Good morning ... and Happy Hump Day, gentle readers!  How is the middle of your week shaping up?

I know, I know, I know.  Who cares about Hump Day, am I right?  Just wake me up when it's Friday, already!  Well, if I did that, folks, then you'd miss all of that creative goodness I keep trying to drop on you each and every fun-filled day, so that's just not in the cards.  Ship up, as they say, or shape out!  Besides, the middle of the week is the perfect day to get your bearings -- if you haven't already -- as the weekend is right around the corner.  It's all downhill from here, so I say you should just buckle up and enjoy what remains of the ride.  That's good advice for life, too, generally speaking.

​There's no a whole helluva lot to report from the SciFiHistory.Net News Desk this morning otherwise.  I'm just puttering away, and I spent a good portion of the morning trying to get all of the particulars for today's Citation Page in order.  In case you haven't noticed, there are a handful of formatting issues that have plagued me over the years.  For those of you who don't know this, I maintained my trivia on a different web site many years ago -- not a different server, mind you, but a website belonging to a different person -- and the user interface only allowed for certain kinds of graphics, shapes, bells, whistles, and whatnot.  It was something that a few of us over there were doing, but after a time it just reached the point wherein traffic was low, the site owner didn't quite show up often enough to keep spammers from infecting the place, and the riffraff started to make my work difficult.  That's when I decided to hang it all up and do my own space.  You know?  Paint my own house.  It's a great deal of work, but coming up on ten years in virtual existence there are still some of my graphics not quite up-to-snuff.  When time permits, I try to concentrate on altering everything so that I'm in consistent parameters.  It ain't easy -- and, yes, it takes a great deal of time -- but it's worth it, I think.

That's just a little bit of 'inside baseball.'  I appreciate you peeps allowing me to vent such information from time-to-time as I think it helps us all get on the same page.

So ... seriously ... take a good look at today's page.  I hope you can see the effort that goes into trying to treat each and every piece of information with the identical level of care it deserves.  Again: it ain't perfect, but I keep pushing in the right direction, and I do hope it shows.

Here's the link:

I am a stickler for things being done a certain way.  As you can guess, this has evolved a bit over the past ten years, so such 'catch-up' work can be very time consuming.  Once it's all said and done, I'll most likely be well in the grave ... and, yet, I'll still rest easy knowing it's as close to perfect as I always intended.

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

​-- EZ

Good morning and Happy Tuesday, gentle readers!  Here's hoping that your new week is off to a grand start!

Me?  Well, thanks for asking.  I'm doing better today.  On the mend -- had a flu bug or something over the weekend that stretched into yesterday -- it would seem, and I'm happily blogging the day away as per usual.  Not a whole lot on the docket for the remainder of the day -- have to get some house errands done and maybe a bit more laundry -- but that's really all I can think of right now.  It's a cloudy day outside -- a rarity in the other land down under, Arizona, that I call home -- so I'm actually enjoying the view right now.  We get so very little rain and/or storms down here that a bit of dreary skies is a welcome sight, I hate to admit.

​Yes, yes, and yes: those of you who asked, I did sound off -- albeit briefly -- this morning on the Jonathan Majors issue.  (You can find my thoughts right here.)  I think there are a few of you who like to taunt me with 'gotcha' style questions, hoping that I'll sound off on whatever subject-of-the-week interests you and say something a bit contradictory to my usual statement on social matters and/or popular events ... but the truth is I do try very hard not to concern myself with things like that, and I think you should to.  While I like thinking about it from a broader perspective -- maybe what it means culturally or financially -- I really don't care how the guy lives his life.  Each of us gets to make those choices; and -- if it should happen to boil over into the public square -- then each of us suffers the consequences, whatever that may be.

