Named after the highly disputed violent dark web spaces known as red rooms in online urban legends, RED ROOMS was inspired by the fans who inexplicably flock to serial killers throughout modern history and further motivated by the current state of cybersecurity and tech crimes. The film not only succeeds as one of the most chilling entries to the serial killer genre from the last decade —despite never revealing any of the explicit images that the film’s characters are forced to witness— with Plante creating a fictional killer that is a devastating product of our time, but excels as a cinematic portrayal of how modern civilization engages with technology while holding a mirror up to the loneliness and isolation that exists within the dark side of present-day society. 

RED ROOMS is Montreal filmmaker Pascal Plante’s third narrative feature, following the 2020 Cannes Film Festival selection NADIA, BUTTERFLY and 2018 Berlinale selection FAKE TATTOOS. The film features captivating performances from its three leads; Quebec actors Juliette Gariépy (Home Turf) and Laurie Babin (THE LITTLE GIRL WHO WAS TOO FOND OF MATCHES) alongside Maxwell McCabe-Lokos, the Canadian actor and filmmaker best known as the writer/director of Oscilloscope’s 2022 comedy STANLEYVILLE. 
​
RED ROOMS is produced by Dominique Dussault for Nemesis Films. Cinematographer Vincent Biron (THE TWENTIETH CENTURY) artfully lensed the feature, Laura Nhem (THE TWENTIETH CENTURY) was production designer, and Jonah Malak edited. 

Official Selection: Karlovy Vary International Film Festival, Fantasia International Film Festival (Opening Night), Calgary International Film Festival, Vancouver International Film Festival, Busan International Film Festival, Hamptons International Film Festival, BFI London Film Festival, Sitges International Fantastic Film Festival of Catalonia, Brooklyn Horror Film Festival, Philadelphia Film Festival, Thessaloniki International Film Festival, Fantasy Filmfest, Miami Film Festival, Atlanta Film Festival, Monster Fest. 

Awards: Fantasia International Film Festival: Cheval Noir, Outstanding Performance (Juliette Gariépy); Cheval Noir, Best Screenplay; Cheval Noir, Best Film; Sandro Forte Award, Best Motion Picture Score (Dominique Plante). Monster Fest: Best International Movie. Brooklyn Horror Film Festival: Festival Prize, Best Feature; Best Actress (Juliette Gariépy). Le Gala Quebec Cinema: Prix Iris, Revelation of the Year (Juliette Gariépy); Prix Iris, Best Supporting Actress (Laurie Babin).
​

​Los Angeles, CA--Freestyle Digital Media is excited to walk down the aisle with Weekly World News for the day and date release of the zomcom romantic comedy The Zombie Wedding. The Zombie Wedding debuts on Cable and Digital VOD September 13, 2024, including Apple TV, Amazon, Google Play, Fandango At Home, Comcast, Dish, and DirecTV. The Zombie Wedding will also be available in select markets theatrically.


The Zombie Wedding is based on the eponymous interactive play and is the first title to launch the Weekly World News IP-driven studio slate of movie projects. Head down the aisle with a large ensemble cast that includes Cheri Oteri ("Saturday Night Live"), Seth Gilliam ("The Walking Dead"), Heather Matarazzo (Scream, The Princess Diaries), Kevin Chamberlin ("Jessie"), Siobhan Fallon Hogan (Men in Black), Vincent Pastore ("The Sopranos"), Ajay Naidu (Office Space), Micky Dolenz of The Monkees, and more!

Written by Greg D’Alessandro, The Zombie Wedding was directed by Micah Khan and produced by D’Alessandro, Joe Corcoran, Sue Wolf, Maria Capp and Jeff Mazzola. Executive Producers include Robert Dragotta, John Harris, John Fahy, J. Todd Harris, Jijo Reed, and Grace Lovret.
​

Even today, Hollywood maintains a dubious love/hate relationship with superheroes.
 
Now, don’t get me wrong.  Yes, the suits behind these production companies are only too happy to wring every dime of profit possible out of ticket sales when it comes to DC, Marvel, and other graphic-based intellectual properties; but rest assured that if you do any amount of serious reading into behind-the-scenes shenanigans – i.e. suggestions made by studio executives to changes they feel would better serve a story – you might think otherwise.  Batman without his signature cape and cowl?  Yep.  That was suggested.  When is Superman going back to visit Krypton in a future movie?  Yep.  That was intended as well.  Can we have Spider-Man swinging about less?  Believe it or not, that input was supplied as advice, too.  If anything, this and other examples just go to show that not every effort gets spearheaded by the right creatives, and perhaps these forays into the worlds of spandex are really best left in the hands of those who capably demonstrate they understand the respective mythologies.  Isn’t that what fans would ultimately want?
 
Going back even further into our cultural past can be even riskier.  While champions like Superman, Batman, Wonder Woman, and The Flash have been around for decades and continued to grow their fan bases, others like Hugo Hercules, Chandu The Magician, Dick Tracy, or The Shadow have languished in obscurity or been given limited expression in the marketplace with sub-par representations that felt more like fan fiction than authentic interpretations.  While a theatrical outing here and there might’ve been met with modest clamor, these pictures never truly demonstrated the potential behind these heroes of old; and these masked (or not) do-gooders found themselves shelved yet again even though fandoms rarely balk at the chance to watch good triumph over evil again.
 
Such was the case with 1996’s The Phantom.  While I’ll admit that I’m not as up on The Ghost Who Walks’ mythology as I am those of Batman, Superman, or The Shadow (my three personal favorites, if you’re wondering), I had enough passing familiarity with the property to know that, theatrically, it had fabulous potential.  Directed by Simon Wincer (1980’s Harlequin and 1985’s D.A.R.Y.L.), Phantom’s script was penned by Jeffrey Boam (1983’s The Dead Zone and 1989’s Indiana Jones And The Last Crusade); and the film cast Billy Zane in the lead role alongside such supporting players as Kristy Swanson, Treat Williams, Catharine Zeta-Jones, and James Remar.  Tonally, the feature works largely as a nostalgic throwback to the days when screen adventures were really for audiences of all ages; but, sadly, this one-off affair wasn’t enough to guarantee the costumed crimefighter a return visit to the multiplexes.
​

(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:
“The Phantom, descendent of a line of African superheroes, travels to New York City to thwart a wealthy criminal genius from obtaining three magic skulls which would give him the secret to ultimate power.”
 
