Folks, I love the X-Men. When I was a kid, Professor Charles Xavier and his band of mutant outcasts were at their peak with Chris Claremont’s X-Men bringing the super-team into the households of young comic book readers everywhere. Needless to say, I’m absolutely stoked by the recently released Disney Plus continuation of the 1990s animated TV series and have had X-Men on the brain 24/7 these days… seriously guys, I’ve worn this sweatshirt like every day since mid-March… And seeing as I’ve been let down by the last couple of movies I’ve covered on this show- Today I’m going to be selfish and talk about an entry in the Fox X-Men universe that I love. A film that breathed new life into the decaying franchise with exciting new timelines and a fresh filmmaker with bright eyes and a passion for comics. A movie that promised a very exciting future for the coming X-Men adventures… And we were almost immediately let down. But we did get a few great entries in the First Class saga and that’s where we’re going to begin for today. I just can’t handle any more bad superhero movies right now without getting depressed. So, in today’s video I’m going to revisit Matthew Vaughn’s X-cellent 2011 prequel film, X-Men: First Class.

Now, this movie (and really this entire collection of movies) is sort of a soft reboot of the X-Men series that was originally led by Brian Singer. This film introduced Charles Xavier as a young man in the 1960s whose life purpose is found through his discovery of a way to help other mutants hone their abilities and use them for good. The film feels like a new telling of the X-Men altogether with some continuity changes and switcharoos being present throughout the film, but it also is the same film that came before Fox brought back the original cast for a time-travel crossover film adaptation of “Days of Future Past”- so honestly- don’t get too caught up on the timeline and continuity of these movies because, boy is it fucked.

But in any scenario- First Class truly represents what makes the X-Men such a juggernaut (pun very intended) in the comic book community. It’s a story about family, purpose, sacrifice, and rebirth, and it really is one of those movies that I swoon over every time I watch it so, let’s see if today’s video goes better than the last few on Marvel Revisited.

2011’s X-Men First Class follows the early years of Charles Xavier and his ambitions to find others like him and show them that they are not alone. The movie serves as a prequel to the original Fox trilogy but does rewrite some history here and there to make the movie a little less tethered to its predecessor. We see an 11-year-old Raven Darkholm sneaking around Xavier’s childhood home looking for food in the middle of the night. When Charles senses her with his blossoming abilities, he confronts her and immediately befriends her as he notes that she is the first mutant he’s encountered outside of himself. This sets up Charles and Raven for a lifelong friendship lasting well into their adult years. More on that later.

In contrast, we also get an extended version of Magneto’s origin scene from the 2000 X-Men film, with Erik Lencher being taken from his family at a Nazi camp when his magnetic abilities show themselves for the first time. This scene is very similar to that of the original X-Men movie and it nicely paints a contrast between Erik and Charles that will ultimately lead to their rivalry down the line. See, this movie is interested in showing us the roots of the X-Men and the Brotherhood of Mutants and how they started as one singular cause that split into two opposing factions. This shit is X-Men through and through, true believers.

Now, what’s the conflict here? Well, similar to many other entries in this franchise- The X-Men will find themselves at odds with the United States Government, as well as the Russian military and an underground group of extremist mutants known as The Hellfire Club, led by Sebastian Shaw, AKA Black King- A nazi mutant who was responsible for killing Erik’s parents in the camps, and whose abilities allow him to absorb energy and store it inside his body to be dispensed at his will. Meaning, if you shoot this guy, he can absorb the force of the bullet and send it back to you with the ease of a hand wave. The energy he absorbs keeps him almost ageless, so while he was an adult when Erik was a child in the camp, he’s now the same age as Erik and Charles as the years have not affected him. Also rolling with the Hellfire Club is Emma Frost (played by January Jones), Azazal (played by Jason Flemyng), and Riptide (played by Alex Gonzalez).

The grand plan is that The Hellfire Club plans to hijack some nukes from Russia and the US and fire them at each other which would prompt a massive War between countries and lead to the overall destruction of humans, so that mutants can rise as the next step in human evolution. Pretty standard X-Men stuff again, and I love it. When Shaw and his goons start their plans, the CIA recruits Charles and Raven to help them locate other mutants and defend the US from an all-out war with Russia. Now, in the 1960s, mutants were barely understood and made known by the masses. So, Charles is excited to find more mutants and continue his discoveries of his species.

The first half of this movie is mostly putting the chess pieces in place and getting us adjusted to this team dynamic. There’s a sense of kinship between Charles and the other mutants that really illustrates the honorable nature of Xavier’s school. See, Charles in these movies starts off as a total empath. If nothing else, this movie shows his abilities as being able to feel what others feel and truly understand the pain of everyone. His motivation is to learn more about people of his kind, but also to allow mutants to serve alongside humans as equals in harmony. This effort will seem futile most of the time as humans think they’re freaks, mutants don’t feel safe, and the bad guys are both parties. It’s about 45min into the film when Charles meets Magneto for the first time and the two become fast friends. Charles saves Erik’s life when Erik attacks Shaw’s yacht and nearly drowns. Charles demonstrates his bond with Erik from the very beginning, as when Charles senses him in the water below the ship- he refuses to abandon him and instead dives into the dark water to save him- and recruits him to the CIA’s new Mutant division.

The relationship between Magneto and Professor X is also something to be appreciated in this movie. The scene in the middle of the film where Erik and Charles go on the road to find and recruit other mutants is so much fun and full of character moments that make these two surrogate brothers a believable duo. The recruits include Zoey Kravitz as Angel, of course J-Law as Mystique, Nicholas Hoult as Beast, Caleb Landry Jones as Banshee, Edi Gathegi as Darwin, and Lucas Till as Havok. Oh, and how about when they TRY to recruit Wolverine and we get this:

Okay, so up until this point there’s been mostly enjoyable and somewhat soapy character and plot development. It’s difficult to establish believable dynamics between each character when there’s this many on screen and they’re all so vastly unique. But Vaughn does well at keeping it light and interesting the whole time- But then we get to a scene in the film that I don’t love…

The scene where the new recruits are sitting around the military base and demonstrating their powers started off kind of cute. It’s just a bunch of young kids who are discovering that they’re not alone for the first time. They’re bonding over their differences and united purpose- but it goes on for a while and starts to feel a little bit too overstuffed with cheese. For example, when they’re coming up with their code names- I just don’t buy it. I think it was cool that this movie goes out of its way to explain the origin of like everything in the X-Men universe, but some stuff was just too on the nose. I didn’t dig it. I also didn’t like that for most of this movie Beast isn’t blue- as it’s explained that his physical mutation wasn’t genetic but self-inflicted when trying to cure his ugly feet syndrome. I get that sitting in the makeup chair for 6-10 hours a day can be troubling- but I don’t want to see Jennifer Lawrence as Jennifer Lawrence if she’s meant to be Mystique. ALTHOUGH- This line from X2 has so much more bite behind it now because of this prequel so… Actually, maybe I don’t hate it THAT much.

I mentioned some retcons that happen in this movie, and I guess now is the time to explain that. While some of these changes aren’t as blatant, they do have some impact on the original story. For example, it’s never explicitly said in X-Men 2000 that Mystique and Charles weren’t family- but if this movie is canon to that movie (which it is) it is very weird that that never gets referenced or hinted at in the original trilogy. Or how Shaw is the first owner of the Magneto helmet that blocks Charles from getting into his head- not quite a retcon but also Charles seems surprised by the helmet in X-Men 2000 which wouldn’t make sense if this movie is their history. I mean, it’s no secret that the Fox X-Men franchise has a seriously fucked up timeline and so many continuity errors that even a movie like Days of Future Past couldn’t fix them all. But here’s the thing- it’s not enough to distract me from how much I like this movie. Remember folks, The X-Men is meant to be sort of a soap opera that focuses on misfit mutants that choose to anonymously protect the very humans that fear and hate them. It’s meant to be bold with its interpersonal relationships and make us care about the person behind the superpowers. Continuity aside, this film does that.

Let’s look at some scenes that REALLY make this movie worth the rewatch:

• The scene where Magneto kills the pig farmer and the tailor is iconic. Seeing Michael Fassbender’s rage and lust for revenge fuel his power is classic Magneto. See, Magneto relates his power to anger. He thinks the key to maxing out your potential is getting angry enough to master it. This of course contrasts Charles’ belief that calmness is the key to unlocking your ability.
• The scene where Banshee learns to fly is perfect. The team dynamics during this entire training
• montage is brilliant and it really shines in both capturing the tone of the Giant Sized X-Men, but also creating that foundation of hope and empathy that the X-Mansion is built on. Love it.
• The first scene of Charles using the prototype of Cerebro is also very well done. The way they depict Charles’s connection to the mutants looks very similar to the original trilogy so i like that- and James Macavoy as Professor X is literally spot on casting. Look at his eyebrows! Also- this pickup line that Charlie boy uses to get girls at bars is so much fun.
• The costume reveal scene took a little too long for my liking but man was it glorious. Now, this movie IS an origin so I can forgive the X-Men symbol not being on the suit as the team wasn’t yet known as the X-Men. And the blue and yellow color scheme is everything for X-Men fans. Although, I do not love the look of Beast in this movie… yikes.
• Shaw’s mutant breakout attempt is another favorite of mine. It shows how Shaw’s motivations, while misguided, aren’t exactly unrelatable for the young mutants.
• The Rebecca Romjin cameo is a nice moment for fans of her portrayal as Mystique and the timing of it in the movie was definitely appreciated.

