Creature Feature

IT Chapter Two

MV5BYTJlNjlkZTktNjEwOS00NzI5LTlkNDAtZmEwZDFmYmM2MjU2XkEyXkFqcGdeQXVyNjg2NjQwMDQ@._V1_SY1000_CR0,0,674,1000_AL_

It’s been twenty-seven years since the Losers’ Club thought they defeated Pennywise the clown. Now, he’s back and taking children again. The friends are called back to reunite in Derry to try to stop It once again. As they remember their past, the old friends will have to face the monster head-on to break the cycle and save the children of Derry… and themselves.

The second half of Stephen King’s legendary novel is yet again brought to life in IT Chapter Two by screenwriter Gary Dauberman (The Nun, Annabelle Comes Home) and director Andy Muschietti (IT [2017], Mama). The film begins right where the previous film left off, with the Losers’ Club together in the field right after defeating Pennywise for the first time. After seeing a sign from Pennywise, the only person in the group to have stayed in Derry, Mike, calls his friends and reminds them of the promise they made all those years ago. From there the film weaves back and forth between the past and the present as each member of the group is called and brought home, then as their long-forgotten childhood memories finally come back to them. The way the plot is integrated with past and present is done perfectly in a way that still allows the film to naturally flow and move forward.

Dauberman and Muschietti do a fantastic job of including the important scenes and aspects of the source material, while still giving audiences something new. It allows the filmmakers to capture the spirit and feel of the book, even if it is not an exact adaptation. In several scenes, fans of the book will recognize what is happening. Yet there are still many exciting new things that did not come from King’s novel. Some of the changes were entire scenes, while others were more subtle, but impactful changes in the characters. One specific aspect of the novel I know many people were curious to see in the film is the “ritual of Chud.” Without giving away too many details, they do reference the ritual and have it in the film, but it might not be quite what fans of the novel expect. The climax of the film is thrilling, frightening, and heartbreaking. It pays homage to King’s work, but changes things up in order to give fans something unexpected and new.

Considering the IT Chapter Two has an almost three hour run time, somehow the film still felt like it went by very quickly. This is great because it means that, despite the long run time and everything they are able to include, the film is exciting and intriguing enough to keep the audience interested. Yet it also almost feels like many aspects of the film were simply brushed over instead of giving them the more in-depth look they deserved. Considering the length of the source material and how much the filmmakers were able to include in the film, I still applaud this cinematic achievement.

Fans of the first film were likely blown away by the kids’ performances. The adults in IT Chapter Two are no different. Of course, everyone knew James McAvoy (Split, Dark Phoenix) and Jessica Chastain (Mama, Molly’s Game) as adult Bill and Bev would be phenomenal. Jay Ryan (Beauty and the Beast, Terra Nova), who plays adult Ben, is one of the least known actors in the Losers’ Club. What makes his performance so great is how much he is able to convey more than words can with just a look, even when the camera is focused on other characters. James Ransone (Insidious, Generation Kill) is perfect casting as adult Eddie and comes across as the same person as the child we saw in the first film. One of the most surprising performances comes from Isaiah Mustafa (Chuck, Shadowhunters) as adult Mike. He is unrecognizeable as the “Old Spice guy” in this role. Not only does his character get more spotlight than his younger counterpart in the first film, but Mustafa is clearly up to the task and shines in the role. All of these actors are fantastic, but Bill Hader (Trainwreck, Barry) as adult Richie will be the one audiences remember most. Hader is absolutely hilarious, adding some great laugh out loud moments in the middle of the most tense moments. Yet what makes his performance so amazing is the emotional depth he conveys beyond the humor on the surface. Last, but not least, it is important to mention Bill Skarsgård (Castle Rock, IT [2017]) as Pennywise the clown. Just like his performance in the first film, Skarsgård manages to play what is likely the most terrifying clown in movie history.