Folks, I can specifically recall being somewhat totally geeked out with anticipation back in the days when I learned that The Phantom was coming to the silver screen.
 
You see, I grew up a huge fan of pulp properties; and having just been so horrifically disappointed with how badly director Russell Mulcahy and actor Alec Baldwin (of all people) had theatrically butchered The Shadow in 1994, I hoped that The Phantom might serve as a return to form for heroes that had largely vanished from the zeitgeist.  Having also amicably sat through such marginal attempts to reinvigorate cinemas to the dynamism of the 1930’s with Dick Tracy (1990) and The Rocketeer (1991), I really, really, really wanted this attempt to produce something special.  The theatrical trailer for the forthcoming release had the right look; all that was needed now was a story big enough to catapult this purple-clad adventurer with his blazing .45’s and his skull-bearing belt into our collective consciousness, and I would be one happy camper.
 
Sigh.
 
As I often counsel readers, it ain’t always easy being a fan of our respective pursuits because so many folks who work in or around the entertainment industry just don’t see things the way we do.  When there are volumes upon volumes of source material that can effectively be drawn upon to craft a winning adventure, these movers and shakers would instead pick-and-choose the elements they desire to spin their own interpretation even if it bears little resemblance to the original tales.  In other words, putting any Tom, Dick, or Harry under the cowl and giving him a souped-up street racer is good enough to convince most moviegoers that he’s Batman … but actor Billy Zane’s turn as The Phantom was little more than a celebrity lookalike for writer Lee Falk’s original Kit Walker – aka ‘The Man Who Cannot Die.’
​
Having done a bit of research into the making of the film, I’m well aware that screenwriter Boam had originally intended his draft to be a superhero spoof and not one more notch in cultural utility belt.  1989’s Batman had pierced the veil (as they say), and truly lit a fire amongst studio executives to the gold mine that was action/adventure material; so the resulting trend brought about a respectable number of knock-offs and/or subsidiaries.  Why not jump into that bedlam right away and go in a vastly more comic direction?  Whether or not Boam drew inspiration from that Tim Burton project or not I’ve never established, but it’s clear to see some baseline similarities between the two efforts.  However, somewhere between the script’s finish and a change in the director’s seat (Joe Dante left and Simon Wincer came in) it’s very clear that this version of The Phantom wasn’t so much comical as it was intellectually vapid.
 
In fact, The Phantom opens with little more than a typeset shot that reads “For those who came in late …”
​

Now, I hate to harp on first shots because – let’s face it – they’re little more than narrative hooks, but such a banal set-up kinda/sorta implies that there’s more to that story but we’re choosing to begin it right here.  Who came in late?  Why were they not on time?  Did what happened before this not matter?  Are you openly mocking the audience?  To what end?  The list of questions only grows longer the more one thinks about why any intelligent person would begin a superhero movie with this opening; and I’m not sure the picture ever really recovers.  Granted, what follows is a very, very, very quick hint at an origin story, and yet there’s still no escaping the loose parody implied from that first placard.
 
Rather quickly, the film turns into what starts to look like a copy of 1980’s vastly superior Raiders Of The Lost Ark – not surprisingly, perhaps, given Boam’s involvement with 1989’s Last Crusade – with screen veteran James Remar filling the shoes as a kinda/sorta villainous Indy knock-off known only as Quill.  Apparently, he’s been traveling the world raiding tombs all in pursuit of archaeological relics being sought by his employer Xander Drax (Treat Williams) and Sengh Brotherhood, a rather nebulous group of sea pirates tied to the original Phantom’s origin story.  (For those who came in late, The Phantom appears to be immortal because successive incarnations are little more than the adult offspring of the man who served under the mask previously.)  Eventually, the tombs appear, and they’re looted predictably, all of which sets this Phantom hot on the heels of Quill and his associates.
 
What gives this opening caper the narrative depth to propel an entire motion picture is that among the stolen treasure Quill finds one of the Skulls of Touganda.  History says that – like Raiders’ Ark Of The Covenant – an army that can find and join the three (or is it four) skulls together will be invincible; and this through-line pushes both The Phantom and his Bruce-Wayne-like counterpart – Kit Walker – to pursue Quill and company back to New York City after their business is concluded in the Bengalla Jungle.  Naturally, there’s a fair amount of derring-do that takes place in the Big Apple, including the introduction of Drax and the loose realization that he’s little more than your routine capitalist with a thirst for global domination though we’re never quite given any legitimate reason why.  (FYI: Hollywood hates capitalists, don’t you know?)
 
Sadly, the resulting story never really rises above the level of feeling as if it was intended as anything greater than being an excuse to string its separate action sequences into one convoluted whole.  Characters have no depth – Williams does what he can to supply the big villain with the charisma to chew scenery with dialogue no more memorable than the words on that opening placard, and Swanson tries to muster the same level of pluckiness that made her at least watchable in Buffy The Vampire Slayer (1992).  The sequences – while theatrically pretty – spool out in pretty much the way everyone expects.  Even the effects – reasonably quaint by early 1990’s standards – have the look of being throwbacks to what the studios were doing a decade or two earlier, so where’s all the excitement for a new superhero when this has been done before?  Why, it’s almost like this was all meant to be parody … only it’s (allegedly) not.
 
As for The Phantom’s blazing .45’s?
 
