writer/director got his start doing genre shorts in his native country, and the quality of his work quickly caught the attention of Hollywood. While he’s gone on to helm such features as Don’t Breathe (2016) and Alien: Romulus (2024), helming an all-new iteration of Evil Dead was his first American effort; and he secured the blessing and cooperation of Sam Raimi in the process. This speaks volumes within the wider Horror community; and I think it helps establish the proper context with which to both approach his film as well as critique it.
Yes, it’s a bit imperfect – as are so many remakes – and, yes, one might question whether or not it was ultimately a necessary project. Still, nothing denies the competency of the work delivered because – in that perspective – maybe his Dead will launch the careers of as many potential filmmakers as did Raimi’s in the 1980’s.
(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:
“Five friends head to a remote cabin, where the discovery of a Book of the Dead leads them to unwittingly summon up demons living in the nearby woods.”
If the movies have taught me anything, then it would be that allowing a small group of teens to head out into the woods just to escape from it all is bound to be bad for them but good for theatrical box office ticket sales.
That’s basically the ‘through line’ for far too many films deserving mention in any one space, but methinks it’s core to understanding what chiefly makes 1981’s Evil Dead vastly different from 2013’s iteration. The 80’s – being what they were – was the era wherein folks wanting to escape from it all – especially in the great American Midwest – really only had the great outdoors. If one was reasonably poor, then a good time could still be had by all in picking up a few six packs of beer and getting lost off of some country roads. Though I’ve been assured by a good many collegiates that drinking is still the best way to make friends and party, most of them suggest they tend to gravitate more toward urban escapes to do so as opposed to rural.
In contrast, the young and potentially irresponsible youth brought front-and-center in Fede Alvarez’s Evil Dead are actually doing their part to make the world – their world – a better place: Mia (played by Jane Levy) has succumbed much too deeply to recreational drug use, so her closest friends have staged an intervention (of sorts) to take place at the old family cabin (still situated deep in forest country). Immediately, the undercurrent of Mia’s detox becomes a potential culprit for why she’s seeing things; but, thankfully, that inference fades very quickly once the others become wrapped up in the spectral shenanigans of a demonic force they’ve awakened in the woods.
Now, it would be easy to dissect each character – what drives them, what they bring to the group dynamic, etc. – but this isn’t exactly why audiences flock to Horror. Sure, it’s grand to see someone overcome a personal tragedy; but viewers are vastly more intrigued by how this band of unfortunate souls both clash with the entity and meet their demise (if that happens). Alvarez’s skills are top notch in this department, and he efficiently takes each player through his or her paces to the breaking point with bloody aplomb. Sadly, not everyone gets a death of contextual significance; and yet the thrills, chills, and spills still work wonderfully, mostly because of Alvarez’s obvious commitment to practical effects. Dead is full of spectacle … and, yet, it still feels a bit hollow.
Some of my disappointment could be owed to the fact that, yes, I was raised on Raimi’s originals; and there was a certain swagger to old school web-spinning that just isn’t quite here. David (Shiloh Fernandez) serves as the central voice of reason; and while I think he had enough to do as Mia’s chief support system I just wasn’t drawn to him as the flick’s driving champion of goodness and light. Eric (Lou Taylor Pucci) delivers his work as the resident skeptic with the necessary book smarts to figure out what he’s inadvertently unleashed upon his friends; but even he is never quite given any key scenes that speak to a uniquely qualified character. Sadly, Olivia (Jessica Lucas) and Natalie (Elizabeth Blackmore) are utterly wasted – their corpses-in-waiting – turning in acceptable performances in the mold of stock faces we see all too often in teen-centric Horror.
While it can easily be said that, functionally, Dead delivers on the construct without rejiggering too much of what made the original work – the Necronomicon here has a mildly different purpose or, at least, is implied to have some specific use in primitive exorcisms – and I’m thankful for that. But if at the end of the final reel all I come away with is how the effects work between the decades has vastly improved, is that enough? To his credit, Alvarez keeps everything moving at a brisk pace – there’s no room for fat here much less blood to puddle – and it’s about as technically accomplished any 90-minute Horror film can be. However, the failure to deliver anything new and compelling in the character department didn’t help the film in achieving the necessary pulse.
Evil Dead (2013) was produced by TriStar Pictures, FilmDistrict, and Ghost House Pictures. DVD distribution (for this particular release) has been coordinated by the fine folks at Sony Home Entertainment. As for the technical specifications? While I’m no trained video expert, I can still assure readers that Dead both looks and sounds phenomenal: I did notice that the sound mix was incredibly low volume-wise – I had to crank this one up just to hear the dialogue – but I can’t say this is owed to any flaw of the production or the disc. Some films are just that way. Lastly, if you’re looking for special features? This two-disc set comes with an audio commentary along with a solid handful of behind-the-scenes filler that fans crave, so it’s definitely worth the investment if you’re a die-hard enthusiast of the franchise.
Recommended.
Though I didn’t feel that 2013’s Evil Dead brought anything new to the franchise – certainly not in the way that 2023’s Evil Dead Rise offered – there’s no denying that it competently updates the original on the technical front. Alvarez is a bold new voice in genre entertainment, and this one percolates nicely when those moments of tension fill the screen. My disappointment with it is largely owed to the fact that I just didn’t get much reason to care about these folks, nor were any of them charismatic enough to even suspect they’d have a life beyond this tale. (No, I’m not talking about sequels: I’m just saying they were all mostly flat and undeveloped.) While it occasionally felt like a thrill ride, it didn’t work the same way as did Raimi’s forays in this universe … and I did miss that.
In the interest of fairness, I’m pleased to disclose that the fine folks at TriStar Pictures (via Allied Vaughn) provided me with a complimentary Blu-ray copy of Evil Dead (2013) by request for the expressed purpose of completing this review. Their contribution to me in no way, shape, or form influenced my opinion of it.