And finally, the entire final battle of the movie is FANTASTIC. This movie has a lot of ground to cover as a prequel, but Vaughn and his editors did a great job of keeping the pacing mostly on point- But anywhere that the film drags in the first half is immediately made up for when the 25-minute-final battle sequence sets off. Shaw is in a submarine with a nuke and his plan is to absorb the bomb’s energy to basically be a walking warhead. Professor X, Magneto, Mystique, Havok, Banshee, Beast, and the CIA are on their way to stop him while the US and Russian military are aiming cannons at each other waiting for the World War to begin. 

This final act will give us iconic X-Men action, cruel revelations, heartbreak, betrayal, death, and rebirth all in one shot with Magneto attacking Shaw and finally killing him as he completes his revenge. This leads to a conflict between the X-Men and their co-leader as Magneto realizes that there is no sense in fighting to be equal with humans as they will blame mutants for the war in the end. Magneto recruits Mystique, Azazel, Angel, and Riptide to form the brotherhood of mutants after he mistakenly paralyzes Charles in a scuffle. And just like that, the divide between The X-Men and the Brotherhood of Mutants begins, and we pick up with the official opening of Xavier’s school for gifted youngsters.

Whoo, this movie is 2 hours and 15 minutes long and I kind of want it again just for that final act. This movie shines in it’s casting and strong leads in James McAvoy and Michael Fassbender, it delivers on action, humor, political thrills, and even a cute group dynamic- all things that I want from my X-Men. 8/10 this movie kicks ass.

What did YOU think of X-Men First Class? When was the last time you saw it and do you plan on going back to revisit it? Also, who else is watching X-Men ’97 and what do you think of it so far?

The post X-Men: First Class Revisited appeared first on JoBlo.

When it comes to the character of Spider-Man, we’ve seen it all from Sam Raimi’s iconic trilogy, the MCU’s more tech-heavy and modern trilogy, some stunning animated Miles Morales films, and even a catalogue of disappointing spin-offs which follow villains like Venom and Morbius. Even Madame Web delivered yet another mediocre spin-off film in Sony’s ongoing attempt to give us Spider-Man movies that don’t feature Spider-Man. But tucked away in the depths of the Spider-Verse is Marc Webb’s 2012 reboot, The Amazing Spider-Man. A film that was released just 5 years after Raimi’s disappointing third installment of the Tobey Maguire era and was marketed to be the untold story of Peter Parker and capture the darker elements of the character and his origins. This, of course is hot off the success of Christopher Nolan’s Batman Begins and Dark Knight films which had added a prestige touch to the genre of comic-book movies and pushed studios to make darker fare out of their own heroes. Now, the topic of Andrew Garfield as Spider-Man is one that, in recent years, has seen somewhat of a resurgence as Garfield’s appearance in Spider-Man: No Way Home gave audiences a chance to see him finish his character arc and swing into the sunset one last time… Or was it?

With recent talks online of “superhero fatigue” and cameo-driven muck, it gets easier and easier to believe that the once anticipated Amazing Spider-Man 3 may still be in the cards for fans of Garfield’s take on the web-head. But for me, I’m holding out any hype until I’ve gone back into the Marvel vault and taken a proper retrospective look on Marc Webb’s original installments and see how well they stack up against all the iconic (and not so iconic) films in this ever-expanding library of wall-crawling-cinema. So, if you’re ready than refill your web shooters and aim them directly at that like button, and let’s take a look back on 2012’s The Amazing Spider-Man.

The Amazing Spider-Man is directed by 500 Days of Summer director, Marc Webb and stars Andrew Garfield as Peter Parker, a teenage orphan living with his aunt and uncle after the death of parents who gets bit by a radioactive spider and gains extraordinary superpowers that he’ll use to protect New York from a grave threat. The movie also stars Emma Stone as Gwen Stacey, Martin Sheen and Sally Fields as Ben and May, Denis Leary as Captain Stacey and of course Rhys Ifans as The Lizard.

Now, the plot of this movie is basically a spin on the classic Spider-Man origin but made to be a little more modern and a slightly more… confusing. See, we’re going to get more into this when the time comes to review the sequel in this series- but the seed is planted in this movie for Peter’s mom and dad to be much more pivotal in the story- which honestly, isn’t really worth talking about because it… sucks. And it has nothing to do with the rest of the plot.

So, when we’re introduced to teenage Peter, we’re automatically blasted in the face with the idea that this movie is not the same as the previous ones. The character of Peter Parker was mostly faithful in the Raimi films- Tobey Maguire was meek and dorky and had a charming quality of being oddly outdated in tone. I like that, actually. It’s kind of how I imagine Peter Parker would be. What I wasn’t ready for at the time- was a new and cool Peter who rode a skateboard and had edgy clothes and a chiseled jaw. Andrew Garfield’s take on Peter is not so much a bullied loser- but more of an anti-social and sort of “too cool for school” kind of kid- which, re-watching this now feels a little outdated in its own way. For example, both Tobey Maguire and Andrew Garfield will occasionally mumble lines of dialogue that are difficult to hear, but where Tobey’s Peter sounded shy and insecure, Garfield’s Peter sounds more like he’s going for sexy. And the result is that we have a Peter Parker who doesn’t really feel like the one that the masses were familiar with. Now, do I dislike it? No. Not really. I think after seeing all three spider-men together in No Way Home, I have a new appreciation for the differences between each one.

Now, another pretty big change is that this movie has Gwen Stacey being Pete’s love interest- and there was no MJ to be found. At least, not yet.

Emma Stone and Andrew Garfield famously dated between these two movies and their onscreen chemistry has been widely praised by many who’ve seen the film. It’s cute, for sure but this movie spends a little too much time getting to the good stuff. There are some pretty good moments in here before Peter gets his powers, but it feels like it takes forever to get to the Spidey stuff. In fact, it’s about an hour into the movie that we see the suit- but it’s not until close to the end of the movie that we see Peter REALLY become Spider-Man.

See, here’s the thing about Spider-Man- When we think of Peter Parker, we usually picture him as sarcastic, snarky, quippy, and whatever other words go with his attitude. But he’s also always a good person at heart. Peter’s origin always has the initial anger that comes from Uncle Ben’s death- it’s a classic tale. But I think that with this movie, they take that anger a little too far into unlikable territory. Even when Spider-Man is in his early stages, he goofs around with the criminals he takes down and makes his little jokes to keep that light-hearted tone. But Garfield in this movie really seems more like Flash Thompson than Peter Parker. When he finally goes on his first patrol as Spider-Man, he comes off as kind of mean-spirited and a little bit too much of a dick. Also, his quips aren’t that funny, which I’ve almost gotten used to after so many cheap MCU jokes in the new trilogy. And while I like Andrew Garfield more now than I used to, this kind of punk-ass version webs me the wrong way.

HOWEVER, at about an hour and fifteen minutes into the movie, when Peter finally gives us the heroics we’ve been desperately waiting for, it is so worth it.

So, the real antagonistic force in this movie is Dr. Kurt Conners, an Oscorp scientist who specializes in cross-species genetics and uses a serum he developed to grow back his lost arm. Of course, we know the rest, don’t we? Well, in this “untold” version, after the serum transforms Conners into a full blown humanoid reptile, the Lizard plans to administer the serum to everyone in the city, turning all of New York into giant reptilian monsters. And when Peter has his first showdown with the Lizard on the bridge, we finally get to witness what makes Andrew Garfield a good Spider-Man. There’s a moment when Spidey either has to pursue the lizard to stop him, or double back and save a little boy who is stuck in a car. Garfield gives the tenderness that we want from Peter in this moment and the magic of this character is restored after over an hour of thinking our friendly neighborhood Spider-Man was gone forever.

Okay, let’s talk about the suit. We all know that Garfield’s suit from the Amazing Spider-Man 2 is one of the best and most iconic suits that the web-head has ever worn. We all love the giant eyes, the classic colors and textures, and the homemade look of it. But the costume in this movie? That’s a different story. We’ve all heard the jokes, yeah? It looks like a basketball. The yellow-tinted eyes look stupid, the shoes are weird, and the whole thing just does not look like Spider-Man. If anything, it looks almost like that evil Spider-Man we got in Madame Web.

So, with the ugly costume out of the way, let’s talk about the controversial design of the villain. See, I don’t think this movie is as bad as the people who hate it say, and I don’t think it’s quite the masterpiece that others think it is. But one thing I am quite firm on, is that character design in these movies… is strange. Of course, the designs in the next installment improved for Spidey, but also saw the odd choice to make Electro look like Mr. Freeze. Marc Webb is a good director, but one thing that requires a lot of care when you make a Spider-Man film is the look of the super-powered people. The design of the Lizard isn’t completely hopeless, but the round head and face make him look more cute than scary. BAD LIZARD! BAD!

The scene where the Lizard tracks Peter down and has a massive destructive battle in the school with Spider-Man- is probably my favorite scene in the movie, aside from the bridge scene. I love the combat, the movements, the chaos, and the performance from Garfield while he quips around. This takes WAY TOO LONG to be in the movie. In fact, the final battle of this movie is also pretty good, and while the story gets worse, the CGI and special effects are very impressive. Sony’s special effects in Spider-Man films have always been hit or miss depending on the budget and scope of the film, but when they nail it, they really nail it and deliver on good-looking images that feel as real as they possibly can.