I will add to what I wrote over there that I do think the question of how it impacts Marvel is open for discussion.  Yes, it looks as if the Mouse House and Marvel Studios are going to have to alter the course a bit; and I'll always concede that those developments are worthy of discussion.  Still, because I've no way of knowing much less predicting how those alterations could possibly metastasize on screens big or small I tend to leave those matters to others.  I've no sources who could give me a scoop on what's next, so ... there.  It's fascinating ... but I'll see what happens next.  That's all I can truly do.

​On the news front, I did receive a few new(ish) releases yesterday via a distributor relationship, so I've a few forthcoming flicks to watch.  Nothing new and/or singularly impressive -- honestly, I prefer thinking and writing about older productions anyway as opposed to some of the newer overhyped stuff -- so I'll keep you posted in this space as I get around to it.  I also spent some time on Sunday -- several hours, in fact -- watching some older Gene Roddenberry yarns.  I screened Genesis II, Planet Earth, and The Questor Tapes -- all for the very first time -- and reviews will be forthcoming on the MainPage.  It is glorious to see what could've been, and I think you'll all be pleasantly surprised.

​In the meantime, what can I offer you?  Well, how about an eye-opening 65 different trivia citations on glorious display?
​

Seriously, there's a good deal up there to love today.  There are some great projects -- some big and small -- deserving of your attention and affection, and I'll encourage each of you to surf on over and check it out.

As always, THANK YOU for being a reader.  It gives me great joy to know that you're here and that you and I share these fascinations.  THANK YOU for sharing.  (Seriously, my hit count went through the roof yesterday.)  THANK YOU for being a fan.  And ... live long and prosper!

​-- EZ

One of the downsides to being a media pundit -- even a small one like me -- is that readers will occasionally reach out asking for one's particular thoughts on a particular subject ... especially those involving more than a bit of controversy.

Longtime readers of this space will tell you that I rarely -- and I do mean rarely -- comment on such things.  Unlike other sites, I'm not a click/bait figurehead, though I probably like to be shared as much as the next bloke.  I do tend to avoid subject matter that gets into political arenas, though I'm also very willing to admit at each and every opportunity that I lean a bit more to the Right Side of the aisle than I do the Left.  My philosophy about avoiding such matters is that they're essentially transient: they don't last.  They're hot button topics -- they're clickworthy for a few days to a few weeks -- and then they disappear into the ether.  I'd rather expend physical and mental energies talking about ideas and actors and films and TV shows that endure -- as well as expounding upon why I think they endure -- than get lost in the brouhaha of celebrity news.

Still, sometimes a word here and there is a worthy exercise, especially if I get asked.  If nothing else, when I'm asked, then I understand that it's of interest to the readership ... and that's the case today with the whole Jonathan Majors kerfuffle.

Now, I've no interest in reliving the guy's issues.  Let's agree to the Starting Point that he had some anger issues that with a certain lady, and those behaviors ultimately boiled over into the public arena.  This understandably led to some legal exercises on the part of said "victim" (yes, I'm using the quotes on victim because I'm not a student of this thing and the word has too many positive and negative connotations for me to go into at this time), and the end result of which was that, just yesterday, Majors was found guilty ... and we are where we are.

It wasn't long after the announced conviction that Marvel dropped the actor from his stewardship over the role of Kang in the whole Marvel Cinematic Universe.

Those are the facts -- or, at least, that's the summary of facts that are relevant so far as this writer is concerned -- and I've been asked my thoughts on the matter.

So ... here they are.

I rarely get involved in the lives of these celebrities.  I may sound off on them occasionally here and there, but -- as a general practice -- I really don't much give a damn what they do.  You see, the way I figure things is you have to sign up for a certain amount of public exposure when you agree to a life on the screen -- big or small -- so when and if your good or bad behaviors get out there in the general atmosphere then there's likely going to be some consequence.  That's just the reality of the world and the way crap works in Hollyweird -- you sign on the dotted line for everything that comes your way -- and that Grim Reaper commands stiff price in exchange for your soul.

But ... does this "derail" the whole Marvel entity?

Well ... of course not.