-- EZ
It isn’t as though allow no room for certain franchises to be revisited. Like any fan of genre entertainment, I get excited almost every time I hear about a new chapter in the continuing saga of blah-blah-blah – assuming that blah-blah-blah is a commodity that I’m fond of – and I, too, begin to wonder about what new angles a budding auteur might bring to the established mythology. On the other hand, I’ve sat through far too many inferior remakes which seem to almost coast on autopilot far too much of the time; and – in the final estimation – they bring nothing new to the table worth digestion. Yes, it might be more visually arresting, what with the development of new effects and cutting-edge technology; but – at the end of the day – is that all there is? No new characters? No new twists and turns to what’s come before? No breath of fresh, bloody air?
Complicating matters further is when some filmmaker sets out to reinvent a veritable cult classic, which Sam Raimi’s groundbreaking independent The Evil Dead (1981) arguably was. Hell, I’ve read commentary from respected historians that credit this little film that could – along with Raimi’s own mild re-interpretation (1981’s Evil Dead II) – as being one of the prime forces behind the original home video craze of the 1980’s. Literally, everyone who had a videotape player in those days has seen one or the other of them; and the word-of-mouth for this phenomenal one-two punch was absolutely gangbusters. Mind you: I’m not saying that I agree with everything that’s been written and/or said about the flicks, but there is no denying their staying power. Why else would anyone think three decades later that the original story was worth remaking if the films weren’t noteworthy?
Well, Fede Alvarez isn’t just any regular storyteller as the man’s track record certainly now attests. The Uruguayan writer/director got his start doing genre shorts in his native country, and the quality of his work quickly caught the attention of Hollywood. While he’s gone on to helm such features as Don’t Breathe (2016) and Alien: Romulus (2024), helming an all-new iteration of Evil Dead was his first American effort; and he secured the blessing and cooperation of Sam Raimi in the process. This speaks volumes within the wider Horror community; and I think it helps establish the proper context with which to both approach his film as well as critique it.
Yes, it’s a bit imperfect – as are so many remakes – and, yes, one might question whether or not it was ultimately a necessary project. Still, nothing denies the competency of the work delivered because – in that perspective – maybe his Dead will launch the careers of as many potential filmmakers as did Raimi’s in the 1980’s.
(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:
“Five friends head to a remote cabin, where the discovery of a Book of the Dead leads them to unwittingly summon up demons living in the nearby woods.”
If the movies have taught me anything, then it would be that allowing a small group of teens to head out into the woods just to escape from it all is bound to be bad for them but good for theatrical box office ticket sales.
That’s basically the ‘through line’ for far too many films deserving mention in any one space, but methinks it’s core to understanding what chiefly makes 1981’s Evil Dead vastly different from 2013’s iteration. The 80’s – being what they were – was the era wherein folks wanting to escape from it all – especially in the great American Midwest – really only had the great outdoors. If one was reasonably poor, then a good time could still be had by all in picking up a few six packs of beer and getting lost off of some country roads. Though I’ve been assured by a good many collegiates that drinking is still the best way to make friends and party, most of them suggest they tend to gravitate more toward urban escapes to do so as opposed to rural.
In contrast, the young and potentially irresponsible youth brought front-and-center in Fede Alvarez’s Evil Dead are actually doing their part to make the world – their world – a better place: Mia (played by Jane Levy) has succumbed much too deeply to recreational drug use, so her closest friends have staged an intervention (of sorts) to take place at the old family cabin (still situated deep in forest country). Immediately, the undercurrent of Mia’s detox becomes a potential culprit for why she’s seeing things; but, thankfully, that inference fades very quickly once the others become wrapped up in the spectral shenanigans of a demonic force they’ve awakened in the woods.
Now, it would be easy to dissect each character – what drives them, what they bring to the group dynamic, etc. – but this isn’t exactly why audiences flock to Horror. Sure, it’s grand to see someone overcome a personal tragedy; but viewers are vastly more intrigued by how this band of unfortunate souls both clash with the entity and meet their demise (if that happens). Alvarez’s skills are top notch in this department, and he efficiently takes each player through his or her paces to the breaking point with bloody aplomb. Sadly, not everyone gets a death of contextual significance; and yet the thrills, chills, and spills still work wonderfully, mostly because of Alvarez’s obvious commitment to practical effects. Dead is full of spectacle … and, yet, it still feels a bit hollow.
Some of my disappointment could be owed to the fact that, yes, I was raised on Raimi’s originals; and there was a certain swagger to old school web-spinning that just isn’t quite here. David (Shiloh Fernandez) serves as the central voice of reason; and while I think he had enough to do as Mia’s chief support system I just wasn’t drawn to him as the flick’s driving champion of goodness and light. Eric (Lou Taylor Pucci) delivers his work as the resident skeptic with the necessary book smarts to figure out what he’s inadvertently unleashed upon his friends; but even he is never quite given any key scenes that speak to a uniquely qualified character. Sadly, Olivia (Jessica Lucas) and Natalie (Elizabeth Blackmore) are utterly wasted – their corpses-in-waiting – turning in acceptable performances in the mold of stock faces we see all too often in teen-centric Horror.
While it can easily be said that, functionally, Dead delivers on the construct without rejiggering too much of what made the original work – the Necronomicon here has a mildly different purpose or, at least, is implied to have some specific use in primitive exorcisms – and I’m thankful for that. But if at the end of the final reel all I come away with is how the effects work between the decades has vastly improved, is that enough? To his credit, Alvarez keeps everything moving at a brisk pace – there’s no room for fat here much less blood to puddle – and it’s about as technically accomplished any 90-minute Horror film can be. However, the failure to deliver anything new and compelling in the character department didn’t help the film in achieving the necessary pulse.