Spidey takes down Lizard and after Captain Stacey dies on the job, Peter swears to break things off with Gwen to protect her from his new life as a super-powered vigilante. Which only lasts for like 5 minutes before he changes his mind and the movie ends. BUT THEN, we get a post-credit scene that teases Peter’s father as a more important element to this story. Ugh… what a waste.

So, at the end of the day, this movie is a mixed bag for me but I must say that knowing what we know now, and after all of the later Spider-Man films we’ve gotten, this movie is more than a forgotten reboot. It’s a modern spin on a classic character that speaks to the Spidey lovers of the Ultimate Spider-Man era and gives a bold new design to the rogues and villains in this beloved universe. If you’re in the mood for a throwback that has some good, some bad and some ugly, but is ultimately a good time- watch 2012’s The Amazing Spider-Man.

The post The Amazing Spider-Man (2012): Revisiting the Andrew Garfield reboot appeared first on JoBlo.

When it comes to the 1980s, there is no shortage of serviceable horror flicks to max out your nostalgia meter and remind us all why that particular decade reigns supreme for us horror hounds. While the 70s may have perfected the slasher with John Carpenter’s Halloween and The Texas Chainsaw Massacre– The 80s delivered on bringing to life some of the greatest creations in the genre. A dream stalking killer with knives for fingers, a summer camp slaughter committed by a giant in a hockey mask, a sadistic demon who loves pain as much as pleasure, and who could forget the slew of iconic and cult status slashers that have spawned franchises still trucking along today. I’m looking at you Leprechaun. But today, my friends, we’re going to be discussing a different kind of horror movie. A movie that breaks the mold from the prototypical horror outing. A creation written by someone outside of the industry that produced a film that exceeded the standards of unsettling cinema. Basically, today we’re talking about 1987’s The Stepfather (watch it HERE) and why I’m obsessed with it.

The Stepfather follows the story of Jerry Blake (not his real name) as he pursues his life’s ambition of having the perfect family with the ideal suburban setup. Nice house, backyard barbecues, children, love, homecooked meals, and of course… cold blooded murder. As the film unfolds, we’re given just a small taste of this character’s motivation and backstory to be properly terrified of this ambiguously driven family man. Where other films of this era focused on killers who wear human faces for masks or have supernatural abilities that allow for multiple sequels and diminishing stakes for the killer- this film wants to show you what evil would look like if it was hiding in plain sight. In fact, The Stepfather shows you something that many kids grow up being afraid of- a new parental figure that you don’t know and can’t trust.

I love this movie. It has so many qualities that stand the test of time and truly tested audiences and our willingness to enjoy a more subdued pseudo-slasher that cares more about the characters than the frights. In turn, this actually makes the film more scary. Of course, today we’re going to watch the movie and breakdown why after nearly 40 years- The Stepfather still gives me goosebumps. I’m Kier with JoBlo Horror Originals, and you’re watching Deconstructing.

The Stepfather was written by American novelist Donald E. Westlake, who, at the time had never written a screenplay for a film. The film is not based on a specific novel, but rather a story written by Westlake and his collaborators to be adapted for film. His works have been adapted by many, notably The Grifters – but none have had the lasting impact of The Stepfather. And I believe this is for many reasons. It’s one of those movies that sets a tone early on and builds off that tone to its inevitable conclusion. It’s a quiet movie with beautiful and peaceful visuals and some scenes that feature nothing more than a couple of characters just talking. Between the fact that most of this movie is free of any actual violence, and that director Joseph Ruben set the story to take place mostly in broad daylight- the sinister nature of the movie all hinges on the characters, the context, and the implied origins and motive of a man who habitually slaughters innocent families.

Man, there is just so many things to breakdown in today’s show- And, I’m going to make a small amendment to the structure of our breakdown. Rather than our usual layout, today we’re going to be analyzing the film through use of our four step-categories. First, we’ll cover a brief origin of the film and how it went from a spooky novel written under an alias, to the big screen and into the zeitgeist of classic films from the decade. Then we’re going to discuss the film’s legacy in a very short segment before we take on a bonus category for today with breaking down the film’s characters. Usually with slasher films the only characters with any real depth are the coveted final girl or final guy character, and in many cases, the killer is the main draw. This movie’s characters deserve a small analysis for each one because they’re all important in their own right, and there are only a handful of them. Then we’re going to break out some JoBlo Horror movie trivia to lighten the mood before we get to the main event- The X-Factor. Where we talk about the one thing that this movie does to solidify its place in my heart and the hearts and minds of many who love this gem of a film. If you’re ready than make sure to get your story straight and drop a like on the video and let’s hit play on The Stepfather.

ORIGIN

In 1971, a local New Jersey accountant by the name of John List would murder his entire family before vanishing and beginning a new life with a new family under an alias for nearly twenty years before being arrested for his crimes. List was living a brand-new suburban life complete with a wife and kids when his neighbor recognized him from America’s Most Wanted and called in a tip to the police. Between the shock value of a story like that, and the insane amount of planning, luck, and skillful manipulation that it takes to pull off such a crime- Westlake felt that he had the perfect elements for a thrilling tale about a family man who won’t settle for anything less than the American Dream.

By the year 1985, the film’s screenplay was written and had received multiple passes from Westlake, Carolyn Lefcourt, and Brian Garfield. Director Joseph Ruben, a filmmaker whose gone on to bring us films like Sleeping with the Enemy and The Good Son– saw this screenplay as a unique approach to an otherwise well-explored subgenre. The movie shot in Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada during the fall which provided the idealistic autumn atmosphere that the film is set in. The shoot was seemingly free of drama and went smoothly with the cast enjoying their time on set. Iconic actor Terry O’Quinn (or as most know him, John Locke from Lost) plays the lead role as The Stepfather. His name, appearance, job, and personality changes with every new family- but O’Quinn spends most of this movie’s runtime as Jerry Blake. A charming, unassuming realtor who is suspected by his teenage step-daughter to be more than just the Mr. Rogers of real estate. His portrayal in this first Stepfather movie is unsettling because of his subtle reactions to the movies many attempts to uncover his disguise. When his new persona starts peeling away, the people around him will grow increasingly suspicious of Jerry and the slow-yet-enjoyable unraveling is nothing short of entertaining.

Upon being released in January of 1987, the film was not a commercial success financially, but was well received by the majority of critics who reviewed it. This of course is with the exception of the late great Roger Ebert who felt that the film was an attempt to sell violence on its own without a story or context to support it. He quotes: “Violence itself seems to sell at the box office, even when it’s divorced from any context. Maybe that’s what the filmmakers were thinking. What often happens though, is that in an otherwise flawed film, there are a couple of things that are wonderful. The Stepfather has one wonderful element, Terry O’Quinn’s performance.”

Now, I’m going to strongly disagree with Ebert’s statement. I actually think the context of the movie is what makes it so unsettling and wonderful. The movie’s opening scene (which we will talk about soon) provides us as an audience with enough to chew on for the rest of the film because it efficiently sets up our main character without any exposition, or a single line of dialogue. The opening scene is the context to the rest of the story, so when the middle portion of the film dips more into dramatic family dynamics and less into the blood and guts, we feel a bubbling anxiety and fear that at any moment, the cycle will repeat. It’s the way the movie doesn’t give you the answers that draws you further and further in. Seriously, this is one of the cleanest and most simple screenplays I’ve seen in a pseudo-slasher film which are notoriously simple in nature as it is. Now, let’s talk a little bit this movie’s legacy and characters.

LEGACY and Characters

Okay, now as for the legacy of this movie- let’s keep it real. The Stepfather 2 was released in 1989 and was a direct sequel to the original film that would once again star Terry O’Quinn as The Stepfather. I watched this movie for research and realized after the fact that the story of The Stepfather really just works best as a single standalone feature. The following installments would grow increasingly unbelievable to the point where The Stepfather 3 tried to continue the story with a different actor and muscled in an explanation that Jerry had facial reconstructive surgery to change his face- unfortunately, that’s nothing even close to what it takes to match this movie. Other than the 2 direct sequels, there was a 2009 remake which I have not seen and don’t really plan to. There just isn’t a need for me to watch this story play out anywhere other than this first movie- as it’s become one of my favorite thrillers of all time. And part of what makes the film work so well is the simplicity, yet attention given to its core characters and supporting characters. So let’s talk about them.

We’ve covered Jerry, right? Well, not enough. See, the thing that makes Jerry Blake different from someone like Michael Meyers is that he isn’t an aimless serial killer who hurts people for fun. He’s actually more of a charming straight man type who has motivations well-beyond inflicting pain. Jerry is after one thing from the looks of it- the good life. He wants a nice place to live, a beautiful wife and kids, and even a scruffy little pooch for his teenage daughter. The problem is that Jerry’s past keeps catching up to him, and in order to preserve his quality of life he… does this.

The thing I like about Jerry as a villain is the same thing that I liked about the first season of the show You. There’s an inherent earnestness to wanting a wholesome family life, and if our killer’s motivation is to create the safest and most loving family possible- and his means of getting there are the exact opposite- we have something interesting and a character that you can almost feel for in a certain way.

