Reviews

Over the past couple of weeks, I've binged all of the Flanagan mini-series entries. The first one, The Haunting Of Hill House, was really good but the ending was lame. Then came the Bly House bore, which I reviewed appropriately for what it was. Midnight Mass was ok but a fairly unremarkable vampire story with the twist of being tied in with religion. The Midnight Club might have been ok for a teenage audience but little else.

This most recent, The Fall Of The House Of Usher, was better than some of the others but certainly no masterpiece. First, I think Mr. Flanagan is going for a diversity gold star, for better or worse. I do like that he seems to reuse a lot of his actors from his previous series' and movies, loyalty is not a common trait these days so good on him for the little film family he's cultivated. I don't really dislike any of the actors.

Some of the sentiments on the show are a bit heavy-handed. They present the opioid epidemic as being entirely greed driven with complete disinterest in the human aspect. But keep the responsibility more balanced because a lot of it is choice. I watched a relative's addiction for years and it was their choice to dive into it and stay there, which ultimately did them in, whereas I'm the type that can have a bottle sit in my cupboard for a year before it's gone, and that's my choice.

I do admit that aside from the granddaughter, Lenore, none of the characters are very likeable. I do agree with the depiction that a lot of people brought up in privilege can come out to be spoiled, entitled brats well into adulthood. They show the excesses of substance abuse, sexual extremes, and carelessness that comes from not having to accept responsibility for their actions. The moral of the story seems to be that you can sell out for all the riches in the world for a limited amount of time, or you can be like the Auguste character who has his modest home and family life and is the "richest man in the world" without having to ethically compromise. Sure, it's a nice footnote if only life worked that way but what one gets and what they deserve are rarely the reality, trust me!

The suspense factor was pretty good and some of the effects were a nice touch, but as a lot of these Flanagan-related series' go, it gets a bit wordy and likely could have benefitted from being consolidated down a little bit. I'm not sure if I can say I'm looking forward to what Flanagan offers up next, considering the inconsistency in quality of the five mini-series stories to date, but I'm sure I'll watch it and find out for myself.

I know I saw this in the theater in 2013 and didn't recall caring for it. But since it's been over a decade, I thought I would try to watch it again today and see what I thought. Well, I am a fan of the original, partially out of nostalgia since I saw it in the theater, I believe in 1984 as a double-bill with A Nightmare On Elm Street.

The only plus I can give this rather exploitively gory remake is that it's more serious in tone, whereas the low budget of the original gave it unintentional comedy at times. Changing the story from four friends just heading to a cabin in the woods for a getaway to turning it into trying to detox a repeatedly relapsing addict was a useless layer that really added nothing.

As the movie progressed, I would distract myself from watching the needlessly excessive gore that just seemed to happen over and over again just for the sake of being gory. It got so bad that I lost total interest and turned it off before it was over.

Far too many films try to appeal to the lowest common denominator by turning up the gore quotient in favor of keeping the story interesting. I consider this one a big fail.

This is without a doubt one of the funniest shows ever. The humor is witty, wacky, outrageous, and much of it would be considered taboo in today's over-sensitive (i.e. Very boring) society, as confirmed by a few episodes being pulled from syndication, streaming and physical media in 2020. 30 Rock pokes fun at stereotypes and the brilliance of Tina Fey is ever-present. Her out of left field comments, dialects and impressions are perfected in either a hilarious deadpan or comically over the top. The writers pushed boundaries but always as an obvious joke.

Despite what some may think of Alec Baldwin on a personal level, there's no denying that he has a fantastic comedic streak, with reactions and responses often hysterical in a straight-faced delivery. The chemistry between Fey and Baldwin is one for the ages, and never dull.

Other primary cast members are like insane cartoons, with Tracey being the harmless and well-intentioned lunatic and Jenna being shamelessly self-absorbed and narcissistic. Kenneth is the charming simpleton with the mystery of his elderly age hinted at and played up throughout the series.

