Movies: Horror Movie Discussion

[shadow1]

Let the Right One In (2008) - 9/10

A severely bullied boy befriends a mysterious girl who's moved in next door.

Kare Hedebrant stars as Oskar, a young student who is friendless, and spends his free time obsessing over local murders and fantasizing about murdering the physically abusive bullies from school. One night while playing outside Oscar meets Eli (Lina Leandersson), a peculiar new neighbor who's moved in next door. The two form a quick friendship, with Oskar unaware that his new ally is a centuries old vampire...

Let the Right One In was directed by Tomas Alfredson, and written by John Ajvide Lindqvist. The film is based on screenwriter Lindqvist's 2004 novel of the same name, which the author insisted on adapting himself to tone down some of the elements from book he thought wouldn't translate well to the screen. How does it fare?

It's excellent. The film tells a coming of age story, with themes of friendship, identity, and loneliness. The movie is well directed and photographed, with multiple memorable shots and sequences. Let the Right One In has an excellent use of color, doing a great job of contrasting the white daytime of snowy Stockholm with the dark nighttime. This creates a nice contrast for this horror film, because at night - usually a time of scares - Oskar is able to be comfortable and share happiness with his friend Eli, escaping the real horrors he has to face in the light of day.

Speaking of Oskar and Eli, the film has excellent portrayals by Kare Hedebrant and Lina Leandersson. I'm aghast how neither child actor has had much of a career since this film came out, as both give performances full of subtlety and nuance. The acting in this film is overall very strong, and is helped by how well written the movie is. At nearly two hours long, Let the Right One In takes its time to develop its world and characters, establishing what normal looks like before injecting vampirism into the mix.

It is a horror movie though, and Let the Right One In more than holds up its end of the bargain in that respect. Because the horror takes a back seat to the themes and events, you're caught off guard whenever there is a really cool horror sequence or special effect. There are a couple really well done practical effects, and the final sequence of the film is magnificent due to how the filmmakers went about shooting it. The only flaw I have to mention on this topic is that there is an unintentionally hilarious scene in the middle of the movie that involves CGI, but fortunately it's easy to look past.

Finally, in addition to just being a great film, there is reason for further thought after the credits role, as there are many ways one could interpret the overall events. I don't think there is a right or wrong answer, as much of what happens in this movie is not black or white (aside from the use of color I mentioned earlier). Your interpretation of the movie will depend on how you perceive the actions, motivations, and even reactions of certain characters.

Overall, Let the Right One In is exceptional. It is a truly fresh take on the vampire genre...which I am just now seeing and reviewing nearly 20 blasted years later! (Just do me a favor and take away my horror card right now). The film received critical acclaim and was remade into a 2010 American version titled "Let Me In", as well as a 2022 Showtime TV series. Let the Right One In earned $11.2M against its $4M budget.

 

[Osprey]

Hey, who told you that you could review non-franchise horror films here, let alone good ones?

I recall almost watching that a long time ago, but ultimately passed because of the vampire subject matter. The Twilight movies were popular at the time (need I say more?) and I'm not interested vampires, in general, unless it's ol' Dracula, himself.

I feel like I'm being pressured into watching a vampire movie if I want to keep my horror card and that's not cool.

 

[shadow1]

Hey, who told you that you could review non-franchise horror films here, let alone good ones?

I recall almost watching that a long time ago, but ultimately passed because of the vampire subject matter. The Twilight movies were popular at the time and I'm not keen on vampires unless it's ol' Dracula.

I feel like I'm being pressured into watching a vampire movie if I want to keep my horror card and that's not cool.

Don't worry, I have tentative plans to start the Leprechaun series soon.

But yeah, Let the Right One In is seriously good. I get where you're coming from because I wasn't sure if it would be my cup of tea. At the risk of overselling the movie, having now watched, it retroactively felt like a big blindspot in my horror filmography.

If you do the Letterboxd "Hooptober" watchlist in October, in the past they've had a category for non-Dracula vampire films. That would be a good time to check this one out.

 

[Fripp]

Let the Right One In (2008) - 9/10

A severely bullied boy befriends a mysterious girl who's moved in next door.

Kare Hedebrant stars as Oskar, a young student who is friendless, and spends his free time obsessing over local murders and fantasizing about murdering the physically abusive bullies from school. One night while playing outside Oscar meets Eli (Lina Leandersson), a peculiar new neighbor who's moved in next door. The two form a quick friendship, with Oskar unaware that his new ally is a centuries old vampire...

Let the Right One In was directed by Tomas Alfredson, and written by John Ajvide Lindqvist. The film is based on screenwriter Lindqvist's 2004 novel of the same name, which the author insisted on adapting himself to tone down some of the elements from book he thought wouldn't translate well to the screen. How does it fare?

It's excellent. The film tells a coming of age story, with themes of friendship, identity, and loneliness. The movie is well directed and photographed, with multiple memorable shots and sequences. Let the Right One In has an excellent use of color, doing a great job of contrasting the white daytime of snowy Stockholm with the dark nighttime. This creates a nice contrast for this horror film, because at night - usually a time of scares - Oskar is able to be comfortable and share happiness with his friend Eli, escaping the real horrors he has to face in the light of day.