You know who doesn’t feel for Jerry? His daughter, Stephanie- played by horror legend Jill Schoelen. Steph is the only character who is immediately suspicious of Jerry and she confides her feelings in her therapist. Her whole deal is that her dad is dead and she isn’t thrilled about the relationship Jerry has built with her mom. She knows that there is something not right about Jerry despite his many attempts to throw her off his trail. When she comes close to finding the truth, Jerry kills her therapist and even goes as far as to plant a fake photo of a different person from his previous killings to convince her that he was not involved. Stephanie’s character is a perfect foil to her mother Susan, who is so lonely and desperate for love that she doesn’t take any of her daughter’s fears seriously until it’s almost too late. Susan is not a fully three dimensional character but I think this film does well at giving her enough screentime to establish that she’s possibly overlooking Jerry’s red flags on purpose because she (like Jerry) doesn’t want her family to fall apart.

We also have some side- characters like Doctor Bondurant, Steph’s therapist and the first person we actually see Jerry murder. This character is much more than just another body for Jerry to dispose if- but he’s also the only person that believes Stephanie’s fears. We also have Jerry’s ex-brother-in-law who is tracking him down after Jerry’s opening murder, and we have a few even smaller characters to help us flesh out this world. These characters are more textured and layered than similar characters would be in subsequent films and other slashers of the era and that makes this film feel more well-rounded and it makes the deaths of certain characters more impactful.

TRIVIA

Going back to the film’s writer, Donald Westlake- part of the inspiration for Stephanie’s character was based on Westlake’s own stepdaughter- who struggled with accepting Westlake as a family member. Of course, Jill Schoelen brought a lot of great material to the role and even did her own stunts during the film’s intense final confrontation. You go, girl.

And before we move on to the finale, let’s see if you can answer this question:

What classic novel was Jill seen reading while her parents watch TV in their room:

1. The Outsiders
2. The Catcher in the Rye
3. Pride and Prejudice
4. The Shining

Comment your answers down below!

X-FACTOR

Okay, it’s like this- There’s three X-Factors for this movie that I think all need a bit of highlighting. I will be narrowing it down to just one, but there’s a few things I want to get into first.

First, I love the scene at the barbecue where Steph is in the basement when Jerry comes down and unknowingly breaks into an unhinged state in front of her. There are a couple different scenes sprinkled throughout the film that show our guy struggling to hold it together while he’s constantly trying to be normal. The first time we see this is in front of Stephanie and it really is the first time we see this side of Jerry. The scene works well because it reminds the audience that this polite and living man that we’ve been watching is indeed a maniac.

I also think a close contender for the X-Factor is the scene where Jerry says this line: “Wait a minute… Who am I here?”

This scene is the last moment of Jerry’s facade that we witness before he goes full-blown homicidal. I like this because of what it says about Jerry’s mental state when he does what he does. He tries to hold everything together and we’re to assume that if he would’ve avoided suspicious, this never would have happened. But the real kicker is that it shows us that Jerry has already made the decision to kill his family. He rents a new house in a new town and gets a new job and identity before returning home to Susan- who confronts him for his behavior. Moments before the confrontation, Jerry is whistling, smiling and joking around- but at the drop of a hat, Jerry unhinges. It is so fucking disturbing.

But of course, the true X-Factor and the absolute standout element of this film, is the opening scene. Seeing Terry O’Quinn doing a completely normal looking morning routine moments before a wide tracking shot that reveals the sinister and blood-soaked living room that served as his family’s unceremonious grave. This one scene sells the movie in opinion. It shows you that there is an unspeakable evil within this person that, perhaps most frightening of all, blends in seamlessly to the colorful, bright, and safe atmosphere that the journey will take you through. It truly is one of the most unsettling 80s films ever made- and if you haven’t seen it- then it’s clear that all we need is a little order around here.

A couple of the previous episodes of Deconstructing… can be seen below,. To see more episodes, and to check out our other shows, head over to the JoBlo Horror Originals YouTube channel – and subscribe while you’re there!

The post The Stepfather (1987) – Deconstructing the Terry O’Quinn classic appeared first on JoBlo.

Folks, I just got done digging through the dustiest, crustiest, mustiest box of 80s schlock that I could get my hands on and… Well, I found something I needed to share with you guys. Now, the art of making an original horror film with unique ideas, clever storytelling, and engaging characters to bounce off a scary antagonist can be damning if not extremely difficult. And this movie is proof that sometimes it can be TOO difficult because it has none of those things. 1980’s The Boogey Man (watch it HERE) is the story of a pair of siblings as they battle with the trauma of their childhood and the return of an evil entity that once possessed them in a blood-soaked trance. The movie was written, directed, and produced by German actor Ulli Lommel and starred his then wife (Suzanna Love) and her brother Nick Love as the film’s main protagonists. It focuses on themes of childhood trauma, suppressed rage, and the power of faith- while somehow managing to say almost nothing about any of those topics. Truly, it’s kind of remarkable how much isn’t resolved by the end of this movie. Stay tuned.

Okay, so if you haven’t heard of this movie- don’t worry- it’s not an original version of the also forgettable 2005 film or the much more memorable 2023 film. This movie is just a one hour and twenty-minute standalone science-fiction slasher which did spawn a couple of sequels that even less people have heard of. Honestly, I can’t really speak to the quality of these movies as I have not seen them. But either way, today we’re going to revisit this movie and see for ourselves whether the past can truly never die.

The Boogey Man opens with what will immediately become an increasingly ridiculous attempt to recreate John Carpenter’s iconic opening sequence from Halloween. We get a long, eerie tracking shot that follows from the exterior of the house into the living room. We see an attractive woman on the couch entertaining a drunk man while her two-young children (Lacy and Willy) watch from the front porch while they’re locked outside in cold. Pretty fucked up. Although, I must say that I quite liked the very late 70s style for the opening score. It’s kind of going hard. The children’s mother is clearly more interested in her guest than the kids, and the movie gives us the harshest possible example of that by showing the mother let her boyfriend tie up and gag her 7-year-old son to stop him from interrupting their private time. Now, mind you this is just the first 10 minutes of the movie, so I was sitting there watching it like “oh, shit! This movie might be kind of intense.” but then by minute 11 I’m back to laughing at the clear attempts to rip off Halloween.

So, here’s the deal. Lacy sees that Willy had been tied up, so she goes to the kitchen and grabs a giant ass knife. She uses the knife to cut Willy out of the ropes but that’s when Willy decides to take that thing into his mom’s room and stab her boyfriend to death while his mother watches in horror from the reflection of a mirror. That mirror comes back into play eventually.

Automatically we’re brought into the present day where Lacy and Willy are in their 20s and Lacy is married with a family of her own. Willy is living with Lacy and the family and working on their farm, but we learn that he hasn’t been able to talk since the murder all those years ago. With the past seemingly behind them, the siblings receive a letter from their mother- who they also haven’t seen in many years. Mom claims that the doctor says she doesn’t have a lot of time left and that’s when Lacy and Willy’s trauma kicks up to haunt them again. What makes it funny though is that in order to show us the trauma of the one night- they just keep flashing back to the same footage we saw literally 10 minutes earlier. They just splice in clips from the previous scene. It’s truly funny.

Now is probably a good time to mention that the dialogue in this movie, and the writing in general is hilarious. It sounds like it was written with the least amount of detail possible on purpose and there are a lot of examples of this. The mom wrote these kids a letter and she basically says she’s dying soon and she wants to see her kids one last time- and Lacy’s husband thinks it might actually be a good idea because it may help Lacy overcome her past and put it behind her. To which lacy agrees- but then… they never do it. Like they START to do it- Lacy’s husband (whose name is Jake by the way) suggests that they drive back to their hometown and visit their mom as well as visit the house they used to live in- which is now owned by new residents. They do go visit the house, but they never make it to the mom. And they never mention… why? Like, what happened? We never hear another line about the mom again in the whole movie. It is supposed to be the source of their trauma and the movie sets it up to be such, but then they all just forgot about it. Well, I didn’t forget, Ulli. Where is this woman?

While visiting the childhood home, Lacy begins having one of her trauma attacks when she sees the mirror that reflected Willy killing the man. She shatters the mirror out of ear which alarms the family living in the house. Lacy and Jake take off and for some reason Jake decides that he needs to bring the shattered mirror and all of the pieces with him. All but one.

Now, in classic slasher fashion- you got to have one or two scenes where random nothing characters that aren’t connected to the main cast in a big way get picked off. This is meant to entertain us and tide us over on the guts while the main conflict is building up. In this movie… They actually do some pretty interesting things with that tradition. Again, this movie is NOT original. It’s basically Halloween meets The Exorcist with less imagination and significantly less talent behind the scenes. HOWEVER, one piece of the mirror ends up being left at the house which is where we learn (say it with me folks) the mirror is evil. It’s unclear what the entity is as we never see it but it breathes and definitely glows orange. The scene where the entity kills the kids that live in the house is pretty good slasher stuff though. There’s a scene where he makes one girl cut her own throat with scissors, one kid gets this hilariously cartoonified death in the window-

And the other one like… gets slapped by a different mirror. Okay I lied; this isn’t interesting at all. But how about the other random kill scene here the mirror gets stuck to Lacy’s son’s shoe and the reflection causes these random beachgoers to die horrible deaths? Talk about a KISS-KABOB.

I’d like to just see a movie of mysterious final destination style deaths but instead this is just a brief break from the bore-fest we’re meant to be invested in. The problem is that these disposable characters that die to fill runtime are MUCH more interesting than the main characters. They all lack basic motivations and unique attributes which make everyone so 2D that it’s distracting. Also, I don’t know why but the number of times we cut to Jake cutting the same exact piece of chicken is so funny to me that for a second, I almost enjoyed it. They spend most of the movie’s runtime on this chicken getting carved I swear to God. The chicken gets more screentime than the Boogey Man. That is not a joke. Also, I don’t know what the hell is supposed to be going on with Willy in like 90% of this movie. His character has the most hilarious reaction shots to supposed awful things happening just offscreen. This shot is so good.

