I've often said what I find immeasurably beautiful about Science Fiction and Fantasy is that its a genre that can be form-fitted to damn near any creative need.

With a bit of spit and polish, SciFi can encompass comic ideas, dramatic ideas, horrific ideas ... practically anything a storyteller might need.  It has no limits -- visually, aesthetically, thematically -- and consequently it can achieve great things on budgets big and small because what propels it is the ideas.  (Well, that and great talent, of course.)

And distant frontiers have often been painted in palettes resembling our own past.  These space-aged pioneers will no doubt encounter many of the same struggles our great-great-grandfathers and great-great-grandmothers did when they first crossed the plains, built a ranch, or plowed the land.  Many SciFi films have benefitted from such comparison, and it looks like we've got one more that we can add to the list: 2021's Settlers.  Here's the plot summary for the motion picture as provided by our friends at IMDB.com:

"Mankind's earliest settlers on the Martian frontier do what they must to survive the cosmic elements and each other."

I don't know about you folks, but this is one I missed when it apparently made the round in theaters.  It looks like it launched its U.S. theatrical run in July of 2021 -- at the height of the dreaded COVID -- so perhaps it came and went pretty quickly.  In any event, I'd received confirmation that it's heading to home video in February compliments of my friends in the distribution business, so I wanted to put up their announcement as a public service.  I'll be doing the usual copy and paste below.

It definitely looks like a return to the days of the Old West in the aptly-titled Settlers.  As is always the case, it looks like we humans are bringing our emotional baggage with us when we venture out into the stars.

God help us all.

As always, thanks for reading ... and live long and prosper!

-- EZ

SETTLERS 

Available on DVD & Blu-ray on February 15, 2022 
​

​How utterly ironic that on the day I was all set to interview actor and producer Osric Chau about his latest project Superhost – a Horror film loosely exploring the dangers of our modern technology – that my iPhone telephone recording APP would utterly fail!  (Curse you, modern technology!)  Fortunately, it wasn’t a total loss as the two of us were eventually able to connect, though your faithful correspondent was forced to conduct the interview old-school style … with pen and paper!
 
Chau is certainly no stranger to the world of genre entertainment.  Fans likely recognize him most from his time as the prophet ‘Kevin Tran’ aboard The CW’s long-running and popular Supernatural, a role that saw the character suffering a grim fate at the hands of the angel Gadreel.  Though it’s always sad to see a fan-favorite player exit a show, Chau has nothing but fond memories and praise for his time aboard the Horror serial.
 
“I’m nothing but grateful for the time I spent on Supernatural,” he says.  “I’m a Vancouver native – born and raised here – and Supernatural brought me back home so that I could stay instead of traveling around for work.  It was a great opportunity.  I love that show and its fans.”
 
Still, his time exploring things that go bump in the night isn’t his only experience with Science Fiction and Fantasy.  A quick perusal of his IMDB.com profile proves his flexibility as a talent as he’s secured screen time in such projects as Roland Emmerich’s 2012 (2009), Halo 4: Forward Unto Dawn, The 100, Dirk Gently’s Holistic Detective Agency, Demon X, DC’s Legends Of Tomorrow, Nancy Drew, and The Flash.  And – as a creative person – Chau’s begun expanding his net worth by branching out with screenwriting, producing, directing, and more.
 
“I wrote and directed my first short film recently,” he confirms, “so I’m looking at opportunities to do more of that in the future.  That, and I’ve opened a couple of restaurants!”
 
Indeed, expanding his creative portfolio is front-and-center with the young entrepreneur as 2021’s Superhost appears on IMDB.com to be his first foray into producing a full-length feature film.  The film premiered at Miami’s Popcorn Frights Film Festival in 2021 before release for streaming in the U.S. via the Internet.  As of today’s date, RottenTomatoes.com has the flick with an 87% Tomatometer rating (with critics) while dipping a bit to 57% with audiences.  IMDB.com scores the film with a 5.7 on its 10.0 scale.  (For the record: my review is embargoed until January 31st, but I’m excited to write about it already so watch our MainPage for coverage.)
​

“Superhost was a fun project that was perfect to produce during the COVID pandemic,” Chau explains.  “I got involved with it very early on as Brandon Christensen (screenwriter and director) and I were rooming together at the time, and he had this great idea for a Horror film.  I was able to talk about it with him and Kurtis David Harder (producer), and I even gave some writing suggestions and feedback.  But it was Brandon who pulled it all together, and I’m glad it all worked out the way it did.”
 