Speaking of Oskar and Eli, the film has excellent portrayals by Kare Hedebrant and Lina Leandersson. I'm aghast how neither child actor has had much of a career since this film came out, as both give performances full of subtlety and nuance. The acting in this film is overall very strong, and is helped by how well written the movie is. At nearly two hours long, Let the Right One In takes its time to develop its world and characters, establishing what normal looks like before injecting vampirism into the mix.

It is a horror movie though, and Let the Right One In more than holds up its end of the bargain in that respect. Because the horror takes a back seat to the themes and events, you're caught off guard whenever there is a really cool horror sequence or special effect. There are a couple really well done practical effects, and the final sequence of the film is magnificent due to how the filmmakers went about shooting it. The only flaw I have to mention on this topic is that there is an unintentionally hilarious scene in the middle of the movie that involves CGI, but fortunately it's easy to look past.

Finally, in addition to just being a great film, there is reason for further thought after the credits role, as there are many ways one could interpret the overall events. I don't think there is a right or wrong answer, as much of what happens in this movie is not black or white (aside from the use of color I mentioned earlier). Your interpretation of the movie will depend on how you perceive the actions, motivations, and even reactions of certain characters.

Overall, Let the Right One In is exceptional. It is a truly fresh take on the vampire genre...which I am just now seeing and reviewing nearly 20 blasted years later! (Just do me a favor and take away my horror card right now). The film received critical acclaim and was remade into a 2010 American version titled "Let Me In", as well as a 2022 Showtime TV series. Let the Right One In earned $11.2M against its $4M budget.

I love this movie so much. Great review.

 

[PK Cronin]

Let the Right One In (2008) - 9/10

A severely bullied boy befriends a mysterious girl who's moved in next door.

Kare Hedebrant stars as Oskar, a young student who is friendless, and spends his free time obsessing over local murders and fantasizing about murdering the physically abusive bullies from school. One night while playing outside Oscar meets Eli (Lina Leandersson), a peculiar new neighbor who's moved in next door. The two form a quick friendship, with Oskar unaware that his new ally is a centuries old vampire...

Let the Right One In was directed by Tomas Alfredson, and written by John Ajvide Lindqvist. The film is based on screenwriter Lindqvist's 2004 novel of the same name, which the author insisted on adapting himself to tone down some of the elements from book he thought wouldn't translate well to the screen. How does it fare?

It's excellent. The film tells a coming of age story, with themes of friendship, identity, and loneliness. The movie is well directed and photographed, with multiple memorable shots and sequences. Let the Right One In has an excellent use of color, doing a great job of contrasting the white daytime of snowy Stockholm with the dark nighttime. This creates a nice contrast for this horror film, because at night - usually a time of scares - Oskar is able to be comfortable and share happiness with his friend Eli, escaping the real horrors he has to face in the light of day.

Speaking of Oskar and Eli, the film has excellent portrayals by Kare Hedebrant and Lina Leandersson. I'm aghast how neither child actor has had much of a career since this film came out, as both give performances full of subtlety and nuance. The acting in this film is overall very strong, and is helped by how well written the movie is. At nearly two hours long, Let the Right One In takes its time to develop its world and characters, establishing what normal looks like before injecting vampirism into the mix.

It is a horror movie though, and Let the Right One In more than holds up its end of the bargain in that respect. Because the horror takes a back seat to the themes and events, you're caught off guard whenever there is a really cool horror sequence or special effect. There are a couple really well done practical effects, and the final sequence of the film is magnificent due to how the filmmakers went about shooting it. The only flaw I have to mention on this topic is that there is an unintentionally hilarious scene in the middle of the movie that involves CGI, but fortunately it's easy to look past.

Finally, in addition to just being a great film, there is reason for further thought after the credits role, as there are many ways one could interpret the overall events. I don't think there is a right or wrong answer, as much of what happens in this movie is not black or white (aside from the use of color I mentioned earlier). Your interpretation of the movie will depend on how you perceive the actions, motivations, and even reactions of certain characters.

Overall, Let the Right One In is exceptional. It is a truly fresh take on the vampire genre...which I am just now seeing and reviewing nearly 20 blasted years later! (Just do me a favor and take away my horror card right now). The film received critical acclaim and was remade into a 2010 American version titled "Let Me In", as well as a 2022 Showtime TV series. Let the Right One In earned $11.2M against its $4M budget.

I enjoyed it when it came out, might have to give it another watch after this review.

 

[Osprey]

The Lodge (2019) - 7/10

When their father can't get off work, two kids must spend part of their Christmas vacation at a remote lodge with their troubled soon-to-be stepmom (Riley Keough). This is an unsettling psychological horror that's short on conventional scares but heavy on mood and suspense. That's right up my alley. Give me atmosphere over jump scares any day. It's a slow burn that steadily increases the tension and dread as the situation goes from bad to worse. The Shining felt like an inspiration and I was also reminded of Hereditary from the year before. A sense of tragedy permeates the film and centers on the main character of Grace, who's to blame for some of it, but also a victim of it. I liked that she's a flawed character who manages to be sympathetic in spite of or even because of her flaws. Keough does an impressive job walking that line. The two child actors are also surprisingly good. Most of the film is just the three of them, so it really helps that they all give strong performances. If there's one thing that I wish were a little better, it's the very ending, which is a bit abrupt and unsatisfying, but not enough to spoil it. I was still left with a lot to think about. This appears to be a rather divisive film, with nearly half of viewers strongly disliking it, calling it boring and slow, and the other half and most critics praising it. I obviously fall into the latter group because I really value atmosphere and don't mind a slow film if it slowly and intelligently builds suspense, which this does. It won't be everyone's cup of tea, but it was mine.