Last I checked, the whole Marvel business wasn't exactly in smooth waters to begin with.  The Marvels pretty much tanked, and there was little to no interest in the past few streaming affairs.  The web itself has made bank on the rumors of allegedly completed Marvel films going for endless reshoots.  And -- in case you missed it -- Marvel's owner is financially and intellectually bankrupt.  So this whole thang with Majors is, literally, chump change in the prospects for that studio's future.

I leave questions about "should he or shouldn't he" have lost his job to the studio's lawyers.  Really, folks: there's nothing for us in attempting to answer those queries.  Ultimately, what I think has no effect on the world-at-large -- there is no authentic Butterfly Effect as it relates to the machinations of a wild blogger ... but the comparisons I've read to the trials and tribulations of Ezra Miller have drawn my attention.

Look ... Miller's public behaviors were pretty bizarre.  I'm not sure how they match up to Majors, honestly.  (As I said, I just don't follow this stuff all that closely as I find it unimportant on so many levels.)  Toxicity -- whether we like it or not -- kinda/sorta falls under that whole "there's no such thing as bad advertising" heading, and perhaps the suits at Warner Bros. and DC Studios decided 'rolling with the punches' was a better strategy.  It isn't as if the news of Majors' trouble derailed his work within Marvel Studios; it's just that they decided all of it had a finish line, and that was crossed yesterday.

Others have fallen farther and faster than Majors.

​Hollywood is replete with scandal after scandal, and -- only on rare occasions, so far as I can see -- has something like this effectively ended a career.  As it's been remarked by those in the know, everyone was well aware of what Harvey Weinstein was doing for years, and it never got in the way of his co-conspirators celebrating his efforts at each and every awards show.  I don't think this'll be the last we'll ever see of Jonathan -- I hope this development gives him pause and, if needed, that he seeks out the assistance to make peace in whatever way he can -- but all of that starts with the admission that a problem exists.  That's why I don't give a damn about, say, Will Smith's predicament: he refuses to admit that there's a problem, so he can't be helped much less applauded for whatever meager public efforts he presents as 'evidence' that he's improving.

These things, sadly, happen.  Life is, unfortunately, sometimes ugly.  Solutions, inevitably, come from dark destinations ... so I'll simply wish Majors well on his continued journey.

​-- EZ

Good morning, gentle readers, and welcome to yet another Monday in the never-ending stream of Mondays stretching across our respective timelines!  The date is December 18th, and you know what that means: those of you who celebrate the high point of the Silly Season are only one week away from Christmas itself ... so you'd better buckle up and get things a'rollin' if you want the Man In Red to come climbing down your chimney next week!

Well, well, well ... what do I have for you this morning?

Ah, it's a quite morning, indeed, folks.  I had a bit of a flu bug (or something) over the weekend, and that kept me a bit out of sorts.  I know that there are a few illnesses going around, so I probably picked up something from somewhere or other.  Mostly, it was aches and fatigue, thankfully, so I did catch some extra Zzzz's to comfort and joy me.  That always helps.  I think I've reached that fateful age where almost every illness makes me a bit groggy, so sleep definitely does a body good.

Otherwise, that was the main attraction for me over the weekend.  Sorry that I don't have anything exciting to relay, but somtimes life is just life.

As for today?

Well, if you take a healthy gander at the MainPage, then you'll see that I've already highlighted a few of the bigger film birthdays -- Walt Disney's The Black Hole (1979) and Amblin's Batteries Not Included (1987) -- for posterity's sake.  I've seen them both -- mixed reviews so far as I'm concerned as well -- but to each his own.  I realize that both of these flicks have a respectable cult following in certain quarters of the Web, and I'll never sugggest anyone is wasting his or her time by investing in a viewing of either of them.  I just like my fare a bit meatier than these two provided, and there's also nothing wrong with that.

But there's a bit more on the page with people, films, and TV shows spreading out across the years.  As usual, I think that there's something in there for everyone, so I do encourage each of you to follow the link and discover the goodness that is genre triva.
​

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

​-- EZ

It goes without saying that not every theatrical feature that comes down the pike is intended for every demographic, and I think that the Steven Spielberg production of Batteries Not Included was definitely one for a younger set.