For those unaware of the story, Superhost explores the tale of two social media influencers – Teddy (played by Chau) and Claire (Sara Canning).  In their bid to recover from their web show’s sagging ratings, Teddy finally secures what he believes will be the dream destination for their airBnB vlog: this remote villa has finally become available, and he secures it for their stay, also secretly planning on using the opportunity to propose to the love of his life.  As fate would have it, their host – Rebecca (Gracie Gillam) – has decidedly darker intentions behind inviting them to stay, and it just might prove to be their ultimate undoing.
 
When asked about the heavy weight social media influencers have on the modern world, Chau grows a bit reflective.
 
“I am not a social media personality,” he confesses.  “There was a time when I did engage more, but I reached a point where I didn’t want that to dictate my life.  As an artist, I’m always trying to find my ‘authentic self,’ and I just found that difficult when trying to balance time on social media.  I don’t really gravitate toward sharing my life the way others do.  I commend those who do it.  There are many who do it and are great at it.  It’s just not a skill set I possess.”
 
Superhost’s script definitely revolves around its central characters being tied closely to the age of Twitter, YouTube, and TikTok.  Teddy and Claire’s relationship experiences some highs and (bloody) lows in the 90-minute feature as the story explores how both vloggers have invested their separate and shared identities in hit-and-click programming to the point of risking some financial collapse.  Though some might find Christensen’s particular take a bit cynical, others will more likely see it as a cautionary tale about the dangers of taking unwarranted risks.
 
“Horror is a great genre to tell this story,” Chau expands as we talked about the enduring quality of films engineered to scare us silly.  “Horror doesn’t rely on known commodities the way that all other genres do.  That’s what makes it unique.  And Superhost is a great ‘what if’ story.  There’s the added benefit that all of this could be real.  Is it found footage, or did all of this really happen?  So there’s always an audience for Horror.  It doesn’t have to be expensive, and it can be made on almost any budget.  People will pay money to see that.  That’s what makes Horror different than drama or comedy.”
 
Superhost (2021) is scheduled for home video retail on February 1st.  The film is up for pre-order on Amazon.com and other retailers.  It was produced by Superchill, and it is being distributed as a Shudder Original.  Bluray.com reports that the Bluray will include some behind-the-scenes shorts, bloopers, and a few other surprises.

-- EZ
​

Yes, yes, and yes: we fans love to get up on our soapboxes from time-to-time; and with the morning I've had I think I'll take a therapeutic jaunt myself and climb up on way.  Bear with me.

I have a standard response when I'm asked about upgrading my DVD collections.  I always tell folks that I'm holding out for the inevitable 10K versions.

Yes, most folks don't get it, and that's OK.  I don't always seek first to be understood (in contrast to what the teachings of Stephen Covey taught me ... or didn't) because sometimes it's just more important to risk making a point.  But the straight skinny here is that studios -- especially Paramount, especially as it applies to Star Trek -- continue to roll out new editions of their older properties seemingly with no other desire (truly) than to make a buck.

First, we were offered Classic Trek on VHS.  (Ask your parents, kids.)  Then, it became laserdisc.  Then, it become DVD.  Then, it became HD-DVD which inevitably went away with the advent of Blu-ray.  Now, they're shucking 4K restorations ... and in lieu of asking when it'll ever end (it won't) I just tell people -- here it comes -- "I'm holding out for the inevitable 10K versions."

I'm all for enjoying a higher quality viewing experience, and I'd imagine I'm not alone on that point.  Many of us invest a reasonable amount of capital into having a great home entertainment system for that very reason: we want the best we can have stopping short of seeing something on the silver screen.  But at what point have we really strayed into 'this is just getting silly' territory?

Having review a small handful of 4K restorations for my day job here on SciFiHistory.Net, I can say in total honesty that I've really only experienced one upgrade that truly made a difference: I won't name the film, but I will say that earlier prints were incredibly dark in place, so much so that it was occasionally hard to make out what was truly going on without context.  Films from 40 years ago, however, were shot on film; and I've read that there are going to be some inherent difficulties in restoring them via 4K without bringing along a bit of grain here and there.  But is there really that much demand for restoring something 40+ years old?