Night Shift (2023) - 4/10

On her first shift at a remote, run-down motel, a night manager (Phoebe Tonkin) begins to witness strange occurrences and feel that she's being stalked. The first hour is rather slow and predictable as she goes about her job, checking on cabins and watching security monitors, sees things, investigates, finds nothing, gets startled (jump scares), runs back to her desk and eventually repeats the cycle. There's some decent tension and creepiness, but I was still a bit bored. Eventually, though, the movie takes an incredible turn with a big twist that I didn't see coming, but is such a blatant rip-off from another film that I can't really commend it. Regardless, it made the final 20 minutes a lot more interesting to me, but some other reviewers preferred the first hour and thought that the twist and ending ruined the movie. I can see that, especially since the ending is a lot more unbelievable. In fact, a lot doesn't make sense, nor does some of the rest of the film in hindsight, suggesting that the filmmakers cheated a bit. To say that the plot has holes is an understatement. The movie has issues and could've been better, but I will say that it's not bad for a debut, so the filmmakers (Benjamin and Paul China, calling themselves "The China Brothers" in the credits) could have potential.

Stopmotion (2023) - 3/10

A stop motion animator (Aisling Franciosi) becomes consumed by her work and her grotesque creations. This is another film (like The Lodge) that critics love and audiences are split on, but I fall on the other side on this one and didn't like it at all. I'm not much of a fan of overtly "artistic" films or surreal horror and this is both. The stop motion segments are unique and disturbing, but the story outside of those segments wasn't interesting and didn't make much sense to me. I never bought that the main character was so wrapped up in her work as to suddenly start to lose her sense of reality. In fact, I got more of the opposite impression, that she didn't really enjoy her job and wasn't even good at it. Artistically inclined viewers and body horror aficionados might appreciate the movie more, and it has received praise, but I just didn't enjoy anything about it.

 

[shadow1]

Evil Dead Rise (2023) - 6/10

A family in a derelict apartment building comes under siege from demonic possession.

Lily Sullivan stars as Beth, a guitar technician who goes to visit her tattoo artist sister Ellie (Alyssa Sutherland) and her three kids - Bridget (Gabrielle Echols), Danny (Morgan Davies), and Kassie (Nell Fisher). The family lives in a condemned apartment building, and during Beth's visit an earthquake strikes, causing a power outage. Worse, the damage revealed a hidden tomb underneath the building, unleashing demonic possession upon the family...

Evil Dead Rise was written and directed by Lee Cronin. Fifth, sixth, and seventh Evil Dead movies were discussed dating all the way back to 2013, with Fede Alvarez and series creator Sam Raimi tabbed to split the directing duties. Following the "Ash vs Evil Dead" TV series (2015-2019), Executive Producers Bruce Cambell and Raimi went back to the drawing board, and tabbed Cronin to write and direct an original Evil Dead movie with loose ties to the previous movies. How does it fare?

It's decent, but frustrating. Evil Dead Rise has a fresh concept relative to the rest of the series, setting the events in a high-rise apartment building, rather than the familiar cabin in the woods. However, the execution just isn't there. The setting is underutilized, as the audience is largely confined to Ellie's apartment, and we see little else of the structure outside of the parking garage.

I take big issue with this film's writing and characterizations. The first 40 minutes try to establish an emotional base for the movie, but I just couldn't find myself believing or caring about what the characters were saying. Furthermore, the character traits in this movie are way too on-the-nose. One character aspires to be a DJ, that's how they're able to play a vinyl record later in the movie; one character is a technician, so they have a way to jerry-rig an electronic device during a blackout; one character is pregnant and then has to take a maternal role later on. It's like the filmmakers had to make even trivial moments connected back to character traits.

Evil Dead Rise also has multiple idiot plot moments, and you'll have to suspend your disbelief the amount of times a character finds themselves attacked in the small apartment, with the other nearby characters somehow completely unaware. Worse, this movie has a ton of deus ex machina, with characters always seeming to have exactly what they need to get out of a tough situation.

Being as vague as possible, there is a key scene where our protagonists learn how to properly defend themselves against the deadites. They don't make plans on how to get the items(s) they need to, everything just falls into place in the most extreme way possible. It's so convenient that it makes the scene where they learn what they need completely pointless. The equivalent would be if the deadites were hypothetically weak to fire, and our heroes found a flamethrower. Even if they didn't know about the weakness beforehand, obviously they'd use the flamethrower in self defense.

Complaints aside, Evil Dead Rise isn't all bad - and isn't really a bad movie at all. I purposely started this review out with Evil Dead Rise's negatives because that's how the movie played out for me. I was really frustrated early on, but the movie seemed to get better and better as the run time elapsed, ultimately settling in as decent popcorn entertainment.

The movie is photographed well and has serviceable gore, though I'd say the horror is a mixed bag due to an over reliance on jump scares. Alyssa Sutherland gives a standout performance, and I thought Nell Fisher gave a good child actress performance. The biggest thing Evil Dead Rise has going for it is a lack of predictability, as there were surprising deaths along the way and I wasn't really sure how things would turn out. I also thought the open titles were awesome.