30 Rock was a critical darling but constantly struggled to find the ratings. When you see the junk that often become massively popular sitcoms, shows of massive talent, originality and bottomless humor like 30 Rock are too smart for general society. While it managed to squeak out seven seasons, two of which were about half the size of normal seasons, it wasn't near enough. The episodes are so dense with humor and wit that you'll often find something you didn't notice the first, second, or even third time you watched it, likely because you were laughing through it.

It's amazing that someone so self-destructive and backstabbing has had so many movies and shows based on their fairly unremarkable life, but then that seems to be what warrants longevity. I'm not sure if Ryan Murphy is a Capote fan or is taking the daring step to show a dark underside of the gay community, because it's certainly not all rainbows. I'm a gay man and have never clicked with the community, for nearly 40 years since I came out at age 16. The prominent hypocrisy is the demand for equality, yet many have proven to be the most judgmental of anything that doesn't fall into the stereotype. You must support any publicly gay entertainer or politician without question, listen to certain music and act certain ways. Theater and Musicals are a requirement if you want to hold onto your membership card. The worst is pitying the extremely few of us out there who choose monogamy. If your self-worth is determined by how many partners you have, I find that tragic. I was always my own person and have been persecuted by the community for 'not fitting in'. I'm fine with who I am, are you?

Negative stereotypes exist for a reason, they're not just fabricated. Capote fits so many of these stereotypes that I can attest are in fact true, back in the 80's and today. Whether it's the fun side with snarky humor that can easily cross the line, or the self-loathing/self-destructive nature that results in destroyed relationships and any variety of chemical dependencies. There's a big lack of self-awareness. Not to mention the overt sexuality that seems to work for Capote, such as making advances to his 'straight' plumber who then becomes one of his part-time tricks. He's a tortured soul who goes out of his way to sabotage anything of benefit to him, and apparently has zero control over it. I can only assume publishing private details of his closest friends were an attempt at the ultimate self-sabotage, and it worked. It's hard to feel sympathetic towards someone who was given such a wealth of positives and achievements only to systematically ruin each one. On one hand, it's clear he is a very unhappy person who seeks the occasional distraction with friends and flirtations, but to go on TV incoherent and doing things that are in nobody's best interest seem to be the real person inside.

This season is meticulously produced with obvious attention to detail. While I've seen remarks about the acting being over the top, I expect that was the goal. They're presenting rich people with an obvious superiority complex because, once again, stereotypes often exist for a reason. The story would meander from time to time but it wouldn't be long until Capote was drunk again or there was another social lunch with lots and lots of smoking. I'm basing my rating on the overall storytelling and production, not necessarily the story itself.

Whenever a new director's first film does really well, it seems that many people will blindly praise anything they do afterwards... at least for a while. Think Jordan Peele but now you can add Ari Aster to the list of perceived geniuses that maybe just started out with a little luck which appears to have run out.

I am a big fan of Aster's debut Hereditary. It's very creepy and disturbing, and will no doubt remain a classic. His follow up, Midsommar, is a really good movie as well, though that one could have benefitted from a little more editing. Now we get Beau Is Afraid. While not a horror, it looked quirky and intriguing enough to give it a try.

Oh boy, viewers get to sit through three hours, yes, three hours of one disjointed scene after another. It's like waking up in the morning remembering bits and pieces of several different dreams condensed into one tedious movie. Joaquin Phoenix is somewhat eccentric already and he does well with what's on the page. And typical of these art house films, it's fairly vague and left open to interpretation. Or I could be wrong because I was fairly well tuned out when the ending came and all I could say was "Whatever..."

Maybe Mr. Aster needs to stick with horror. He started out very well and does have a nice style to directing, but when these first-time directors have a hit with their debut movie, studios tend to give them carte blanche with the expectation that lightning will strike again. The director then takes the opportunity to go so far left field that they leave most temporarily recruited fans scratching their head. No one needs to try to explain the deeper meaning to me, by that point I couldn't care less. OK Mr. Aster, you got your extra-large piece of self-indulgence out of your system, now get back to making something worth watching.