Purists will certainly suggest that it's all about experiencing art, but I've always thumbed my nose at that because I've heard directors and producers suggest that, on an occasion or two, these restored prints really looked like a completely different film to them.  Is that experiencing the art, or is it merely trying to give the art another outlet now that it's -- well -- 40 years old?  Are studios doing little more than just trying to drum up more consumers?

And may I ask: are viewers truly seeing anything fresh in these restorations that wasn't there before?  I understand that there might be a modicum of greater detail -- all well and good -- but the story remains the same.  Nothing all that new is being added to the experience except some visual bells and whistles, so at what point do we culturally just have to accept that enough is enough?  I'm all for stopping at whatever version allows me to insert myself digitally into the film, but that's never gonna happen!

At some point, these double and triple and quadruple dips really need to stop ... or maybe studios need to start offering digital codes for future releases: buy our 2K restoration now, and you get a digital code for the eventual 4K restoration!

All of this comes about largely because I've read a bit about Star Trek: The Motion Picture (Director's Cut) being prepped for release.  It was in article on ComicBook.com, and interested parties can check it out right here.

As always, thanks for reading ... and live long and prosper!

-- EZ

I've made it pretty clear that I'm no fan of what most folks have christened NuTrek, but for those who may've only recently discovered the pages of SciFiHistory.Net let me offer a bit of clarity.

I don't hate anything.  Simply put, there are just some programs that never do anything for me.  Do I watch them?  Well, yes, from time-to-time I might decide to visit them in my ripe old age.  I did that for Babylon 5, a show I just never got the bug for during its original run in TV syndication: I visited the entire series run (not the telefilms or Crusade) on home video.  Did my opinion change?  Not really.  I thought it was interesting.  I thought it had a fabulous cast.  But for whatever reason it just never struck a chord with me.  Each of us is different, and sometimes that's all it boils down to critically or commercially: if it doesn't 'touch' me, I just tune it out.

NuTrek -- Star Trek: Discovery, Star Trek: Picard, and anything else that's rolled out behind Paramount's pay wall (which I'm not fond of) -- is an animal all its own.  I do find it vastly different from the Treks of old (not in a bad way) that I've tried to explain as follows: while classic Trek was about "ideas," NuTrek seems to be about "ideology."  While ideas don't tend to divide people, ideologies do; thus, I just don't see the shows as crafted or produced with the same motivation behind these stories and characters, so likewise I've tuned it out.

Now, as I said above, I don't hate it.  I don't hate anything.  I don't wish it ill.  I hope it can be around for as long as the original series and maybe even longer (if that's somehow possible).  It certainly speaks to its audience, and there's absolutely nothing wrong with that.  I just don't consider myself part of its audience.  So be it.  We part company as friends, and I've even engaged some of its talent online when given the opportunity (and they respond).

I did purchase Star Trek: Picard on DVD and watched it with the wifey.  Erm ... without going into any great lengths, I was disappointed with it for a lot of small reasons.  Sure, it's great to see Patrick Stewart back, but I didn't see this modern version of Capt. Picard as being the same as Picard of old.  Some of that relates to the way the writers crafted this particular story; I don't think any of us relish the premise of our heroes getting old and/or infirm, and -- given that was the reality of this particular show -- I thought there were ways that could've been handled responsibly and respectfully ... but that wasn't the case.

Again, that's just my two cents.  I never ask for anyone to agree, nor do I expect to agree with all of you.  My thoughts are my thoughts, and I'm as entitled to them as you are to yours.

In any event, there's a trailer for the second season of Star Trek: Picard that was released just today (I believe); and it definitely looks like it could be a bit more of a story aligned thematically with the days of The Next Generation.  While trailers can be deceptive, this one appears to kinda/sorta retread some of the ideas always tinkered with in the shows as well as the movies; but I'll leave it at that for those who want to check it out.  It'll be posted below, you know what to do, and that's all I have to say about that.

As always, thanks for reading ... and live long and prosper!

-- EZ
​

Argh.  Some days it just doesn't pay to have to wake up and read the news.  That's how I felt this morning.