I have a vague recollection of seeing this one in theaters on its initial run, and -- yes, yes, and yes -- I do remember being a bit disappointed.  The story as crafted by Mick Garris, Brad Bird, director Matthew Robbins, Brent Maddock, and S.S. Wilson wasn't all that original except for its inclusion of these wacky little robot creatures.  There had been a never-ending stream of flicks exploring tenant dwellings and evil landlords, but this one put the spin on it involving these mechanical aliens ... so how's that for inserting something fresh into the mix?  Meh.  It just didn't work for me.

But ... dare I say?

Had I been about ten years younger, then this one might very well have tickled my fancy quite nicely.  These airborne robots were quite fetching, so much so that I have to wonder why there wasn't any major attempt at merchandising the heck out of these things?  Given the measure of success Star Wars had, one would think that Batteries would've been a natural.  Granted, the additional of blinking lights and sound chips might have made them a bit cost-prohibitive for the time, and yet I can't imagine the parents passing up the opportunity to gift little Dick or Jane something like a cute little robot under the Christmas tree for the holidays.  Seriously?  Were there actually no toys?  I don't recall any.

​Now, granted, this release was reasonably late in the year for merchandising -- who knew if it would actually be a hit with audiences, so I can understand some suits being understandably shy to go 'all-in,' as they say -- but I can't help but wonder if a small toy line might've helped give this one the robotic legs it needed to endure.  It's largely a forgotten feature these days -- well, if the Information Superhighway is an adequate barometer of such things -- and a quick search of the web suggests that it grossed upwards of $65M on a budget of $25M.  Perhaps those returns weren't exactly what was hoped, so maybe this one was better off in the 'sleeper hit' category that tends to reward Holiday releases with respectable returns but not much else.

In any event, Happpy Birthday to you, Batteries Not Included!  Here's hoping I looked as quaint and wholesome at 36 as you do today!

​-- EZ

In all honesty, the list of my problems with 1979's The Black Hole would be too numerous to mention in this space.  Someday, my promise to you is that I'll pen a full review / retrospective, and that'll be like a confession.  All of this isn't to say that I don't like the picture, but -- in truth -- I don't like the picture that much.

Now, I have read that like many pictures Black Hole kinda/sorta languished in development for a short time.  If I have my facts correct, it actually began as a space disaster movie -- something in the vein of Irwin Allen's popular disaster movies that were big box office for the day -- but several iterations of a shooting script couldn't quite get the central idea right ... and -- also as I understand it -- that whole 'black hole' idea wasn't even part of the first several attempts.  Somewhere in the mid-1970's, the writing was dusted off and the whole idea of the collapsed star was inserted; and yet no screenwriter could come up with anything that worked, at least so far as the financiers were concerned.  As many of you know, Star Wars arrived in 1977, and the George Lucas property quite literally lit a fire under every major studio: there was a frenzy to tap into Science Fiction and Fantasy, so the Mouse House pulled out the script yet again and fast-tracked it for production.

For what it's worth, I've also thought that Black Hole felt like a story that evolved from something else.  I never quite understood how -- twenty years earlier -- Earth had produced a ship the size of the Cygnus for space exploration only to -- twenty years later -- have something like the Palomino tasked with the same duties.  It just never quite gelled -- there should've been some greater backstory explaining these differences along with their respective missions -- but, inevitably these things happen when second-tier ideas get bumped up to prime real estate.  That and the fact that the project went into production without an ending -- what truly awaited the crew that were going to find themselves inside the Black Hole wasn't decided until the very last minute -- pretty much tells me that I was right all along to question how much of this was 'fixed' in post production ... and that's rarely a good thing.

​And another thing?

