Cynthia Erivo and Ariana Grande in Wicked: For Good
There have been various adaptations of L. Frank Baum’s novel The Wonderful Wizard of OZ since its release in 1900, from the 1974 stage version known as the Wiz, the NBC television series known as the Emerald City, or the iconic 1939 film that has become synonymous with the property to this day. One of the most bizarre takes on the material came in 1995, with Gregory Maguire’s novel, Wicked: The Life and Times of the Wicked Witch of the West, which reinvented the story of Oz through the eyes of the Witch herself, renamed Elphaba. The novel was more adult focused in its storytelling, with some of its sequel books, 2005’s Son of a Witch, 2008’s A Lion Among Men and 2011’s Out of Oz, being described sometimes as ‘edgy’ in content. The children novel made by Baum was reinvented in one focusing on themes of terrorism, racism, nature versus nurture and propaganda. The fact that this novel would be then turned into the second most popular Broadway musical of all-time would surprise anyone, with Universal Pictures acquiring the rights for a film adaptation of the novel, with actresses such as Demi Moore, Nicole Kidman and Whoopi Goldberg rallying for the lead role, before composer Stephen Schwartz convinced the studio to pivot to musical theatre.
Opening in 2003, the musical has become the fourth-longest running Broadway show in history and opened the door for Universal to once again become interested in adapting the musical now to film. Plans started all the way back in 2011, with director Stephen Daldry announced to direct in 2016, with Lady Gaga and Shawn Mendes rumoured to be up for major roles. Daldry left the project by 2020 after major setbacks in production, with the film missing various release dates in favour of Universal releasing films like Cats and Sing 2, alongside the COVID-19 Pandemic stalling production. 2021 hit the news that Jon M. Chu boarded as director, and the film finally hit theatres as part one of two in 2024, starring Cynthia Erivo and Ariana Grande. A year later, and the idea of splitting the musical adaptation into two films, one adapting act one, and one adapting act two finally shown the light of day, as Wicked: For Good has opened worldwide.
Jonathan Bailey and Ariana Grande in Wicked: For Good
Adapting the second act of the play, Wicked: For Good follows after Elphaba found out the truth of Oz and the Wizard. Now with a rift between her and her best friend Glinda, the two begin to embrace their roles as The Wicked Witch of the West and Glinda the Good, as the film depicts the last days of the Witch, and eventually overlaps with the arrival of Dorothy as the events of The Wonderful Wizard of Oz takes place.
The original film became a cultural phenomenon when it was released a year ago, finding itself on various best of the year lists, the music trending all other social media and the film finding itself nominated for ten Academy Awards, including Best Picture. The film was not immune from having various faults showing through, the direction is very work-like at times and the colour palette is very dull and muted until the film’s glorious conclusion, but was filled with whimsy, charm and a wonder that made it popular. The film closed out the same way Act One of the plays does, with a triumphant rendition of Defying Gravity, a climatic moment that leaves the film off with a sense of wonder, all the film’s faults leaving the minute the song hits. Going into For Good, the film was in a good place, left on a wonderful hook, with massive boots to fill, but the film really fails to grasp the potential it could have. For Good picks up in the middle of the action, lacking a clear three-act structure, instead having a various number of events happening in a row because the plot demands it and because the book it is trying to connect to has those events happen. It has been long debated that the second act of Wicked is where the play faulters, and it really shows here in this adaptation.
Splitting the play into two films leaves the first film with the fun and the whimsical aspects of the story, and the second film with the dull and contrived. Every character in the narrative must become a character from the original novel, and most of them feel shoe-horned in, in a movie overstuffed with continuous contrived plot elements. It is a tonally confused film, trying to both handle the characters it had introduced in the original film and then also addressing the events of Baum’s novel, and attempting to turn that childlike wonder from those books into serious plot elements. The addition of characters like the Cowardly Lion, The Scarecrow, Dorothy and The Tin Man feel shoe-horned into the narrative, less like they are part of the story and more like ticking boxes to signal the classic elements missing from the prior feature. The prior’s film left off in such a way that it did not even need a sequel, it tells a completed story that could have lead into the events of the 1939 original film, and this film lacks that satisfactory open and close, lacking any substantial character arcs or natural plot progression, everything happens in a rush to get to the ending, and because it needs to tie into the original novel.
The three central performances of the original film continue to impress. Cynthia Erivo, Ariana Grande and Jonathan Bailey are the highlights of the film in their roles as Elphaba, Glinda and Fiyero respectively. Erivo and Grande received Academy Award nominations for Best Actress and Best Supporting Actress for the previous film, and for good reason, they are incredible in both these films. They share wonderful chemistry in their scenes together, and some of the few charming and humorous moments from the dreary film come from their moments together. Bailey is a Bonafide star, he commandeered the screen in his small number of scenes in the first film, and this film turns him into more of a serious star, and gives him a more sizeable role, but he is easily able to hold his own here. One of the major problems with this film is that there is no song featured here that can rival any of the songs featured in the original, and no song that can hit the same heights as Defying Gravity.
Jeff Goldblum, Cynthia Erivo and Ariana Grande in Wicked: For Good
‘No Good Deed’ and ‘For Good’ are both songs that attempt to hit those heights and fall short but are easily the highlights of the film’s soundtrack, and ‘Wonderful’ feels like one of the only musical numbers that attempts something visually distinct. The three central performers do wonders across all the film’s tracks, even if the songs aren’t as memorable as the ones featured in the original. The appearances of Michelle Yeoh and Jeff Goldblum continue to provide small problems for the films, similarly to the first feature, as Yeoh delivers another confused performance as Madame Morrible. Both performers are not as gifted musically as the other stars, which leaves their musical numbers as feeling awkward and stilted.
The tone of the film is incredibly sombre and serious, leaving the whimsical nature of the first half behind for a film which feels ridiculously unpleasant to watch at times, taking it so serious at points and ending up with some elements feeling humorous accidentally. The biggest problem of the original feature came from Chu’s direction, which was lacking visual creativity, and looking washed up and grey in the lightning and colour grading department. It was a visually dull musical, which is the last thing a musical really should be, and this film matches that visual dullness with a dull narrative and tone as well. The colours of the film are washed out and incredibly dark in the lightning department, and the musical numbers lack any creativity visually. There are no big set pieces, with each musical number essentially being two characters singing at each other in flat shot-reverse shot or long takes. Chu can do interesting looking musical numbers, he showed it off in 2021’s In The Heights, but he fails to showcase those directing skills here.
Cynthia Erivo in Wicked: For Good
Wicked: For Good just pails in comparison to its predecessor, it is a film attempting to justify its existence in reinventing moments that have been done in the original text and the iconic 1939 film. Wicked left on such a triumphant note that the change to a sombre tone for the sequel leaves the film feeling like an unpleasant watch, as the great performances from Bailey, Erivo and Grande get lost in the shuffle of middling music and a horrendous colour palette. The problems that shown up in the prior feature are only more apparent here, as Chu fails to deliver a visually spectacular film, leaving off with a muddy and grey film which looks at home with a funeral.
Various characters throughout history have become almost mythological, so contained in culture that every generation will know about them, even if they have never read the original story they were formed from. From Dracula to Pinocchio, Sherlock Holmes to the Peter Pan, or one of the most adapted monsters of all time, Frankenstein’s Monster. The character originates from the 1818 gothic novel that shares the name with the character, also known as the Modern Prometheus, written by Mary Shelley, who published the novel anonymously, until attaching her name in a re-release in 1821. The novel follows the life of Victor Frankenstein; a scientist obsessed with conquering death and creating life. In the process of understanding life, the scientist brings together remnants of dismembered corpses and brings to life an amalgamated corpse that plagues him throughout his remaining life. The first film adaptation of the monster would come in 1910 by Edison Studios, a silent film which was lost to time until being found in the 1980s. After another silent era film in 1915, the Monster would come back to the big screen in his most famous cinematic endeavour, portrayed by Boris Karloff in 1931’s Universal Pictures’ Frankenstein.
Separating the events of the books between the film and its 1935 sequel, Bride of Frankenstein, the films took liberties with the material and turned the monster from horrific victim-turned villain, into a brainless monster who was more of a victim than an antagonist. 1939’s Son of Frankenstein would be the last time the most iconic version of the character would be portrayed by Boris Karloff, the franchise moving into crossovers with characters like Dracula, The Wolf Man and comedians Abbott and Costello. British versions of the character would come in the Hammer horror series, beginning with The Curse of Frankenstein in 1957, and ending with Frankenstein and the Monster from Hell in 1974. Future cinematic depictions of the monster would use both the Universal Pictures version and the Hammer Horror version as a basis, creating films based on film original characters like Igor or The Bride, or depicting the character as either a tragic hero or a mindless monster, far from the horror character from the text.