Between practical effects, CGI, sets, and Easter eggs, IT Chapter Two has many stunning visual elements. As with the first film, the many terrifying creatures and characters IT appears as are a fantastic combination of practical effects and CGI enhancement. The two modes combine seamlessly to create some of the most shocking, disgusting, and frightening imagery. The filmmakers utilize familiar sets from the first film, such as the barrens and the house on Niebolt Street, but also incorporate gorgeous new ones. Some of the most memorable sets are the elegant old inn and the place deep underground where the final showdown takes place. The film also utilizes some really fascinating transitions. These transitions allow the filmmakers to maneuver from the past to the present and back again in unique, beautiful ways.

One of the most intriguing visual aspects of IT Chapter Two is the many Easter eggs hidden throughout. Some of these are characters in the film with small cameos, including Muschietti himself and the actor who played young Ben in the 1990 IT miniseries, Brandon Crane, and one cameo I will leave as a surprise. Other Easter eggs are references to the 1990 IT and other popular films from the 80’s. One especially memorable moment is a creature that is a combination of practical and CGI effects that appears to be an Easter egg or homage to John Carpenter’s The Thing.

IT Chapter Two is a thrilling and heart-felt conclusion to the story of our favorite losers that captures the feel of King’s novel while still giving us something exciting and new. Muschietti and Dauberman clearly know how to tell a compelling story that has a strong emotional core, amazing sets and effects, tons of scares, and even more laughs. They also honor King’s work by creating this cultural phenomenon of a film for horror fans and non-horror fans alike to adore. Every single actor embodies the characters they play in a way that reminds us of the children from the first film. And, of course, Skarsgård still brings the terror with his unique and terrifying portrayal of Pennywise. Purists who want an exact adaptation of the book or fans who are devoted to the miniseries may not be thrilled by the film, but this film is undoubtedly one of the horror highlights of 2019.

OVERALL RATING: 8/10

Crawl

crawl

A category 5 hurricane is heading straight for Florida. A young woman is unable to reach her father, so she decides to brave the storm to try and find him. What she finds instead is a nest of dangerous alligators. She will have to fight the predators and the rising floodwaters in order to save herself and her father.

This tension-filled film is directed by Alexandre Aja (High Tension, The Hills Have Eyes) and written by sibling duo Michael and Shawn Rasmussen (The Ward, The Inhabitants). The film follows Haley, who is on the college swim team. She has a strained relationship with her father, but when she can’t reach him as the storm approaches, she is compelled to drive over to check on him. When she discovers him in the crawl space under their house and realizes he’e been attacked by an alligator, she has to go into full survivor-mode.

The thing that makes this film so effective and brings suspense to the audience is the combination of killer animals and being trapped in a small space. Killer alligators are terrifying enough on their own and, as we have seen in many “when animals attack” type horror films, they are very entertaining to watch. But alligators aren’t all that fast on land, so something more needs to be done to make them more frightening. The filmmakers take it to the next level with Crawl by keeping most of the film confined to the tight crawl space with no means of escape. It gives the film a very claustrophobic fear to compound the terror brought by the alligators. Then that terror is taken to all new heights when the small crawl space begins to fill with flood waters. It leaves the characters with the options of staying put and drowning or attempting to get past the alligators. Both options are enough to strike fear and panic in the hearts of audiences.

Crawl primarily focuses on two characters and both of them give the audience someone to root for. Kaya Scodelario (The Maze Runner, Extremely Wicked, Shockingly Evil and Vile) is tough as nails as Haley. She is a very strong female character with a complicated relationship with her family and a love-hate relationship with being a competitive swimmer. Scodelario is always a joy to watch and her portrayal of Haley delivers a dynamic, complicated, and kick-ass character. Barry Pepper (The Green Mile, True Grit) plays Haley’s dad, Dave. Pepper does an amazing job of playing the supportive dad who sometimes takes things a bit too far when trying to push his child to do better. Scodelario and Pepper play off each other very well. Much of the complexity with both of their characters comes from their strained relationship as we watch Dave fall back into his old swim coach ways as he talks to Haley. Their relationship and the way it strengthens throughout the film gives Crawl it’s heart. I also want to give a very special shout-out to Cso-Cso, the dog who plays Sugar, for being absolutely adorable, even when in peril.