Evil Dead (2013) was produced by TriStar Pictures, FilmDistrict, and Ghost House Pictures. DVD distribution (for this particular release) has been coordinated by the fine folks at Sony Home Entertainment. As for the technical specifications? While I’m no trained video expert, I can still assure readers that Dead both looks and sounds phenomenal: I did notice that the sound mix was incredibly low volume-wise – I had to crank this one up just to hear the dialogue – but I can’t say this is owed to any flaw of the production or the disc. Some films are just that way. Lastly, if you’re looking for special features? This two-disc set comes with an audio commentary along with a solid handful of behind-the-scenes filler that fans crave, so it’s definitely worth the investment if you’re a die-hard enthusiast of the franchise.
Recommended.
Though I didn’t feel that 2013’s Evil Dead brought anything new to the franchise – certainly not in the way that 2023’s Evil Dead Rise offered – there’s no denying that it competently updates the original on the technical front. Alvarez is a bold new voice in genre entertainment, and this one percolates nicely when those moments of tension fill the screen. My disappointment with it is largely owed to the fact that I just didn’t get much reason to care about these folks, nor were any of them charismatic enough to even suspect they’d have a life beyond this tale. (No, I’m not talking about sequels: I’m just saying they were all mostly flat and undeveloped.) While it occasionally felt like a thrill ride, it didn’t work the same way as did Raimi’s forays in this universe … and I did miss that.
In the interest of fairness, I’m pleased to disclose that the fine folks at TriStar Pictures (via Allied Vaughn) provided me with a complimentary Blu-ray copy of Evil Dead (2013) 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
- Published on
It all began right here ...
On this day in 1984, Voltron: Defender Of The Universe aired "Space Explorers Captured." Officially, this served as the first episode in the program's first season.
According to our friends at IMDB.com, here's the plot summary:
"A crack team of pilots are selected by the Galaxy Alliance to travel to Planet Arus and uncover the secret of a weapon from ancient times - Voltron! Keith, Lance, Sven, Hunk and Pidge arrive too late, the planet has already been completely devastated by the evil forces of King Zarkon. They engage in battle with Zarkon's general Yurak, only to be captured and thrown into the dungeons on Planet Doom."
-- EZ
On this day in 1984, Voltron: Defender Of The Universe aired "Space Explorers Captured." Officially, this served as the first episode in the program's first season.
According to our friends at IMDB.com, here's the plot summary:
"A crack team of pilots are selected by the Galaxy Alliance to travel to Planet Arus and uncover the secret of a weapon from ancient times - Voltron! Keith, Lance, Sven, Hunk and Pidge arrive too late, the planet has already been completely devastated by the evil forces of King Zarkon. They engage in battle with Zarkon's general Yurak, only to be captured and thrown into the dungeons on Planet Doom."
-- EZ
From Google.com:
The 1984 animated series Voltron: Defender of the Universe is a classic American syndicated mecha cartoon adapted from Japanese anime by World Events Productions. [1, 2, 3]
Origins and Creation
The Story and Characters
Cultural Impact
AI responses may include mistakes.
[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WfInUSTEfZQ
[2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TvhUme5mej8
[3] https://voltron.fandom.com/wiki/Voltron:_Defender_of_the_Universe
[4] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C675aVYTKa0
[5] https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0086824/
[6] https://www.facebook.com/VoltronOfficial/posts/on-september-10-1984-voltron-aired-on-tv-for-the-very-first-timecan-you-believe-/1560587552779842/
[7] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lL1c1LW9sIg
The 1984 animated series Voltron: Defender of the Universe is a classic American syndicated mecha cartoon adapted from Japanese anime by World Events Productions. [1, 2, 3]
Origins and Creation
- The Mix-Up: World Events Productions wanted to adapt a Japanese show featuring a robot combining with a lion, but a shipping error by Toei Animation delivered tapes for Beast King GoLion instead.
- The Name: Producers created the name "Voltron" by combining "volt" (power) and "tron" (technology).
- Two Shows in One: The 1984 run famously combined two unrelated anime series--Beast King GoLion became the iconic "Lion Force Voltron," and Armored Fleet Dairugger XV became "Vehicle Team Voltron"—marketed as seasons of the same show. [2, 4]
The Story and Characters
- The Premise: Five space explorers travel to the ruined planet Arus and unlock the secret of Voltron to defend the galaxy from the evil Drule Empire.
- The Team (Lion Force):
- Keith: Calm and courageous leader who pilots the Black Lion (main body).
- Lance: Cocky second-in-command who pilots the Red Lion (right arm).
- Pidge: Young and smart problem-solver who pilots the Green Lion (left arm).
- Hunk: Strong, gentle, and food-loving pilot of the Yellow Lion (left leg).
- Princess Allura / Sven: Allura (and originally Sven) piloted the Blue Lion (right leg). [7]
- The Villains: King Zarkon, his son Prince Lotor, and the witch Haggar led the Drule Empire, sending giant robotic monsters called "Robeasts" to fight the team. [7]
Cultural Impact
- Massive Success: It became the top-rated syndicated children's show in the mid-1980s and launched a massive diecast toy line.
- The Formula: Every episode built anticipation for the iconic sequence where the five lions combined and drew the Blazing Sword to defeat the monster of the week. [1, 2, 4, 7]
AI responses may include mistakes.
[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WfInUSTEfZQ
[2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TvhUme5mej8
[3] https://voltron.fandom.com/wiki/Voltron:_Defender_of_the_Universe
[4] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C675aVYTKa0
[5] https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0086824/
[6] https://www.facebook.com/VoltronOfficial/posts/on-september-10-1984-voltron-aired-on-tv-for-the-very-first-timecan-you-believe-/1560587552779842/
[7] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lL1c1LW9sIg
- Published on
site update
so many movies ... so little time ...
On this day in 2010 (in Canada), audiences in attendance of the Toronto International Film Festival were treated to the big screen premiere of Clara. Written (in part) and directed by Akash Sherman, the film starred Patrick J. Adams, Troian Bellisario, Ennis Esmer, and others.
According to our friends at IMDB.com, here's the plot summary:
"An obsessive astronomer and a curious artist form an unlikely bond which leads them to a profound, scientific discovery."