Well, under Wincer’s adequate direction, The Phantom is the kind of motion picture where the hero only uses his weapons to shoot the gun out of his opponents’ hands.
​

At best, what emerges from this outing is little more than a bloated kid’s movie, something that feels like the kind of thing studios were attempting before 1989’s Batman brought a measure of Gothic-feel and borderline psychological menace to the party.  When setting the escapade in the 1930’s was – so far as I’m concerned – the kind of sheer genius that could’ve propelled the property to the same kind of aesthetics developed and exploited so (damn) well in the Indiana Jones franchise, this Phantom dumbs down its tenor in pursuit of small moments instead of big ones.  While its occasional campiness works, Wincer and Boam relied too heavily on delivering cartoonish simplicity to the whole affair.  Even the luminous Zeta-Jones is wasted – as is the reliable Cary-Hiroyuki Tagawa as ‘The Great Kabai Sengh’ – is such a cardboard construction.
 
The Phantom (1996) was produced by Paramount Pictures, The Ladd Company, Boam Productions, Robert Evans Company, and Village Roadshow Pictures.  DVD distribution (for this particular release) has been coordinated by the fine folks at Paramount Pictures.  As for the technical specifications?  While I’m no trained video expert, I thought that the provided sights and sounds were very good from start-to-finish: this would look to be sourced from the original release, and I do not believe that there has been any rescanning or updates to the source material.  Lastly, if you’re looking for special features?  Well, you have only an obligatory theatrical trailer to look forward to.
 
Alas … only Mildly Recommended.
 
Yes, I’ll admit decades later to being so hugely disappointed by The Phantom (1996) that I really haven’t given the property so much as a second thought.  While its setting had promise and its cast had talent, the resulting film is one of those opportunities that exists to be studied as how could so many positive attributes wind up being misused in the process?  Perhaps a team that truly loved the character could've done better than begin with a script meant to lampoon him, but what do I know?  Like The Shadow and The Rocketeer and Dick Tracy, I’m still holding out hope for big screen iterations that show audiences what’s possible when the magic happens … and, yet, at this late date in my life, I’ve come to peace with the fact that this may be the best those properties ever get.
 
In the interests of fairness, I’m pleased to disclose that the fine folks at Warner Archive provided me with a complimentary DVD of The Phantom (1996) 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

​

I have a debate with friends over the efficacy of teaser trailers.

Now, for those of you who don't know the difference, let me explain just a bit.  A full coming attractions trailer is a stand-alone work of art that tries as best as is humanly possible to encapsulate the breadth of the forthcoming story along with separate highlights made by the assembled cast.  When done right, it gives the audience a welcome sense of what the completed project has to functionally offer without granting them so much information as to spoil any of the surprises that are learned along the way.  In constrast, the teaser trailer is -- generally speaking -- very short, and it is meant to be more of an appetizer than it is a full taste of what cinematic delight awaits the watchers.  They often tend to be quizzical -- never really doing anything more than to whet one's taste buds -- and might even through a sheen of doubt over what's truly waiting in store.

When it comes to teasers, I hate them.  Compatriots of mine insist that they're works of sheer genius, tantalizing a potential audience with whatever they might deliver, be that a joke, a jest, or an enigma.  My point is that I've seen far more of them produced that risk foisting a cloud of ambiguity over a property, and why gamble with winning some ticket buyers with something that might eventually be a misdirection?  Give me something of substance, or give me nothing.  That's just how I'm wired, kiddos.

In any event, I received a press release this morning regarding a little something-something called Rumours; and the teaser was -- ahem -- curious enough that I thought it worth sharing with the readership.  Check it out -- it's under a minute in run-time -- and you'll see what I mean.  You learn nada ... but that, too, might be what its makers really wanted after all.

You know what to do.
​

Good morning, gentle readers!

As I've previously mentioned, sometimes one of the biggest joys I get in my blogging life is passing along information from one person to the next.  While it's perfectly grand toiling away in Web obscurity by producing my own content, article, and reviews, I really do appreciate more these days hearing from the readership and other like-minded folks out there in Cyberspace.  It gives me an added dimension to my sense of purpose, helping each of you keep up with the goings on in Science Fiction, Fantasy, Horror, and more ... and I'm tickled pink when those out there find my humble outlet -- SciFiHistory.Net -- a worthwhile purveyor of information to our every growing masses-at-large.  You -- the recipient -- are sought, and it isn't great to feel wanted?

So in that spirit I'm doing the dutiful copy-and-paste this morning from a press release I've received from the kind folks at The New York Science Fiction Film Festival.  It's a rather expansive bit of data -- so cull it over at your leisure -- but there just might be something of interest in here.  All of the provided deets are below.

Similarly, if you or someone you love needs to get your word out via the Information Superhighway, my email links are generally provided at the end of every original article.  Never hesitate to drop me a line, even if it's just a casual inquiry.  Trust me when I say that those of us who do this kinda/sorta thing on a regular basis can never hear too much from the readership.  After all, some of you know what's up'n'coming well before I do, and it's a thrill to be in on the action!
​

Block 4: Feature Presentation
Time: 8:30 - 10:00pm EST

Red Earth (2022)
Director: Georg Adrian Koszulinski
66 minutes, USA
Red Earth imagines a world in the late Anthropocene, where large parts of Earth have become inhospitable to life. The story follows three generations of Martians, from the first colonists to the first expedition to return to an Earth decimated by interplanetary war.

Q&A will follow.


​
Screenplays, Graphic Novels, and Virtual Reality

Coke and A Smoke (Best Short Screenplay)
Writer: Charli Brown
United States

Lotus (Best Short Screenplay)
Writer: Kyle Hatley
United States

I/O (Input-Output) (Best Short Screenplay)
Writer: Molly J Vernon
United States
Final Timefall (Best Sci-Fi Screenplay)
Writer: Ivanhoe Flighter
Serbia

Robot Asteroid (Best Sci-Fi Screenplay)
Writer: Paul May
Canada

The Age of Revenge (Best Sci-Fi Screenplay)
Writer: Jason H. White
United States

The Age of Revenge (Best Sci-Fi Screenplay)
Writer: Jason H. White
United States
Light Years (Best Sci-Fi Screenplay)
Writer: Jaroslaw Gogolin
United Kingdom