Oscar Isaac in Frankenstein
Kenneth Branagh’s film, known as Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein, would follow the success of Bram Stoker’ Dracula from Francis Ford Coppola, releasing in 1994. The title would be deceiving however, as the feature would differ incredibly from the novel, even with the author’s name attached. The original script for the feature was helmed by Frank Darabont, who would go on to direct features like The Shawshank Redemption, and a script that Guillermo Del Toro would describe as a ‘pretty much perfect’ script. Del Toro had made his interest in directing a Frankenstein adaptation known for decades, first stating in 2007 and was then announced to be part of a three-year picture deal with Universal Pictures, making the film alongside Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde, Slaughterhouse-Five and Drood. None of these films would come to fruition, with Del Toro’s Frankenstein film being paused once Universal Pictures transitioned their Universal Monsters characters into their Dark Universe shared universe. The project was finally revived in 2023, when Del Toro signed a multi-year deal with Netflix to release films on the service, and the success of his animated Pinocchio movie allowed him to get the funding to finally craft his dream feature. Beginning a limited theatrical release on October 17th 2025, and finally released on Netflix this November, Del Toro’s Frankenstein is released on the world after so many years in development.
Del Toro’s film opens in the same way that the novel opens, a ship gets stranded in the Arctic and the crew pick up a badly injured Victor Frankenstein, who is being hunted across the frozen wasteland by his creation. Once free of the monster briefly, the movie conveys its narrative through Victor telling the ship captain his past but also allows the film to separate the film in half. Separated as chapter titles, the film begins as Victor’s recounting of events and then switches to the Monster’s own perspective. This matches the film’s character exploration and its use of the unreliable narrator, Victor is a troubled character across this film, the film very heavily handily says at a certain point that he is the true monster, and the film conveys this by showing the differences once it switches perspectives. Victor sees the world one way, and some relationships one way, but they are revealed to be figments of his imagination once you get the Monster’s more streamlined and simplistic perspective. Del Toro conveys the narrative as more of a gothic tragedy, for both the monster and Victor, as he picks up the sympathetic portrayals of the monster from the Universal features.
Jacob Elordi and Mia Goth in Frankenstein
Jacob Elordi’s performance in this film will be the thing that will be talked about most after the film has been on Netflix for years, and it is only right. Elordi disappears into the role, proving himself an incredibly capable actor, and even more impressive when he was the second choice for the role after Andrew Garfield departed the role. There is an innocence to the character that he can portray, as he learns the world for the first time, and the movie makes you feel for him as he faces abuse at the hands of his creator. However, what the film also manages to balance that many versions are unable to, is making him scary as well. Elordi’s massive height allows him to be both a gentle giant but also a towering presence, a force of nature who becomes consumed by vengeance and loneliness. There is something so sad about the character, as he struggles with becoming the thing he is told he is, and how experiences life’s struggles, not its strengths.
Most of his abuse comes from his creator, who features in one of the film’s biggest changes from the novel, as Victor keeps the monster after his creation, rather than almost instantly leaving it to go on the run. This brief time with the monster becomes important, as his ego comes to full effect as he moves from protective father to an abuser, who repeats his father’s mistakes. Oscar Isaac brings a level of gravitas to this multi-faceted character, keeping the character from falling too far down the villain category. He is a tragic figure, who contains the film’s messages around nature versus nurture, the power of nature when trying to play God, and generational trauma. The film takes its time in building Victor as a character, with an incredibly slow-paced opening act which explores his childhood and how he brings the monster alive, enough time to give the character enough backstory to make him sympathetic. Isaac can play much with the ego of the character, and his obsession with science and controlling life and death, coming from a personal history with death.
Oscar Isaac in Frankenstein
His trauma from being abused by his father is passed down to the monster, as the film makes you sympathise with both characters for their shared trauma and the constantly continuing cycle of hurting the other. Elordi’s Monster doesn’t want to feel alone, shown in a translation of a scene from the book, where he demands Victor to make him a bride, which comes across less threatening and more desperate in this version. The refusal to give him a companion is the final nail in the coffin for him, as his creator refuses to allow him to live and feel happy, resorting instead to succumb to his monstrous appearance and inflict the pain he also faced. This slow-paced opening allows great exploration into some of the minor characters, with a specific memorable performance coming from Christoph Waltz. Mia Goth’s role as Victor’s brother’s fiancée, and as the romantic connection for Victor, is a slightly underdeveloped part of the narrative, but later narrative reveals showcase the purpose for this. Her tenderest moments come from her interactions with the Monster, the one character who is not scared of his appearance, her role seems to bring a level of humanity to the monster, tender moments that bring warmth to a very serious film.
The film feels like almost a culmination of Del Toro’s career so far, from his early work with Cronos and The Devil’s Backbone, to more contemporary work like Pan’s Labyrinth and Crimson Peak, Frankenstein feels like all the elements of those features put on as a final display. Del Toro feels drawn to monsters throughout his films, with films like The Shape of Water showcasing the beauty and humanity of what is seen as monstrous, and the tragic tale of Frankenstein’s Monster just climaxes that draw. His films have always had a level of gothic backdrops to them, his use of shadows and muted colours have always been a draw, and his look at fantastical technological in a world grounded in moody backdrops. The locations in Frankenstein invoke the gothic backdrops of Crimson Peaks and reflect the visual look of Hammer Horror and Universal Monsters takes on the characters. The production design of the film is immensely impressive, with fantastic costuming and an incredible attention to detail in the use of Mia Goth’s character in makeup. Del Toro has always had a great control over the camera, and expresses great confidence in direction, and paired with the excellent cinematography by Dan Laustsen, the film looks fantastic. The final sequences where the film finally shows how the Monster and Victor came to the arctic showcase some of the best-looking visuals across the film, as the frozen landscape showcases their slow chase and the sun shines down on them in beautiful shots.
After so many years in development, it could have been easy for Del Toro to deliver something messy and disjointed with all the versions that probably existed over the years, but he has instead delivered a film that feels like a culmination of his work. Frankenstein is a moving piece of cinema that looks at generational trauma, with all the gothic and drama elements pulled from Mary Shelley’s original story. There are clear changes made across the film from the text, but they are all in service of a grand story, a story which still feels the same in its soul as the original text. Jacob Elordi proves himself an incredible talent here and will be the most memorable part of this film for sure.
Director Chris Stuckmann started his career in the film industry by being one of the earliest film reviewers on video-sharing website, Youtube. Starting on the website in 2009, the film critic has gained over 2 million subscribers and over 779 million views, marking him as one of the biggest online critics. His career on the website has allowed him to focus on other big projects, from releasing two film-focused books and directing the short film, Auditorium 6, in 2017. In a controversial video released in 2021, Stuckmann revealed that he would be cutting down on his film-reviewing content, and he would stop reviewing films that he did not enjoy. His content would transform instead into informative videos on filmmaking and the work behind the camera, and his reviews to something more positive, focused on what he likes about new releases. This change was marked with the news of the film reviewer making the jump to becoming a full-fledged director, with Stuckmann stating it would not be fair to be a filmmaker who criticised other filmmakers. With the dawn of Youtube, there was bound to be a large movement of Youtubers making their way onto the big screen, with mixed success, from 2010’s Fred: The Movie and its sequels, to 2015’s Smosh: The Movie. In the years following however, there has been a clear movement of Youtubers making their way behind the camera rather than in-front, and to large success. From David F. Sandberg being able to get a career making films for Warner Bros, to Danny and Michael Philippou moving from their youtube channel RackaRacka to big screen horror features like 2022’s Talk To Me and 2025’s Bring Her Back, Youtube filmmakers are becoming common place, and it is only more impressive that Stuckmann could make the jump himself.
This film debut would come in the form of horror feature Shelby Oaks, which has finally released in cinemas this Halloween. Initially an independent feature, which was crowdfunded by Kickstarter, the film drew in a massive amount of support, becoming the most-funded horror film ever placed on Kickstarter. Its world premiere was held in 2024, at the 28th Fantasia International Film Festival, where horror director Mike Flanagan would come onboard as executive producer, and, after another screening, film distribution and producer company Neon would come onboard and would fund substantial reshoots. The film serves as a continuation to a set of short films Stuckmann released, focusing on an online paranormal investigation team known as the Paranormal Paranoids. Shelby Oaks sees a woman searching for her sister, who went missing during the production of an episode of the Paranormal Paranoids, when investigating the abandoned town that shares the film’s title.