For the record:
To the film's credit, Clara earned a wee bit of praise from a screening on the film festival circuit.
-- EZ
According to our friends at IMDB.com, here's the plot summary:
"An obsessive astronomer and a curious artist form an unlikely bond which leads them to a profound, scientific discovery."
For the record:
To the film's credit, Clara earned a wee bit of praise from a screening on the film festival circuit.
-- EZ
From Google.com:
Clara is a 2018 Canadian-British science fiction drama film directed by Akash Sherman. [1]
Plot and Overview
Cast and Production
AI responses may include mistakes.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clara_(2018_film)
[2] https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Film/Clara
[3] https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/clara-2019
[4] https://www.thegate.ca/film/036964/review-clara/
[5] https://tv.apple.com/in/movie/clara/umc.cmc.5zf8btrlpiis7cbu9wnsin0v2
[6] https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/clara-is-a-story-of-exoplanets-existential-longing-mdash-and-real-science1/
[7] https://www.imdb.com/title/tt6613878/
Clara is a 2018 Canadian-British science fiction drama film directed by Akash Sherman. [1]
Plot and Overview
- The Story: The film follows Dr. Isaac Bruno (Patrick J. Adams), a bitter and obsessive astrophysicist searching the cosmos for signs of extraterrestrial life after personal tragedy and a divorce.
- The Collaboration: Needing help to sift through massive amounts of stellar data from NASA telescopes like TESS, he reluctantly hires Clara (Troian Bellisario), a free-spirited, under-qualified artist.
- The Discovery: Despite their conflicting personalities and worldviews, their partnership leads to a monumental discovery of a potentially habitable exoplanet and a deep personal connection. [2, 4, 5]
Cast and Production
- Real-Life Couple: The lead actors, Patrick J. Adams and Troian Bellisario, are married in real life, which brings authentic chemistry to their characters' evolving relationship.
- Real Science: The movie incorporates genuine astronomical concepts and references real-life space instruments like the TESS and James Webb space telescopes. [5, 6]
AI responses may include mistakes.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clara_(2018_film)
[2] https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Film/Clara
[3] https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/clara-2019
[4] https://www.thegate.ca/film/036964/review-clara/
[5] https://tv.apple.com/in/movie/clara/umc.cmc.5zf8btrlpiis7cbu9wnsin0v2
[6] https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/clara-is-a-story-of-exoplanets-existential-longing-mdash-and-real-science1/
[7] https://www.imdb.com/title/tt6613878/
- Published on
On this day in 1987 (in the United Kingdom), a special charity event screening benefitting the Homes For Homeless People in London, England served as the big screen premiere of Hellraiser. Written and directed by Clive Barker, the film starred Andrew Robinson, Clare Higgins, Ashley Laurence, and others.
According to our friends at IMDB.com, here's the plot summary:
"A woman discovers the newly resurrected, partially formed, body of her brother-in-law and lover. She starts killing for him to revitalize his body and escape the demonic beings that are pursuing him after he escaped their underworld."
For the record:
ExtraExtra Alert:
In 2024, I caught a cable broadcast airing of Hellraiser (1987) on a platform to which I subscribe. Interested readers can find my review right here.
-- EZ
According to our friends at IMDB.com, here's the plot summary:
"A woman discovers the newly resurrected, partially formed, body of her brother-in-law and lover. She starts killing for him to revitalize his body and escape the demonic beings that are pursuing him after he escaped their underworld."
For the record:
- At the 1988 Saturn Awards, Hellraiser received nominations in the categories of 'Best Make-Up,' 'Best Music,' and 'Best Horror Film.'
- At the 2010 Saturn Awards, an all-new home video release -- the Hellraiser Boxed Set -- received a nomination in the category of 'Best DVD Collection.'
ExtraExtra Alert:
In 2024, I caught a cable broadcast airing of Hellraiser (1987) on a platform to which I subscribe. Interested readers can find my review right here.
-- EZ
From Google.com:
Hellraiser is a 1987 British supernatural horror film written and directed by Clive Barker in his feature film directorial debut. [1]
Based on Barker's 1986 novella The Hellbound Heart, the story follows Frank Cotton (Sean Chapman), a hedonistic man who opens a portal to a dark dimension by solving a mystical puzzle box known as the Lament Configuration. This act summons the Cenobites, a group of extra-dimensional, sadomasochistic beings who view pain and pleasure as one and the same, and they tear Frank's body apart. [1, 2, 3]
Plot and Characters
Production and Legacy
AI responses may include mistakes.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hellraiser
[2] https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/hellraiser
[3] https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0093177/plotsummary/
[4] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WrzQ-h6gFdw
[5] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U6Ad097wDhY
[6] https://bostonhassle.com/hellraiser-1987-dir-clive-barker/
[7] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SU8xZjYutAo
[8] https://www.reddit.com/r/movies/comments/xq575l/discussion_what_made_hellraiser_1987_such_a_good/
Hellraiser is a 1987 British supernatural horror film written and directed by Clive Barker in his feature film directorial debut. [1]
Based on Barker's 1986 novella The Hellbound Heart, the story follows Frank Cotton (Sean Chapman), a hedonistic man who opens a portal to a dark dimension by solving a mystical puzzle box known as the Lament Configuration. This act summons the Cenobites, a group of extra-dimensional, sadomasochistic beings who view pain and pleasure as one and the same, and they tear Frank's body apart. [1, 2, 3]
Plot and Characters
- The Resurrection: Frank's brother Larry and Larry's wife Julia move into Frank's old, derelict house. Larry accidentally spills blood on the floorboards, which resurrects Frank as a partially formed, skinless corpse.
- The True Villains: Julia, who previously had an affair with Frank, becomes obsessed with him again and agrees to lure men to the house so Frank can murder them and use their blood to regenerate his body.