For a summer creature-feature, this film has some very impressive effects. Most of the alligators are CGI, but they look absolutely stunning. There is one scene where the CGI looks especially gorgeous as the audience is shown a close-up of one of the alligator’s mouths. The use of CGI allows for the alligators to traverse the crawl space and the flood waters in order to deliver many fantastic jump-scares. The practical effects are equally well done. In any animal attack film it is a guarantee we will see bloody wounds from bites. The gore is truly taken to an unexpected level in this film. Most likely this is Aja’s influence. He is known for lots of amazing gore. Between bites, breaks, and other horrifying injuries, the practical effects are sure to make audience members cringe, gasp, and maybe even avert their eyes.

Crawl is the perfect summer creature-feature bringing action, scares, gore, and tons of thrills. Aja is definitely known for giving crowd-pleasing, bloody horror films and Crawl is no different. He expertly combines different fears to create a fun and thrilling summer flick with fantastic performances by Scodelario and Pepper. It may surprise audiences, but the story created by the Rasmussens delivers not only on the action and scares. It’s also a great heartfelt story about family coming together and conquering past issues. I wouldn’t suggest going into this film assuming you will see the next Oscar-winner, but if you go in expecting something that is fun and will have you on the edge of your seat, then Crawl is sure to be a fan-favorite.

OVERALL RATING: 8/10

Boar

BOAR-OfficialPoster-WEB-723x1024

There are many things that can kill you in Australia. In one remote part of the outback, there is a wild boar on the loose. This isn’t your average wild boar and it is out for blood. One family unwittingly wandered into the beast’s territory. They are in for the fight of their lives.

I remember first hearing about Boar a few years ago, but then it drifted off my radar. Now, it is being released as a Shudder exclusive. The film is written and directed by Chris Sun of Charlie’s Farm fame, which makes the reference to Charlie’s Farm in this film even more hilarious. I’m generally a fan of the killer animal subgenre of horror. Fans of other killer animal flicks such as Razorback and Lake Placid will definitely enjoy Boar. The plot is appropriately simple and doesn’t bog itself down by creating an elaborate backstory for why the boar is so huge. Instead, the focus is on the ensuing carnage caused by the boar and the people it terrorizes.

While the focus of Boar is clearly the savage kills, it does a surprisingly good job of including character development. There are two families who get the most screen time. They are introduced in fairly organic ways and the audience is given time to get to know them. This is an important aspect of horror films because if the audience doesn’t care if the characters live or die, then the tension and suspense will be lost. Yet the filmmakers wisely placate the boar’s (and the audience’s) thirst for blood by throwing in a few kills of random characters along the way.

Almost all of the main characters are likable, with one exception, but the performances are just okay. Audiences don’t necessarily expect Oscar-worthy performances from killer animal horror films, so there isn’t anything wrong with that. My personal favorite performance is Melissa Tkautz (Game Room, Houses) as Sasha. She is the independent and strong-willed bar owner in the small town. Tkautz makes Sasha an enjoyable character by making her both sassy and charming. Probably the most well-known actor in Boar is Bill Moseley (The Devil’s Rejects, The Texas Chainsaw Massacre Part 2) as Bruce. Bruce is the lone American of the group and he’s basically a kindhearted dork. This is a nice departure for Moseley as most horror fans know him as a villain. Nathan Jones (Charlie’s Farm, Mad Max: Fury Road) plays Bruce’s brother-in-law, Bernie. Jones is a beast of a man, which makes it hilarious to see how the men fear him yet he is so sweet to all the ladies. The dynamics between each of the main characters draws the audience in so we want them to outlive the boar.