Honestly, I'm not one of Meatloaf's biggest fans, but I did have an incredible amount of respect for the talented musician because of his long partnership with songwriter Jim Steinman.  On his own, Meatloaf's work was middleground stuff so far as I'm concerned (no, haters, I'm not a music critic in any estimation of the word), but when the two of these minds paired up they produced some incredibly magical stuff.  The Bat Out Of Hell albums are phenomenal listening experiences; and I'd argue whether or not you're into this style of rock there's some showmanship that deserves to be explored at least with a single listen.

Not all that long ago, I think Meatloaf appeared on one of those 'Songwriter' specials (VH1? MTV?), and the wifey and I watched it on video.  Much like the music he performed, Meatloaf knew how to tell a great story; and he recounted some fabulous tales regarding his career and compositions.  Fans of the man are also encouraged to check it out (I suspect it's probably available either for purchase or streaming somewheres), and I think you'll find some of what he shared especially bittersweet now that he's gone.

But music wasn't his only passion.  Though I'd argue Meatloaf was no accomplished actor, he's enjoyed a somewhat prolific career as a guest star to such programs as Monsters, Tales From The Crypt, The Outer Limits, and Ghost Wars (so far as genre-specific titles are concerned).  I think it's safe to suggest that singers know more than a thing or two about living larger-than-life, and he could bring some of the required sensibilities to acting as a side gig.

Alas, no one lasts forever, and he's shaken off his mortal coil as of yesterday.  Though it's sad to see him go, I find comfort in knowing that his powerful voice will sing on so that others may continue to find and appreciate what a gift he was while turning out hit-after-hit when the inspiration moved him.

Prayers to the man's friends and family in their time of need.

​-- EZ

Like many who've been on this journey with TV's The Walking Dead since it started I suppose it's safe to say that I have a love/hate relationship with the show.

Now, when I say hate, I don't really hate it, per se.  Honestly, I don't really hate anything, not even shows I don't watch or understand.  I attribute the hate to a measure of frustration I might have with subplots that have served to anchor the show down when they instead should've challenged it to achieve more from, arguably, one of the most talented casts to ever grace a primetime show.  Yes, the problem gets a bit shoddy from time-to-time; and the writers try to eke a bit too much emotion out of some elements of the narrative.  But, again, I don't hate it ... certainly not the way some who write about media online do these days.

I've loved most of the journey.  As I said, the cast has been mostly phenomenal; and I think it many ways the franchise -- unlike some others -- has actually been very good for fandom.  For example, Star Trek and its crew of ideologically-driven writers seem to be content on dividing fandom into its respective segments.  It seems Star Trek: Discovery and Star Trek: Picard would rather shun long-established fans in favor of propping up what they perceived as -- erm -- tomorrow's members of the Federation.  They see themselves as trailblazing authors welcoming in a new era of social justice, and I see them as just trying to beat a dead horse in a new way in order to prop up an enterprise that was never about dispiriting people but elevating all of mankind.

By comparison, The Walking Dead has stayed true to doing what it does best: put good people in dire circumstances and let 'em figure out how to survive.  Some of their humanity may've been lost in the process, but isn't that part and parcel about what we want our storytellers to do with characters?  Put them through their paces so that we can see what they look like on the other side?  When Trek has taken to preaching its weekly sermons, Dead is more about surviving than Trek ever was.

I don't mean to wax on, and I won't belabor the point any longer: all I really wanted to point out was that the trailer for the second third of episodes for Dead's swan season is here.  Be warned: it's a bit jumbled (for my tastes), not quite presenting a clear picture of what to expect when the show returns to the airwaves in late February on AMC but rather just an assortment of fast-moving sequences pitting character against character ... with very few walkers.  Call me old-fashioned, but I do prefer we keep our focus on the real enemy -- that being the undead.

In any event, I'll put it below so you can check it out if you're so inclined.  As always, thanks for reading ... and live long and prosper!

​-- EZ

Reviewing television programming is always a risky proposition.
 
Essentially, a critic is left to react sometimes to very few developments.  The nature of episodic storytelling is that some installments feel a bit more like filler between better hours.  Getting from Point A to Point B takes a catalyst, and the stuffing of lesser moments, secondary reveals, and narrative exposition can leave one with little to ruminate over … and such is the case with Chapter 4: The Gathering Storm.  In fact, the name alone implies that this might just be the calm before the storm, an assessment not all that far off the mark.
 
What Storm did have was a flashback exploring just how Fett and Fennec Shand found themselves in their unlikely partnership.
 