- The Cenobites and Pinhead: Led by the iconic lead Cenobite (played by Doug Bradley and later famously dubbed "Pinhead"), the interdimensional beings return to claim Frank when Larry's daughter, Kirsty (Ashley Laurence), discovers the horror and tries to bargain with them. [1, 3, 5, 6]
Production and Legacy
- Low Budget: Made for roughly $1 million, the film relied heavily on creative, practical gore effects and creature makeup that defined a new era of body horror.
- A Horror Icon: Despite having minimal screen time in the original film, Pinhead became an instant horror icon and spawned a massive multi-film franchise.
- Critical Reception: Unlike standard slasher flicks of the 1980s, the original movie focuses heavily on human greed, infidelity, and obsession, earning a lasting reputation as a classic of modern horror. [8]
AI responses may include mistakes.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hellraiser
[2] https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/hellraiser
[3] https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0093177/plotsummary/
[4] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WrzQ-h6gFdw
[5] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U6Ad097wDhY
[6] https://bostonhassle.com/hellraiser-1987-dir-clive-barker/
[7] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SU8xZjYutAo
[8] https://www.reddit.com/r/movies/comments/xq575l/discussion_what_made_hellraiser_1987_such_a_good/
- Published on
(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:
“A Florida vacation becomes a blood-soaked fight for survival when a group of friends are hunted through the swamps by a savage cult that feeds its victims to ravenous alligators in the name of an ancient reptilian god.”
To its credit, Gator Face (2026) demonstrates an understanding the basic structure of the grindhouse thriller.
Basically, it casts a small unit of tweenage and/or teenage actors and actresses – all of them good-looking – to populate this tale of mortal jeopardy. It sets the bulk of the action sequences in some mildly picturesque yet strangely dangerous-looking backwoods locales, the kind where something idyllic can easily spin the other way in the blink of an eye. Lastly, writer/director Padraig Reynolds creates a central heavy – a Friday The 13th Jason Voorhees knock-off – and outfits him with a grim mask, tattered black leathers, and a hefty swinging axe, knowing full well that one look at the guy would, could, and should instill anyone with mortal fear.
Of course, there’s a bit more to the formula. GatorFace – as I suspect we’re to call him based solely on the film’s title – displays some sort of mystical connection to these Florida gators. Like moths to a flame, they’re drawn to him; and they seemingly sit, stay, and fetch in response to his whimsical hand gestures not unlike those waved like some hillbilly Jedi Master. Most important, they eat on command; and – as anyone can guess from the previews or the film’s poster – that’s the main attraction here. Irresponsible young men and women are about to be ground into bloody pulp by these reptiles’ mouths; and – in that respect – Gator Face sets about fulfilling the terms of its unspoken verbal agreement.
Now … I hate to be nitpicky, but – as a critic – that’s kinda/sorta my job at times, and Gator could use a pit of dissection.
First up, there’s no way the killer would be able to see in that cumbersome mask. (I know, I know, but hear me out.) It’s meant to be, basically, the long extended snout of the popular reptile itself; and – though it looks the part – it kinda/sorta hangs off the human head, protruding more than a noticeable bit forward. The eyeholes are more than a bit sunken, leaving me to suspect that the actor likely had little to no peripheral vision while under it, meaning that those fleeing teenagers would have had little difficult evading capture so long as they ran in a zigzag fashion. Unlike a gator – which reportedly has a fairly wide field of vision – GatorFace was probably a bit visually-impaired, making him a dubious predator at best.
Secondly, the film ignores the traditional Horror aesthetic, rendering almost all of its cinematography in blazing sunlight. Of course, a great deal of this is owed to the fact that this was set in Florida during a kinda/sorta spring break of sorts (or that’s what I’m going with); and the corresponding settings would be equally sunny and vibrant, the kind of environment the college kids are drawn to with their washboard abs and their bikini bodies. But because everything is so overexposed, there’s a decided lack of unease through two-thirds of the picture. Thankfully, there are some indoors bits which do help to bring the film to life the way they should.
Thirdly, Gator Face absolutely reeks of derivative cinematography. Certain scenes – if not whole sequences – feel a bit too familiar – admittedly not a dealbreaker for Horror, but it does grow a bit tiresome. About the time things do pick up, we – the audience – are dropped into the middle of a swamp-surrounded junkyard of vehicles; and Reynolds does make better use of the surroundings to ramp up the needed tension. Sadly, we don’t stay there very long; and even of few of those scenes could’ve used a fresh look from the lens or a different perspective as they’re just a bit too flat to be as inventive as the whole shebang could’ve been.
Where things get even a bit more incredulous is when some backwoods pastor turns out to be the actual ringleader of the whole affair, casting this ‘man of God’ more as a ‘man of reptile’ whose lost his way and embraced gators – that’s right, you heard it – as the community savior. I’ll admit that I’m entirely uncertain as to the logic here – the fellow admits to losing a leg to one of the insufferable critters, and normally that’s a turn-off though here seems to be his ‘come to Jesus’ catalyst – but I’ve learned in Horror the less questions asked the better. Just how and why Father Eli (played by Scot Scurlock) and Gator Face (Nikolas Kolasinski) were able to lure their flock into group worship is never touched upon – or touched upon well enough to have it make sense – so, as I said, sometimes it’s best to accept the world as is and ride the storm out. Minimally, the idea of a cult of alligator-worshipping hillbillies might rustle up a few laughs; and there’s nothing wrong with chuckles in terror.
Sadly, the chosen Final Girl – Jess (Amariah Dionne) – never sticks the landing, and Gator Face entirely chucks Horror’s Prime Directive in favor of a late-breaking glory kill meant to show the futility of escaping doom’s mighty jaws. The actress never quite displays the moxie needed to survive anyway; and – in the final reel – she’s shown toting a bloody axe than likely weighs more than she does. In a world where no heroes exist, she deservedly goes down for the count before the credits roll in a curious kinda/sorta recap of what we just spent the last 80 minute watching … a curious editorial choice.