Overall, Evil Dead Rise is an average movie, and in my opinion the worst Evil Dead film, barely scraping by at a "6" for me. It is a film that I find to be more annoying than bad, and I think most people will find it to be a serviceable horror movie. Regardless of what I think of it, Evil Dead Rise was a big hit, earning $147M against its $12M budget.

 

[Osprey]

I had all of the same complaints with Evil Dead Rise, plus that it didn't feel like an Evil Dead movie because of the setting and lack of quirkiness/humor (and Ash). I didn't warm up to it as it went along like you did, though. In fact, I found the ending one of the most insulting things about it. She conveniently finds a wood chipper and a chainsaw in a parking garage (aren't trees usually cleared out before those are built and opened?) and we're expected to cheer because the chainsaw is one of Ash's iconic weapons. Ugh. I agree that it's the worst in the franchise.

At least we got 3 seasons of Ash vs Evil Dead, which is so much better. If you haven't seen it yet, I highly recommend it. The first season is included with a Prime subscription and The first episode is free on Prime and Roku.

 

[BostonBob]

Let the Right One In (2008) - 9/10

The film received critical acclaim and was remade into a 2010 American version titled "Let Me In", as well as a 2022 Showtime TV series. Let the Right One In earned $11.2M against its $4M budget.

I liked the 2010 remake but when I saw the original I thought it was so much better.

At least we got 3 seasons of Ash vs Evil Dead, which is so, so much better. If you haven't seen it yet, I highly, highly recommend it. The first season is included with a Prime subscription and, if you don't have one, the first episode is free on Roku.

I just checked and the series is not currently available on Amazon Prime Canada. Did you ever watch " Stan Against Evil " ???? Not quite as good as AvED but still an enjoyable watch.

 

[Osprey]

I just checked and the series is not currently available on Amazon Prime Canada. Did you ever watch " Stan Against Evil " ???? Not quite as good as AvED but still an enjoyable watch.

Yeah, it looks like the first season of Ash vs Evil Dead isn't on Prime in the US, either, so the site that I was going off of was wrong... but the first episode is available to watch for free. The series is worth the Starz subscription, though, IMO.

I've never even heard of Stan Against Evil. I may check it out. Thanks.

 

[BostonBob]

Yeah, it looks like the first season of Ash vs Evil Dead isn't on Prime in the US, either, so the site that I was going off of was wrong... but the first episode is available to watch for free. The series is worth the Starz subscription, though, IMO.

I did watch AvED years ago when it was on Super Channel. I wouldn't mind watching it again.

I've never even heard of Stan Against Evil. I may check it out. Thanks.

Yeah - it's pretty good. It stars John C. McGinley ( the mean Doctor from Scrubs ) and it didn't get a lot of promotion but I thought it was quite good.

 

[shadow1]

I had all of the same complaints with Evil Dead Rise, plus that it didn't feel like an Evil Dead movie because of the setting and lack of quirkiness/humor (and Ash). I didn't warm up to it as it went along like you did, though. In fact, I found the ending one of the most insulting things about it. She conveniently finds a chainsaw in an underground garage (were there trees down there that needed cutting or something?) and we're expected to cheer because it's one of Ash's iconic weapons. Ugh. I agree that it's the worst in the franchise.

At least we got 3 seasons of Ash vs Evil Dead, which is so much better. If you haven't seen it yet, I highly recommend it. The first season is included with a Prime subscription and The first episode is free on Prime and Roku.

I agree with you actually, I didn't like the actual ending. The monstrous creature parking itself in front of the wood chipper was awful, as were the callbacks you mentioned; the chainsaw, the shotgun, several pieces of dialogue, etc. I also thought the bookend story with the people at the cabin was pointless (though as mentioned, I liked the big "Evil Dead Rise" credit).

What I liked was I started to think all of the characters were going to bite the dust. I don't mean that in a morbid sense, just that I wasn't sure where things were heading. It seemed like Beth and Kassie were totally screwed, but sadly found their way out of their predicament via a handy dandy wood chipper that just so happened to be in the parking garage of this vacant apartment building.

Agreed on Ash vs. Evil Dead. I think that series is probably the perfect blend of what fans love most about the series: the horror-comedy of Evil Dead 2, combined with the iconic/doofus version of Ash from Army of Darkness.

 

[shadow1]

Ash vs. Evil Dead, the complete series (30 eps), is on sale for a reasonable $24.99 on Apple for anyone who hasn't seen it.

 

[shadow1]

Tales from the Crypt: Demon Knight (1995) - 7/10

A boarding house comes under siege from demons searching for an important artifact.

William Sadler stars as Frank Brayker, a drifter who is on the run from a mysterious man called The Collector (Billy Zane). With no transportation in a desolate New Mexico town, Brayker hides out a boarding house previously converted from a church. However, The Collector quickly finds him, and the boarding house tenants - including former convict Jeryline (Jada Pinkett Smith), cook Roach (Thomas Haden Church), owner Irene (C.C.H. Pounder), and town drunk Uncle Willy (Dick Miller) - must fend off a horde of undead demons and survive until sunrise...

Tales from the Crypt: Demon Knight was directed by Ernest R. Dickerson, and written by Mark Bishop, Ethan Reiff, and Cyrus Voris. The script was originally written in 1987, with Tom Holland (1985's Fright Night) and Mary Lambert (1988's Pet Sematary) both attached to direct at points. Eventually landing with producers of HBO's Tales from the Crypt TV series, Demon Knight was originally planned as the second in a trilogy of films, but was bumped up to first in the order due to perceived marketability compared to HBO's other scripts. How does it fare?