As had been previously seen on The Mandalorian, Shand herself was left seriously injured on the sands of Tatooine.  Indeed, it looked very much like the mercenary had shaken off her mortal coil, an ending somewhat surprising when she showed up episodes later in the same show.  The Book Of Boba Fett picked up with Fett’s discovery of her fallen body.  Discovering that she hadn’t expired, he took her to a ‘modification clinic’ where the somewhat Borgified tech mended her wounds – essentially rebuilding her destroyed abdomen with bionics.  Once she had awakened, Fett then solicited her cooperation in raiding Jabba’s palace to recover his signature spacecraft (no longer named Slave I thanks to our modern age’s political sensibilities), and a new partnership was born.
 
As far as plot points, there’s a bit more than happens.  Fett extracts a revenge on behalf of his slain Tusken Raiders, and the new partners go in pursuit of the bounty hunter’s lost armor.  But still most of Storm felt like a bit of this and a bit of that thrown together to help position the season’s central arc – Fett’s establishment of a ruling criminal dynasty on Tatooine – get from the aforementioned Point A to Point B.  The biggest scene in this regard comes at the end when they confront the heads of the modern crime families at a meal within Jabba’s Palace, wherein these leaders come face-to-face with the reality that Fett has acquired another Rancor … perhaps no greater indication that, as a ruler, this hunter means business.  It was a great reveal, handled with a bit of humor, and thankfully the episode felt like scribe Jon Favreau was trying to right the course (just a bit) away from last episode’s Power Rangers-like additions.  (FYI: they were entirely absent from this adventure.  Good choice.)
 
Because the chapter really was a series of chess moves meant to set-up where we’re likely heading, there isn’t much associated commentary.  As a character, Fett is further established as a character who’s through his crossroads, and now – like the Mandalorian – perhaps he’s seen just as a man trying to man his way across the galaxy.  The significant difference here Fett’s only one step further along in his journey with a deliberate destination whereas no one quite knows where Mando will end up next.  This bounty hunter turned leader has a vision for his future, one that involves management skills he’s only beginning to grasp, so the conflict continues to evolve.  By contrast, Shand looks more like a mover and shaker willing to truly get her hands dirty in their quest to establish their own law and order; though she’s not much with motivating others, she’s willing to use the business end of a blaster to see her respective objectives achieved.  Their clash of styles might be leading us somewhere dark, but we’ll have to wait and watch.
 
In perhaps the best sequence of the new series so far, the audience is treated to old school Fett: in a brilliant scene, the hunter flies his gunship down over the Tatooine landscape in pursuit of the speed bikers who executed his tribe of Sandpeople, and he razes the flock with blaster fire.  One-by-one, they’re shot down in the tracks; the obvious carnage isn’t shown – this is Disney, after all – but it’s hard to imagine any of these malcontents escaped with their lives fully intact … and, dare I say, that’s the Boba Fett most of us have been waiting to see from a show that even bears his name in the credits.  While I get that the character may need to grow and change a bit for a serial drama, it’s still nice to enjoy a side of red meat with a meal this delicious.
 
Happy hunting.

-- EZ

Someone had asked me just this morning if I'd seen the second trailer that recently dropped regarding HBO/Max's Raised By Wolves, and I had to admit that I had, meant to share it in this space, got sidetracked, and here we are.

I don't recall (at this point) if I've written a review regarding the show's first season -- though I know I've referenced it on a few occasions -- but it was one of the most pleasant surprises in the last year or so for me.  The show's promotional materials (for season 1) were not very impressive -- in all honesty -- so it was a jaunt I wasn't all that interested in taking.  I read a few reviews after it released, and even those weren't all that complimentary.  I don't remember what put those folks off about the show, but I seem to recall some taking issue with the story's ideology.  (Like so many, I'm disappointed when storytellers infuse political messages into their dramas.)  As the season wore on, it seemed as if more critics were enjoying it, so the wifey and I gave it a spin.  It was quite nice.

Yes, I'd confess that the story has a political undercurrent -- it would seem that we just can't help ourselves these days -- but I found it negligible.  Also, I didn't feel the Ridley Scott production really beat any drum (message) singularly: watchers could interpret some of the developments any way they liked, and perhaps I grew to appreciate that kinda/sorta open-ended political narrative more than themes that tell me what to think or caution me to think otherwise.  (Hello, Star Trek: Discovery!)  By the first season's end, I was more invested in the characters anyway, so the messages were easier to set aside.