Pocketful of Mondays (Best Sci-Fi Screenplay)
Writer: Lindsey Morrison Grant
United States
Alpha Chase (Best Sci-Fi Screenplay)
Writer: Chuck Gordon
United States

Inversion (Best World Building Sci-Fi Prototyping Screenplay)
Writer: Suzy Stein, Fernando Perez
United States

Song of the Shadows (Best Supernatural/Horror Feature)
Writer: Les Zig
Australia

Sight Specific (Best Supernatural Screenplay)
Writer: Peter Hardy
United States

If November Ends (Best Supernatural Screenplay)
Writer: Michael Yurinko
United States

Restoration (Best Supernatural Screenplay)
Writer: Don Stroud, Winter Mead
United States

Donavan Emery, The Android & Himself (Best Supernatural Screenplay)
Writer: Jesse Dorian
United States
The Panharmonion Chronicles (Best Graphic Novel or Manga)
Writer: Henry Chebaane
United Kingdom

MASTIFF #1 (Best Graphic Novel or Manga)
Writer: Big Tim Stiles
Australia

A Little Favor (Best Graphic Novel or Manga)
Writer: Russ Meyer
United States

Halloween Girl Book One: Promises to Keep (Best Graphic Novel or Manga)
Writer: Richard T. Wilson
United States

Asteroid Quest (Best Virtual Reality/Immersive Experience)
Director: Bertrand Jack Daniel Loyer
France


​
Festival Lineup and Passes:
The festival will be held on Saturday, September 14, 2024 at Stuart City Cinema and Cafe, located at 79 West St, Brooklyn, NY 11222. All shorts will be streamed online on Sunday, September 15. Event lineup subject to change. For more information on the full schedule and passes, visit https://www.newyorksci-fifest.com.

About The New York Science Fiction Film Festival:
Founded in 2017, The New York Science Fiction Film Festival celebrates freedom of expression and the unique approaches of independent filmmakers as a merit to the science fiction, horror, supernatural, and fantasy genres. By honoring a groundbreaking past and looking ahead to an unprecedented future, the festival is committed to encompassing the brilliance of film.

Event Contact:
Jonathan Carsten, PR Manager
[email protected]

Connect with Us:
Website: https://www.newyorksci-fifest.com
Twitter: https://www.twitter.com/nyscififilmfest
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/newyorkscififimfestival

I've often said that -- generally speaking -- I don't find a great deal of Horror films truly frightening.

This isn't because I'm above being scared in any way.  I'm just like all of you.  What frightens us is, largely, similar across cultural boundaries.  All I'm trying to say is that -- when it comes to cinematic experiences -- I'm just not moved strongly one way or the other unless there's something psychological about it.  I get truly frightened when a story breaks the fourth wall and makes me consider something truly stark; and -- sigh -- just not a great deal of theatrical outings do that.

Now, that isn't always the case because some stories do better than others in ratching up that psychological component I do fine a requirement from the get-go.  In that respect, I'm not seeing a lot of information about the forthcoming chilled Believer; but I do have some press materials received via email that I'm all-too-happy to share with the readership.  That, and I'll be posting the trailer below.

As coming attractions go, I don't get a great deal beyond the initial set-up here.  It looks as if the perpetrator might have the means to exercise some psychic abilities beyond those of mortal men, going so far as to perhaps even manipulate from beyond the grave with little more than a mere suggestion.  That's decidedly spooky, so I'll definitely be checking out the reviews for this one once it gets closer to its street date.

As for now?  Well, you know what to do.
​

Science Fiction wouldn’t be Science Fiction without its tropes.  As a genre, it’s been around for some say over two centuries; and – as a consequence – it’s probably built up an ample supply of things we’ve seen before.
 
This isn’t to suggest in any way that incorporating something that’s either been done before or risks bordering on being downright cliché is necessarily a bad thing.  The dirty little secret to being a fan of any genre is that we enter each and every project with a level of expectation we want to be met minimally: if a director, screenwriter, and assembled cast and crew go out of their way to give up something a bit too fresh or a bit too different, then we’re equally capable of tuning out, losing interest, and going elsewhere.  Tropes are called tropes because they’re familiar – perhaps more so than we like – but that doesn’t make them cheap or inexcusable in and of themselves.  A great story can still tread in amicable territory just so long as it doesn’t cheapen the whole trip.
 
For example, aliens coming down to Earth intent upon occupying our bodies while going about whatever nefarious agenda they seek to achieve has been glorified on screens big and small, but perhaps it’s never been any more glorious than it was aboard 1956’s Invasion Of The Body Snatchers.  Don Siegel directed the adaptation of the Jack Finney novel – simply titled “The Body Snatchers” and published in 1954 – and the effort gave big roles to Kevin McCarthy, Dana Wynter, Larry Gates, King Donovan, and Carolyn Jones.  The original source material – along with this inaugural exploration – was so good that Hollywood has gone back to it for remakes not once but twice: 1978’s Invasion Of The Body Snatchers cast Donald Sutherland as its lead and it shifted the focus from the original small town setting to the big city while 1993’s Body Snatchers took a step back with choosing to establish its stomping ground as the great American military base.  There are some who suggest that the 1978 version is the highpoint in realizing this particular story for audiences; while that might be true, I still prefer the original because it blazed the trail first in such a way that the project was eventually inducted into the U.S.’s National Film Registry because of its lasting cultural, historical, and aesthetic impact.
 
Still, when something works, I’ve always found it refreshing to know that – as a consumer of products – there are alternatives; and one such trope that’s fresh on my mind as of late has been the whole ‘body snatching’ phenomenon that, yes, has made the rounds in various ways across Science Fiction, Fantasy, and Horror.  So if body snatching is your thing, then here are a few other suggestions that might be worth your time and attention.

​Of course, I realize that 1953’s Invaders From Mars predates the original Body Snatchers by a few years; and I suspect that there may be readers who show up suggesting that perhaps this article should be structured in such a way as to highlight the 1956 movie is more like a copy or iteration of it.  Indeed, both flicks share a heady dose of paranoia that fuels a good portion of the narrative; and I suppose there’s nothing incorrect about suggesting that the latter may very well have been influenced by the former.  However, Invaders ends – depending upon which version you’ve seen – with the strong indication that what audiences just saw was little more than a bad dream; and I prefer the greater sense of dread that pervades so much of Body Snatchers.
 