Tonally, the film just never quite works.  It was clear that certain storytelling ideas suggested that the Walt Disney Company was ready, willing, and able to push their cinematic fare into let's say is more adult territory.  There are some rather gruesome elements to Black Hole -- including a rather grisly death here and there -- that kinda/sorta defies the studio's usual focus on kiddie adventures.  But because this was still a Disney production, I think the producers felt it a prerequisite to include some simpler pieces -- i.e. the exceedingly kid-friendly robots along with a dumbing down of the science of the day that had both discovered and was interested in such ideas of black holes -- and, again, these two worlds never merged effectively.

Still, I don't like dissecting too much any intellectual property on its birthday, so I'll leave it at that for today.  Instead, I'll celebrate the fact that The Black Hole did come into being, and it brought with it one of the more talented casts of players for an occasionally thoughtful space yarn.  It's also a flick that has been tossed around now and then with suggestions for a reboot; and I, for one, would definitely be interested in seeing this curious oddity get its own thematic do-over.

​So ... Happy Birthday, The Black Hole!  Who ever knew you'd look so grand at 44 years young!

-- EZ

Well, well, well ... BOOOOOOOM!

Happy Friday, gentle readers, and welcome to The Daily Grindhouse!  (I really need to think of a new name for this daily announcements, if you ask me, but I'm honestly at a loss for inspiration on this front presently.  Don't worry: I'll keep focusing on coming up with something new ... something that would be a little more in keeping with All Things Genre instead of just giving a nod to both my 'daily grind' and the 'grindhouse' nature of entertainment ... but for now it'll have to do.)

So ... how've you been?

Me?  Oh, thanks for asking.  I spent a good portion of yesterday watching films in the daytime.  I had a few streaming links that had been provided to me, and I wanted to get a few of them out of the way.  I did post one review yesterday, but the other well?  Well, as it turns out, that one doesn't actually 'street' until the first week of January, 2024, so my distributor buddy asked me if I could hold off on publishing the review until a bit closer to time.  Normally, these folks will tell folks like me that the reviews are 'embargoed' until a certain date, but this one had no such restruction.  Here I was -- doing my duty -- and I was thinking I could share my thoughts with all of you, but -- alas -- you'll have to wait a few more weeks for that one.  Hopefully, all of you will find it worth the wait.

The other little side activity I've been doing is the wifey and I have been making our way through the second season of Star Trek: Strange New Worlds.  No, no, and no: we haven't subscribed to Paramount+ -- nor are we bloody likely to -- so we've had to wait to get our Trek 'fix' with these home video releases.  While Season 1 of the Trek incarnation was reasonably solid -- yes, it has some of the same politicization I rant so fondly against here and there, but it was respectably tempered -- we're both honestly struggling to get into Season 2.  There's a part of me that wonders if a good deal of these scripts were actually ideas thrown into the melting pot for Season 1: when they weren't selected as being 'good enough' for an inaugural season, they were simply pulled out of the hat for the second outing of episodes.  Alas, I think we're seven episodes in, and there's really only been one memorable adventure.  That doesn't bode well ... but it is what it is.

​Otherwise, I've done my duty and preserved a fabulous assortment of people, places, and things that you can celebrate in the interim.  December 15th is definitely a sight to behold, and here's the important linkage that you're all hungrily waiting for ...
​

Please feel free to take a gander, at your leisure, and maybe even squeeze in that visit while you're winding down in anticipation of the weekend.

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

​-- EZ

The sad truth to the world of Science Fiction, Fantasy, and Horror is that there are a great many talented movers and shakers who traffic in these properties, and yet we never quite know their faces.

This is because a good many of them do so under make-up.  That's not a complaint because how else could so many storytellers introduce so many great critters, creatures, and ghouls to make us fear the dark the way that we do.  Without these monsters -- buried under layers of grease and plastics -- whole universes couldn't come to life the way that they do, and I always try to get up a post when one passes away because it's the right thing to do.