There was a trailer release earlier, but now a second one fleshes out a bit more action for what's in store when the new episodes are available.  As this one was a pleasant surprise, I'll definitely be tuning in.

Trailer is below.  You folks know what to do. As always, thanks for reading ... and live long and prosper!

-- EZ
​

Huh.

With as much as I've read about programs and programming, you'd think I might've noticed that The Boys -- the popular Amazon Prime anti-superhero comedy -- forthcoming spin-off was going to be animated, but somehow that fact completely escaped me.  It seems that I do recall having read about the show being given a spin-off, but -- mmm -- how exactly is an animated spin-off going to bring the same kind of delivery?

Don't get me wrong: I'm all for expanding popular properties, especially when some time, care, effort, blood, sweat, and tears are being put to efficient use.  But The Boys is a live action show -- one built for a decidedly adult audience -- and this one looks to be a bit more juvenile.

And, sure, I get that Star Trek has undergone a recent growth in animation with both its Lower Decks and Star Trek: Prodigy entries, but Trek is -- thematically and tonally -- way different from the incessantly bloody and destructive tales at the core of The Boys' best diversions.  Again, not griping ... just trying to be honest ...

Whatever the case may be, I'll tune in for it, as I do kinda/sorta catch a Venture Bros. vibe in this latest video release.  Who knows?  Since that Cartoon Network highwater mark was disgracefully cancelled, maybe Diabolical will step in to fill the void.

Trailer is below.  You folks know what to do.

-- EZ
​

​Stories involving sleep – or perhaps, more importantly, what goes on in our heads while we’re asleep – have long fascinated audiences.
 
Dreaming is a universal experience.  Our dreams can be inspired, or they can scare the stuffing out of us.  Psychoanalysts have long insisted that dreams are a doorway to understanding what truly goes on in the deep recesses of our personalities, and many experts have written extrapolations over what certain symbols mean when evaluated by conscious minds.  I suppose the dark secret is that we’ll never truly know just where dreams come from, but they’ll always find a way to keep us up at night, the very antithesis of what a dream should be intended to do.
 
Filmmakers around the world have used the stuff of dreams to populate all kinds of interesting tales.  Douglas Trumball’s Brainstorm (1983) explored the dangers of bringing one’s own troubles along for the ride into another person’s subconscious.  Joseph Ruben’s Dreamscape (1984) spun a therapeutic twist on the idea of a specialist entering another’s dream for the sake of curing various phobias.  Christopher Nolan’s Inception (2010) played tricks with reality when it investigated the predicament of manipulating a subject’s frame-of-mind by inserting ideas into gray matter.  Still, an entire film series – Wes Craven’s Nightmare On Elm Street films – ratcheted up the sheer terror of having an evil villain inhabit the dreams of his victims solely for the sake of killing them in the vilest ways imaginable.
 
Make no mistake: Michael Venus’ Sleep (2020) is a horror film.  It touches on similar ideas from what’s come before in the landscape of dream pictures, but the storyteller also incorporates some heady ideas about how our past continues creeping into our present in much the same way the stuff of dreams affects our waking moments.  Though it’s occasionally unclear what all of this means to the characters he’s created, I found most of the flick refreshing enough that I could actively assign meaning where definition was a bit undercooked.
 
(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 product packaging:
“Tormented by recurring nightmares of a place where she has never been, Marlene cannot help but investigate when she discovers the place is real.  Once there, she suffers a breakdown and is admitted to a psychiatric ward.  Determined to discover what happened to her, Mona, her daughter, follows and finds herself in Stainbach, an idyllic village with a dark history.  What is it that so tormented her mother, and the people of Stainbach?  What is the source of the nightmares she suffers?  And who is the mysterious Trude that lives in the forest?”
 