In any event, here’s the plot summary for the film as provided by IMDB.com:
​
“One night, young David McLean sees a spaceship crash into a nearby sandpit. His father goes to investigate, but comes back changed. Where once he was cheerful and affectionate, he's now sullen and snarlingly rude. Others fall into the sandpit and begin acting like him: cold, ill-tempered and conspiratorial. David knows that aliens are taking over the bodies of humans, but he'll soon discover there have been far more of these terrible thefts than he could have imagined. The young doom-monger finds some serious help in a lady doctor and a brilliant astronomer. Soon they meet the aliens: green creatures with insect-like eyes. These beings prove to be slaves to their leader: a large, silent head with ceaselessly shifting eyes and two tentacles on either side, each of which branches off into three smaller tentacles. It's up to the redoubtable earth trio to stop its evil plans.”

In all honesty, 1975’s The Stepford Wives is a film that I haven’t seen in years.  And – for the record – it isn’t thematically the same as Body Snatchers in that the folks responsible for the snatch-and-replace of the lovely Stepford women – the wives of important and powerful men – are most definitely not some aliens seeking to penetrate our culture.  Still, the film operates largely on the same psychological level as it plays fast and loose on the fears of these ladies who find themselves disposable only so that they can be substituted with replicas who made for better ‘arm candy’ in the society in which they live.
 
Here's the plot summary as provided by our friends at IMDB.com: 
​
“The Stepford Wives is about a small suburb where the women happily go about their housework - cleaning, doing laundry, and cooking gourmet meals - to please their husbands. Unfortunately, Bobbie and Joanna discover that the village's wives have been replaced with robots, and Joanna's husband wants in on the action.” 
​

Truly one of the great B-Movies to emerge from the late 1980’s, The Hidden is a great cat-and-mouse chase caper that has two body-swapping aliens – one a criminal, one a peacemaker – arriving on our planet and leaving a trail of mayhem in their pursuit.  Part Science Fiction and part ‘buddy cop’ film, it’s the kind of story that subsists largely on the chemistry of its various players, including two fabulous grounding performances by Kyle MacLachlan (as the alien peacemaker) and Michael Nouri (as the Earth cop who joins him on his mission).  While it may lack the scope that Body Snatchers’ impending invasion threatens, it makes up for it in action set pieces and a final act of redemption that suggests maybe the aliens are more human than some of us.
 
Here's the plot summary as provided by IMDB.com:
 
“An alien parasite with the ability to possess human bodies goes on a violent crime spree in LA, committing dozens of murders and robberies. In pursuit of the extraterrestrial criminal is an FBI agent, and the local officer investigating the rash of violence. As they close in on the vicious intruder, the city faces a brutal threat like no other it has ever encountered.”
​

From what I recall of 1998’s The Faculty (and remember thinking at the time), the script from David Wechter, Bruce Kimmel, and Kevin Williamson essentially takes the Body Snatchers central idea – that of a force of invading aliens – and 90210’s it up, generating a teenage-set parable for the young and young-at-heart.  While there’s absolutely nothing wrong with that, I’ll still concede that I just didn’t find any of its performances all that memorable: they were good and occasionally interesting, but the terror and mistrust of the 1956 film never quite survives as anything greater than teen angst to some degree in the re-imagination.  It has some good moments, most of which I think are owed to director Robert Rodriguez’s excellent execution of the big scenes.
 
Here's the plot summary as provided by IMDB.com:
 
“A horror tale set in a High School where the students suspect the teaching staff of being aliens, who are intent on making the students their victims.”
​

Recently, I was provided streaming access to view 2023’s The Becomers, and that was the experience that served as the catalyst behind my penning this article.  While it’s a low budget independent effort, the central premise aligns almost entirely with Body Snatchers, except for the fact that writer/director Zach Clark cleverly upends the paranoia of that original by inevitably saddling the aliens with it, making for some great comic bits in the second half.  Mind you: the picture still has some problems, never quite investing much scope in its narrative, but there’s no denying the relationship between it and the vision novelist Finney spawned so many decades before.
 
Here's the plot summary as provided by IMDB.com:
 
“A body-snatching alien comes to Earth, reconnects with their partner, and tries to find their way in modern America.”
​

Of course, it should go without saying that there are countless other films and television shows out there that tap this same vein in Science Fiction; and my humble suggestions are in no way, shape, or form intended to be considered independent of those.  The point is that such tropes when they're used as narrative structures do not go out of style; and their re-invention -- or reconsideration -- from time to time suggest that not only might they be considered good DNA for storytelling but also audiences embrace them because they're the equivalent of visual comfort food.  We've been here before.  We've seen this somewhere else.  It goes down easy ... so long as you don't push it too far from the norm.

​Still, there's value in them there hills, and if body snatching makes you feel good then rest assured you're in good company if you try these side dishes.

-- EZ
​

The beauty of a good Science Fiction idea is that – in so many ways – it’s timeless.
 
Now, for the record, I may not be using that word – timelessness – exactly the way you’re expecting because I’m not trying to suggest in any way that the resulting films themselves necessarily transcend their specific moment in history.  While that may be inarguably true about some projects, there are others that may not mean as much to audiences today as they did for those of the era in which they were manufactured or intended by storytellers.  Indeed, some tales are timeless simply because of their use of technology or the subject matter they breach, and others are ageless because of the social, artistic, or cultural impact they had on folks of the day.  Those flicks are owed whatever reverence they earn, and I give them their due, respectively.
 