That said, Camden Toy certainly left his indelible mark on a solid handful of intellectual properties.  A quick review of his resume on the reliable IMDB.com shows that he enjoyed parts -- some under disguise, some not -- in such visions as Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Angel, All Souls Day: Dia de los Muertos (2005), Immortally Yours (2009), Carnies (2010), Chromeskull: Laid To Rest 2 (2011), Bedeviled (2016), and a few significant others.

Alas, none of us lasts forever -- word just reached my desk this afternoon of the man's passing -- but his work will live on for those us who to rediscover as well as, hopefully, inspire new fans into the growing fold that is genre fandom.

Our condolescenes are expressed to the family, friends, and fans of Mr. Toy.

May he forever rest in peace.

​-- EZ

I don’t watch as many Horror imports as I used to.
 
The biggest reason for this fall-off of interest on my part is owed to the fact that, globally, many storytellers have really gone all-in with All Things Zombie; and that phenomenon – while often quite interesting – just has fallen into a creative rut, so far as I can see.  For all intents and purposes, there has always been only two types of undead walkers – the slow, lumbering, stumbling variety or the super-fast, crazed, rabid dog-like variants – so unless the central story truly pushes the envelope in a direction I’ve not seen, an entire library of entries feels repetitive.  Until such a time that there’s a renewed fascinations with spirits and ghosts, I’m inclined to just ride things out … only then a little something something like The Ghost Station (2022) comes along and challenges me to rethink my self-imposed time-out.
 
As I’ve come to understand, Station is a screen adaptation of a popular Korean webtoon: Oksu Station Ghost (aka The Ghost Of Oksu Station, depending upon the translation) was written and illustrated by Horang, and it explores the paranormal happenings involving some vengeful ghosts seeking their own form of vengeance from the other side while being tied to a Korean subway station.  As best as I can tell, the story originally came to life in 2009 (some outlets suggest it was later in 2012, but I’m going with what I’ve found until I can substantiate it further); and its popularity alone practically dictated that it would eventually find life on the silver screen.  After all, who doesn’t care for a good ghost story every now and then?
 
On the front end of my review, I’m perfectly comfortable saying that I enjoyed the stop at this Station, but a bit of extra reflection might be required to dissect what was a bit inferior.  These days, nothing is perfect, but kudos to all involved for trying something a bit outside the box for what audiences appear to desire most.
 
(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 public service worker at Oksu Station witnesses a shocking incident and recruits his friend to help uncover the truth behind the station’s mysterious happenings.”
​

For anyone who has watched a fair amount of Eastern and Western ghost stories, it’s pretty clear that there are some reasonably significant thematic differences.
 
While I’m not inclined to get into a plethora of examples categorizing these distinctions, I’m willing to mention a few.  American ghosts tend to get involved in shenanigans to the point wherein they can instill some serious bodily harm on the victims; 1982’s The Entity – starring the lovely Barbara Hershey – explored the grim details of Carla Moran, a woman repeatedly raped at the hands of a rather lecherous ethereal aggressor.  Still, the operative word here is ‘shenanigans;’ Western ghost are usually involved far more in spectral pranks – moving chairs, opening doors, knocking on windows, etc. – and these spirits are typically downplayed to the point wherein most folks are perfectly comfortable sleeping in a haunted house.  In fact, do a Google.com search, and you’ll find a good number of them as tourist destinations if not AirBNBs … for your otherworldly enjoyment.
 
By comparison, Eastern Horror – especially as depicted on film or television – doesn’t quite revel in the bloody excesses that we in the U.S. appreciate so much.  Perhaps it’s safe to suggest that such frights are intended to be more imaginative, pushing what truly goes bump in the night into the fertile brains of those witnesses such delights in lights and shadows.  I’ve read on many occasions that connoisseurs insist that Japanese and/or Korean releases rely more heavily on establishing an atmosphere of dread; this might require delivering stories that are a bit more involved personally with characters, their friends and family, and/or their descendants, pushing instead for a bit of subtlety in places wherein Westerners want the heart-pounding images punctuated with stylish visuals, ample special effects, and an inspired soundtrack.  Suffice it to say that what scares us may not exactly be what scares them, and that’s why American studios would prefer to remake a popular J-Horror project instead of giving it theatrical runs here in the states.
 