I can’t say this from firsthand experience, but I’ve been told that schools these days don’t teach the real threat Nazi Socialism posed to all of mankind during World War II.  (I’ve got no reason to dispute that, either.)  I’ve even been told that some students today are told that the Nazis had some good ideas but executed them poorly (and I use that word “executed” lightly).  Back in my day when perhaps things were a bit more on track we were told about the horrors that Germany performed, and we were even enlightened about what danger a political party posed to the greater world-at-large.  Suffice it to say, the Nazis were some really bad dudes who’d stop at nothing to get what they wanted; and it’s this blinding fury that fuels only a portion of what’s explored in writer/director Michael Venus’ debut feature film, Sleep.  Though its characters are much removed from the 1930’s and 40’s, the overall theme here is about lingering influence; much in the same way our dreams impact both our sleeping and waking hours, there’s always a risk of past inspirations affecting subsequent generations.  This is why we’re told to learn our history; otherwise, we’re likely to repeat it.
​

In this world, Marlene (played by Sandra Huller), Mona (Gro Swantje Kohlhof), and Trude (Agata Buzek) represent a spiritual trinity joined in ways more than just dreams (I won’t spoil it): the mother, the daughter, and the unholy ghost.  Trude has used her otherworldly influence throughout all of Marlene’s life, but the woman’s eventual mental collapse forces the spirit to now redirect her vengeful desires onto Mona, who is necessarily drawn to the mountain town of Stainbach to investigate what happened with her mother.  It is here where these forces will converge at a time and a place wherein Otto Fahrmann (August Schmolzer) has risen to prominence in the community and is secretly attempting to bring back the Third Reich as a cultural norm.
 
There’s a bit more to the story (again, I won’t spoil it), and there’s an awful lot of symbolism the audience might choose to work through; but – at its core – Sleep juggles a handful of personal issues all the while staying mostly true to the classic revenge-from-beyond-the-grave format. Venus and Thomas Friedrich’s script creates a world within a world wherein characters are allowed to be a bit out-of-touch with reality mostly because supernatural influences have taken residence in their respective souls.  Mona has grown increasingly despondent, feeling that her mother’s psychological issues have seeped into her DNA.  Franzi (Martina Schone-Radunski) – one of Stainbach’s disaffected youth – discloses to Mona that even she has grown so obsessed with her dreams that she occasionally struggles in understanding when they’ve stopped.  Even Lore (Marion Kracht) – Otto’s wife – has fallen into a workday stupor wherein she goes about the routine of living, never quite grasping the greater circumstances at play were she to truly open her eyes.
 
Because evil never sleeps (and goodness takes effort), this collective slumber is the most dangerous place for all of these characters to intersect.  That’s where and when Sleep excels as a slow-burning chiller.  After all, no one’s truly aware of the danger they’re in until it’s too late.  In fact, sleep is exactly what Trude requires of the players in order for her to extract her nefarious rewards.  It was a sleeping nation that allowed Adolf Hitler to rise to power, and it’s the drowsy mountain folk of this resort city who might unbeknownst to them embrace that dark call once again.  Perhaps that is the warning to all who come to Stainbach: “Always be watchful.”
 
You can’t do that while you’re asleep.
 
Sleep (2020) is produced by Das Kleine Fernsehspiel (ZDF) and Junafilm.  DVD distribution (for this particular release) is being coordinated by Arrow Video.  As for the technical specifications?  The film looks and sounds extraordinary, and I might add that sound played a very role in constructing much of the true frights in here.  As for the special features?  Well, this is Arrow Video, after all, and they rarely disappoint!  The disc boasts an audio commentary, a visual essay, some intellectual discussion about dreams, deleted scenes, some making-of materials, various promotional materials, and a collector’s booklet with related essay.  It’s a fine, fine collection that should keep interested parties busy for quite some time.
 
Recommended.  Though I could argue that Sleep may’ve bitten off a bit more than it can chew (such can be the nature in an ambitious director’s first full-length feature), I’d be silly to deny that the film conjured up a beautiful yet nightmarish scenario wherein the past is clearly haunting everyone still alive.  Though some might scoff at the comparison, the feature also bears a strong resemblance to early adventures with Freddy Krueger in the popular Nightmare On Elm Street films: while Venus’ picture is decidedly more highbrow about it, the central trickery of a vengeful spirit who needs to inhabit those while asleep can’t be denied.  Still, not everything went down easily – I’m still trying to process some smaller moments and what they may’ve meant – but such vivid imagery promises what could be an impressive career for the new storyteller.
 
In the interests of fairness, I’m pleased to disclose that the fine folks at Arrow Video provided me with a complimentary Blu-ray of Sleep (2020) by request for the expressed purposes of completing this review; and their contribution to me in no way, shape, or form influenced my opinion of it.

​-- EZ