Essentially, what I’m talking about here is the boundless potential that a central construct of a good SciFi film – no matter when it’s used – is that it can be applied to any era in human history while, perhaps, swinging open doors to new and exciting reflections of those times.  Some laugh off such genre tropes as inconsequential to any tale’s ‘moral of the story,’ and yet the more insightful narrators out there can still squeeze a bit of freshness from something others might immediately dismiss as cliché.  Granted, it doesn’t happen all of the time – there’s a reason why stereotypes become stereotypes, after all – but keen eyes should be forever watchful for those instances wherein the introduction of something done before might still have relevance in the modern period.  Though these times are a’changin’, that doesn’t mean we throw things out that still function, and that should be true of storytelling as well.
 
So … at first blush, you may think you’ve seen 2023’s The Becomers before … and I suppose you’d be correct.  Body snatching isn’t new – yes, it’s been done before, many times, and will likely be done again – but Zach Clark’s SciFi/Comedy incorporates a sly but sometimes not-so-subtle commentary on who we’ve become as a people, especially over the last few years with the rise of COVID, the loss of identity, and the portability of culture.  In the scope of an earnest 86 minutes, he demonstrates that the timelessness of a good narrative device should and might resonate long after the films that put such tricks to good use.
 
(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 body-snatching alien comes to Earth, reconnects with their partner, and tries to find their way in modern America.”
 
For those unaware, a little bit of education is in order to establish the groundwork for my thoughts on The Becomers (2023), an occasionally whimsical re-interpretation of Science Fiction’s ongoing fascination with the idea of alien body-snatching.
 
The first and arguably most successful use of it was in 1956’s groundbreaking Invasion Of The Body Snatchers.  Directed by Don Siegel and based on 1954’s “The Body Snatchers” novel, the film told the story of a somewhat isolated group of survivors who uncover an alien invasion slowly seeping across their small town and growing menacingly toward national proportions.  It’s been said that, thematically, many believed the story was intended as an artistic response to the growing threat of McCarthyism – the political persecution of folks foisting what was seen as a decidedly un-American agenda on the United States.  The dirty little secret, however, is that no single person involved in the film’s production either in front of the camera or behind it (allegedly not even the book’s author) deliberately inserted that political theme into the yarn.  Still, we see in art what we wish, and that resulting indictment of paranoia remains to this day, so much so that it’s often difficult to separate the fact from fiction.
 
In 1978, director Philip Kaufman gave Invasion what many have deemed an even greater re-imaging when he cast Donald Sutherland, Leonard Nimoy, and Jeff Goldblum in his big city adaptation of basically the same core story.  Special effects gave the film an added dimension, evoking a level of modest body horror that the original only hinted at; and, certainly, this incarnation could be said leaned somewhat heavily on the politics of the day.  The great American debacles of the Vietnam War and Watergate had audiences wondering just how far big government’s reach had grown to affect the quality of life; and its script debatably suggested that a heavy dose of skepticism should be applied to any calls to action issued by once credible institutions … if not even your next-door neighbor.
 
1993 saw yet one more embodiment of the Jack Finney novel take shape when celebrated director Abel Ferrera picked up the trope and ran with it in his simply titled Body Snatchers for Warner Bros.  Though I’ve read that the film had a relatively short theatrical run, it still managed to achieve some critical praise from those who like this sort of thing.  Thematically, however, the assessment is that the script varies a bit too widely from the source material, instead engaging in arguments on feminism, conformity, and collectivism, even going so far as to question the usefulness of militarism in the modern world.  Personally, I think it’s also interesting to note that Snatchers hit the consumer marketplace at or around the same time as Fox TV’s juggernaut The X-Files launched into the zeitgeist; while one is still being talked about in some circles even to this day, the flick is, largely, forgotten.
 
The point to all of this cinema history is not to discount the use of body-snatching as a trope in Science Fiction; rather, it’s to underscore that each repetition found a means to re-apply it for its respective time … and that brings me to (finally, I know) discussing my thoughts of The Becomers.
​

In stark contrast to the versions that came before it, Clark’s fable dispenses with exploring the plight and perspective of we (pitiful) humans struggling against whatever troubles inhabit our days and instead weaves his tapestry from that of the occupiers: two aliens (played by different actors and actresses as the plot unspools) seek refuge on Earth after their civilization collapses (of sorts), and they spend the bulk of their time trying against the odds to find their way back to one another.  So unlike those earlier attempts to explore body-snatching and/or body-swapping, this one is centered on being a love story; and it achieves only a measure of charm along the way.  True, our two heroes (but are they?) do eventually achieve their sought-after, co-habitational bliss (but do they?), and yet the big finish really only underscores there’s much more to ‘happy ever after’ than we get to witness.  Then, the real invasion begins, but that’s an epic for another day.
 
By switching the central focus from that of the endangered to those prosecuting their penetration of our species, Clark does achieve something that’s vastly more magical than his fish-out-of-water parable: he effectively removes the central paranoia of the victims and transplants it on the shoulders of the aggressors.  With each exposure to a potential new human host or even casual human contact, the aliens are forced to reexamine what they think about our species and how they might slip into lockstep without being noticed for their infiltration.  They – like us in those previous body-snatching films – just to survive, to retain their individuality, but (dammitall) if our pesky tribe doesn’t make it (dammitall) difficult.  Before they know it, these extraterrestrials find themselves wrapped up in the toils and trouble of adapting to the life requirements during COVID lockdowns, adjusting to humdrum suburban life, and (inadvertently) joining a cult and kidnapping a governor.
 
This is, of course, satire; and, when it works, it’s really damn funny.
 
The problem therein is that it doesn’t work for considerable stretches of the tale’s connective tissues.  Searching takes time, obviously, and those moments just aren’t as convincing as the ones when our galactic soulmates are finally conjoined.  Because Clark chose to spin his yarn via an unseen narrator, I found it never as easy as it should’ve been to connect the bits and pieces of who these aliens were, precisely why they came to Earth, and why it seemed so patently easy for them to find one another despite never travelling all that far.  A bit more set-up could’ve alleviated this confusion.  In fact, it really wasn’t until The Becomers’ midpoint that the whole bite of its satirical potential became patently obvious (the cult’s attempt to videotape their message is the highpoint of the madness here); while that elevates the second half considerably, a bit more upfront could’ve done wonders for the vibe.
 