I said 'Nope' to seeing this film for a long time. But while browsing through all the other forgettable junk that saturates Amazon Prime, this one popped up again. It's a blistering cold day and I didn't have anything pressing to do, so I figured just get it done and over with.

Like many other reviews state, it's a completely undeveloped and unexplained mess. You can try to hide behind the claims of "you don't get it" when you're just trying to defend your new favorite director who has, let's face it, only one fairly good movie to his credit. Really, the only worthwhile thing here is the scenery.

The characters are tedious. The female lead is beyond grating. She thinks she's spunky and funny but she's just annoying. And while she was in one of my favorite TV shows, Scream Queens, she was the most uninteresting character there. The male lead is played overly dour, like someone who's coming from a childhood background of abuse. He has no personality other than someone you'd expect to find drinking alone in the dark. The salesman with the bad peroxide job is pointless, since every other word out of his ignorant mouth starts with a big F. The horses are the most interesting characters.

Nothing is explained, the ship creature thingy is just there and that's the extent of what you learn about it. When things started getting effects heavy at the end, I was completely lost as to what I was even watching. And when you decide to name your movie after the character's response to seeing things that scare them, you're really taking what was likely an offhand joke just too far. But if Universal Pictures felt this partially put together puzzle was worth financing, it must be good, right? Nope.

Jordan Peele seems to be little more than the writer/director everyone is rooting for these days, the flavor of the month among critics. But just like the previous golden child, M. Night Shyamalan, everyone is eventually going to get tired of these concoctions of pieces of randomness and start reviewing appropriately, and then he's actually going to have to make a good movie to retain any sort of credibility. I won't hold my breath.

Despite the onslaught of negative reviews, I gave in this evening and rented this. Let me confirm the reviews are correct. The only real plus is that the title character is definitely interesting. He's eerie, creepy and quirky, and very unsettling. Unfortunately, the rest of the cast are absolutely terrible actors. Their overall delivery is the caliber of a group of kids putting on a show for their parents in the backyard. I laughed out loud several times at how poorly these drama students comically recited lengthy monologues or tried to convey some sort of hurt or pain. Don't quit your day jobs!

I guess the attempt at a story can be open to interpretation but if my guess of the Jester being a manifestation of a person's inner demons is correct, that doesn't really explain the cop scene in the convenient store, unless this manifestation is the previously used scenario that it can be seen by others as well. Either way, this one should definitely be a pass for anyone considering it.

What a bizarre, trippy movie. Lots of very dark imagery and themes, and an oddball cast to make it that much more of a standout. First, there's Charlie, the odd looking, awkward pre/early teen with a peanut allergy that results in one of the most starling scenes. Right away, you know something about her just isn't right, but if anyone had doubts then it would be confirmed when she cuts off the head of a bird that splats into her classroom window. The parents are two extremes with mom being some sort of artist who carves very detailed miniature settings. She's very high strung, rambling and reactionary, bursting with angry monologues and panicked pleas. Played by the always intriguing Toni Colette, her performance will raise anyone's blood pressure. The dad is a dullard who doesn't want to hear or do anything out the ordinary and prefers just to think of his wife as nuts. The actor playing the son, Peter, was an odd choice, for sure. He's clearly of Indian descent but he's supposed to be the biological son of these very white parents. And when he gets upset and cries, he sounds ridiculously like a child faking it. Toss all of this into a story about decapitations and demon worship, you get one disturbingly surreal piece of horror.

This may be the most hilarious TV series ever made! Scream Queens was produced right at the tail end of the era when humorous boundaries could be pushed without all of the faux-outrage people love to spout these days because they apparently have no other problems in their lives to focus on. I'm sure the youth of today would just view it as mean spirited and offensive, but I love how daring and over-the-top it is. It's all obviously a joke but the over-serious types just won't get it. Their loss! With characters names such as Deaf Taylor Swift, Predatory Lez, and Moebius Girl, what's not to love?