Sarah Durn in Shelby Oaks
Stuckmann’s debut starts out with great promise, pre-title drops, the first 30 minutes set a mood and a central intriguing mystery that the rest of the film can very clearly not deliver upon through its full runtime. The film has been advertised as a found-footage feature, and was labelled as so when initially announced, and the first act delivers on that, but once the title sequence drops, the real film begins. The best moments of the film are the eerie and creepy found footage of the Youtube ghost-hunters, as they encounter a sinister threat. Stuckmann delivers excellent scares which sometimes fall back on jumpscares but are more commonly based around mood and tension. Exposition is conveyed in a mockumentary style, which delivers on all the backstory required and setting up a mystery that engages the viewer. Found footage has always been a effective new horror sub-genre, conveying a realism that some horror features lack, and the simplicity of the scares help the terror feel real and palpable.
This opening good will only take a movie so far however, as the movie transitions into becoming a standard horror feature that stumbles and falls in attempting to answer its mysteries. Stuckmann’s film seems more concerned with building horror and tension, and showing off his impressive directorial talents, and lacks clear focus on delivering worthwhile characters or dialogue. Camille Sullivan does what she can with a script that doesn’t seem to concern itself with her or her character, as the downfall of her relationship with her character’s husband seems to just rely on cliches rather than to build anything worthwhile or dramatic. Cliches plague the second half of Shelby Oaks, from a sequence of the main character going the library to research the plot, a husband that does not believe the central supernatural events, or a scene with Keith David, who only serves to be a clairvoyant character who hands the plot reveals to the main character and the audience.
Keith David in Shelby Oaks
The film is clearly inspired by various other horror features, and uses various scenes, plotlines and scares as blueprints to transport over. It feels like a disjointed combination of Rosemary’s Baby, Hereditary and The Blair Witch Project in particular. Even the use of an online campaign where the advertisers are pretending that the events of the film are true and delivering more footage and theories on a website harkens back to the marketing campaign for The Blair Witch Project. The central tagline of ‘What Happened to Riley Brennan’, also seems to share a lot in common technically to ‘Who Killed Laura Palmer’ from David Lynch’s Twin Peaks series. These inspirations plague that second half of the film and leave the film feeling predictable and unoriginal, and its only hurt more by an underwhelming finale that gives the film’s central mystery out on a whimper. As a directorial debut, the film feels like an entertaining B-movie that wants to be higher, but the third act strives for something grander and more metaphorical, that the film has not earned at all. It feels A24-lite, but in a way that is incredibly unsatisfying, and seems to be engaging with Stuckmann’s time as a Jehovah Witness during his youth, but this is not developed at all.
Shelby Oaks is a film fighting against itself, between an original mockumentary with clear tension and emotions, to a derivative and cliché supernatural feature with worrying special effects and a mystery that feels disjointed and not thought out at all. Things happen for seemingly no reason, as the plot races to the finish line with no time to stop and breathe, the only lights to be shown being the found footage sequences that still rear their head in the second half. The film is a good showcase of Stuckmann’s directorial talents, and it can only be hoped that he can continue after this, maybe with a screenwriter on hand to work on a script that can match his eye for visuals.
The Pirates of the Caribbean movies were a lightning in a bottle for live action Disney projects, films that lit up the box office in a dry period of Disney’s live action attempts. The studio would come to purchase Marvel and Star Wars to bolster their live action output, and their live action remakes of beloved animated classics would bring up their numbers, but Pirates brought Disney the idea that they could replicate that success. Through the 2010s, and even moving into the 2020s, Disney would make multiple attempts to create successful live action franchises that could stand alongside Marvel and Star Wars. From the Dwayne Johnson-starring Jungle Cruise that was released during the COVID-19 lockdown, to the box office bomb John Carter in 2012, and even the Johnny Depp-starring Lone Ranger from 2013, which the studio marketed thoroughly, included the characters in their crossover game Disney Infinity.
The most notable live action attempt however would come in 2010, with the release of Tron: Legacy. A sequel to cult classic film Tron, released in 1982, the film followed the events of that film by seeing lead character Kevin Flynn, played by Jeff Bridges, becoming lost in the Grid, a virtual reality game he had created. His son would follow him into the game many years later and help stop a rogue AI from escaping the game. Though not being as much as a box office bomb as the original film, the film was only a moderate success and would only become popular in the years following release. The overall franchise has become a cult classic and spawned comic book follow-ups and a Disney XD animated series, which ran for a season. The popularity comes from the visuals that stand out from the normality of Hollywood visuals, from the white and game-like visuals of the original to the neon and colourful look of the 2010 follow-up, and the immensely popular soundtracks that come from Wendy Carlos and Daft Punk.
Jared Leto in Tron: Ares
A Legacy sequel has been in the works ever since that film became a cult film and was in production until being abandoned in 2015 after the failure of another Disney live action attempt, Tomorrowland. Tron was finally back alive again in production by 2017, when Jared Leto boarded the project as lead star and producer, moving the project from a direct follow-up, to instead a soft reboot which would strike out on its own narratively. After swapping directors and production designers in the years since, the film has finally hit the big screen eight years after initial announcement, as Tron: Ares. The film follows Leto’s character Ares, an AI from the Grid, created by tech billionaire Jullian Dillinger, who has cracked the code on bringing AI programs into the real world and back. Using the programs to make money with the armed forces, his plans go wrong when Ares goes rogue.
For fans of the Tron franchise, the film’s lack of continuing key storylines and bringing back the lead characters of Legacy will hit hard as a negative, but the film continues the franchise’s core focus of music and visuals. The movie is worth the price of admission for the music by Trent Reznor and Atticus Ross, who make up the band Nine Inch Nails. The rock band has made a prominent movement into film soundtracks since working with David Fincher on The Social Network in 2010, as frequent collaborators on Finchers’ releases since then, alongside director Luca Guadagnino. The music works hand in hand with the visuals to give the movie a futuristic mood, a sense of gravitas and awe that matches the visuals of the previous features. As a visual focused movie, the film however lacks its own identity outside of just copying designs and visuals from the previous film. The visuals are impressive all the same, but the jump between the original film and Legacy came from the change in the visual style, and this lack of originality in the visual department makes this film feel lesser in some ways. Legacy was directed by visionary big budget director Joseph Kosinski, director of F1 and Top Gun: Maverick, and brought his own special-effects history to the franchise, crafting a unique visual style. Joachim Ronning, a director who seems to be contained to just making sequels for Disney, delivering films like Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Men Tell No Tales and Maleficent: Mistress of Evil, seems to be more of a work-for-hire gig here, lacking any clear unique visual style.
Greta Lee in Tron: Ares
The plot of the film is relatively simple, it is essentially a fetch quest to obtain an item to save the day, and that would not be negative against the film if the lead characters were not all incredibly uninteresting. The previous features did not have the most compelling or complex narratives, but they survived on likeable leads, a pleasant score and incredible visuals. When those likeable protagonists are stripped away, it is easy to see the flaws in the script and the lack of creativity. After receiving critical acclaim as the lead of 2000’s Requiem for A Dream and then receiving an Academy Award for 2013’s Dallas Buyers Club, Jared Leto has become a hot commodity for Hollywood.
His franchise roles however have been less impressive than ever lately, from his panned performance as the Joker in 2016’s Suicide Squad, and then the 2022 box office bomb Morbius, and his performance as Ares here continues to show this lack of passion for the actor in franchise roles. His performance is incredibly flat, and when the AI starts to gain a conscience, he continues to act the same without any added personality. The lead is uninteresting, and his performance makes him even more unlikeable, and it does not help that he shares zero chemistry with co-star Greta Lee. Lee just gained prominence from her starring role in the Oscar-nominated Past Lives, and she feels lifeless here, lacking any central charm as she sleepwalks through her dialogue. Evan Peters’ antagonist, Julian Dillinger, is the highlight of the cast, capturing a spoiled rich nepo-baby fantastically, Peters has the charisma for a franchise like this, and it’s a shock he wasn’t considered for the lead role instead.