Furthermore, The Becomers makes great use of some practical make-up effects in briefly exploring the – ahem – sexuality of its body-snatchers.  The truth of their technique is that their species cannot duplicate you or I precisely; apparently their powers of genetic reassembly don’t include to the human sex organs.  (What can I say?  Some of us don’t understand how they work either.)  Puritanical viewers might take issue with – ahem – the alien ‘heavy petting’ as it gets rendered on film, but there’s still a tastefulness to romance as depicted.  They’re hot.  They’re heavy.  They’re exploring as we all do.  Yes, what transpires might qualify as body horror to some, but rather than it exploring a loss of identity it’s really only meant to draw comparisons to how these E.T.s’ necking might have curious similarities to our own.  Consider it … equally gooey.
 
As for the talent?  Keith Kelly does a great job.  Mike Lopez needed a bit more grounding in places.  And Molly Plunk?  I’m smitten with your awkward appeal.
​

The Becomers (2023) was produced by Slasher Films.  According to the press materials provided to me by Dark Star Pictures, the film is presently played via exclusive theatrical engagements but will be available VOD in late September, 2024.  As for the technical specifications?  While I’m no trained video expert, I thought that the provided sights-and-sounds were pretty exceptional from start-to-finish: the effects budget was understandably modest – the picture never quite overcomes the texture of being an independent production, and that’s not intended as an insult – but they work fine as intended.  Lastly, if you’re looking for special features?  As I was provided only streaming access to the flick, there were no special features under consideration.
 
Recommended.
 
Look, folks: I’ll never apologize for (A) being a Science Fiction/Fantasy junkie or (B) being an unabashed fan of storytelling that tries to do something different … and, on those fronts, The Becomers (2023) is uneven, delightful, and quirky almost all at the same time.  I enjoyed it, even if it could’ve used some tightening here and there.  When it really finds itself and the potential of writer/director Clark’s vision, it excels with surprising laughs.  The cast seemed to have no trouble buying into the economical nature of presenting something bigger-than-life with the modesty that goes with indie-style filmmaking.  This is the kind of feature that should find a respectable cult following – not that there’s anything wrong with that – and it, too, might transcend time and space in the same way body-snatching seems to get reincarnated generationally.  Only time will tell …
 
In the interests of fairness, I’m pleased to disclose that the fine folks at Dark Star Pictures provided me with complimentary streaming access to The Becomers (2023) 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
​

Folks, there are some days when it ain't easy being a lifelong Star Wars fan.

Now, I'm not trying to court any controversy, people.  All I'm trying to do respectfully is demonstrate that fandom has its respective highs and lows.  Rarely does something start out 'on top of the heap' and stay up there forever.  We've all seen what Russell T. Davies has done to Doctor Who.  We've all struggled with the utter narrative collapse of the Marvel Cinematic Universe.  And -- dare I mention it? -- our beloved Star Wars has found itself on hard times indeed as The Mandalorian Season 3 crapped the bed, Ahsoka turned out to be a visual Ambien, and now The Acolyte destroyed the Force in favor of the Thread where a cartel of Communist Space Witches gave immaculate birth to twin boring actresses.  (Well, at least one actress, that is ...)

No, no, and no: I'm not making a statement on the quality or lack thereof of Kathleen Kennedy's latest disaster.  I think it's pretty clear that the show's ratings speak for themselves.  I didn't watch it.  I've no desire to see it.  Ever.  And the sudden disappearance of its merchandise from the Disney online portal suggests maybe even the Mouse House would like that diversion to be forgotten.  Only time will tell.

(Again: if you liked The Acolyte, then that's great.  I'm glad you did.  Keep fanning those flames, my friends, and maybe you'll get a bit more of the same.  "You deserve what you accept," after all, and it is what it is.)

​But ...

I'm happier sticking with what's tried-and-true, and the classic characters have never looked more adorable than they do at present with Doorables line of miniature figures.  Yes, I've posted about them before in the space, and the reason I'm bringing them up again is that -- over the weekend -- I noticed at the local WalMart that they've finally put out a few more additions, these tied specifically to some themed sets.  I passed at picking them up because some WalMart clerk had tagged them incorrectly (at a ridiculously exorbitant price, I might add), but now that the merchant has corrected them I'll likely pick one, two, or maybe even all of them up.  These really are incredibly cute, and they make wonderful decor for those of us who still appreciate classic Star Wars and are willing to tolerate a face or two from the Disney iterations.

Pictures are below.
​

Of course, not that anybody's asking, but wouldn't it be cool to get a set based entirely on each of the movies in the original two trilogies?  (Sorry, JJ and Kathleen, not a fan of the Sequel Trilogy ...)  What better way to commemorate these motion pictures with a box on each film; and I think the hardest of the hardcore fans would be willing to pony up respectable pocket change for individual character additions they way they did in the days of their youth ... like, maybe, a Bounty Hunter set?  Woof.  That would be killer.

In any event, like and share the post as you like, kids.  These things are wonderful -- the wifey concurs, even -- so get 'em while you can.

As always, thanks for reading ... thanks for sharing ... thanks for being a fan ... and live long and prosper!

-- EZ
​

Editor's note:
Folks, as I've mentioned before, I've been writing about film for far longer than many of you have even been alive!  Back in the day, I was an Amazon.com Top 1,000 Reviewer -- the vast majority of my pieces were reviews on films I'd seen privately or via distributors -- but when that commercial juggernaut changed their rules all of my content was dumped into the aether.  As time permits, I recover an old gem, dust it off a bit, and post it in this space ... where I have greater control.  That's the case with my thoughts on 2013's Banshee Chapter.  Enjoy!
​

You know, long gone are the days when a Horror film just wanted to be a good Horror film.
 
These days – what with the widespread availability of digital equipment or even the prevalence of your top-of-the-line smartphone – any Tom, Dick, or Harry can pursue the dream of becoming an auteur.  Still, why is it that every horror film coming down the pike these days has to be a concept film of some variety?  Can’t we just simply scare viewers silly any longer?  Why must a premise be deeper than that?  Why is every storyteller trying to incorporate this narrative trick or that visual technique whenever possible and so little real effort being expended on just freaking the audience out with terror?  What can’t a film just spin a good yarn and have that be enough?  Are we overthinking the construct that much, or do the makers just no longer care?
 