Not all is lost: Gator Face still manages to squeeze in the kind of practical old-school effects that true Horror fans appreciate. Though the body count is low, take comfort and solace in knowing ahead of time that blood was spilled … and it was pretty glorious when it did.
Gator Face (2026) was produced by Epic Pictures. Digital distribution (for this particular release) has also been handled by Epic Pictures. As for the technical specifications? While I’m no trained video expert, I can still assure readers that the provided sights and sounds are very solid throughout: though some of the cinematography is a bit amateurish in spots, Reynolds ultimately delivers on what little promise the whole idea had, so there’s something to be said for minimal efficiency. Lastly, if you’re looking for special features? As I viewed this one via streaming, there were no special features under consideration.
Alas … only Mildly Recommended.
Like the visceral low-budget Horror/Thrillers that probably served as inspiration, Gator Face (2026) at least totals the sum of its parts … which, unfortunately, is to say that there just isn’t all that much here. The conglomeration of ideas all feel a bit too derivative with nothing wholly standing on its own; and a kinda/sorta laughable lead menace – think of a Chippendales dancer who midnights as a backwoods serial slayer, complete with alligator-scaled leather jacket and a discount Spirit Halloween mask – refutes any major sense of dread. Regardless, the picture succeeds in small ways in spite of the fact that it tried to break a great number of established rules of what audiences show up to Horror expecting. While that alone might be noble, is it noble enough to sink your teeth into? Well … that’s debatable … so buyer beware.
In the interests of fairness, I’m pleased to disclose that the fine folks at Epic Pictures provided me with complimentary streaming access to Gator Face 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 the film’s IMDB.com page citation:
“A Florida vacation becomes a blood-soaked fight for survival when a group of friends are hunted through the swamps by a savage cult that feeds its victims to ravenous alligators in the name of an ancient reptilian god.”
To its credit, Gator Face (2026) demonstrates an understanding the basic structure of the grindhouse thriller.
Basically, it casts a small unit of tweenage and/or teenage actors and actresses – all of them good-looking – to populate this tale of mortal jeopardy. It sets the bulk of the action sequences in some mildly picturesque yet strangely dangerous-looking backwoods locales, the kind where something idyllic can easily spin the other way in the blink of an eye. Lastly, writer/director Padraig Reynolds creates a central heavy – a Friday The 13th Jason Voorhees knock-off – and outfits him with a grim mask, tattered black leathers, and a hefty swinging axe, knowing full well that one look at the guy would, could, and should instill anyone with mortal fear.
Of course, there’s a bit more to the formula. GatorFace – as I suspect we’re to call him based solely on the film’s title – displays some sort of mystical connection to these Florida gators. Like moths to a flame, they’re drawn to him; and they seemingly sit, stay, and fetch in response to his whimsical hand gestures not unlike those waved like some hillbilly Jedi Master. Most important, they eat on command; and – as anyone can guess from the previews or the film’s poster – that’s the main attraction here. Irresponsible young men and women are about to be ground into bloody pulp by these reptiles’ mouths; and – in that respect – Gator Face sets about fulfilling the terms of its unspoken verbal agreement.
Now … I hate to be nitpicky, but – as a critic – that’s kinda/sorta my job at times, and Gator could use a pit of dissection.
First up, there’s no way the killer would be able to see in that cumbersome mask. (I know, I know, but hear me out.) It’s meant to be, basically, the long extended snout of the popular reptile itself; and – though it looks the part – it kinda/sorta hangs off the human head, protruding more than a noticeable bit forward. The eyeholes are more than a bit sunken, leaving me to suspect that the actor likely had little to no peripheral vision while under it, meaning that those fleeing teenagers would have had little difficult evading capture so long as they ran in a zigzag fashion. Unlike a gator – which reportedly has a fairly wide field of vision – GatorFace was probably a bit visually-impaired, making him a dubious predator at best.
Secondly, the film ignores the traditional Horror aesthetic, rendering almost all of its cinematography in blazing sunlight. Of course, a great deal of this is owed to the fact that this was set in Florida during a kinda/sorta spring break of sorts (or that’s what I’m going with); and the corresponding settings would be equally sunny and vibrant, the kind of environment the college kids are drawn to with their washboard abs and their bikini bodies. But because everything is so overexposed, there’s a decided lack of unease through two-thirds of the picture. Thankfully, there are some indoors bits which do help to bring the film to life the way they should.
Thirdly, Gator Face absolutely reeks of derivative cinematography. Certain scenes – if not whole sequences – feel a bit too familiar – admittedly not a dealbreaker for Horror, but it does grow a bit tiresome. About the time things do pick up, we – the audience – are dropped into the middle of a swamp-surrounded junkyard of vehicles; and Reynolds does make better use of the surroundings to ramp up the needed tension. Sadly, we don’t stay there very long; and even of few of those scenes could’ve used a fresh look from the lens or a different perspective as they’re just a bit too flat to be as inventive as the whole shebang could’ve been.
Where things get even a bit more incredulous is when some backwoods pastor turns out to be the actual ringleader of the whole affair, casting this ‘man of God’ more as a ‘man of reptile’ whose lost his way and embraced gators – that’s right, you heard it – as the community savior. I’ll admit that I’m entirely uncertain as to the logic here – the fellow admits to losing a leg to one of the insufferable critters, and normally that’s a turn-off though here seems to be his ‘come to Jesus’ catalyst – but I’ve learned in Horror the less questions asked the better. Just how and why Father Eli (played by Scot Scurlock) and Gator Face (Nikolas Kolasinski) were able to lure their flock into group worship is never touched upon – or touched upon well enough to have it make sense – so, as I said, sometimes it’s best to accept the world as is and ride the storm out. Minimally, the idea of a cult of alligator-worshipping hillbillies might rustle up a few laughs; and there’s nothing wrong with chuckles in terror.