It all culminates in Jake putting the mirror back together piece by piece (because that’s how it works) and hanging it over their dinner table for some reason? The mirror then reignites the evil and begins picking off the main crew one by one.

Listen, at this point we’re at the end of the movie. Like, there is less than 10 minutes left and we’ve got almost no information as to what the hell thing even is. At first, we think that maybe Willy is just a creepy little freak. He kills his mom’s boyfriend (even though we don’t blame home) but then he like doesn’t talk and he almost kills this neighbor girl for some reason, but then we think it’s the mirror possessing people, but then the mirror has like a mind and being of its own so basically nobody knows what the fuck is going on here and we’ve only got a few minutes to explain this shit.

And wouldn’t ya know it- we get no information. The mirror’s underwhelming killing spree takes out two completely meaningless characters off screen for Jake to find the bodies after the fact. But the crime scene does look awesome. And that’s kind of a perfect example of every aspect of this movie- good ideas, interesting themes, and some inspired visuals that really help it out- but ultimately just adds up to nothing. Lacy and Willy don’t die and neither does Jake, but in the last 3 minutes of the movie- Lacy get’s possessed by a piece of the mirror and as quick as you can scream it’s pretty much over when Lacy pulls the glass off of her and seemingly defeats the evil? It all happens so fast, you guys.

What we’ve got here is a swing-and-a-miss attempt to capitalize on the unprecedented success of John Carpenter’s Halloween but with a crew that didn’t have the experience, the talent, or the money to pull it off. There are some moments that I can have some fun with particularly if I’m leaning into the “So bad it’s good” perspective- But overall, this movie is just Halloween and The Exorcist‘s less interesting and kind of smelly lovechild. 3/10 I would not waste your time.

Two previous episodes of Revisited can be seen below. To see more of our shows, head over to the JoBlo Horror Originals channel – and subscribe while you’re at it!

The post The Boogey Man (1980) Revisited – Horror Movie Review appeared first on JoBlo.

Let me paint you a picture- It’s the early 90s in Los Angeles, California. You’re stopping by the bank on your way home from work and you’re really hoping to beat that Friday L.A rush hour. Just as you’re about to step up to the teller’s counter, the transaction is cut short by the entry of four men in rubber President’s masks and they’re swinging guns around the busy bank lobby. This bank is being robbed- by Patrick Swayze.

Folks, Point Break is more than a bonafide classic. And there’s more to it than explosions and fire fights. Point Break is one of my favorite movies, and if you haven’t seen it, and I haven’t sold you on it thus far, the movie also features Keanu Reeves jumping out of a charter plane with a loaded pistol and no parachute…so…

This movie on the surface is a buddy-action thriller about the most extreme game of cops and robbers that you could possibly imagine. But seeing as its influence has spanned from the iconic first installment of the Fast and the Furious mega-franchise to the extremely disappointing 2015 remake- which I’m still recovering from- I figured there’s got to be something more to this movie that makes me and everyone else I know cherish it so damn much. It’s a story that packs a lot of relatable themes like friendship, love, loyalty, and sacrifice. With Patrick Swayze’s movie legacy getting a bit of a revival thanks to the new release of the Road House remake (which is far superior to the Point Break one), now is the time to take a deeper dive into perhaps his greatest film. It is indeed a real blue flame special, and what I need to know is “What’s Point Break REALLY About?” Check out the video above and let us know what you think in the comments!

The post Point Break: What’s It Really About? appeared first on JoBlo.

What do we talk about when we talk about 1979’s iconic outer space slasher, Alien (watch it HERE)? Personally, I start the list with the incredible slow-burn tone and impressive special effects, then I usually gush for twenty or thirty minutes about how inspired the horror aspect was- and especially for its time. It creeps along with nothing but quiet, dark spaces to lure out your fears as this mysterious man-eating creature stalks your every move. Truly scary stuff. And then of course I mention how Sigourney Weaver swiftly cemented her status as one of the greatest final girls in slasher cinema. All of that to say that this film truly lives up to the chills they promise from the movie’s tagline- In space, no one can hear you scream. Folks, slasher movies are kind of a big deal here on JoBlo Horror Originals. We love seeing Ghostface reveal their identities at the end of Scream, we revisit the horror of Haddonfield every Halloween and we sure as shit make sure to cover our fair share of cult slashers that fly below the mainstream radar. But lately, I’ve been trying to scratch a different itch. I mean, I’m always in the mood for blood and guts, but I’ve been in the mood for something a little more “out there” from a hulking masked killer. Of course, within horror, there are many avenues that I could go down. See, on this show I’ve covered ghosts, demons, cults, witches, haunted artifacts, monsters, serial killers and even robots- but I don’t feel that I’ve properly explored- is aliens.

Imagine if you were a regular astronaut who wasn’t expecting and properly equipped and trained to handle a homicidal alien. What if you were alone in space with no way to get help and this thing had its sight fixed firmly on you. Or as writer Dan O’Bannon said, what if “Jaws in space”? 1979’s Alien is the story of a group of astronauts who are headed home to earth when a potential distress signal takes them to a nearby moon where they discover alien life that is sure to make their journey home a hell of a lot bloodier. The film was famously directed by Ridley Scott and remains to be one of the greatest horror classics in cinema history. And truthfully- I can’t wait to get into its so I’m Kier with JoBlo Horror Originals, and you’re watching Deconstructing.

Now, the setup for Alien is quite simple. We’ve got seven astronauts- Ripley (played by Sigourney Weaver), Captain Dallas (Tom Skerritt), Lambert (Veronica Cartwright), Kane (John Hurt), Ash (Ian Hom), Parker (Yaphet Kotto), and Brett (Harry Dean Stanton)- This crew is on the way back to earth when they get a transmission from a moon nearby. On this moon is the remanence of an alien ship. The crew finds a chamber full of eggs and what’s inside finds its way onto the ship via Kane’s face. This sets up the rest of the film which sees a rapidly growing alien creature with slimy skin and chrome teeth roaming about the ship and taking out the passengers one-by-one. A classic plot for a classic film indeed- but there’s more to it than that so as usual, we’re going to break this movie down by way of our four-key-categories. First, we’ll talk about the original of this movie and how it went from an egg to a STILL ACTIVE mega franchise. Then, we’ll talk about the film’s legacy, which will allow us to dive into what makes it so… mega-franchisable? After that we’ll play a quick game of JoBlo Trivia to get our movie minds buzzing before we get to the finale- the X-Factor- where I discuss that one small thing that takes Alien from being a space-station slasher, to being the timeless horror masterpiece that it is.

So, if you’re ready then keep your back to the wall, and don’t forget to like the video- and let’s hit play on Alien.

ORIGIN

Have y’all ever seen the movie Dark Star by John Carpenter? You know, the one where a beach ball is haunting the ship. Well, as it turns out- Dan O’Bannon worked on that film with Carpenter and his experience on the film got him thinking “What if there was a fully horror version of this that played it completely straight?” And so began the process of writing a script that would feature a handful of victims, an endless hellscape of space, and one VERY angry alien. O’Bannon knew that the key to making it scary was having a believable looking monster for his antagonist. More on that soon- but with the idea fresh in his mind, O’Bannon wrote the first act of a script called Memory which actually turned out to be used as the film’s iconic opening scene which features our astronauts awaking to a distress transmission and deciding to investigate a broken-down ship. With O’Bannon being stuck with a case of writer’s block after creating this incredible beginning. While working on other projects and leaving Memory on the backburner, O’Bannon discovered the haunting artwork of H.R. Giger. Giger is known for his incredibly disturbing and unflattering imagery that was a hot commodity for authors to use as book covers for the Sci-Fi genre. Around this time, O’Bannon moved to L.A. to live with Ronald Shusett, the film’s uncredited co-writer and the two wrote the rest of the script about one of H.R. Giger’s horror creations stalking and killing the astronauts. Giger would of course go on to create the now iconic xenomorph.

With a dark and bloody script in hand, Shusett and O’Bannon began shopping their movie around Hollywood hoping to get enough capital to make a convincing Giger Monster. Along comes Brandywine Entertainment which consisted of producers Gordon Carrol, David Giler, and Walter Hill. They agreed to make the film but throughout the process they would make the development of the final screenplay a living hell by demanding absurd rewrites, re-arranging material and ultimately putting their own stamp on an otherwise great script. It’s believed by many, including O’Bannon, that the studio heads at Brandywine were trying to edge out their work just enough to take credit and leave the writers with none. And with O’Bannon being the sole credit for writer- I guess we know who won that battle.

When it came down to it, the then recent release of Star Wars had studios in Hollywood bursting at the seams to get their own Sci-Fi blockbusters out into the world. This caused Brandywine and O’Bannon and Shusett to begin their search for a proper director. After going through the list of potential talent to helm the movie, names like Robert Altman, Jack Clayton, Robert Aldrich, and Peter Yates all proved to be too slick and the studio and writers feared that hiring them would run the risk of making the film less serious. They wanted someone who would approach the movie as a straight horror. And sure enough, after seeing the film The Dualists, Brandywine pursued Ridley Scott to direct. Scott loved the script and signed on immediately to make the movie and even contributed some seriously beautiful and detailed storyboards to map out the film’s gorgeous and grand look. When the studio saw these magical storyboards, they immediately doubled the film’s original budget from $4.2 Million to $8.5 Million- which later racked up even further to about $11 Million. Money well spent, boys.