Because Scream Queens was such a good show, it was no surprise it lasted no more than two seasons. The cast across both seasons is great and Emma Roberts shines as the most hilariously vicious rich girl in history. Jamie Lee Curtis and Kirsty Alley play their roles wonderfully, and the rest of the cast fill everything out perfectly. Binging both seasons has become an October tradition for me and I never cease to be entertained. I will always appreciate Scream Queens as the last series to get away with such colorful humor, and I applaud the series writers for being so unrestrained.

I saw a clip of this today in a video about Tom Savini, and it immediately looked familiar. I suspected I had seen this as a kid and I recalled being creeped out by it. I looked it up and found it on Amazon Prime. Pretty much from the start, bits and pieces started coming back to me likely more than 40 years since I had seen it either on late night or Saturday afternoon TV.

The first thing that struck me all these years later is how unbelievably bad the acting is, and I mean just about everyone ever on screen. The only memorable performance was the eerie Andy, played emotionless and practically in slowmo. Savini's special effects are pretty good as Andy gradually rots away, but it doesn't save the film from the hambone acting by the principle cast, namely mom and sis.

Unlike other 70's films that I rediscovered decades after seeing them and really liking them (The Redeemer), this one will not become a new classic. Maybe I'll watch it again some time but that's about it.

Darkness, as a story, is very intriguing. The sacrifice of seven children by loved ones to bring forth evil and disorder. Ok, not something I would want personally but as a harmless movie, it sounds like something to keep my interest. The problem here though is everything is an absolute mess.

First, let's talk about the directing. This guy loves his flickering lights and shaking camera, and uses each ad nauseum. Don't watch if you are prone to seizures or motion sickness! Next, the acting. Anna Paquin may have been fine as a child actor but as a teenager she is abysmal. She clumsily delivers her lines as if she's on tranquilizers, and has a perpetual uncertain look on her face like she doesn't know how she's supposed to look with the emotion on the page. And it's not just a scene or two, it's from start to finish. She's just terrible. Some of her clumsiest deliveries makes you wonder if the third rate director just used the first take, or if the acting was so poor that what you see in the film is the best of the worst. Lena Olin is always a bit hammy and over-the-top, and she doesn't stray from that here. But she combines it with deliveries that convey overall boredom and disinterest as she plays an extremely unlikable character who doesn't want to deal with anything in her family that's going wrong. The young son keeps getting bruises, oh, he's fine. The daughter is concerned about dad's erratic behavior and their overall safety, just slam the door in her face. Iain Glen as the dad tries too hard to come off as the emotionally unstable father descending into madness that his performance is that of a school play. The most believable of the cast is the young boy.

Darkness does have some eerie moments and the overall feeling of dread, but it could definitely have benefitted from a more competent director and set of actors. I like it enough that I own it, but each infrequent viewing has me debating whether I should add it to the discard pile.

In general, I'm not much of a fan of Shyamalan movies. I do eventually end up seeing them, and do find a select few interesting (Split, Devil), while others seem over hyped, self-indulgent, or just bad. The premise of this one intrigued me, but not until it ended up a home rental.

The first thing I have to give props for is that, as a gay man, it's such a relief NOT to see the usual depiction of blatant flamboyance and over-the-top camp in demeanor and/or attire, i.e. Every gay character introduced on the TV show Modern Family (of which I am a fan, but come on...) These are two guys who just happen to be a couple, and not the predictable "open" and cruisy or dramatic types. I'm well aware I'm a unicorn in the gay community, so it was very nice not seeing the novelty cookie cutter depiction.

I've seen a lot of reviews complaining that M. Night didn't follow his usual big twist ending, and perhaps that in itself is the twist. Because we all had the expectation, and even though the film set itself up to go in one of two directions, it went for the one most were not expecting. There were lots of tense moments and suspense as the story unfolded about the alleged mission of the four visitors, who claim one of the family of three must be sacrificed to save humanity. Of course, I found myself shouting at the screen to let the end times come, but that's just me...