Jeff Bridges in Tron: Ares
The film’s narrative just suffers incredibly from its lack of originality, mixing its plot points from the previous Tron films and then throwing in other film influences throughout. The second act feels increasingly like it is inspired by T2: Judgement Day through the interactions between Ares and his new found allies, but Leto’s delivery doesn’t do any wonders like Arnold’s did in that feature. The fetch quest featured in the film feels like it only exists to dwell in nostalgia in a drawn-out scene which brings back Jeff Bridges as Kevin Flynn, a nostalgic sequence that seems out of place in a franchise such as this. The goal of the movie seems to remind the audience of the previous feature, and the sequel that would never come. The soundtrack and visuals are fantastic as expected, but reminding the audience of another film only leads to being reminded, you could just be watching Legacy instead.
Dwayne Johnson got his start as ‘The Rock’ in WWE wrestling, where he appears on a part-time basis, but made his big splash into the public consciousness as an actor. Making his film debut in 2001’s The Mummy Returns, the actor has had a long-running career starring in action, family and comedy films across the 2000s and the 2010s. The Jumanji franchise came back to prominence with him in the cast, in 2017’s Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle and 2019’s Jumanji: The Next Level, he has starred as fan favourite character Luke Hobbs in the Fast and Furious franchise beginning with 2011’s Fast Five, and he has lent his voice as Maui in Disney’s Moana duology.
These films have led to him becoming one of the highest paid actors in Hollywood today, an actor synonymous with the blockbuster genre and an actor who draws in a crowd. However, in the aftermath of the COVID-19 pandemic and the change in cinemagoing, the draw of an actor seems to have gone, and Johnson’s films have fell in both popularity and box office success. 2022’s Black Adam was billed as Johnson’s takeover of the DC Universe, with reports of him strongarming creative control around a franchise that had lost its central narrative, but even with revealing the big post-credit cameo of Henry Cavill’s return as Superman, the film bombed. Mere weeks later, the sequels were cancelled, and Peter Safran and James Gunn became the new directors of the brand, and after 2023’s Fast X failed to become profitable, it seemed that the franchise potential of Dwayne Johnson is over.
Emily Blunt and Dwayne Johnson in The Smashing Machine
His most recent feature, 2024’s Red One, was a holiday box office disaster, grossing only $185.9 million against an estimated £250 million budget. Though still attached to various blockbusters soon, with a live action Moana remake coming to the big screen in 2026, and a third Jumanji film in production, Dwayne Johnson has made the bold career movie to get into serious acting. The blockbuster actor seems to be attempting to go for the Oscar, and with the help of director Benny Safdie, most known for films like 2019’s Uncut Gems and 2017’s Good Time which he directed with older brother Josh, comes The Smashing Machine. The film stars Johnson as MMA legend Mark Kerr, chronicling the life of one of the first personality fighters in the sport, as the 90s changes the way the sport is played. The film showcases his struggles with addiction and the conflict that rises in his life with girlfriend, Dawn Staples, portrayed by Emily Blunt.
The biggest conversation coming out of this film will easily be around Johnson’s performance, and he really surprises in how capable he is as a dramatic actor. He is a good actor in his action and blockbuster work but has become typecast in the same role in each feature, giving him less of a chance to showcase his talents outside his natural wrestling-born charisma. The Smashing Machine really allows Johnson to show a more vulnerable side, seeing the actor cry on screen for maybe the first time, and to see the actor lose when his career has been set by characters who cannot lose is something very refreshing. It is one of those performances where you can almost forget it is Dwayne Johnson in the role, he looks unrecognisable and dwells the character in both anger, sadness and desperation, which is incredibly unusual for a Johnson performance. The actor also shares incredible chemistry with already proven dramatic actor Emily Blunt, the scenes between them feel very real and natural. Blunt must deal with some heavy topics, and a character who can only be described as a mess, and this constantly changing character is handled perfectly.
Dwayne Johnson in The Smashing Machine
Director Benny Safdie was awarded the Silver Lion for Best Director for this film when it premiered at Venice Film Festival, and as his solo-directorial debut the direction impresses. Shot to give a documentary feel, the film has a clear grainy texture which makes the film feel like a home movie, a gentle and homely feel that contrast well with the serious sequences on display. Safdie’s camera is always on the move, staying stationary for very little of the runtime, giving the viewer the feeling that they are a cameraman filming this exclusive documentary. The fight sequences are entertaining and shot with some technical prowess, but there is not enough involvement of this part of Kerr’s life. The film picks a specific part of Kerr’s life to portray; his drug addiction and relationship troubles and puts a lot of the details around his fights and the overall movement of the MMA world to the backburner. Which part of his life an audience would prefer to see is completely up to that viewer, but it feels like a targeted choice to focus on the aspects that would allow Johnson more time to emote for a potential Oscar win.
Safdie’s script however does not feel up to the task of delivering the emotional weight needed for this type of film, with a lot of the dialogue coming across as clunky and strange when not delivered by a capable actor. A large section of the supporting cast includes boxing and MMA champions, with Ryan Bader, Bas Rutten and Oleksandr Usyk all taking roles in the feature, and they all fall flat in both performance and the lines they are given. Bringing these champions in gives the film a level of authenticity, but their acting is just not up to snuff. The film also just lacks a satisfactory narrative structure, the film just retackles the same plot elements repeatedly, multiple fights between Kerr and Staples, multiple drug sequences or a fight sequence, the film is just repeated sequences with very little resolution to each of these plot elements. The film lacks a substantial change in the character’s development or in closing any of these plot elements, that the film just falls into feeling repetitive. A closer look into the rule changes and the other changes that face the MMA during this period, that only exist in the periphery of the film’s narrative, would have livened up the script.
Dwayne Johnson in The Smashing Machine
All in all, The Smashing Machine is a film that is brought together by the surprising and impressive central performance by Dwayne Johnson, breaking out of his signature box as an action and comedy actor into a capable serious drama star. The overall film feels very derivative of various other sports dramas that have lit up the big screen over the years and lacks a signature hook outside of the same drama beats which every sports drama already contains. The film ends on a triumphant and emotional note that feels unique to most films in this genre, but that is not true for the rest of the film, and this ending does not feel completely earned because of so. Though underperforming at the box office, this film feels as a stepping stone in Johnson’s future possibility as a known serious actor, and with upcoming features with directors like Martin Scorsese, it can only be hoped that this performance will not be a one time thing, and that Johnson’ career is on a new successful path.
John Carpenter is one of the masters of the horror genre, forming the basis for the slasher sub-genre, but also dabbling in the psychological horror, the science-fiction horror and even wandering outside of the horror genre. He is characterised heavily by pessimistic and nihilistic films, and by composing his own scores for his features, becoming a soundtrack artist long after he has finished being a filmmaker in the modern day. With the upcoming Halloween season, following will be a ranking of the eighteen theatrically released films directed by the horror auteur, not including his direct to television features or his involvement in anthology features.
18) Ghosts of Mars
Pam Grier, Natasha Henstridge, Clea DuVall and Liam Waite in Ghosts of Mars
Starting the list off, comes Carpenter’s second most recent film released into cinemas, 2001’s Ghosts of Mars. Starring a central cast of Natasha Henstridge, Ice Cube, Jason Statham and Pam Grier, the film centres itself around a future where Mars has been colonized. A squadron of police officers and a convicted criminal are forced to work together to fight against the possessed residents of a mining colony, with the ghosts of the planet’s original inhabitants taking control over the peaceful residents. The film has slowly become a cult classic to many fans of the director’s work, but the film also marks a downward trend in the director’s late career, from the 1990s to the present day. The film essentially serves as a remake of one of Carpenter’s classic features, Assault on Precinct 13. Just like that film, the feature brings police officers and criminals together to stop a gang that essentially act as zombies, mindless monsters that exist as cannon fodder in various action sequences where they try to break into one building.
Where that original feature is entertaining, this film just blends itself in mediocrity, with all the central players failing at making their characters feel convincing or entertaining. The film lacks the central feel of a Carpenter feature; his nihilistic characters and plot lines are replaced with a film that feels more campy and embarrassingly unfunny compared to a genuine horror-action feature. Carpenter’s score feels generic and unimpressive, lacking a unique hook that makes it stand apart, and the direction flounders in keeping up with the set style of 2000s horror, with an oversaturated look and shaky camera use that makes it fall in line with the eventual style that Saw, in 2004, would set for the genre. Action sequences can be fun at parts, but when the film stands out so much from the general quality of Carpenter’s work, it is hard to praise anything in the feature
17) Village of the Damned
Christopher Reeve in Village of the Damned
In a 2011 interview, John Carpenter described his remake of Village of the Damned as a ‘contractual assignment’ that he was ‘really not passionate about’. Starring Christopher Reeve, Kirstie Alley, Linda Kozlowski and Mark Hamill, the film follows what happens after all women in a town are impregnated by brood parasitic aliens, with the children growing rapidly and having psychic abilities. Based on 1957’s The Midwich Cuckoos, the book has created various adaptations of the work, with 1960’s Village of the Damned and its sequel, 1964’s Children of the Damned, being the basis of Carpenter’s remake. The novel also spawned a television remake, sharing the same name as the novel rather than the film version, released in 2022. A remake of Village of the Damned had been in the works for a decade since the popularity of 1978’s Invasion of the Body Snatchers, with the adaptation being aimed to tackle the subjects that the original film could never tackle.