That’s the question I found myself asking at the end of Banshee Chapter.
 
Hint: I did like the film.
 
The negative: it tried too hard to be something that it probably could never be when all it truly needed to be was right there in front of its face.  Instead of going for broke with various tale-spinning devices, writer/director Blair Erickson really should’ve clocked some serious mileage in keeping this thing a lean, mean, scream-producing machine.
 
(NOTE: The following review will contain minor spoilers necessary solely for the discussion of plot and/or characters.  If you’re the type of reader who prefers a review entirely spoiler-free, then I’d encourage you to skip down to the last three paragraphs for my final assessment.  If, however, you’re accepting of a few modest hints at ‘things to come,’ then read on …)
 
From the packaging:
“On the trail of a missing friend (Michael McMillian) who had been experimenting with mind-altering drugs, a young journalist (Katia Winter) – aided by a rogue counter-culture writer (Ted Levine) – finds herself drawn into the dangerous world of top-secret government chemical research and the mystery of a disturbing radio signal of unknown origin.”
 
I’ll try to be as precise as I can in detailing what I didn’t like about Banshee Chapter, but, as I said above, let me get this out of the way once more first and foremost: I liked it.  Even better said, I enjoyed it quite a bit.  Writer/director Blair Erickson tapped a lot of veins here – conspiracy, found footage, documentary, ghost stories, etc. – and they all get mixed up in a pleasant enough concoction that I honestly figure it hard for anyone to not have some measure of fun with the experience.  At 90 minutes, it's that perfect movie length long enough to convey the story in here … but it’s still really, really bloated with its narrative trickery … and not in a good way.
​

For example, I thought Chapter was going to fall into the category of the ‘found footage film’ right out of the gate.  Indeed, those first scenes are constructed from archival footage surrounding the US government’s disclosure of a real-life scandal – the MK Ultra experiments – and then it segues nicely into Anne Roland’s narration.  As those moments tick on and the reporter’s investigation deepens, Chapter starts to take on an almost documentary feel, gradually leaving behind the ‘found’ premise and instead going-for-broke in what starts to look like a real-time expose.  (Some might suggest that two halves make a whole, sure, but there’s no denying they’re a bit uneven.)  However, as those moments give way and suddenly breach an even broader story, I started to see that the resulting ordeal settled into a groove where Erickson decided the best way to spin the yarn was to combine these elements along with little more than a good old-fashioned ghost story.
 
Now … this is where I started to tire of the techniques.  On their own, they each have strengths and weaknesses, and – depending upon the story – they work just fine.  When they’re combined in such a way as happens here, the end result isn’t smooth.  It’s more like I felt myself being pulled in a direction that should’ve been accomplished more naturally, more organically.  For me, the artifice of forcing a story into being cheapens the thrill ride, even if I appreciate the thrills along the way.
 
There’s nothing wrong with a little misdirection. 
 
In fact, many very good pictures (not just horror ones, mind you) make ample use of established plot devices to push you in one direction while concealing the big reveal for maximum effectiveness later.  The problem here is that because of the elaborate set-up – because we, as an audience, are treated to Roland’s near-exhaustive construction (we’re led to believe that she’s recounting these events much after-the-fact) – we feel the rug pulled out from under us when the last scene – that big reveal – makes the set-up improbable if not downright impossible.  Emilio Estevez ruined a respectable shot as a film director early in his career with a similar convention: he built his entire film up with him as the narrator, detailing for the audience a life of crime.  Yet, once the story unfolds, we find out that he was already killed in the film’s closing moments.  Uh … so who was that telling us the story all along?  His ghost?  His spirit from the beyond looking down from Heaven?  Trickery of this sort must be used with greater restraint; otherwise, the fabric of an already fragile universe comes apart at the seams.
 
Banshee Chapter isn’t a failure.  Rather, it’s pretty pleasant, and Katia Winter is awesome to look at for 90 minutes.  I just expected more of this to make sense in the end, and it didn’t.
 
Banshee Chapter (2013) is produced by Sunchaser Entertainment, Before the Door Pictures, and Favorit Film.  DVD distribution is being handled by XLRator Media.  As for the technical specifications?  While I’m no trained video expert … yeah, the film looks and sounds fairly solid, though I’ll admit in advance that I had to really crank the volume up on this one (mixed too low?) in order to hear everything, and, even then, some of the dialogue sounded a bit muddled (some I suspect was deliberate but others not so much).  As for the special features?  Well, the packaging promises an in-depth look at the making of the film, but the few shorts here clocked in at about three minutes a piece, and they really offered up no great substance at all.  I found them disappointing, only because I would’ve liked to know more.  I always do.
 
Recommended.
 
Banshee Chapter (2013) is probably everything you expect it to be.  First, it’s a Horror film.  Second, it’s still a Horror film.  And, lastly, it’ll always likely be nothing more than just a Horror film.  It’s a fairly clever picking-and-choosing of what works best in the genre, and it’s liberally spread it all around in such a way as to, basically, delight (and scare!) the audience.  It’s a carnival thrill ride.  It’s meant to be enjoyed in the moment, remembered while you’re putting it away, and (most likely) forgotten tomorrow.  There’s absolutely nothing wrong with that.  If you expect it to mean more?  Well, apart from your curious visuals, you’re probably barking up the wrong tree.  (To the film’s credit, it did earn a bit of extra love from a screening on the film festival circuit, so there’s that.  And all of it is apparently derived from a story by H.P. Lovecraft, so that’s another significant plus.)
 
In the interests of fairness, I’m pleased to disclose that the fine folks at XLRator Media provided me with a DVD copy of Banshee Chapter by request for the expressed purposes of completing this review.  Their contribution to me in no way, shape, or form influenced my opinion of it.

-- EZ
​