The movie did a great job of keeping the viewer wondering if these were just a bunch of religious crackpots or were they speaking truth. And while I'm not a fan of religion in the slightest, it can occasionally make for an interesting fictional story. It's a bitter sweet (but unfair for the characters) ending that confirms which direction the film was going. I'll be watching again soon to see how I feel now that I know what to expect, but this was definitely one of the better horror films I've seen in a while.

Right from the start, it was clear they 'borrowed' from the Children Of The Corn plot, in that no matter how much you drive, you just end up in the equivalent of Gatlin. I do find these sorts of unnatural occurrence themes fairly interesting, if done right. This was not the case with From. The main thing bringing this down is the most phoned in, cliche dialog accounting for the majority of the scripts. Whether it's the mother having a forgettable conversation with her obnoxious by-the-numbers defiant and overly emotional teen daughter, or a self-appointed sheriff trying to keep the towns folk in check, it's like listening to a compilation of generic cut-and-paste dialog from any TV show or film over the last 50+ years. And my god, I cannot count how many times I had to listen to one of the forgettable characters state an empty "I promise". I literally started to scream each time someone finished a sentence with "I promise". Are people actually making decent money for this lazy writing? Seriously, every single episode, it's juvenile and patronizing. Perhaps this would have made for an interesting (enough) film, but stretching it into a full season, let alone two, is wringing the rag entirely too long. While the mystery food sources or lamps powered by nothing are marginally intriguing, it's nothing that hadn't been done more than half a century ago in The Twilight Zone. Nothing original here, I promise!

I rented this by accident shortly after it came out. I say by accident because had I known it was subtitled, I wouldn't have. To this day, I just don't have the patience for subtitles. But this was back in the days of going to the local video store and picking out a DVD to view, so since I paid for it and had it in the player, I begrudgingly watched it.

Wow, it must have been a calling because all these years later I rank this as one of my all-time favorites. The visuals are gorgeous and the acting is stellar. My favorite films are ghost stories but finding one that gets it right is a challenge. This is up there with Full Circle (aka The Haunting of Julia) as the best. I would never class this as a horror movie, it's a supernatural drama.

Laura, her husband, and adopted son Simon, return to Laura's childhood home, which was an orphanage. Laura wants to make it a home for challenged children to have a safe place to grow up. But it's not long before things start happening and Simon disappears. The story of Laura's desperate search to find Simon unfolds like a riddle being decoded. You feel her desperation to solve the mystery while still trying to remain hopeful for a happy outcome.

The revelations at the ending are very sad but also very sweet, a happy ending in an alternate sort of way. It tugs at the blackest heart, and is one of those rare movies that chokes me up on every viewing. A very engrossing, atmospheric story masterfully told.

The fact that the movie has been lumped in as 'horror' guarantees that there's a fraction of ignorant non-reviews that refer to anything that requires an attention span and contains an actual story as "boring". Those types need to go back to Halloween 721 and Friday The 13th, Part 429 to get their juvenile superficial blood-and-gore fix. This is the thinking person's "horror" film, of which there are far too few.

This is one of those movies that arrived without my awareness, but immediately became one of my top 5 all-time favorite films. According to the filmmakers, Session 9 barely opened in cinemas before it got lost, only to be found by most fans on home video. I'll consider myself one of the lucky, having been introduced to it during the film's brief theatrical run where I was invited to a viewing at one of the Cleveland art house cinemas in 2001.

Session 9 was one of those rare films that stuck with me immediately after the credits rolled in the theater. Scary films with a dark ending often have a lasting, more satisfying effect on me. But it wasn't just the ending because Session 9 has the most unsettling atmosphere that has you hugging your knees as you anxiously wait to see how it unfolds. Even after countless viewings, one of which I just finished, I get lost in the bleakness of the story, which is strangely comforting. From the visuals to the sound, they really tapped into something here. The session tapes are wild to listen to, from the static to the quivers and wobbles in the recordings, to the story of Mary, Peter, Princess, Billy and the eerie Simon that unfolds. Chills!