With censorship at the time of production, the original could not even mention impregnation and could not explore the true focus of the narrative, abortion. Outside of this big change with the lack of censorship, Carpenter’s version of the narrative just falls short and ends up feeling campier than a serious outlook on abortion. Reeve’s final role before he was paralysed in 1995, both him and Hamill feel miscast in their roles and fail to convince as serious stars, and the score suffers, similarly to Ghosts of Mars, as feeling generic, and at times, out of place in such a dramatic feature. The film marks the ‘work for hire’ time in Carpenter’s career, with the 1990s serving him badly with a lack of creator-owned projects.
16) Escape from LA
Kurt Russell in Escape From L.A.
A fifteen-year late sequel to Carpenter’s classic feature, Escape from New York, 1996’s Escape from L.A, is a derivative film that feels in line with sequels to 80s classics. Similar in case to features like Ghostbusters 2, the film serves more as a remake of the original film than a direct sequel, with very little callbacks to the original and more of Carpenter just doing the same plot beats again. Set in a near-future world of 2013, where the United States is ruled by a President for life, the film sees Snake Plissken returning into action when the president’s daughter steals the remote of a new superweapon. She finds herself in L.A., which has been walled off from the rest of the States as a prison-city, and Plissken is tasked to save her and retrieve the weapon to stop his upcoming deportation. Carpenter has long declared his sequel to be his favourite of the two, stating his reasons as because of the film’s darker and more nihilistic tone and its deeper themes, but the film fails at being either of these things.
A competent film, but a lesser feature when compared to Carpenter’s original, the film feels sillier and more cartoonish than a darker feature. Scenes including a paragliding action sequence, a chase on surfboard and a showdown between heroes and villains through a basketball game come across as goofier than anything, and the turn from impressive miniatures and practical effects to poorly aged digital effects lead the film looking less impressive than ever. Originally, the film would be followed with an end of a promised trilogy, as Escape from Earth would double down on the special effects, however the poor box office performance left all plans for the franchise on the cutting room floor. The shining light of the film comes from Kurt Russell’s still impressive performance as Plissken, he is still committed to making the character cool and the character never flounders when the rest of the film does.
15) The Ward
Amber Heard in The Ward
There would be a nine-year gap between Ghosts of Mars and Carpenter’s most recent big screen venture, 2010’s The Ward. He has since directed an episode of the streaming series Suburban Screams in 2023, but until then this was his most recent directorial work, with the director falling out of love with the medium in the years since Ghosts of Mars. It was during his short stint working on two episodes for Showtime’s anthology series, Masters of Horror, that his love for the medium returned. The Ward sees that love for return, and though it is nowhere near groundbreaking, it is a chilling story that proves that Carpenter still can make a tension inducing and briefly scary feature. The film follows a young woman who is institutionalized after setting fire to a house, and once arriving at the institute, she becomes haunted by the ghost of a former inmate at the ward. Starring Amber Heard, Mamie Gummer, Danielle Panabaker and Jared Harris, the film suffers from a script that undermines everything Carpenter has done with the atmosphere and setting.
Characterisation is basically null in the film, with each inmate having one personality trait, and the late-game reveal that the narrative is all happening in one person’s head, and no one is real gives that a reason, but leaves the film feeling cheap and empty. Knowing the central twist as well, leads to the film feeling impossible to enjoy on a rewatch, when nothing that is happening on screen is real, it is hard to become invested.
14) Memoirs of an Invisible Man
Chevy Chase in Memoirs of an Invisible Man
The production of Carpenter’s take on H.F. Saint’s novel, Memoirs of an Invisible Man, would be hellish and would almost make the director want to quit, a hard start to his downward trend in filmmaking during the 90s. The film was backed by the studio because of Chevy Chase’s intense interest in using it as a star vehicle to move him from being a comedic actor to a serious star. The star was most well-known off the back of his stint on comedy series, Saturday Night Live, where he starred from 1975 to 1976, and then a comedy leading man in films like 1980’s Caddyshack and the five National Lampoon’s Vacation movies. His move to serious actor was a confusing one, and the departure of director Ivan Reitman, famous for Ghostbusters, came about because of these budding heads of tone, with Carpenter eventually hired after Superman-director Richard Donner left the project after eight months.
The film follows Chase as Nick Halloway, a man who is rendered invisible after an accident, and he soon becomes the target of a CIA operative who sees him as a potential new weapon for the American government. Chase wanted to base the film in drama, focusing on the troubles a man would have when becoming invisible and how that would drive him away from his friends and family, and wanted the film to be a central love story. This is where the film falls flat, Carpenter directing a light-hearted comedy drama, where the main star is refusing to do the comedy aspect only leads to disaster. The film is tonally confused, and there are interesting uses of the invisibility effects, and a fun performance by Sam Neill, but Chase only bewilders in his performance, and the central connection between him and love interest Daryl Hannah is nowhere to be seen. The troubled production has only led to an equally troubled feature.
13) Vampires
Thomas Ian Griffith in Vampires
When asked in an interview on his opinion of the filmic version of his novel, Vampires, author John Steakley pointed out how the adaptation retained much of his dialogue but none of his original plot, though he liked the film. Carpenter’s 1998 film Vampires has become a cult classic since its release, spawning a franchise which contains two direct-to-DVD features, 2002’s Vampires: Los Muertos and 2005’s Vampire: The Turning. Moving away from the gothic loneliness that the monsters were known for, Carpenter’s film tackles the vampires as bloodthirsty monsters which more resemble zombies than anything like the Draculas of the past. Starring James Woods as Jack Crow, who leads a team of vampire hunters, after being raised by the Catholic Church to become their master vampire slayer. The plot kicks into gear after his crew are killed, and he must pull together new members to take down the first vampire, Jan Valek, who is after a centuries-old cross. The plot is paper-thin, essentially a series of engaging action sequences that are stitched together by something resembling a plot.
The film has become a cult classic because of its reliance on action, it is a movie trying its best to be cool and kick-ass, with a central performance by James Woods that feels laughably over-the-top at times. Carpenter has always wanted to make a Western, with many of his films falling into Western-lite at times, with Ghosts of Mars and They Live being the prime examples. Vampires serve as the closest to a Western for Carpenter and showcases his tendency to make his films increasingly goofy and comedic in the 90s, but its also hard to be completely invested when Carpenter makes all his characters so increasingly unlikeable. It has gained a cult-following in the years since but outside of some great action and some maybe not on purpose-comedic moments, it is hard to see why.
12) Dark Star
Serving as Carpenter’s debut feature, the science-fiction comedy, Dark Star, is a bit rough around the edges as a student film but has enough charm and is important enough to the genre that it deserves to be high enough on the list. Set up essentially as a spoof of Stanley Kubrick’s 2001: A Space Odyssey, the film went through a journey from University of Southern California student film, to expanding with reshoots in 1973 and then having a limited theatrical release in 1975. Serving as Carpenter’s first directorial project, the film also offered Carpenter his first chance to score a feature. The film follows the crew of the deteriorating starship, named after the title of the film, twenty years into their mission to destroy unstable planets which might threaten the future of galactic colonization.
The film feels messy at times because of the clear inclusion of various random sequences to lengthen the runtime of the film, with the film’s plot essentially being a bunch of comedic sequences one after another until the central bomb plot takes place in the back half. The film does not really get going into that secondary half, but the inclusion of a beach ball alien is humorous and makes up for some of the shortcomings of the set up. Outside of making a career for horror auteur John Carpenter, the film is equally important for launching the career of Dan O’Bannon, who would take the beachball alien concept and turn it into screenplay of the hit 1979 film Alien. His animation work here would also lead him to provide the special effects animation for 1977’s Star Wars, setting himself up as a signature creator for the science-fiction genre, and marking the importance of Dark Star as a figurehead of the genre.