So … Station does have some ingredients that make it uniquely Eastern.  Its central story involves the dark fate of a forgotten orphanage – along with the children its caretakers were entrusted to serve – and the resulting curse that can only come to life, initially, with those closest to the covered-up events.  But just as watching a video featuring a murdered girl can pass along the curse to viewers seven days later (in 1998’s Ringu), Station dabbles in the same black witchcraft while also dishing out a bit of social commentary on the nature of press and/or state relations at the same time.
 
Flash reporter Kim Na-young (underplayed by a somewhat dowdy Bo-ra Kim) finds her and her reportage in hot water when she inadvertently outs a Trans in print, an action that brings the he/she to filing for a financial settlement against the newspaper.  In order to keep her job, Kim is forced to find something that’ll ‘get clicks’ and fast, and – thankfully – her best buds Woo-won (Jae Hyun Kim) and Seung-joon (Oh Jin-Seok) have a scoop-in-waiting: their jobs at the Oksu Train Station has given the direct access to footage featuring a passenger committing suicide on the rails beneath a screaming subway … and there just might be more to it.  Once the conductor who drove the train turns up dead under curious circumstances, Kim realizes that’s far more to the story than just unfortunate coincidence … and it just might involve ghostly children, a forgotten orphanage, and a curse that stretches from beyond the grave.
​

Because this is Eastern Horror, there’s a good deal of Station that isn’t exploitative in any measure.  It’s understandably light on blood – victims and those somehow tied to the curse have scratches that mysteriously appear on their persons – and writer/director Yong-ki Jeong makes great use of some deep focus photography to give some relatively routine locations the depth and dimension suggestion there’s more here than meets the eye.  All of the principal players are good – or at least as good as is required to convey their increasing sense of doom once the details are known – and the film’s pace works well enough to both maintain audience interest and keep them invested for more.  It’s a lean 80-minute chiller, one that really only flirts with material that could’ve been handled far more gratuitously.
 
Still, there’s a subplot involving Kim’s publisher (the attractive but domineering Kim Na-Yoon) that kinda/sorta disturbs the flow of the second half.  This isn’t to suggest that there’s no measure of delight in seeing the comeuppance a snooty boss necessarily deserves; rather it’s pretty easy to see that 11th hour plot twist coming – even despite a little misdirection – and this has Station ultimately fading to black without a full resolution to what put everything in motion in the first place.  Whether that was intended as a possible cash grab should the first film prove profitable is presently unknown … but I’ll keep my eyes peeled in case producers want to jump on the franchise bandwagon.
 
The Ghost Station (2022) was produced by Studio & New.  DVD distribution (for this particular release) is being coordinated by the fine folks at Well Go USA Entertainment.  As for the technical specifications?  While I’m no trained video expert, I thought that the sights-and-sounds to this Horror/Fantasy were, actually, quite impressive.  Director Yong-ki Jeong utilizes a great many scenes composed with some deep focus cinematography, and I think the entire milieu feels part-and-parcel to just about any ghost story I’ve run across in the past few years.  Lastly, if you’re looking for special features?  As I viewed this one via a streaming link, there were no special features to consider.
 
Recommended.
 
Frankly, there are elements to The Ghost Station (2022) that may not be all that original or refreshing.  At times, this Korean Horror project feels more like writer/director Yong-ki Jeong – along with fellow scribes Horang, Soyoung Lee, Koji Shiraishi, and Hiroshi Takahashi – was intending little more to pick up some traits of popular frights of the past in order to riff on them for modern audiences.  That isn’t a bad thing because it does feel like the intention here was as much to pay homage to what’s come before while also delivering something that kinda/sorta fits within the same supernatural or spectral universe.  Besides, if you had a grudge to play, why not shamelessly steal from some of the best?
 