The effects team behind Boar uses a combination of practical and CGI effects. For most of the shots of the massive beast the effects are entirely practical. These effects are honestly a bit on the hokey side, but even that seems to be par for the course when it comes to killer animal movies. The practical effects for the boar are still impressive just because of the sheer size it had to be built in. For the scenes where there is more wide shot action, such as when the boar runs around, the team went with CGI. The CGI isn’t quite as good as the practical effects, but it doesn’t detract from the overall appeal of the creature design.

Boar delivers on laughs, excitement, and one killer animal. The plot is simple, but gives the audience enough to keep them engaged. This is helped by having a group of likable characters. Much of the acting and the effects are average, but the film makes up for it by being fun to watch. If the allure of watching a killer boar on the loose isn’t enough to get people to watch this film, then the star-power behind Bill Moseley’s name definitely will.

OVERALL RATING: 6/10

Saint Bernard (2013)

RcEjPZ1w

Bernard has loved music his entire life. He grows up to be a composer. On the surface he has achieved his dream, but Bernard’s reality unravels right along with his mind.

In 2013, special effects master Gabriel Bartalos released a film he wrote and directed that was his second feature film, Saint Bernard. The film flew under the radar for most horror fans. Now, six years later, Severin is finally bringing it to blu-ray. The film focuses on Bernard, a composer who loses his mind as he turns to drugs and alcohol for comfort. While that plot sounds simple enough, it is shown in quite a unique way, primarily relying on visual metaphors. The film is very unique and strange in a way that almost makes it difficult to review.

From the very first frame, many viewers will likely wonder what the hell they are watching. It only gets more bizarre from that point on. There is a lot of commentary through the visual metaphors. The film touches issues such as drugs and alcohol addiction, religion, capitalism, childhood trauma, anxiety, depression, and much much more. Bartalos takes on a very surrealist approach to his film. It almost takes on the appearance of a Salvador Dali painting. There is a heavy reliance on imagery over substance from start to finish. Normally this would be an issue for me, but somehow it works very well in Saint Bernard. Many of the various elements seem random, but there is still a story hidden behind all of the strange and spectacular imagery.

With Bartalos’s background in special effects, it’s no wonder his film relies so heavily on different types of effects of set design. The film utilizes a mix of multiple different mediums. There are prosthetics, puppets, creatures, disturbing props, and CGI. All of these elements lend to the surrealistic appearance of the film and they are all beautifully done. One of the most memorable effect used is a Saint Bernard head. As the film goes on the head decays more and more. It is rather disgusting, but very well done. The sets are sometimes even more elaborate than the effects ranging from rotting buses, wood junkyards, and an outrageous police station. The effects and sets lend a tactile element to the film. You can almost feel the wood grains, the salted woods, and the rotting goo through the screen.

There are an odd range of performances in Saint Bernard. In one of his few leading roles, Jason Dugre (Moonbeams) plays Bernard. It is fascinating to watch Bernard as we see the world through his eyes. What is even more fascinating to to see Dugre convey Bernard’s shock, dismay, and confusion at the world around him while everyone else acts as though the world is as it should be. While it is a smaller role, I was thrilled to see Warwick Davis (Willow, Leprechaun) as Othello. He was the main draw for me when the film was brought to my attention, and he does not disappoint. As a whole, the cast is weird and wild in a way that fits perfectly with the tone of the film.

Saint Bernard is a weird fever dream that relies more on imagery over content, yet it works so well. If audiences are able to follow the outlandish metaphorical visuals, then there is still a complete story to be told in the film. While the performances are entertaining, the true star of the film is the fantastic effects and stunning set design. It is truly like watching a work of art. There is no doubt this film will polar audiences, but I highly recommend everyone watch it at least once just for the experience.

OVERALL RATING: 8/10

Saint Bernard is available for purchase here.

The Head Hunter

head hunter

In Medieval times, monsters roam free. After losing his daughter, a warrior makes it his life’s mission to kill as many monsters as he can. He has killed many monsters, but one still manages to elude him. His quest will not end until he collects the head of the monster who murdered his daughter.