11) Christine
Keith Gordon in Christine
The opening sequence of John Carpenter’s Christine sets itself apart from the original novel instantly, as the film opens with the creation of the signature car, with the car instantly revealed to have a mind of its own as it injures a mechanic. The film marks a connection between Christine and femineity, the car strikes out in anger when a man touches herself in a private area, and later becomes jealous when Arnie, it’s owner, becomes entwined with another woman. It is far away from Stephen King’s original concept for the central car, where the car was possessed by its previous owner, marking it as a normal car made evil through possession, where Carpenter’s is evil from the assembly line. Like Kubrick’s take on The Shining, this had led King to disliking this version of his novel, but outside of this central origin difference, and some more cinematic depictions of the death sequences, the film is faithful to the textual events. The film was handled by Carpenter as a work-for-hire job, while he was trying to develop a filmic version of King’s other novel, Firestarter. The film follows Arnie Cunnigham, as his life takes a dramatic change when he purchases the car known as Christine, which only becomes worse when he meets a new girl at school, and the car begins to take control over him.
As a work-for-hire job, the film excels in showing the class of Carpenter’s 80s work, working hard to make a car scary and capable of gruesome kills. The film conveys an interesting personality through an inanimate object, and Keith Gordon’s central performance as Arnie holds the film together perfectly. The character is as multilayered as the novel, the film spending so much time away from the character so that by the end of the feature, he feels as evil and alien as the car, Gordon tracking a change in his performance, from innocent and kind student to a crazed murderer. Even if King does not like this version of his work, it has the spirit contained in it for sure.
10) Prince of Darkness
Donald Pleasence in Prince of Darkness
The second instalment in what Carpenter names as his ‘Apocalypse trilogy’, alongside The Thing and In The Mouth for Madness, Prince of Darkness is a mix between Sam Raimi’s Evil Dead and Evil Dead 2. Starring Donald Pleasence, in a welcome return to the world of Carpenter after last being in Halloween, and a larger cast, the film follows a group of quantum physics students who are assigned to assist a Catholic priest. The priest has found a liquid at a local monastery, which they soon come to find is a sentient, liquid embodiment of Satan himself. At heart, the movie is a possession film, a possession takes on The Thing, as the characters fall one by one to the possession in a similar way to that previously mentioned feature. Like Raimi’s Evil Dead movies, the charm comes in the possessed creature effects, and the compelling ways that each character plays their possessed self-compared to the original character, mixing the serious nature of Evil Dead with enough goofy and comedic performances that makes it stand toe-to-toe with Evil Dead 2. The central romance of the film feels underwritten, but each other aspect of the film more than makes up for it. An early found footage scene is included, well before the concept boomed with the release of The Blair Witch Project, and the film works to convey a film brimming with doom and despair.
The liquid possession angles the film explores seems to be a clear comparison to the AIDS epidemic that was still raging during the release of the film. The possession is transmutable, passing via fluid transferred between person to person. Similarly, the film also transmutes many references to homosexuality across its runtime, namely through a sequence where Walter, an implied gay man, is only able to escape from a group of possessed women, by coming out of a closet. Homosexuality, at the time, was believed to be the only sexuality to be infected by AIDS, marking a deeper meaning in a tonally comedic film, balancing both comedy and heavier themes perfectly.
9) Assault on Precinct 13
Austin Stoker and Darwin Joston in Assault on Precinct 13
Carpenter’s second feature as a director is essentially a remake of George A. Romero’s classic 1968 feature, Night of the Living Dead, only swap out the mindless undead instead for an army of mindless gangsters. The film even retains Romero’s accidental social commentary by focusing the film on a black lead during a time where that was a phenomenon in mainstream cinema. Originally developed as a straightforward Western, a film that Carpenter has always wanted to create, the film explored a similar plot to Rio Bravo, where a sheriff’s office is attacked by the local rancher’s gang when the sheriff arrests the corrupt rancher. When the film lacked the budget required, the film was downsized to taking place in the present day instead, following a police officer who must band together with a death row-bound convict to defend a defunct precinct against a criminal gang. The film opened to mixed reviews, and a dwindling box office performance, but would soon become a cult classic, allowing it to even garner a remake in 2005, starring Laurence Fishburne and Ethan Hawke.
Even if no longer a Western, the film still retains Western components and features a running gag of the line ‘Got a smoke?’, a reference to the various cigarette gags that came from Howard Hawks classical Westerns. The film features a poppy score from Carpenter, a synthy electric score that breaths strong life into the action, as the station gets swarmed by army after army of faceless goons. The film’s most shocking moment, however, comes from the execution of a little girl in bloody fashion, an event that kicks off the central plot of the film after a slow start of plot build-up. The MPAA threatened that the film would receive a X rating if the scene was not cut from the film, and Carpenter relented, removing the scene from the copy he gave to the MPAA, but distributing the film with the scene still present to play coy with them. It was for the best that the film retained this harrowing sequence, it marked it for what it truly was, one of the very best exploitation features.
8) In The Mouth of Madness
Sam Neill in The Mouth of Madness
The one movie that still proved that Carpenter had the ability to make a tremendous film during his ‘work-for-hire’ period of the 90s, In The Mouth of Madness is a great outlier in Carpenter’s filmography, a supernatural film that feels smart and surreal in its narrative, that many critics considered it pretentious during its initial theatrical run. Starring Sam Neill, in his return to the world of Carpenter after a villainous turn in Memoirs of an Invisible Man, as an insurance investigator, visiting a small town when looking into the disappearance of a successful horror author. Once reaching the town, the lines between reality and fiction begin to blur as Neill’s character begins to question his sanity, as this famous horror author seems to be able to bend reality to his own whim. The horror from this feature comes from the sense of the loss of free will, questioning how much free we will really have when something dictating our every move can be written. It is a clearly multilayered feature, questioning even what insanity really means, when one can be labelled as such when they are just acting outside of the regular order of nature put forward by society.
The texts written by the central author also make people insane, essentially showcasing Carpenter questioning the true meaning between crime and media, does what people view through film, television and fiction truly make them violent, or is it the people themselves that is to fault. There is a grand scale to the narrative that is so unlike Carpenter, with excellent creature designs and a genuine foreboding tone. Inspired by the works of H.P Lovecraft, and clearly with the author being designed to be like Stephen King, the film matches the scale of those two authors perfectly. The film even opens in media res, as Neill’s character tells the film’s narrative in a similar way to Lovecraft’s work, it’s a love letter to Lovecraftian horror that truly works.
7) The Fog
Jamie Lee Curtis in The Fog
Started in 2020, and occurring annually on April 21st is Fog Day, a day where fans will watch Carpenter’s classic supernatural feature, The Fog. The fact that there is an entire day named after the film is a shocking one, especially after it received incredibly middling reviews during its initial theatrical run in 1980. In the years since, the film has garnered a cult following and an impressive re-assessment as one of Carpenter’s finest works, a drive which brought upon a critically panned remake in 2005. The film follows the day-to-day lives of the residents of a small coastal town in Northern California, whose lives are mixed up when a strange fog arrives in town. The fog brings ghosts linked to the past of the town, as the ghosts seek revenge on the children of the men that wronged them many years in the past. Dean Cudney’s cinematography is the star of the show of this feature, as Cudney shoots an incredible number of scenic shots of the coastal town, as it becomes encased in eerie fog, with the one brimmer of light coming from the tall lighthouse poking out in the distance. Carpenter makes the use of shadows to shoot the ghosts in complete murky light, more silhouettes than fully formed designs that add to the creepiness of the sequences, the fog hides them, and the lightning follows suit, but the little you see, of the zombie-like pirates makes for memorable creature design.
Carpenter’s strength here is the build-up, bringing together an incredibly well-cast set of characters that make the town feel alive, the tension palpable and makes you question the validity of the ghosts when both sides are almost human. Tom Atkins, Jamie Lee Curtis, Janet Leigh and Carpenter’s at-the-time wife, Adrienne Barbeau, all deliver strong performances. At heart, the movie is about the pain and sin that causes a town, a nation to be built, for each beautiful thing created, someone else is either stolen from or hurt for it to be made. 100 years on, the townsfolk celebrate their town with no idea what was done to create that very town, a topical message that could be conveyed to various aspects of American life, with a clear analogue to the pain and suffering brought to the Native Americans.