I'm sure some may interpret the film differently, but I've always viewed it as a possession movie. No, not in the endless Exorcist-inspired rip offs, but the intriguing slant of evil hopping from "the weak and the wounded", be it Mary Hobbs and the slaughter of her family, and then waiting in the decaying hospital until the next open vessel arrives. The building is its own character, perhaps the uncredited top billing, but the cast and the range of characters they play keep this a thinking man's horror movie. Those looking for endless gore, juvenile and unnecessary comedic dialog, and the beyond tired sex=death storyline better look elsewhere. Films of this quality on every level are so rare in the generally disappointing horror genre, I can't help but return to it at least once a year for a viewing.

It's great that Session 9, like another lost and effective classic, Halloween III, has found a fan base through home video, but it would be great if scary films of this caliber came along more often than only once every handful of years.

I am a fan of Weird Al, ever since I heard 'My Bologna' given some attention on Cleveland radio back in 79/80. I even owned the first two LP's in the early 80's. Since then, my fandom has been more when I happen across something Al-related on TV. Although, I did used to love his stints on MTV taking over as ALTV. But there's no question, this isn't really a biopic at all. It appears to have a couple of vague real life experiences wrapped into a work of fiction.

All of that would have been fine... had the final product been worthwhile. Initially, I was amused and curious to see where it would go, but then when we get to the whole Madonna abduction thing, I found myself distracted and soon letting it run in the background, not even sure (or caring) how it ended. Perhaps Al is best served with small segments of time because this one definitely overstayed its welcome. I would have been far more intrigued by an actual biopic.

The only 'traditional' holiday film I actually like has always been A Christmas Story. I first saw it during its original theatrical run in late 1983. I loved it then, and now, because of the quirky offbeat humor and wit, and an excellent cast of kids and adults that brought such personality. I'm surprised it became such a universally loved movie over the years because it is so offbeat. When I saw that a legit sequel (not the forgettable, loosely linked follow ups that should be entirely ignored) was happening, I couldn't help but be curious. Since I'm big on nostalgia, seeing the bulk of the cast reunite in their original characters would have been enough for me to at least give it a viewing. I perused user reviews here on IMDB and it seems to be either loved or reviled, not much in-between. I watched it this morning with my expectations in check.

Well, I was pleasantly surprised. No, it's not the caliber of the original film but I actually laughed several times, no easy feat. The nostalgia is there by the ton, not just the cast and the story, but it takes place in 1973 so it's awash with all of those lovely period greens and browns. My expectation was it would probably be just another syrupy rainbow-soaked movie, but thankfully they kept the quirky angle intact. The standout was mom's horrified reaction to Christmas carolers. Oh, that's so me! As much as I absolutely loved Melinda Dillon's portrayal of the mom in the original, I already knew she was not participating, as she retired from acting 15 years ago. In her place, we get Julie Hagerty, best known as the loveable ditzy star of the Airplane movies. Of course, there are a lot of references back to the original film, but I didn't find it overdone as some reviews sniped.

It's not a total win, some of the scenarios fall flat and the kid actors are all pretty forgettable, but I view them as secondary to the original cast anyway. They do take a more realistic approach that the kids mostly grew up to be under to moderate achievers, Ralphie included. Brother Randy seems to be the biggest success, a traveling businessman, but eventually makes it back in time for Christmas casserole. The one plot that I really didn't care for is the about-face of bully Scut Farkus, but it's always great to see Zack Ward, as he's such a character. And while the main plot of the movie is that Ralphie took a year off from the work world to try to fulfill his dream of becoming a writer, and then gets a call from mom about the passing of 'The Old Man', we do get a somewhat predictable chipper ending.

In the end, I can see this one becoming part of an annual double feature, though maybe not an every year type of thing like the original. It's no masterpiece but also no sophomore slump. It has many charms but don't expect it to be a 100% winning counterpart. It kinda felt like a reunion of old friends I've known for decades.

Like others have pointed out, there's not much new here. It's basically the next day with only an ounce of back story. It does seem the characters get away with a bit more noise now, and the alien reactions are not as immediate. But there's still no explanation of their purpose other than taking any available opportunity to fatally smack anyone upside the head for no other purpose than just 'cuz. And let's be honest, the whole baby in a box with an oxygen mask remaining just quiet enough to keep everyone safe is ludicrous. But they opened that ridiculous plot line in the first movie and now they are stuck with it.