The Head Hunter is a unique film. Director Jordan Downey (ThanksKilling) co-wrote the film with cinematographer Kevin Stewart (ThanksKilling). The collaboration between Downey and Stewart leads to some interesting filmmaking choices. The most unique aspect is the storytelling choices the duo make. The film starts with a bit of exposition through voiceover, revealing the warrior’s daughter was killed by a monster. After that there is virtually no dialogue moving the plot forward. Instead, the filmmakers rely on visual queues to tell the story.

As the film progresses it becomes clear that the warrior has become a literal head hunter. We know this as the audience because we see the warrior sharpen a stake for his wall, ride off ready for battle, and return with a monster head to adorn his wall. It also seems clear that a nearby kingdom is giving him rewards for slaying these creatures. This becomes apparent because every hunt is precipitated by the sound of a horn and when the warrior returns from his hunt he also has what appears to be a medieval “wanted” poster with a drawing of a monster. All of this plot is told with no monologue, dialogue, voiceover, or anything other than simply what the audience sees on the screen. It is a form of storytelling I have not seen in a feature-length film, and it works surprisingly well in The Head Hunter.

While the storytelling method works, for the most part, there are still aspects that feel as though there isn’t enough meat to the film.  As I mentioned before, multiple times the audience is shown the warrior riding off to kill a monster then returning with its head. It seems like an odd choice that we don’t get to see the warrior engaged in battle with these creatures. I can only assume it was due to budgetary constraints, but with how many times he rides off into the distance it becomes more and more apparent that we are missing the battles. There are two battles shown, but they are primarily in darkness so the action isn’t as palpable as it could be. The Head Hunter is already a shorter film clocking in at 1 hour and 12 minutes, but with the storytelling method, lack of dialogue, and minimal action it may have worked better as a short film.

The two most vital aspects of the film are the acting and the visuals. The Head Hunter is almost entirely filmed with one actor, Christopher Rygh, in his first feature film role. While Rygh doesn’t have much dialogue in the film, he still has quite a presence on screen and is able to emote very well. He truly embodies the look of a warrior and expertly conveys a wide range of emotions. On the visual side, the two strongest aspects are the cinematography and the creature designs. The cinematography does a majority of the storytelling and it as absolutely stunning. Each shot is purposefully framed and focused in a certain way to draw the eye. While for the most part we only see creature heads, the designs are varied and very well done. There is every sort of creature one could want and the big bad in the climax of the film is quite memorable.

The Head Hunter is a stunning feat in visual storytelling, yet it feels a bit devoid of the excitement and tension one would expect from this kind of film. I commend the filmmakers for taking on this fascinating style and creating a beautiful film. The performance from Rygh only helps to make the tale of this warrior compelling to watch. Some will likely notice the lack of tension that comes from skipping over a majority of the monster kills. Some will also likely feel the method used to propel the film forward requires more dialogue. While I stand by my statement that the film may have worked better as a short, it is still an accomplishment in filmmaking and beautiful to watch.

OVERALL RATING: 6/10

The Silence

silence

A primeval species that hunts by sound is accidentally unleashed from a cave system. As they spread and take down city after city, one family flees in hopes of reaching an area away from cities. The journey is treacherous and even reaching a remote cabin isn’t enough to keep them safe. The family will not only have to keep each other safe from the creatures, but also from other people.

The Silence is one of a slew of films to recently be released with similar concepts including A Quiet Place and Bird Box. There are definitely similarities between this film and last year’s hit, A Quiet Place, but the novel by Tim Lebbon this film is based on was released in 2015. There is the same basic premise of a family trying to survive in a world where deadly creatures can hunt by sound. The similarities continue as the film focuses on a daughter who is deaf and her relationship with her father. The plots diverge from each other from there, but it is impossible to ignore the similarities.