It's extremely fun! Demon Knight is a Night of the Living Dead (1968) style siege movie, and has a ton of strong elements going for it. It's atmospheric, set on a dark and stormy night in a run down hotel. This movie has a certain look to it that I enjoy but can't properly describe, other than to say you can visually tell it was produced by HBO and that its from the 1990's.

The story has a surprising amount of lore (which I won't spoil) and cool flashback scenes, with William Sadler giving a good dramatic lead performance as the tormented Brayker. On the flip side, the movie doesn't take itself too seriously. The gore is fun and over-the-top, and the film has a healthy dose of comic relief. Billy Zane is an absolute riot as The Collector, stealing a bunch of scenes with an extremely charismatic performance. The cast in general is solid and has a ton of familiar faces. You know you're in for a good time when Dick Miller has a leading role, as opposed to his usual one scene cameos.

I don't have too many issues with the film, but I have to critique one plot related moment. Towards the middle of the film, the characters make a decision/take a course of action that I wish the screenwriters had found a different way to write. It's not that our heroes action(s) are necessarily unbelievable, but it was pretty obvious their safest course of action during that moment was to do absolutely nothing. I won't go as far as calling this an "idiot plot" moment as much as I'd call it "the characters chose the worse of two bad choices to pad out some run time".

Overall, Demon Knight is an extremely satisfying siege movie best watched on a dark and stormy night (or even as a part of a Halloween movie marathon). Unfortunately, the film - which was released between the final two seasons of the Tales of the Crypt, and possibly hurt by the show's waning popularity - underwhelmed commercially, earning only $21M against its $13M budget.

 

[shadow1]

Leprechaun (1993) - 4/10

An evil leprechaun goes on a killing spree in search of gold.

Jennifer Aniston stars as Tory, who along with her father rents an old farmhouse for the summer. Contract workers Nathan (Ken Olandt), his 10-year-old brother Alex (Robert Hy Gorman), and their special needs friend Ozzie (Mark Holton) have been hired to re-paint the farmhouse. Alex and Ozzie come across gold, which they stash in the hopes of using later to fix Ozzie's condition. However, this causes them to be hunted by an evil leprechaun (Warwick Davis), who had been laying dormant in the farmhouse's basement...

Leprechaun was written and directed by Mark Jones. Jones, who worked mostly in TV, wanted to break into film by making a low budget horror movie. Influenced by the movie Critters (1996) and the Lucky Charms cereal commercials, Jones was able to secure a very small budget of less than $1M to make Leprechaun. How does it fare?

Okay, so I already reviewed this movie. I said it was bad (no kidding), but didn't really say why, so here we are. Leprechaun starts things off on the wrong foot, with a severely uneventful first 40 minutes. Other than the opening flashback scene, this movie is a whole lot of nothing in the first half. We see our characters painting a house, eating at a diner, getting into small arguments, and other types of minutiae that does little more than kill screen time. The leprechaun is shown, but he's hiding beneath a staircase not going much of anything. This movie's music also sounds like is belongs in a Disney movie.

Once the horror ramps up at the midway point, Leprechaun turns into a slasher movie. But the body count is criminally low, and there's not much of an attempt at horror. When the leprechaun is done taking out of a couple of extras, he isn't able to really do much to the principal cast. They outnumber and outsize him, and for the most part handle encounters with the villain pretty easily, beating him with sticks, kicking him, and even using a shotgun. The big thing the leprechaun has going for him is seemingly being indestructible. It is a horror-comedy though, and the filmmakers really put all their chips on the latter, hoping the leprechaun's wisecracks can keep the audience entertained. Comedy is subjective, but I would personally need to be so drunk as to being near death for me to find any humor in this movie.

Most movies have some redeeming qualities though, and Leprechaun is no exception. The makeup on the leprechaun character is amazing; I think most horror fans are familiar with the character even if they haven't seen the movies, largely due to the strong makeup. Warwick Davis gives a good performance as the character, though as mentioned he doesn't have great dialogue to work with. And, as I mentioned last time, Jennifer Aniston is legitimately good in this movie. It's not that I've never seen a good performance in a horror movie, but Aniston's character really has nothing going on beneath the surface, yet she manages to bring life to her mediocre dialogue. It probably helps her case that her lines are often juxtaposed against some extremely wooden deliveries from other performers...but I've complained enough about this film.

Overall, Leprechaun is a bad movie. Even with consideration of its meager 900K budget, the film feels like a chore to get through. Nevertheless, in spite of my critiques of it artistically, Leprechaun did well commercially, earning $8.5M and eventually spawning seven sequels.

 

[CDJ]

Immaculate (2024) directed by Michael Mohan

A Sydney Sweeney nunsploitation psychological horror. Overall it was fine, I’m not going to seek it out again but I’m glad I watched it. The end was funny in a “The Mist” sort of way. Seemed like a commentary on forced childbirth.

6.0/10

 

[shadow1]

Leprechaun 2 (1994) - 6/10

An evil leprechaun seeks to marry the descendant of one of his slaves.