In the interests of fairness, I’m pleased to disclose that the fine folks at Well Go USA provided me with complimentary streaming access to The Ghost Station (2022) 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

Far be it from me to court a bit of controversy this morning, folks, but I think -- when it comes to the creative end of Star Wars -- I do consider myself a bit ahead of the curve.

Old school fans of the George Lucas created saga really didn't begin pointing out that it wasn't until Rian Johnson's Star Wars: Episode VIII - The Last Jedi (2017) in which things began to look (cough cough) creatively bankrupt for that galaxy far, far away.  But, for me, it was as plain as the nose on my face when The Force Awakens stirred such feelings.  Like sensing a tremor in the Force, I felt that things were amiss -- that characters and circumstances of the J.J. Abrams flick were a bit too derivative, maybe even a bit too familiar to what had come before -- and that the entire Intellectual Property was on a path from which the franchise's most ardent fans couldn't follow.  No, no, and no: it wasn't like a thousand voices crying out in the darkness were suddenly silenced, but regardless the sensation was there: this beloved set of adventures known as the Original Trilogy and the Prequel Trilogy would always stand proud and tall when stacked up against JJ and Kathleen Kennedy's Sequel Trilogy, as inferior a concoction as was the second Death Star.

And I know what many of you are thinking.  You're cogitating on the fact that I wasn't more vocal and/or more outspoken at the time, and you're probably even mustering the courage to throw the old " hindsight is 20/20" blurb back in my face.  That's alright.  As someone who is only occasionally right in his rare prognostications, I can deal with your lack of faith (though a Jedi Master might insist he finds it a bit disturbing).  My point isn't to say "I told you so" (but I did) or "We should all expect better" (said that, too) but rather merely to suggest that current creative minds under the stewardship of the corporate studio system were likely unable to recapture lightning in a bottle.  That rarely -- RARELY -- if ever happens, and the resounding reality that so very much of The Force Awakens felt like a rehash of blue milk should've sent shock waves across fandom at the onset.  It didn't -- perhaps nostalgia for a trip to the Outer Rim was stronger -- and, alas, we are today where we are today.

​Again, I didn't dislike The Force Awakens.  I think my observations -- much like those attributed to The Last Jedi -- were that it felt a bit too much like a carnival ride, like a cheap and inferior knock-off that only tried to recapture the Force Ghost's spirit of the original; and no studio mill system has proven up to the task since 1977.  Sure, there have been obvious copycats -- and some of those copycats have even been entertaining -- but nothing has both culturally impacted our way of lives and also inspired like-minded storytellers to follow in its footsteps in the way Star Wars has ... so let that be a lesson to us all.  George Lucas's films remain the peak -- the very summit -- of Space Fantasy on the silver screen; and everything else -- no matter how big and bold -- remains a distant second, third, fourth, fifth, or sixth place.  The Force was strong with those stories.  They DID where others TRIED.

But, sure, like all of you, I was glad to see that someone was interested in continuing the saga; I was just disappointed that it was all so creatively bankrupt as has been a great deal of what emerges from the mind of JJ Abrams.  The man's affinity for puzzle boxes shows he isn't so much fascinated with what's inside of them as he is with making them into something worth being dangled in front of the audience's collective face.  He knew full well that he had one big rabbit that hadn't eaten in years, so his was a bit easier challenge than perhaps we -- fandom -- realized.  Instead of giving us an all-new adventure, he copied what worked the first time and slapped some new faces on already established archetypes, never really giving it the depth, character, or imagination that flows -- like the Force -- through Lucas's originals.  I don't fault the man -- few in Hollywood have demonstrated the understanding of mythology ol' George has -- and, yet, it is what it is.

So ... if you can ... still go out and find away to celebrate today.  Yes, yes, and yes: I saw it as an end to All Good Things ... but that doesn't make it any less phantasmagoric.

Happy Birthday, The Force Awakens!

Now ... go back to sleep.

​-- EZ