Brothers Carey and Shane Van Dyke (Chernobyl Diaries, The Sacred) took on adapting Lebbon’s novel for the screen while John R. Leonetti directed (Annabelle, Wish Upon). Despite the multiple similarities between The Silence and other films, there are still some differences that set it apart. One of the biggest differences is that audiences will immediately know the origin of these creatures. Their existence isn’t shrouded in mystery, giving the film almost a more scientific monster movie feel at first (although this part will likely also make horror fans think of films such as The Descent and The Cave). Events quickly escalate after the creatures are released. The audience gets brief introduction to the various characters before they are thrown into the end of the world. Something that makes the daughter in this film different is that she only became deaf three years ago, yet she adapted to her new state of being quickly. There are many instances that force the audience to think what they would do in a similar situation as the family is forced to make numerous difficult decisions. It makes some of the more intense scenes evoke emotions one wouldn’t expect. These are the scenes that will likely stand out the most in the minds of viewers.

The thing that had the potential to make this film stand out the most is the introduction of a bizarre cult. This could have been the most interesting part of the film and it could have added a lot of tension to the film. Unfortunately, it’s never fully developed. The cult isn’t even introduced until the third act of the film. It ends up coming across as an afterthought used simply to make the climax of the film more exciting, but it doesn’t necessarily achieve that.

The Silence is a star-studded film with many familiar faces, a few being familiar for other roles in Netflix original projects. Kiernan Shipka (Chilling Adventures of Sabrina, The Blackcoat’s Daughter) stars as Ally. Because Ally is deaf she is able to notice things other are not, such as warning signs of danger. Shipka for the most part delivers a great performance, but there are a few instances where she appears to react to sound despite her character being deaf. Stanley Tucci (The Hunger Games, Spotlight) plays Ally’s father, Hugh. Overall Tucci’s portrayal of Hugh is interesting to watch as he does what he can to protect his family from harm. The biggest issue I have with his performance is likely a choice made by the filmmakers; for a dad who cares so much about the well being of his daughter, he barely ever uses sign language with her. In fact, many conversations with Ally and Hugh make it easy to forget that Ally is deaf because neither character signs very much with each other. They do make a point of saying Ally can read lips, but it still seems like an odd choice. The only time sign language is really used is when the family is in danger and needs to communicate while being completely silent.

There are many interesting visuals in The Silence. The creatures themselves are brought to life with CGI. Considering they are from a dark, sealed off cave, they have the right look one would expect. These things are relatively small, look almost like a cross between a bat and a small pterodactyl-like creature, have pale skin, are blind, and use sound to find their prey. Some of the most gorgeous images in the film are seeing the creatures fly and swarm from afar. It ends up being both terrifying and beautiful all at once. To add to the terror, there is an unexpected amount of practical effects gore throughout the film. Unfortunate victims of the creatures tend to get torn to shreds, and the filmmakers wisely chose not to hold anything back when showing the aftermath.

The Silence has the potential to bring audiences something new and terrifying, but it sadly fails to surpass other films with similar plots. There are some elements that keep the audience interested such as decent performances, a well-known cast, great effects for the creatures, and a healthy dose of blood and gore. What ultimately holds this film back is numerous underdeveloped aspects of the plot. This is the most obvious with the sparing use of sign language, despite the main character being deaf, and with the cult not even being introduced until the third act. The film is entertaining enough to be worth a watch, but it doesn’t do enough to stick with viewers for long.

OVERALL RATING: 6/10

Book of Monsters

monsters

When Sophie was little she thought she saw her mom get killed by a monster. Now, on the eve of her 18th birthday, Sophie and her friends are throwing a party. Her mom’s old monster book resurfaces only to be used by a mystery woman to conjure up some terrifying monsters to wreak havoc on the party guests. It’s up to Sophie and her friends to stop the monsters before they are unleashed on the world.