A new male character is introduced with little other reason than taking over for dearly departed dad, despite the predicted initial resistance. And despite the big budget, the computer generated aliens still appear like glorified cartoons. Lots of other twists and turns seem ill-conceived and don't really make much sense. And when the movie ends basically in the middle of a situation, it's clear this is going to extend to an ongoing series of movies. And while it was harmless fun, I'm not sure how far they can extend this premise, especially if there's not much effort put into expanding the reasons for the aliens and what they are doing.

It's rare that a movie blows me away and sticks with me for hours after I've finished watching it, but that's exactly what Come Play did to me. Right from the beginning, the eerie vibe starts and it doesn't let up.

I have a tendency to get deeply involved with movies of this nature, outcast child struggling through a broken home and difficulty in school. Yes, it's because I can completely identify, so it makes these films more effective and personal. In this case, Oliver is an autistic child who uses smart phones and iPads to communicate.But when an e-book titled Misunderstood Monsters appears out of nowhere, the story begins to unfold.

Misunderstood Monsters is about Larry, a lonely creature just looking for a friend to protect. But it's not as simple as that, Larry is not the kind of friend you want. He taunts, torments and injures as he tries to gain enough strength to "take" his chosen new friend, in this case Oliver.

The amount of tension is constant because Larry is persistent, and the moments of peace are very brief. Eventually, mom and dad put their differences aside as each becomes aware of Larry and his intentions, and their attempts to stop Larry become a lot more challenging than just destroying the devices of communication in the immediate vicinity.

The basic story of the parents is that mom is the primary caregiver who struggles to help her child gain the ability of speech and have some sort of social interactions with others. Dad is the fun one who distances himself from the serious aspects of caring for a child with limitations, and prefers to be the lighthearted and fun parent, despite the inequality in responsibilities. Further interpersonal plots twists are one of Oliver's school bullies was once his best friend but that ended in a misguided effort by mom to protect her son from scrutiny. Larry plays on all of this in an effort to convince Oliver to take his hand and be his 'friend'.

And like the best movies of this nature, the ending is very bittersweet. You realize the steps mom is willing to go to protect her son, to the point that Oliver actually understands. It's a real heart tugging finale and it has choked me up both times (so far) that I've watched the movie, and that's not an easy thing to do.

This is a classic film in that you understand the director likely had aspects of Oliver's upbringing in his own childhood, and that's what gives it a very penetrating authentic feel. It's smart and scary, sweet and sad, and ultimately very effective for those who can connect with the subject matter rather than just expecting a silly knife wielding psycho looking for his next teenage victim to off.

An extra mention to the child actor playing the lead role. He did an outstanding job! Right away, your heart goes out to him. He portrays a shy timidness with the innocence of a child that makes you just want to protect and comfort him. His looks and mannerisms playing such a challenging role at his age are to be commended because nothing about it seemed silly or fake. He kind of reminded me of Danny from The Shining but even more engaging.

There are a number of messages in the movie, one of which is how technology has crippled human interaction and responsibility. All you need to do is look at how many millennial females cannot seem to drive a car without a phone in their hand and you completely understand.

Come Play became an instant classic for me. I was never bored and was on the edge of my seat the majority of the movie. The ending that left me sitting there in the dark feeling a bit emotional helped solidify it as a new favorite. Very well done and highly recommended.

I'm not surprised by the horror fans complaining about this. They generally want gore and jump scares and this is anything but. It's a refreshing re-take on the old children's story, a good story that kept me glued to the screen and never bored. The filming is beautiful with a dark gothic flare that will make this a halloween classic for me. Nice acting and amazing atmosphere. Very creepy and effective. And while the ending initially looked like a triumph of good, the final scene brings it into perspective. If you enjoy a good story-based film that's creepy and gets under your skin with a steady build, you'll love this. I'm eager to see it again.