The casting process was fairly simple due to the script’s writing being intentionally vague in its description of each astronaut. The intent was for the director to feel free to interpret each character in their own way- even as far as their gender and physical attributes- and cast accordingly. This gave Ridley the freedom to find the most powerful actors for each role and that is how we got Sigourney Weaver as Ripley. Right on. With the main players in the mix- cameras were finally set to roll in Shepperton Studios in London in 1978.

LEGACY

Now, it’s no secret that the Alien franchise has seen quite a robust history. This film was released in May of 1979 and was met with astonishing box office numbers. The film was such a hit that people were seeing it twice and bringing more and more friends each time. Alien’s final box office run totaled at over $180 Million which in Hollywood terms means…. Nothing? Well, at least not for a while. In 1986- James Cameron took on a direct sequel titled Aliens which would also see the return of Ripley. As if two great directors weren’t enough for this franchise, David Fincher stepped up to direct Alien 3 in 1992 which also saw Ripley come back and (spoiler alert) die- only to be brought back in Alien Resurrection in 1997 as a clone. These direct sequels did well- but the time between each film and the return on investment eventually led to the franchise fizzling out in theaters but gained a lot of traction in the comic book and collectable space. This led to the beloved Alien VS Predator comic book which later revived the silver-screen slasher with AVP in 2004 and AVP Requiem in 2007. Alien tried its hand at the prequel thing with Prometheus and later went on to bring us Alien Covenant and the highly anticipated, Fede Alverez directed Alien Romulus– which hopefully looks to bring the franchise back to being more grounded- no pun intended.

But what makes the movie worth the trip to the theaters every time for the follow up? Why did the original Alien film spawn such a huge success? Well, it was made the right way. On its own and away from the franchise- Alien delivered us stunning cinematography that invites you directly into the ship with our crew. The Blu-ray of this thing is beautiful, folks. But what about the chilling slow-burn tone and pacing? The movie lets you float around the ship in suspense with the cast for a lot of this film. Personally, I find it delightful either way, but what makes it special is that even in these slow moments, you’re treated to a warm and grounded group-dynamic between the characters that make the dialogue scenes that much more gripping. It’s truly a movie you can just sit and vibe with and I think that says a lot. This movie’s legacy goes beyond a good movie and a pretty good franchise- Alien was such a shockwave of a film that its impact on the genre in general can still be felt in movies today. While Ridley Scott would call it “The Texas Chainsaw Massacre in Space”- Science fiction has benefitted the most from the film’s influence- movies like Galaxy of Terror, Inseminoid, Forbidden World, and Dead Space. The reach even extends to recent films like Underwater and Life– which are essentially the same movie with different monsters. And honestly- both of those movies are alright, so check them out.

And while it’s easy to say that alien inspired dozens of movies over the years, let’s also not forget that part of the movie’s charm is the familiar nature of this otherwise brand-new concept. When talking about the film, Dan O’Bannon said “I didn’t steal Alien from anybody- I stole it from Everybody!”. Alien was a mashup of ideas notably taken from films like Forbidden Planet, Planet of Vampires, and multiple EC Comics from the time. These old-time science fiction films give me a sense of nostalgia that Alien also touches on in the same way and I think that must be true for many of us seeing as this film is rightfully ranked up there with the best of them.

TRIVIA

Did you know that there was originally a scene written for the end of the movie where the Alien sees Ripley hiding in the closet while she’s undressed and becomes strangely aroused by her. This would cause the alien to note the difference in their bodies and add to the disturbing nature of it all. Luckily, that was cut from the movie and the ending stands as it should- not gross. Although can we REALLY blame that alien?

And speaking of the Alien, let’s see if you can answer this question:

Which famous painter inspired the iconic “Chestbuster” scene which has gone on to be the film’s most memorable sequence:

1. Thomas Kincade
2. Francis Bacon
3. Ivan Plusch
4. Faris Heizer

Comment Your answers down below!

*ANSWER: Francis Bacon for “Three studies for figures at the base of a crucifixion”

X-FACTOR

I can’t believe it’s that time already. Folks, we’re at the X-Factor and this is where I’m supposed to pick one small and seemingly meaningless thing and crown it as the most important. And usually, I struggle to find just one thing and then I have this grand revelation at the buzzer. And yeah, it is no different this time. Originally, the X-Factor seemed obvious- the practical effects, right? The way that this terrifying creature was brought to life was both impressive for the time, and honestly- impressive for today as well. You’d never see a movie of this magnitude risk puppeteering their ONLY villain and engineering it to move smoothly when there was no human to operate the body. The digital effects that were used were still very good and this thing held up hard. BUT we expect that. I can’t give the X-Factor to Sigourney Weaver for the same reason of it being too obvious although, she REALLY did an amazing job in this movie and especially in the following movie.

But what it’s really all about for me, and what really makes the movie a beacon for quality sci-fi seekers- is the film’s final showdown. Now yes, this may seem obvious as well- but what makes this final confrontation different from any of the other ones we’ve seen in the seven film since? It’s quiet.

This movie’s slow build up does lead to a triumphant climax- but that’s not the end. The movie truly ends with Ripley thinking she’s finally ditched the Xenomorph after losing her entire crew. But then, she realizes the thing is still on her ship and is knocked out. Instead of blaring music, flashing lights and CGI purple energy beams- Ripley slowly and quietly sneaks into the closet, suits up, and blasts the ship’s thrusters to expel the alien from the ship. But it’s done in stealth. She doesn’t scream, she doesn’t fight, she doesn’t blink, she barely even breathes. It’s satisfying. It feels like you quietly snuck up on that scary spider that’s been crawling around your room at night. And it’s definitely the reason that this movie sticks the landing.

Folks, we did it! We talked about Alien, and I got to add it to my ever-growing list of horror sub-genres that have been properly deconstructed. What else should cover? What do you want to see next? I have a feeling the next one will be quite spooky so… make sure you’re around for that. From JoBlo Horror Originals, I’m Kier, and this has been Deconstrcting. Goodnight everybody.

A couple of the previous episodes of Deconstructing… can be seen below,. To see more episodes, and to check out our other shows, head over to the JoBlo Horror Originals YouTube channel – and subscribe while you’re there!

The post Alien (1979): Deconstructing Ridley Scott’s classic creature feature appeared first on JoBlo.

Whenever I get asked to recommend a good horror movie- I immediately take into consideration who I’m recommending it to. The key to a good movie recommendation is to compliment the other person’s tastes and suggest something that will comfortably expand their horizons. It also helps if the movie you’re recommending is criminally underseen for how incredibly well-made it is. Here’s what I mean- In 2020- yes, THAT 2020- the entire world was affected by unprecedented events that caused the everyday lives of everyday people to dramatically change. One of the many industries that suffered during this time was the Movie Theater industry. It was rough. It was stale. It was fucking Groundhog Day. At first, there were delays- movies just weren’t coming out at all. Then, some that were meant for theaters and Imax ended up going straight to streaming, delays, delays, more delays. And before you knew it, the days of limited theatrical releases were starting to come back. Movies were starting to exist outside of our living rooms again and for the everyday JoBlo- that meant new stories and adventures awaited us at the happiest place on earth, the movies. Only… Now people weren’t going. Listen, I have a movie recommendation that I simply cannot sit on any longer- You need to watch Gretel & Hansel. Yes, I know that the cult classic Jeremy Renner-led Hansel and Gretel: Witch Hunters is going to spammed in the comments of this video, and yes, it is an underrated and fun gem that deserves more respect but no- I’m not talking about that one. Although… Comment below if you’d want to see that. Instead, today I’m going to tell you why I think Gretel & Hansel (watch it HERE) is a forgotten masterpiece and why you should revisit it- after this video.

Gretel & Hansel is the 2020 horror fairytale starring Sophia Lillis as Gretel and Samuel Leaky as Hansel. The film was written by Rob Hayes and directed by Oz Perkins, who happens to be the son of iconic Psycho actor- Anthony Perkins- although, he is a talented filmmaker in his own right with film’s like The Blackcoat’s Daughter and I Am the Pretty Thing That Lives in the House. I know for sure that Tyler is going to notice that I once again found a way to talk about Hitchcock movies on this channel so, leave a like on this video so I don’t get sent off into the woods.

Gretel & Hansel is a similar take on the familiar fairytale but this time told with cold and sadistic intent. It mainly focuses on the character of Gretel who, after refusing to sell herself to a wealthy businessman, is forced by her extremely scary Mother to take Hansel and journey deep into the forest to find themselves new lives. This movie doesn’t waste any time sending these kids off either. The movie’s plot is fairly simple, and I’d argue that it’s not exactly the most important thing to the viewing experience for this particular film. While venturing through the cold and foggy woods, Gretel and Hansel will encounter the dangers of being young and vulnerable in a very evil place. I’ve heard some criticism that the movie is boring and to that I say- What in the hell are you talking about? As if this movie’s gorgeous and rich cinematography wasn’t enough (which it is- and we WILL be covering that later), the movie drops two kids off in the middle of nowhere 5 minutes in and they’re immediately in danger with scary monsters, suspicious strangers, and some very questionable mushrooms being the least of their worries.