Warwick Davis returns as Lubdan the leprechaun, who in the year 994 is seeking a bride on his 1,000th birthday. However, when he is tricked by one of his slaves into losing his bride-to-be, Lubdan vows to marry the slave's descendant on his next 1,000th birthday. Awakening in 1994 Hollywood, Lubdan works to track down the descendant, Bridget (Shevonne Durkin), but her boyfriend Cody (Charlie Heath) and his horror tour guide, scam artist uncle Morty (Sandy Baron) work to stop the evil leprechaun...

Leprechaun 2 was directed by Rodman Flender, and written by Turi Meyer and Al Septien. With series creator Mark Jones stepping back into an Executive Producer role due to working on the film Rumpelstiltskin (1995), a new creative team was brought in. The original concept was for Jennifer Aniston's Tory character to return as the target of Lubdan's infatuation, but with Aniston working on the TV series "Friends", the writers developed the marriage concept around a new cast of characters. How does it fare?

It's fun! Leprechaun 2 understands what type of film it is - a cheesy horror movie about a killer leprechaun - and fully embraces it. The comedy is good, and is aided by the self-aware decision to set the movie on St. Patrick's Day. Warwick Davis has better material to work with this time around, and we also learn more about Lubdan's character and his weaknesses. However, it should be noted there is significant discussion online about whether or not the leprechaun in this movie is the same one from the first film due to backstory changes.

In addition to solid comedy, the kills are fun (with one kill in particular being very memorable), and there was a moment or two that reminded me of something you might see in an Evil Dead movie. As for the plot, it's extremely generic but I think it's a good choice for this series entry. I've read complaints online about it (more on that later), but in my opinion giving the Lubdan a different motivation than gold - while still having him held back by his obsession with it - created a nice bit of nuance. But I'm not trying to oversell the plot; it's serviceable.

Of course, Leprechaun 2 is far from perfect. Some of the comedy gags don't work, there are logic flaws, and the characters and performances are a mixed bag. One one hand, Sandy Baron - best known for playing Jack Klompus in Seinfeld - gives a fun performance as a sleazy-but-lovable grifter. On the other, Cody is a generic lead protagonist, and Bridget gets it the worst by being a prototypical damsel in distress. Most of Shevonne Durkin's scenes are alone, and though the movie tries to give her things to do, they are very obviously filler and give credence to people who don't like this movie's "bride" plot.

With all of that said, for all its pluses and minuses, I found Leprechaun 2 to be a significant upgrade on the original Leprechaun. I was surprised to see it rated slightly lower on both IMDB and Letterboxd, so I dug into the reviews. Though the consensus seems to be split as to which film is better, those who prefer the 1993 original seem to really hate the plot of Part 2. As mentioned, I disagree and think it's serviceable, and ultimately is just a means to an end. To that end: you can have fun with Leprechaun 2, whereas the original Leprechaun is an insomnia cure.

Overall, Leprechaun 2 is a fun movie that caught me off guard. While no masterpiece, my expectations were so low after the original film that part 2 ended up being a very pleasant surprise. Unfortunately - probably in part because the original was such a steaming pile of four leaf clovers - Leprechaun 2 bombed at the box office, earning only $2.26M against its $2M budget.

(Side note: I had to watch this movie in two sittings. One of my toilets started leaking while I was about 30 minutes in, and it took me two full nights to fix the bloody thing. I found a nihilistic video on Youtube that helped me keep my sanity, with the great quote "We're using wax rings on toilets? What, did we run out of corn cobs?" Overall, I do not recommend my toilet repair adventure. It earned -$73 at The Home Depot.)

 

[Pranzo Oltranzista]

Leprechaun 2 (1994) - 6/10

An evil leprechaun seeks to marry the descendant of one of his slaves.

Warwick Davis returns as Lubdan the leprechaun, who in the year 994 is seeking a bride on his 1,000th birthday. However, when he is tricked by one of his slaves into losing his bride-to-be, Lubdan vows to marry the slave's descendant on his next 1,000th birthday. Awakening in 1994 Hollywood, Lubdan works to track down the descendant, Bridget (Shevonne Durkin), but her boyfriend Cody (Charlie Heath) and his horror tour guide, scam artist uncle Morty (Sandy Baron) work to stop the evil leprechaun...

Leprechaun 2 was directed by Rodman Flender, and written by Turi Meyer and Al Septien. With series creator Mark Jones stepping back into an Executive Producer role due to working on the film Rumpelstiltskin (1995), a new creative team was brought in. The original concept was for Jennifer Aniston's Tory character to return as the target of Lubdan's infatuation, but with Aniston working on the TV series "Friends", the writers developed the marriage concept around a new cast of characters. How does it fare?

It's fun! Leprechaun 2 understands what type of film it is - a cheesy horror movie about a killer leprechaun - and fully embraces it. The comedy is good, and is aided by the self-aware decision to set the movie on St. Patrick's Day. Warwick Davis has better material to work with this time around, and we also learn more about Lubdan's character and his weaknesses. However, it should be noted there is significant discussion online about whether or not the leprechaun in this movie is the same one from the first film due to backstory changes.

In addition to solid comedy, the kills are fun (with one kill in particular being very memorable), and there was a moment or two that reminded me of something you might see in an Evil Dead movie. As for the plot, it's extremely generic but I think it's a good choice for this series entry. I've read complaints online about it (more on that later), but in my opinion giving the Lubdan a different motivation than gold - while still having him held back by his obsession with it - created a nice bit of nuance. But I'm not trying to oversell the plot; it's serviceable.