Sadly, the chosen Final Girl – Jess (Amariah Dionne) – never sticks the landing, and Gator Face entirely chucks Horror’s Prime Directive in favor of a late-breaking glory kill meant to show the futility of escaping doom’s mighty jaws. The actress never quite displays the moxie needed to survive anyway; and – in the final reel – she’s shown toting a bloody axe than likely weighs more than she does. In a world where no heroes exist, she deservedly goes down for the count before the credits roll in a curious kinda/sorta recap of what we just spent the last 80 minute watching … a curious editorial choice.
Not all is lost: Gator Face still manages to squeeze in the kind of practical old-school effects that true Horror fans appreciate. Though the body count is low, take comfort and solace in knowing ahead of time that blood was spilled … and it was pretty glorious when it did.
Gator Face (2026) was produced by Epic Pictures. Digital distribution (for this particular release) has also been handled by Epic Pictures. As for the technical specifications? While I’m no trained video expert, I can still assure readers that the provided sights and sounds are very solid throughout: though some of the cinematography is a bit amateurish in spots, Reynolds ultimately delivers on what little promise the whole idea had, so there’s something to be said for minimal efficiency. Lastly, if you’re looking for special features? As I viewed this one via streaming, there were no special features under consideration.
Alas … only Mildly Recommended.
Like the visceral low-budget Horror/Thrillers that probably served as inspiration, Gator Face (2026) at least totals the sum of its parts … which, unfortunately, is to say that there just isn’t all that much here. The conglomeration of ideas all feel a bit too derivative with nothing wholly standing on its own; and a kinda/sorta laughable lead menace – think of a Chippendales dancer who midnights as a backwoods serial slayer, complete with alligator-scaled leather jacket and a discount Spirit Halloween mask – refutes any major sense of dread. Regardless, the picture succeeds in small ways in spite of the fact that it tried to break a great number of established rules of what audiences show up to Horror expecting. While that alone might be noble, is it noble enough to sink your teeth into? Well … that’s debatable … so buyer beware.
In the interests of fairness, I’m pleased to disclose that the fine folks at Epic Pictures provided me with complimentary streaming access to Gator Face 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
- Published on
press release
After a car accident that kills his wife, a man discovers he can communicate with the dead.
Before The Lord of the Rings made him a household name, Peter Jackson delivered The Frighteners - a wildly inventive blend of supernatural horror and dark comedy. Produced by Robert Zemeckis, it cemented Jackson's reputation as one of the most imaginative filmmakers of his generation. Michael J. Fox (Back to the Future) stars as Frank Bannister, a small-town psychic who uses his ghostly friends to con unsuspecting locals - until a series of mysterious deaths points to a far darker force. Racing to uncover the truth, Frank realizes he's the only person capable of stopping a malevolent spirit from claiming more victims... even if it means facing his own haunted past.
As macabre as it is mischievous, The Frighteners blends chilling suspense with offbeat humor and groundbreaking visual effects. Stylish, spooky, and full of heart, this cult classic continues to thrill from beyond the grave.
As macabre as it is mischievous, The Frighteners blends chilling suspense with offbeat humor and groundbreaking visual effects. Stylish, spooky, and full of heart, this cult classic continues to thrill from beyond the grave.
Bonus Materials
'A special-effects fiesta'
—Janet Maslin, New York Times
'Anyone who appreciates special effects, computer animation or movie makeup will regard this movie with awe.'
—Roger Ebert, rogerebert.com
Director Peter Jackson, at home with all kinds of excess, keeps everything spinning nicely, not even losing a step when the mood turns increasingly disturbing
—Kenneth Turan, Los Angeles Times
- 4K ULTRA HD LIMITED EDITION CONTENTS
- 4K restoration from the original camera negative
- Reversible sleeve featuring two original artwork options
- Collectors’ booklet featuring Peter Jackson’s 1998 introduction to the LaserDisc release, original production notes, and two 1996 articles from American Cinematographer
- DISC 1 – THEATRICAL AND DIRECTOR’S CUTS (4K ULTRA HD BLU-RAY)
- 4K (2160p) UHD Blu-ray presentation of both cuts in Dolby Vision (HDR10/compatible)
- Original lossless theatrical mix in DTS-HD MA 5.1 (theatrical cut only) and original lossless 2.0 stereo audio (both cuts), plus DTS-HD MA 5.1 home video mix (both cuts) and optional Dolby Atmos remix (director’s cut only)
- Optional English subtitles for the deaf and hard of hearing
- Optional English subtitles on all bonus materials
- Audio commentary by co-writer/producer/director Peter Jackson (director’s cut only)
- Peter Jackson’s 10th anniversary introduction to the film
- Theatrical trailer
- DISC 2 – OPEN MATTE VERSIONS (BLU-RAY)
- High Definition (1080p) Blu-ray presentation of both cuts, with the same audio/subtitle options and extras as Disc 1
- DISC 3 – EXTRAS (BLU-RAY)
- No Way to Make a Living: A Look Back at The Frighteners, a feature-length documentary produced in 2022, featuring new interviews with actors Dee Wallace Stone and Jake Busey, cinematographer John Blick, production designer Grant Major, creature and miniat
- The Making of The Frighteners, an exhaustive 225-minute documentary exploring every aspect of the film’s production, from script development and casting to post-production and release, produced in 1998 for the LaserDisc release, with a 2005 retrospective
- A Conversation with Richard Taylor and Alexandre Poncet, a 2022 interview with the man behind the film’s creature and miniature effects
- Image gallery
'A special-effects fiesta'
—Janet Maslin, New York Times
'Anyone who appreciates special effects, computer animation or movie makeup will regard this movie with awe.'
—Roger Ebert, rogerebert.com
Director Peter Jackson, at home with all kinds of excess, keeps everything spinning nicely, not even losing a step when the mood turns increasingly disturbing
—Kenneth Turan, Los Angeles Times
- Published on
press release
Upon attempting to expose Futureworld, an ex-employee is dispatched after he tips off the reporter who exposed Westworld.
