handcrafted by maryann johanson (human) | 100% free of AIs and algorithms
Uniquely fresh yet also deeply lodged in the history of cinematic horror, with a powerful breakout performance from David Dastmalchian. But its triumph is, ironically, marred by the use of “AI” “art.”
1973’s The Exorcist is on Max in the US, BBC iPlayer in the UK (but leaving soon).
More of the same old religious-horror hoohah, plus Russell Crowe hamming it up, complete with terrible Italian accent. Its only twist on the usual exorcist-movie nonsense is genuinely pretty appalling.
As credulous — or con-artist cheaty — as its demon-hunter protagonists, but lacking their charm. Worse, it can’t even be bothered to justify and satisfy the procedural approach to its mystery.
It’s incredibly unnerving in ways that filmed horror often fails to achieve… [This post is not behind the paywall.]
A tad dated and scattershot, but the messy package is inventively absurd… and unlike many Hollywood comedies, able to carry that absurdity to a silly end.
Inspired by Tubular Bells II, and how cinematic the movements are. There are huge chunks of this I’d love to see onscreen…
Me? I cannot ever hear Eric Clapton’s “Layla” and not think of GoodFellas…
Does this seem so terrifying that it could not be seen by human eyes?
Plus: the shocking number of British actors who have not been in a Harry Potter movie; is Wikileaks’ Julian Assange being persecuted?; we don’t need no stinkin’ objectivity in journalism; and more.
sample sponsored post (sponsored) - Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Fusce quis risus odio.