After some close encounters with the threats that lurk in the forest, Gretel begins experiencing hallucinations that guide her and Hansel to a cozy cottage in the middle of nowhere. The kids are starving and whoever lives in the house seems to have prepared enough food to feed a giant family. Now, if you think you know what happens next, don’t you dare be so sure. See, this is where the real darkness of the movie ensues. Inside this home is an old and mysterious witch with black fingertips and a sinister grin- and while Hansel quickly trusts her, Gretel isn’t so quick to succumb to the temptations and hunger that motivate the siblings.

You may be thinking that the witch fattens up the kids and eats them and that’s the movie- but buddy, you’re wrong again. Instead, this film takes the approach of having Gretel’s arrival at the witch’s cottage be a place where she can learn more about her hallucinations and why she has them. Would it surprise you to learn that Gretel herself is a witch? While staying at the old woman’s home, Gretel will learn things she never expected or knew she was capable of and when the time comes, she’ll have to use those talents to defeat her own mentor and save her brother from a horrific death. Does that sound boring to you?!

This movie establishes at the beginning what seems to be an origin story for the witch in the film- but instead it turns out that Holda, the witch, was actually the mother of the little girl from the story, and she killed and ate her own daughter before continuing the same ritual for many years. Until now. Gretel not only learns about her supernatural abilities, but she also learns from Holda herself about the internal power that exists inside of her as a person, and as a woman.

Now, why should you watch it if you haven’t seen it? And why should you watch it AGAIN if you have? This movie offers you all the slow burn intensity that you want from a folklore period piece fairytale, but it also gives you the creatures, frightening moments, and adventure that keep you invested. And because I don’t know if I’ve mentioned it enough- this movie’s visual style is a fucking treat. It’s shot in the very vintage looking 1:55:1 aspect ratio which usually I can kind of give or take but in this case, it just HAD to be done like this. The use of wide-angle lenses and distorting fisheye clashing with the tight aspect ratio give a liberating yet claustrophobic look that really connect you to these characters and how they’re feeling being both free to roam the world and trapped in the woods of never-ending trees. The color grading, the wardrobe, the composition, it’s all stunning. If Wes Anderson shot a horror movie, I think some of it would look a lot like this.

I also need to talk about this movie’s score. I’m in the process of listening to it on loop for like the millionth time this month and I’m still in love with it. Robin or “Rob” Coudert did the musical tracks for this movie and the use of retro synth risers and youthful and somehow whimsical orchestral themes are brilliant and I’d love to hear what you guys who are into movie scores think about it. It makes the slow moments of the film that don’t feature much dialogue still very stimulating to watch. And that’s the word for the viewing experience of this movie- stimulating. We of course can’t forget Sophia Lillis’ excellent performance as she carries much of the film on her shoulders and does so with grace and subtlety. I always look forward to seeing this actress in any project and this one is well-suited to her and her acting sensibilities. Of course, Alice Krige does a wonderful job as the oddly charming yet still horrifying witch. I loved her in this movie, and I think she gave a perfectly committed and weird performance that stands out among witches in movies.

Oz Perkins is a name that I’d like to see attached to more movies in general. I mean, the guy was in Legally Blonde for like 2 minutes and has made some of my favorite horror films in the last decade, but this movie shows me that he’s a creative mind that we should definitely be on the lookout for. In fact, if you’re still not convinced about this movie- look at some of the names attached to this thing and tell me you’re not curious:

Rob Hayes co-wrote the film and you’d know him as the writer of popular TV series, Chewing Gum. It was produced by Brian Kavanaugh-Jones who was behind Sinister, and also produced by Autopsy of Jane Doe producer, Fred Berger. You know what’s consistent across all of these people? They make REALLY good shit. Director Oz Perkins had this to say about the film: “It’s awfully faithful to the original story. It’s got really only three principal characters: Hansel, Gretel, and the Witch. We tried to find a way to make it more of a coming of age story. I wanted Gretel to be somewhat older than Hansel, so it didn’t feel like two 12-year-olds – rather a 16-year-old and an 8-year-old. There was more of a feeling like Gretel having to take Hansel around everywhere she goes, and how that can impede one’s own evolution, how our attachments and the things that we love can sometimes get in the way of our growth.”

Gretel & Hansel hits you in the senses from the very opening all the way through to the time the credits roll. You’ll be looking at beautifully composed images with top-tier acting from the brilliant Sophia Lillis and a musical score that will chill you to the core- all while maintaining a sense of child-like adventure that weaves a crafty, beautifully twisted, and unnervingly forgotten masterpiece. If you’re in the mood for a dreamy fairytale with dark and twisted scares, beautiful music and even more beautiful visuals- revisit this one for yourself, and maybe consider sleeping with the light on.

Two previous episodes of Revisited can be seen below. To see more of our shows, head over to the JoBlo Horror Originals channel – and subscribe while you’re at it!

The post Gretel & Hansel (2020) Revisited – Horror Movie Review appeared first on JoBlo.

Look, I don’t want to waste anyone’s time. We all know that Starship Troopers (watch it HERE) isn’t a horror movie. It’s a science fiction intergalactic comedy with a light tone and Neil Patrick Harris- but it’s also a well-made and tightly performed 90s creature feature that is sure to tickle the nostalgia bone for many JoBlo Horror fans. And with Paul Verhoeven being fresh on the mind from our Robocop episode, we thought it would only make sense to follow it up with another Verhoeven classic that showcases how far the director had come in the 10 years between these two films. If you’re still not convinced, this film also delivers on terrifying creatures, plenty of blood and guts, and even some boobies for you slasher trope seekers out there. While being more comedy/action than anything- Starship Troopers is a film that brings the goods with every action sequence and doesn’t spare audiences the gory details while also giving you a sort of college underdog comedy. And for me, sometimes that is simply all I’m looking for. So, my goal today isn’t to convince you that Starship Troopers is a horror movie- but what’s more is that I want to convince you that it’s worth watching anyway. And the best way I know how to do that is to put this movie over the microscope and figure out just what it is that makes it so special after all these years. I’m Kier with JoBlo Horror, and you’re watching Deconstructing.

Released in 1997, Starship Troopers follows the story of Johnny Rico, played by Casper Van Dien. A recent high school graduate living in the 23rd century who decides to skip his admission to Harvard and enlist in the United Citizen Federation- a special branch of military that is engaging in a vast and seemingly endless war with the creatures who inhabit our neighboring galaxies. While his parents don’t approve, Johnny’s clairvoyant friend Carl, played by Neil Patrick Harris, is also enlisting in the Federation’s intelligence branch. As well, his friend with benefits Dizzy, played by Dina Meyer is joining up, and so is Johnny’s new girlfriend Carman, played by Denise Richards. If you were a kid in the 90s, did you know anyone who didn’t have a crush on Denise Richards? Comment below.

So, when Rico and his friends enter the Federation as newbies, they all quickly climb the ranks of their respective departments as they each develop their own new relationships and gear up for their mission to take out an army of giant aliens. And to best look into what works so well with this movie- we’re going to be breaking down Starship Troopers by way of our four key categories. First, we’re going to discuss a brief origin of the film and how it got made- This is a MUCH more interesting topic than you might think so, stick around. Then we’ll get into the film’s legacy, which includes a similar franchise fate to Robocop. After that we’ll play a quick game of JoBlo Horror Trivia before we take on the most difficult topic- the movie’s X-Factor, where we look for that special something that really makes it shine. If you’re interested in revisiting this 90s cult classic and having one hell of a time along the way then make sure you leave a like on the video and of course, subscribe for the best in horror movie content. And let’s hit play on Starship Troopers.

ORIGIN

Okay, so once again this movie is a collaboration of Paul Verhoeven and Edward Neumeier- the duo that brought us Robocop. HOWEVER, instead of being an original story, this film is based and reworked from a 1959 novel of the same name. The original novel was written by Robert Heinlein and when I say that the book was reworked, I don’t mean the story was completely changed. However, in classic Verhoeven/Neumeier fashion, the commentary and subtext of the novel were dramatically altered. Here’s what I mean- Starship Troopers, the novel, is widely believed to be less of a satirical adventure, and more of a propaganda piece for fascism, racism, and the glorification of violent behavior. Now, I haven’t read the book, and some say that there is a sort of irony and sarcasm in the writing that makes it more critical of those ideas. It’s not for me to say, but what I can say with absolute certainty is that Paul Verhoeven did basically the opposite of that.

Much like Robocop’s commentary on police brutality, Starship Troopers offers a not-so-subtle criticism on military, politics, and patriotism. You might think the comedy comes from these ironic digs, but it doesn’t. The comedy in this movie comes from the incredible interactions between these young soldiers who are all learning to survive in their new roles. Verhoeven directed these characters to be likable, brave, tough, and funny- but also, dumb. Well, mostly dumb anyway. But, we’ll get to that.

Despite the controversy of the source material, Verhoeven’s reputation as a filmmaker granted him enough street credit in Hollywood to secure a lofty $100 Million budget from Tristar and Touchstone. And folks, I do not say this lightly- They put that shit to GOOD use with the movies visual effects being way too good to be from the 1990’s. I mean, am I out of my mind or does this look better than the CGI in like half of what we see today? It’s actually nuts. Shout out to Tippett Studio for that one. According to reports from the production, about half a million dollars went into just visual effects. That’s about half of the movie’s total budget- but it is so worth it. Unfortunately, the film barely made its budget back and struggled to even break even at the box office- which is a tale too often told with these beloved cult classics. And that brings me- to this movie’s legacy.