Following the success of Westworld, director Richard T. Heffron expanded Michael Crichton's techno-nightmare with Futureworld - a sleek, conspiracy-laced slice of 1970s science fiction that trades frontier thrills for post-Watergate paranoia in the age of automation.
When reporters Chuck Browning (Peter Fonda, Easy Rider) and Tracy Ballard (Blythe Danner, The Great Santini) are invited to inspect the newly reopened Delos resort, they find a futuristic paradise promising safe, sanitized entertainment. But beneath the polished surface, troubling inconsistencies begin to emerge - and as suspicion turns to terror, the pair uncover a sinister conspiracy with consequences far beyond the park itself. Stylish, suspenseful and packed with all-star turns - including the return of Yul Brynner's implacable Gunslinger - Futureworld spins a compelling web of sci-fi intrigue, serving as a timely reminder that progress always has its price.
When reporters Chuck Browning (Peter Fonda, Easy Rider) and Tracy Ballard (Blythe Danner, The Great Santini) are invited to inspect the newly reopened Delos resort, they find a futuristic paradise promising safe, sanitized entertainment. But beneath the polished surface, troubling inconsistencies begin to emerge - and as suspicion turns to terror, the pair uncover a sinister conspiracy with consequences far beyond the park itself. Stylish, suspenseful and packed with all-star turns - including the return of Yul Brynner's implacable Gunslinger - Futureworld spins a compelling web of sci-fi intrigue, serving as a timely reminder that progress always has its price.
Bonus Materials
'A great cast and an awesome soundtrack'
—The Vault Master, The B-Movie Film Vault
'A lot of gadgetry which was hi-tech in 1976 and sweetly retro now'
—Kim Newman, Empire Magazine
- 4K ULTRA HD LIMITED EDITION CONTENTS
- 4K (2160p) Ultra HD Blu-ray presentation in Dolby Vision (HDR10 compatible)
- Original restored lossless mono audio
- Optional English subtitles for the deaf and hard of hearing
- Brand new audio commentary by filmmaker and film historian Daniel Kremer
- Future Present, a brand new video interview with producer Paul N. Lazarus III
- NASA: Science Fact and Fiction, a 1976 behind-the-scenes short film chronicling filming at the Johnson Space Center, presented in high definition for the first time on home video
- Theatrical trailer
- TV and radio spots
- Image gallery
- Reversible sleeve featuring original and newly commissioned artwork by Jeff Marshall
- Collectors’ booklet featuring new writing on the film by David Michael Brown, Barry Forshaw and James Rose
'A great cast and an awesome soundtrack'
—The Vault Master, The B-Movie Film Vault
'A lot of gadgetry which was hi-tech in 1976 and sweetly retro now'
—Kim Newman, Empire Magazine
- Published on
Why wait for The Transformers to show when you've ready, willing, and able to do it all yourself ... including transforming into a high-tech automobile? That would seem to have been the whole idea behind Turbo Teen which premiered on this day (in the U.S.) all the way back in 1984. Developed by Michael Maurer on behalf of Ruby-Spears Productions, the show featured the voice talents of Frank Welker, T.K. Carter, Pamela Hayden, Pat Frayley, and Michael Mish.
According to our friends at IMDB.com, here's the series' premise:
"The adventures of a boy who can physically transform into a living car."
According to our friends at IMDB.com, here's the series' premise:
"The adventures of a boy who can physically transform into a living car."
On this day in 1984 (in the U.S.), Turbo Teen aired "Turbo Thieves." Officially, this served as the first episode in the program's only season in original broadcast existence.
According to our friends at IMDB.com, here's the plot summary:
"Brett is kidnapped by goons who believe Turbo Teen will make them rich."
-- EZ
According to our friends at IMDB.com, here's the plot summary:
"Brett is kidnapped by goons who believe Turbo Teen will make them rich."
-- EZ
From Google.com:
Turbo Teen is a 1984 Saturday morning animated television series created by Ruby-Spears Enterprises that aired on ABC for 13 episodes. [1, 2]
The Plot and Origin
Characters and Crew
AI responses may include mistakes.
[1] https://www.instagram.com/reel/DF0ODr2ph24/?hl=en
[2] https://www.facebook.com/groups/565765698352808/posts/1393778105551559/
[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turbo_Teen
[4] https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0211171/plotsummary/
[5] https://www.instagram.com/reel/DIe4XUEys_m/?hl=en
[6] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VlUnnrG3CFQ
[7] https://www.youtube.com/shorts/FS13pbzfFvo
[8] https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0211171/
Turbo Teen is a 1984 Saturday morning animated television series created by Ruby-Spears Enterprises that aired on ABC for 13 episodes. [1, 2]
The Plot and Origin
- The Accident: High school student Brett Matthews crashes his red sports car into a secret government lab during a thunderstorm and is exposed to a molecular beam.
- The Power: Brett and his car fuse together. He transforms into the sports car when exposed to extreme heat or excitement, and reverts to human form when cooled down.
- Abilities: As a car, he features high-speed capabilities and a jet-powered "Turbo Thrust". [4, 7]
Characters and Crew
- Brett Matthews / Turbo Teen: Voiced by Michael Mish, the teenage protagonist.
- Pattie: Brett's girlfriend and a freelance news reporter.
- Alex: Brett's mechanic friend who calls him "TT".
- Rusty: Brett's pet dog who tags along.
- Dark Rider: A recurring villain driving a monster truck who tries to discover the secret of Brett's transformation. [3, 6, 8]
AI responses may include mistakes.
[1] https://www.instagram.com/reel/DF0ODr2ph24/?hl=en
[2] https://www.facebook.com/groups/565765698352808/posts/1393778105551559/
[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turbo_Teen
[4] https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0211171/plotsummary/
[5] https://www.instagram.com/reel/DIe4XUEys_m/?hl=en
[6] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VlUnnrG3CFQ
[7] https://www.youtube.com/shorts/FS13pbzfFvo
[8] https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0211171/