Of course, Leprechaun 2 is far from perfect. Some of the comedy gags don't work, there are logic flaws, and the characters and performances are a mixed bag. One one hand, Sandy Baron - best known for playing Jack Klompus in Seinfeld - gives a fun performance as a sleazy-but-lovable grifter. On the other, Cody is a generic lead protagonist, and Bridget gets it the worst by being a prototypical damsel in distress. Most of Shevonne Durkin's scenes are alone, and though the movie tries to give her things to do, they are very obviously filler and give credence to people who don't like this movie's "bride" plot.

With all of that said, for all its pluses and minuses, I found Leprechaun 2 to be a significant upgrade on the original Leprechaun. I was surprised to see it rated slightly lower on both IMDB and Letterboxd, so I dug into the reviews. Though the consensus seems to be split as to which film is better, those who prefer the 1993 original seem to really hate the plot of Part 2. As mentioned, I disagree and think it's serviceable, and ultimately is just a means to an end. To that end: you can have fun with Leprechaun 2, whereas the original Leprechaun is an insomnia cure.

Overall, Leprechaun 2 is a fun movie that caught me off guard. While no masterpiece, my expectations were so low after the original film that part 2 ended up being a very pleasant surprise. Unfortunately - probably in part because the original was such a steaming pile of four leaf clovers - Leprechaun 2 bombed at the box office, earning only $2.26M against its $2M budget.

(Side note: I had to watch this movie in two sittings. One of my toilets started leaking while I was about 30 minutes in, and it took me two full nights to fix the bloody thing. I found a nihilistic video on Youtube that helped me keep my sanity, with the great quote "We're using wax rings on toilets? What, did we run out of corn cobs?" Overall, I do not recommend my toilet repair adventure. It earned -$73 at The Home Depot.)

I really remember nothing of this film, but I have the feeling you are being way too generous! And too hard on the leaking toilet, you should have been grateful it gave you a break from that movie. ;-)

 

[shadow1]

I really remember nothing of this film, but I have the feeling you are being way too generous! And too hard on the leaking toilet, you should have been grateful it gave you a break from that movie. ;-)

I probably am. But it's a movie I'd consider rewatching on a future St. Patrick's Day.

Leprechaun 2 (from the mid-90's) felt like an 80's horror movie - maybe akin to a middle-of-the-road Nightmare on Elm Street sequel - and actually has me somewhat looking forward to the rest of the series.

 

[shadow1]

Leprechaun 3 (1995) - 5/10

A college student is stalked through a Las Vegas casino by an evil leprechaun.

John Gantis stars as Scott, a college student passing through Las Vegas. After helping broken down motorist Tammy (Lee Armstrong), as a favor she sneaks Scott into the casino where she works as a magician's assistant. While there, Scott comes across a lucky gold coin which can grant him one wish. Unfortunately, other casino goers - including roulette dealer Loretta (Caroline Williams) and magician Fazio (John DeMita) - find out about the coin's powers and try to steal it from Scott. Worse, Lubdan the evil leprechaun - the coin's rightful owner - is leaving a bloody trail behind as he tries to repossess it...

Leprechaun 3 was directed by Brian Trenchard-Smith, and written by David DuBos. Following the commercial failure of Leprechaun 2, Leprechaun 3 was made direct-to-video. The film was based on the concept of "Leprechaun in Vegas", and seven writers submitted scripts based on this guideline, with DuBos winning the competition. How does it fare?

It's fun, but mediocre. Giving credence to the theories each movie has a different leprechaun, Lubdan's backstory is once again different in this entry, and the movie takes its sweet time expositing it. After a 20+ minute cat & mouse game between Lubdan and a pawn shop owner, it's established that a piece of the leprechaun's gold can grant a singular wish to those who possess it. After that, the film shifts to the main events of the movie, which take place inside a small casino.

And those main events don't have a ton to do with Lubdan. He has a lot of screen time, don't get me wrong. But most of the movie focuses on the eccentric casino goers and their quest to acquire Scott's gold coin. Though the acting is incredibly mixed due to this being a non-union film, this portion of the film still has its moments. Caroline Williams is good as a crooked casino dealer, and John DeMita gives a fun and memorable performance as a stuck-up magician. On the flip side, the supposedly 18-year-old Scott (played by Oscar winning screenwriter Gantis) and Tammy are bland and underwritten.

As for Lubdan, there are times you'd forget you're watching a Leprechaun movie, if not for the fact there are spliced shots of him walking on the Vegas strip (where the filmmakers apparently didn't have a permit to film). These sequences don't add much to the film, but I guess they're fun in a cheesy way. However, because Lubdan's sidelined from the main events for so long, I'd argue it wouldn't take much reworking of the script to remove him from the film.

Eventually the leprechaun rejoins the fray though, and Warwick Davis - who cites this film as his favorite in the series - does have some decent comedic material to work with, but nothing I'd call super memorable. Leprechaun 3 doesn't really have any horror, though the gore is probably the best up to this point in the series. But, because of how generic the lead characters are and how (at times) divorced the leprechaun is from the main events, when I think of this movie my mind immediately goes to all of the weirdos that work in the casino.