LEGACY

Despite the movie’s lack of profits, Starship Troopers ended up receiving the franchise treatment and getting 2 direct-to-video sequels (Starship Troopers 2: Hero of the Federation and Starship Troopers 3: Marauder). While Verhoeven was interested in directing a sequel, he stated that he needed time to develop something fresh and new. Unfortunately, due to the low box office numbers, the films were not intended to be released in theaters. This caused Verhoeven to walk away from the project- but Ed Neumeier stayed on as the writer of both sequels, and even directed the third film himself which brought back the character of Johnny Rico played again by Casper Van Dien. More recently, there have been two CGI animated films titled Starship Troopers: Invasion and Starship Troopers: Traitor of Mars. I haven’t seen any of these subsequent films. Not that I’m not interested in the universe, but more that I’m not interested in a watered-down version of the first film’s original message. And from what I’ve heard, none of the sequels really find that balance.

However, there have been talks of a reboot and a legacy TV series that kicked up pre-pandemic and have since sort of died down into rumor territory. But I have high hopes that eventually we will get something that does proper the original. Maybe I’m being optimistic, but I really believe that the magic of this cast could take a sequel a long way. While certain actors from the film have reprised their roles here and there for a cameo, I think a Starship Troopers film that brings back all the main players who survived the film and if we made them the focus of the story that takes them on one final mission- maybe then we can get something worth watching and discussing. Verhoeven’s use of the Robocop style propaganda commercials are also very much missing from my life these days so I need more of that asap.

When it comes to why this movie is so beloved- I really think that it’s a combination of things. For fans of old science fiction movies, this movie harkens back to classic alien films with its retro-futuristic aesthetic. If you love movies like Stripes or even Road Trip, this movie will give you those vibes. If you’re looking for an empathetic approach to being a young and stupid kid who follows his heart into the most dangerous pants to impress a girl because you’re too young to know any better- this movie is for you. It explores its share of political themes, yes. But it also explores far more grounded themes like friendship, loyalty, heroism, and finding your place in either this world, or an arachnid riddled warzone somewhere off-galaxy.

TRIVIA

Okay, now admittedly, if you’re a fan of this movie- you probably know this story. But I want to share it because I think it really speaks to this movie’s legacy. During an interview in 2016, Casper Van Dien told a story of a time he was picking up his 10 and 8 year old daughters from school. When he pulled up to the pickup zone, he notices his daughters talking to some boys from their class and when the boys saw Casper, they called out “Johnny Rico!” as the two had recognized him. According to Van Dien, when he asked the boys how they recognized him, they said their dads had made them watch the film with them. That just goes to show you that we are getting older and this is officially a dad movie. But I don’t have any kids and even if I did, it’s a fucking sweet dad movie. Van Dien continued with the story stating that his daughter asked him if he actually went naked for the movie’s shower scene. When Casper told his daughter he did indeed go nude, she replied saying “How could you do that to me?!” and “My life is ruined!”. Hey, if being naked in a Paul Verhoeven means you can’t have kids than… I guess I made the right decision. Call me Paul, I’m available.

And before we move on, let’s see if you can answer this question:

During the production, which actor from Starship Troopers suffered from heatstroke while filming in the 120 degree desert weather?

1. Casper Van Dien
2. Jake Busey
3. Clancy Brown
4. Patrick Muldoon

Comment your answer down below!

X-FACTOR

Okay, look- I’m not going to sugarcoat it. I’m having some trouble with this one. As usual, this is a movie that I adore. A movie that works for me on many levels and a movie that really just plays as one giant X-Factor. This is even Paul Verhoeven’s favorite film of his. How do I distill that into one small thing that makes it tick?

Well, first I wanted to praise the casting of this movie. And I’m not just talking about NPH and Denise Richards. This movie’s supporting cast and main cast are incredible. We get Jake Busey, Clancy Brown, Michael Ironside, Amy Smart, and Seth Gilliam. These actors are all great on their own, but together, it’s truly special. I also wanted to give the X-factor to Denise Richards just on principle, and then I even toyed with the idea of using this section to discuss the incredible CGI and visual effects that hold up so well. But, the truth is, you’ve heard all of that before. You already know that the creature design is flawless, the comedy is raunchy and light, the performances are perfectly dialed in and Rico’s hair is literally ideal. But what I think is the glue that holds that together is the brave and controversial decision of Paul Verhoeven and Edward Neumeier to adapt a book written in hate and turn it into something that brings people together. Imagine reading a book or even seeing a movie that you don’t agree with. In fact, it’s the opposing side of the things you personally believe. Then imagine taking that thing you don’t like and flipping it into the same story, but somehow saying the opposite in subtext. It’s brilliant. It would be like making Titanic into a commercial for a cruise- and making people like it. If you ask me, that more than deserves to be praised by fans of this cult classic film.

Thanks for watching our show! If you enjoyed this video please leave us a like for encouragement and a subscription for the very best in horror movies (and apparently Paul Verhoeven movies).

A couple of the previous episodes of Deconstructing… can be seen below,. To see more episodes, and to check out our other shows, head over to the JoBlo Horror Originals YouTube channel – and subscribe while you’re there!

The post Starship Troopers (1997) Revisited – Movie Review appeared first on JoBlo.

Sherlock Holmes is a character that has been iterated and reiterated for every living generation and a few dead ones as well. The character has been written in short stories, novels, films, TV, video games, and even comic books. No matter which direction you kick a can, you will likely hit someone who knows Sherlock Holmes and has their own version of them as “Their Sherlock.” For me, Guy Richie’s take on the pipe-smoking sleuth is the one that gets me the most excited about solving mysteries. In particular, the first installment in the two-part series (with a long-delayed third potentially on the way) is a work of film that I rewatch often and am endlessly impressed by. And within that film, I think there is almost no better display of Robert Downey Jr.‘s idea of what this 18th-century freelance detective was all about than the boxing match- also known as “The slow motion fight scene.” 

In the scene, Sherlock Holmes is in the middle of a bare-fist fighting match with a large opponent. The scene’s purpose is to show how quick Sherlock’s intellect is and how many steps ahead of everyone he really is. After nearly giving up on the fight, Sherlock is motivated to continue after being spit on by the other fighter in front of Sherlock’s on-again-off-again romantic partner, Irene Adler (played by Rachel McAdams). He maps out a theoretical brawl in his head using deductive reasoning and basic anatomy to demonstrate Sherlock’s wits. The scene was shot with specially made cameras that could capture a high frame rate, such that the footage could be slowed to an almost still shot to capture the detail of the hit’s impact perfectly. This fighting style is one that RDJ practices in real life and has dedicated the 10,000 hours it takes to be an expert in Wing Chun kung fu. Despite being a seasoned pro, he did incur a few real-life injuries during the film’s production- as did one of his scene partners, who states that Downey accidentally hit him in real life. 

The scene shows off Sherlock Holmes’ sharp cleverness and fighting skills and the character’s emotional vulnerability to Irene Adler. In one VERY entertaining scene, this tells us a lot about our titular character. Make sure you check out today’s episode of Scene Breakdown, where we watch the scene together, break it down, and have a few laughs along the way.

The post Guy Ritchie’s Sherlock Holmes: Does It Have The Best Slow-Motion Fight Ever Shot? appeared first on JoBlo.

It feels that the term “superhero movie” used to be a subgenre that could take on many forms. For example, Logan was a Western epic with super-powered characters at the core, but the tone was nothing like any of the other X-Men films of years past. Or the way Constantine gave us a dark horror-thriller with demons and monsters but kept the detective-slash-noir aesthetic and allowed it to bleed through. But, these days, it feels like nearly all of the caped cinema we’re getting fits into the same all-encompassing, mass-appealing mega-genre that has started to feel the same across every film- With the rare exception of movies like The Batman or Marvel’s recent Werewolf By Night, there’s been a frustrating lack of variety in the tones of modern comic book cinema. But back in 2011, Marvel was in the infancy of building out there now-dominating connected universe by way of introducing different characters in their films, before crossing over into one giant blockbuster event with Marvel’s Avengers.

With Iron Man already being two films in and Thor and the Hulk being introduced in their outings, it was time for Kevin Feige and the folks at Marvel Studios to rewind the clocks to 1942 and introduce audiences to one of the MCU’s most iconic heroes- in Captain America: The First Avenger.

If the Iron Man movies were a high-octane action romp, Thor was a Shakespearian ode to the Renaissance era, and The Incredible Hulk was… I don’t know, something? Marvel Studios wanted to tell the story of Captain America in an adventurous trip to the past where we can meet the man who unknowingly made it possible for the Avengers to come together nearly 70 years later. The film offers a full origin story for Steve Rogers as the character. Also, it brings in some history to help fill out the already-established MCU, giving the entire connected universe a sense of lore and detail that connects these films even further. But, by this time, Marvel’s confidence in the success of their projects led them to use this movie to dabble and experiment with the historical war epic genre- and in some ways, it works, and in other ways, it simply does not. But of course, the big question today is how this movie stacks up against the standards or lack thereof in today’s world of comic-riddled content. Let’s find out in today’s episode of Marvel Revisited.

The post Captain America: The First Avenger – How does Cap’s first screen outing hold up? appeared first on JoBlo.