This gory monster comedy feels like a love letter to horror films of the 80’s. Written by Paul Butler (Nothing Man, The Creature Below) and directed by Stewart Sparke (The Creature Below), Book of Monsters brings campy fun with what appear to be nods to The Evil Dead films while also delivering an interesting and unique plot. The cold open of this film introduces the audience to a young Sophie as her mom reads her a bedtime story from a rather odd book filled with drawings of strange monsters. Sophie then witnesses a monster kill her mother, but of course no one believes her. This quickly sets the tone for the film while also establishing the main character, Sophie. As a teen she is a bit of an outsider; she has a couple close friends, is shy and quiet, and it quickly becomes apparent that she is interested in girls. Her birthday party is the catalyst for the carnage which ensues on the unsuspecting guests.

On the surface Book of Monsters is simply a splatterfest where people are killed left and right and the monsters are a bit on the cheesy side. There are also some odd choices in terms of character development, such as a mean girl who is a bit over-the-top in her mean ways and Sophie quickly goes from meek to warrior woman at the drop of a hat. While some of these aspects can take away from the film, I believe they ultimately have a purpose. It all goes back to paying homage to horror films of the 80’s. The book filled with monsters and spells is reminiscent of The Evil Dead, the monsters themselves can be a throwback to many older films, the mean girl reminded me of Judy from Sleepaway Camp, and Sophie herself is like most virginal final girls of that time who fight for survival. Even the cast, who are all supposed to be teenagers, look like they are between the age of 25-30 just like in 80’s films. What makes Book of Monsters stand out from other films that honor the films of the past is the mythology it creates. Not only are the monsters unique, but the filmmakers gradually build on Sophie’s connection to them in an interesting way that moves the plot forward while also giving plenty of opportunity to create a sequel (or even a prequel) with this mythology.

The performances are a bit of a mixed bag, some being very good and others being over the top. That being said, I believe the range of performances as a deliberate choice by the filmmakers to stay in-keeping with the 80’s nostalgia. Lyndsey Craine (The Creature Below) stars as Sophie. While her character arc is a bit abrupt, Craine’s performance as Sophie stays true to the character. She starts out very shy and sweet, but when her friends are in danger she turns into a monster killer. Craine is also the most believable as a teenager. Two actors who are not believable as teenagers are Michaela Longden (The Creature Below, Audax) as Mona and Anna Dawson (1921, The Creature Below) as Arya. Mona is one of Sophie’s best friends and a bit of a rebel. What I enjoy most about Longden’s performance is her ability to play multiple characters and the way she injects humor into her performance. Arya is the bully of the film. She is so over the top in how terrible she is to Sophie, and others, that Dawson’s performance also comes across as out there. This seems intentional as many of the bullies of 80’s films act quite similarly to Arya. No matter where the performances fall on a scale of good to not so great, it is still easy to see that the actors had fun making this film.

Between the monsters and the gore, it is impossible to ignore the effects in Book of Monsters. Remembering that this film is meant to be like a campy 80’s horror flick, the practical effects definitely pay homage to that era. The filmmakers wisely avoided using CGI. The heavy use of blood and severed body parts is both disgusting and humorous at the same time. When it comes to the monsters themselves, there are some interesting choices made. A couple of the creature designs rely heavily on cloaks to mask much of the body, allowing the SFX team to focus more on the faces of the monsters and the weapons or body parts they use to kill the teens. It can be a bit unfortunate looking at the monsters and realizing the bodies are mostly ignored in the design process, but it still fits with the low-budget 80’s aesthetic. There is one creature the team clearly took more time and money to create, and the design is very unique. The only creature design I don’t like is for the “djinn.” Instead of having a true monster look, the djinn looks more like a ghost from a J-horror film. This could potentially be another nod or homage to that subgenre of horror film, but it seems out of place with the rest of the 80’s style.

Book of Monsters certainly delivers on the monsters and gore with a classic 80’s aesthetic, while also giving audiences a fun and compelling story. The plot feels reminiscent of other films while still including new elements. The actors may not all deliver the best performances, but there is obviously a lot of heart and fun that went into the film. Book of Monsters certainly isn’t a film for everyone, but if you appreciate classic 80’s horror films with campy practical effects then this is the film for you. It is definitely a love-letter to the misfits and monster lovers.

OVERALL RATING: 6.5/10