Overall, Leprechaun 3 is a decent direct-to-video effort. It's a watchable movie that you can have some fun with, but one you're likely to forget about shortly after. Made for only $1.2M, the film was originally intended to be the final film in the franchise. But due to extremely high VHS sales, the series continued and spawned another sequel the very next year.

 

[Osprey]

The film was based on the concept of "Leprechaun in Vegas", and seven writers submitted scripts based on this guideline, with DuBos winning the competition.

This must be how mediocre sequels get made. Why hamstring the writers like this instead of letting them come up with their own ideas? Out of seven, one or two scripts might've actually been decent. Why be like "No, I don't want a good Leprechaun movie. I want a Leprechaun in Vegas movie, dang it!"?

I don't think that I've seen beyond the first or second in the franchise. It's not a franchise that I've ever thought that I needed to complete, so I'm curious to hear your thoughts. Maybe I'll go through them eventually, but the fact that there are 7 or so of them is daunting.

 

[shadow1]

Leprechaun 4: In Space (1996) - 3/10

An evil leprechaun stalks the crew of a spaceship.

Warwick Davis returns as Lubdan the leprechaun, who in the year 2096 finds himself on a foreign planet courting a princess named Zarina (Rebekah Carlton). A group of space marines - including Brooks (Brent Jasmer) and Sticks (Miguel A. Nunez Jr.) - and a doctor named Tina (Jessica Collins) touch down on the planet, rescuing the priciness. Not wanting to lose his chance to be a king, Lubdan boards the space ship and rains hell on the crew...

Leprechaun 4: In Space was again directed by Brian Trenchard-Smith, and written by Dennis Pratt. Following the success of Leprechaun 3 (1995) on the home video market, a fourth Leprechaun film went into production with a series high budget of $1.6M. How does this second direct-to-video Leprechaun movie fare?

Ay caramba. Leprechaun 4: In Space, originally conceptualized as an Apollo 13 (1995) spoof, is instead a painful Alien (1979) rip-off. I use the word "rip-off" instead of "clone" because this film doesn't feel like a homage, parody, or that it's trying to capitalize on Alien's popularity. Instead, the movie is telling its own (stupid) story, but because it's a "haunted house in space" feels the need to include numerous story beats from Alien, no matter how out of place they are.

The original story Leprechaun 4 tries to tell is extremely underdeveloped. The movie doesn't even attempt to explain why Lubdan is in space; it's the future, he's there... just go with it. Similarly, the motivations of the space marines are murky at best. All we know is they're working on contract for the bizarre scientist Dr. Mittenhand (Guy Siner) - this film's comic relief - and end up being stalked throughout their spaceship by Lubdan. You'd think this setup might lead to some horror situations, but it mostly leads to gun fights between the leprechaun and the marines... which are way less fun than they sound. By the way, at no point do any of the characters refer to Lubdan as a leprechaun, instead always referring to him as an "alien".

Speaking of Leprechaun 4's characters, they stink. Tina - played by Jessica Collins, aka Jackie Denardo from It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia - starts off as the outsider we're supposed to associate with, but quickly turns cheek and becomes a stuck up jerk. Brent Jasmer's Brooks doesn't have much to do aside from showing off his muscles, and Warwick Davis has his worst material of the franchise to work with. The film hands most of the comedy load to the aforementioned Dr. Mittenhand character, but he also has bad material and is incredibly cheesy. At least it was nice to see Miguel A. Nunez Jr. (Friday the 13th: A New Beginning & The Return of the Living Dead), and he had a funny line or two.

Last but not least, Leprechaun 4's costumes and effects are unacceptable. The marines wear what look to be motorcycle helmets with visors, as well as cheap cloth vests with plastic bits sewn on. Lubdan looks screwed up too, with grey coloring around his eyes that ruin the illusion created by his strong leprechaun makeup. The special effects are consistently atrocious, highlighted by a scene where Lubdan increases in size via an effect that looks like a jpeg image being stretched. Additionally, the film is largely devoid of the cheapest effect possible: blood. There's a rip off sequence of the famous Alien chest burster scene, yet there isn't a spec of red on screen.

Overall, Leprechaun 4 is space junk. As much as the original Leprechaun film bores me to tears, the objectively worse Leprechaun 4: In Space is like watching an adult film without the sex. Made for $1.6M, I could not find any earnings or sales information for the film. Logic suggests it did not sell as well as Leprechaun 3 (1995) however, as the Leprechaun series took a short break following the release of this film, eventually returning in the year 2000.

 

[Pranzo Oltranzista]

Leprechaun 4: In Space (1996) - 3/10

Haven't seen this one, and it sounds abominable, but the real question is: how does it fare against Jason in space and Pinhead in space?

 

[shadow1]

Haven't seen this one, and it sounds abominable, but the real question is: how does it fare against Jason in space and Pinhead in space?

It goes without saying those two movies weren't far from my mind while watching this one.

In my opinion, Leprechaun 4 is the worst, and it's not that close. Jason X is at least self aware and has fun kills, while Hellraiser 4 had potential to be halfway decent if not for extreme studio interference.

I'm convinced if not for the fact the Leprechaun series is - let's face it - a "C" tier horror franchise, this would be the space movie with the most notoriety in the horror community.

 

[Osprey]

How come my interest goes up as your scores go down? I said yesterday that I wasn't sure that if I wanted to sit through this series, but I had no idea that there was a Leprechaun in Space! I have to see that (even though I'm sure to regret it afterwards).