6) They Live
Roddy Piper in They Live
Carpenter’s career was characterized heavily by a series of films that were pessimistic in nature, even before he got to a feature focusing around Lovecraftian monsters controlling free will, and no film is more pessimistic than 1988’s They Live. A precursor to that before mentioned Lovecraftian feature, They Live follows a drifter who finds a special pair of sunglasses that reveal the secret truth of humanity. Putting on the sunglasses, they reveal to Nada, played by Roddy Piper, that the ruling class are aliens concealing their identities and rule the world through manipulating people to follow the status quo through subliminal messages across various forms of media. Based on the 1963 short story known as ‘Eight O’clock in the Morning ‘by Ray Nelson, the short story’s film rights were bought by Carpenter as he used it as a basis of his more developed script. His take came from how dissatisfied the director was with then-president Ronald Reagan’s economic policies, also known as Reaganomics, which was focused around increasing defence spending, slowed growth of government spending, reducing government regulation and tightening the money supply to reduce possible inflation. These economic policies were mixed in value, on one hand causing an entrepreneurial revolution, and on the other, the national debt tripling in eight years. The biggest outcome was the rise in consumerism in the country, another factor that Carpenter was spoofing in this feature, connecting mass consumerism as one of the major causes of drone-like personalities and American patriotism.
The film’s signature sunglasses sequences were shot with black-and-white photography, a filmic style which brings the sequences closer in line with war propaganda films during the second World War. The film has all the action movie quirks that makes films like Assault on Precinct 13 and Big Trouble in Little China work but mixed with an excellent amount of social commentary that makes every punch and gunshot come with a thematic purpose. It is a complete shame that the movie has essentially become the opposite of its thematic theming in popular culture, becoming a pop culture juggernaut in one of its central macho lines, and the film’s alien designs becoming synonymous with street art.
5) Escape from New York
Kurt Russell in Escape from New York
Written originally in 1976 as a response to the Watergate scandal, the political turmoil of the time where American society did not trust their own president caused Carpenter to pen Escape from New York. The project would not be released until 1981, after the director had enough pull to begin production on such a risky movie after the smash hit of Halloween, and after Michael Myers actor Nick Castle was able to touch up the script with some humorous additions. The film mirrored a common trope for the time, concerning a grim and gritty look at New York City that perpetuated through the 80s with films like Ghostbusters and then into the 90s with Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles, and a level of humanity drawn through humorous New Yorkers. Dealing with a near-future, a future which is ruled over by a forever president, and one where Manhattan Island in New York City has been caged off as a maximum-security prison. When Air Force One is hijacked and the President is kidnapped into the streets of New York, federal prisoner Snake Plissken is given twenty-four hours to find and rescue the President to be able to be pardoned for his crimes. Plissken is easily where this film shines, he seems like your typical action hero, but he is incredibly stubborn, angry and resentful across the film, speaking in low octave with almost growls rather than the typical one liner you would expect from an 80s action hero. Kurt Russell really shines here, playing against type as a gritty and serious action star after years of being a comedic actor.
He is known by every character in the film, building a mystique around him and the eventual excellent action sequences he will be able to pull off, and he has morals. The film twists the script on the typical hero-villain dynamic, Plissken is a shady individual but he’s a hero, while the people he is helping are clearly the villains. The President is the true antagonist, and the people who are keeping him hostage are just victims of a system that had put them down and refuses to give them the rehabilitation they deserve, a pure criticism of the American prison complex. It is a film which gives its viewers all the gritty action you would want out of your Hollywood blockbuster, but also enough to chew on under the surface, a bridge of both best worlds of cinema.
4) Big Trouble in Little China
Kurt Russell, Dennis Dunn, Victor Wong and James Lew in Big Troubles in Little China
20th Century Fox hired Carpenter to helm Big Trouble in Little China because of his reputation of being able to work incredibly fast, with the film facing a limited preproduction schedule of only ten to twelve weeks and rushed into production to beat a similar releasing film. The Eddie Murphy starring feature, The Golden Child, was seen as big competition for the studio, a film Carpenter was even offered to direct, sharing similar narrative threads, and having such a big star attached. Big Trouble in Little China was originally put into production as a separate film, mixing the action of the Western with the new popular sensibilities of the martial arts feature, but would be rewritten into being more modernised. This version of the script would be what enticed Carpenter to the feature, fulfilling his desire to one day direct a martial arts feature. The film, which continued Carpenter’s lack of success at the box office during theatrical runs, followed drifter truck-driver Jack Burton, who must help his friend Wang Chi rescue his green-eyed fiancée from criminals in San Francisco’s Chinatown. The green-eyed woman is important to the plot of an ancient sorcerer, who requires a woman with green eyes to marry him to be released from a centuries-old curse. An interesting genre blend of various tones and genres, from the American action movie, the comedy, mystical and supernatural elements and the martial arts feature, Carpenter’s high-flying feature has everything and has become a deserved cult classic in the years since release.
Kurt Russell returns to the world of the Carpenter feature, his role of Jack Burton inspired by the machismo of actors like John Wayne, but with an entertaining satirical edge. The film flips the American movie on its head, where once the American lead would have a foreign sidekick, Russell’s Burton is macho and cool, but he is a goof, and out of his element next to such strong leaders like Wang Chi. He is along for the ride in a narrative that spins around him, never through him, to the point that he is knocked out and misses the entire final battle. The failure at the box office of Big Trouble in Little China is what led John Carpenter back into the world of independent filmmaking, disillusioning him with mainstream Hollywood, where he would only come back for work-for-hire jobs. It is a shame as well that the movie put a pin in his big-budget career, because the film is one of the perfect summer blockbusters, feeling like a genre-blender at its best.
3) Halloween
Nick Castle wears the mask of The Shape in Halloween
1978’s Halloween is an important release in the Hollywood zeitgeist for various reasons, from it being Carpenter’s first box office success, to launching the career of Jamie Lee Curtis, or being a big factor in the boom of the slasher movie sub-genre into the 80s and 90s. The slasher film existed beforehand, with 1960’s Psycho, or the double release of The Texas Chainsaw Massacre and Black Christmas in 1974, but the story of babysitter killer Michael Myers, who returns to Haddonfield after escaping a mental asylum to kill everyone who stands in his way, lit up the zeitgeist and proved the sub-genre could be a box office success. The final girl, the use of point-of-view shots of the killer, the chase sequence and the defining of sex as the cause of death in the feature would become staples of the genre and would define the entire Halloween franchise. To date, there are thirteen movies released in the franchise, with varied levels of involvement from series creator Carpenter, who essentially handed over the franchise after releasing the first feature.
The sequel’s script would be penned by the director, the third feature would move away from Michael to go through an anthology lens because of Carpenter’s insistence, and the director would return as producer and composer for Blumhouse’s requel trilogy, 2018’s Halloween, 2021’s Halloween Kills and 2022’s Halloween Ends. The slasher genre would follow the Halloween genre across the decades, with the initial boom coming from 1980’s Friday the 13th, which was a remake without the name of Halloween, to the genre being revived in the wake of 2018’s Halloween. This importance comes with a major reason; Carpenter’s initial Halloween feature is one of his very best. It is his very best score, with his most memorable motifs, and has two winning central performances by Jamie Lee Curtis and Donald Pleasence. The film’s central villain is incredibly intimidating and eerie, a feeling that many slasher villains cannot convey, with the eerie sound of his breathing being felt across various sequences. The film’s final shots linger on empty spaces, leaving the film on a menacing note, retracing each location from the film and proving that nowhere is safe, the boogeyman could be anywhere.
2) Starman
Karen Allen and Jeff Bridges in Starman
What starts as a science-fiction adventure with a creepy alien morphing sequence, soon becomes an emotional drama that stands as the biggest outlier in Carpenter’s filmography. The film, starring Jeff Bridges and Karen Allen, follows an alien arriving to Earth in response to the invitation found on the Voyager 2 space probe. The alien takes the form of a cloned body of a grieving widow’s husband, as the widow and the clone must take on a cross-county road-trip to send him home and escape the government who is after him. The film has been theorised to have been put into production as a response to the success of Spielberg’s ET: The Extraterrestrial and picked up Carpenter after The Thing failed at the box office because of audience’s being more familiar with positive alien features off the back of that previously mentioned Spielberg venture. The film, which went through at least six different script drafts, one where the signature alien flew during sequences, feels like an outlier in a career which is characterized heavily by films which feel pessimistic in nature. The film is hopeful and warm, a love story which uses its central science-fiction narrative to wow and surprise rather than to make the audience uneasy, a scene where Bridges’ alien revives a deer that has been killed by a hunter is one such powerful moment.
It is a road movie, with each character the central leads meet across their journey feeling warm and sincere, and even the central governmental forces allow the characters to go at the end. Karen Allen’s character feels like Carpenter willing himself into the narrative, a nihilistic character who feels only pain from the death of her husband, whose nihilistic tendencies are proven wrong by the film’s genuine pleasantness. Bridges received an Academy Award nomination for Best Actor for the film, in a performance that feels so inhuman but never in a terrifying way, a perfect encapsulation of the fish out of water trope, he is charming in his eccentricities, and the central love story is moving and powerful. The movie ends on a terrific note, a loving final embrace leads Allen’s widow pregnant with a child who is both the child of her late husband and the alien she loved soon after, a moving final beat that encapsulates the tenderness of this film compared to each other Carpenter feature.
1) The Thing
Kurt Russell in The Thing
No other film could be placed first on a John Carpenter ranking, The Thing is just his magnum opus. Based on the 1938 novella Who Goes There? by John W. Campbell Jr, which had already been adapted into the 1951 feature film, The Thing from Another World, the film is another Lovecraftian horror from the director. The film tells the story of a group of American researchers in Antarctica, who encounter an alien life-form that assimilates, then imitates organisms. The group is brought against each other, believing any one of them could be the signature ‘Thing’. The film is a perfect encapsulation of the feeling of paranoia and isolation, the viewer is along for the ride in trying to decide who is the Thing, the film leaving it up to the audience to catch up on the mystery as the characters figure it out together.
The setting of Antarctica also brings the isolation to the forefront, it is open plains of nothingness, encased in darkness which makes the characters cold and isolated, it is an eerie location which is used to its best effect. As mentioned previously, the film was a box office bomb when released in 1982 and was even slated by critics. It has since become a staple of the science-fiction genre, a creature feature with excellent creature effects by Rob Bottin, a film which is both disturbing and impressive in its use of practical effects. The eventual 2011 prequel, with the same name as its title, would try to compete with its CGI effects, but nothing can compare to the practical effects shown here, The Thing looks inhuman in each body modification it causes, but there’s always human elements to it, an eeriness to each form it takes. The film was initially given to director Tobe Hooper, and various other directors were considered after Carpenter briefly decided to leave the project to direct a passion project, which then fell through, but it is hard to see any other director helming the film. It’s Carpenter’s first big-budget feature, and cinematographer Dean Cudney’s as well. Only Carpenter could direct such a bleak film as this, playing the best to his nihilistic tendencies, as the situation feels hopeless and impossible, but balancing that with such well-realised characters.
Kurt Russell takes the lead once again, but with a character who is forced to lead, bouncing off such a wonderful supporting cast that is led by a wonderful performance by Keith David. When asked in an interview, Carpenter stated that the film is pro-human, in comparison to the original text’s pro-science exploration, or the initial film adaptation’s anti-science exploration. The film’s humanist approach to its storytelling has led to a series of discussions about the film’s thematic meaning, namely because of its creation during post-Cold War tendencies. The paranoia can be seen as a metaphor for the red scare at the time, with people not knowing who to trust in the wake of Communists being found across the country. The film is also exploring nuclear annihilation through mutually assured destruction in the wake of the Cold War, with the death of The Thing only being possible if both our lead characters die alongside it. However, the film’s end leads the film on a forever sinister note, a cliffhanger ending that only Carpenter knows the answer to, as both characters sit opposite each other not knowing if either or both are The Thing, a perfectly mysterious ending that leaves the audience thinking long after the film is finished.
In the age of A24 and Blumhouse, the horror genre has made big names out of the most unlikely of faces. Jordan Peele, renowned director of such hits like Get Out and Nope, made his start as part of comedy duo Key and Peele. Barbarian director, Zach Cregger, began work as part of the comedy television troupe known as The Whitest Kids U’ Know, and Until Dawn director David F. Sandberg was discovered when making horror short films on video hosting website Youtube, with one short film turning into his directorial debut, Lights Out. Horror could easily be seen as gateway genre, built to debut entertaining and unique voices that no other genre may give a chance to, and one of those new key voices is the duo of Danny and Michael Philippou.
The duo gained their fame from starting off as Youtube celebrities, creating the channel RackaRacka in 2013, a comedy focused channel, where the brothers filmed humorous and sometimes horrific and violent skits. A love for horror could be seen all the way back then, and after working as crew members on the 2014 film The Babadook, they began work on their directorial debut. Talk To Me served as their directorial debut, a low-budget indie that took the world by storm once it was picked up by A24 after being screened at festivals, and soon became their highest grossing film, grossing $92 million worldwide against a production budget of $4.5 million. A bold new take on the possession genre, with fresh new voices breathing new life into a tired old genre, they became a notable name in the genre.
Sally Hawkins and Jonah Wren Phillips in Bring Her Back
Here, three years after the release of Talk To Me, the brothers have released their follow-up feature, still contained in the horror genre. In 2025, Bring Her Back serves as their return to the big screen, continuing their exploration into the possession genre, in a fresh new way that speaks in unison with their prior work. The film follows 17-year-old Andy and his partially sighted younger stepsister Piper, after the death of their father. Thrown into the adoption agency, they become adopted by a strange woman named Laura, who recently lost her own child, and wraps the two young siblings into a sinister occult ritual.
Bring Her Back serves as hybrid genre film, mixing the worlds of the horror-possession film with the thriller/woman’s film sub-genre of the psycho-biddy. Launched with the release of the 1962 film What Ever Happened to Baby Jane, the genre conventionally focuses around a formerly glamorous woman who has become mentally unstable and terrorizes people in her vicinity. Continuing throughout the 60s and 70s, the films contained in the sub-genre became to be seen critically by film scholars, seen as offensive films that put down its antagonists as ‘hags’, showcasing their unattractiveness and their insanity. This 2025 reinvention of the genre stars Sally Hawkins in the role of the ‘hag’, but instead of forming the character a monstrous villain, Hawkins’ character is incredibly sympathetic.
Sally Hawkins in Bring Her Back
Hawkins’ career in the modern day has been characterised by a variety of heartwarming and human performances, from the family matriarch Mrs Brown in the Paddington films, or the mute woman who falls in love with an aquatic monster in Guillermo Del Toro’s The Shape of Water. Moving into a more horror-focused role, these soft-spoken and humanist performances has not been left behind, Hawkins’ plays the adopted mother character like she is still playing Mrs Brown. There is a sense of eeriness in each of her scenes, like there is something wrong under the surface, similarly to the grandparents in M. Night Shyamalan’s The Visit, but there is something genuine and down to earth about her. She wears glamorous outfits and holds herself strong, in opposition to the 60s’ version of a similar character, but when that eventual ugliness does come out in the film’s final act, it comes out as more saddening and depressing than something horrific.
Sally Hawkins’ central performance holds the movie together, she is the centre piece, but Billy Barratt, Sora Wong and Jonah Wren Phillips all hold their own performance-wise, as aforementioned Andy and Piper, and Phillips as Hawkins’ Laura’s foster son Oliver. Barratt and Wong share incredible chemistry as stepbrother and stepsister, a believable relationship that is heartwarming to view, a dynamic that is a crucial part of making the film work. Phillips’ delivers one of the most frightening child performances in a horror feature in years but also subdues a small sense of heartbreak into that terrifying performance.
Billy Barratt and Sora Wong in Bring Her Back
It is hard to argue whether Bring Her Back is better or worse than the duo’s previous directorial debut, it is going to be a strong argument for fans of the duo. However, it can be seen easily that the films work complimentary to each other. Talk To Me uses the possession sub-genre as a metaphor for drug addiction, the possessing hand makes the film’s lead, played by Sophie Wilde, addicted to the activity. Her addiction leads her to putting her friends in harm’s way and making questionable choices for another go at being possessed. The film is rooted in an exploration into grief; Wilde’s character is rooted to a wish to speak to her mother one more time.
Grief appears as a complimentary theme for Bring Her Back, the siblings of Andy and Piper find it hard to get over their father, and Laura is dealing with her own grief around her daughter. This combination of grief should bring these characters together in collective mourning, but the unpredictability of the script allows a fresh exploration into the all-consuming feeling of grief, and the steps people may take to not feel those feelings once more. The Philippu’s also seem to be making clear messages around child endangerment and abuse and showing a concern around the adoption agency.
Jonah Wren Phillips in Bring Her Back
The film never reaches the terror of the scenes of hell in Talk To Me, but the more character focused storytelling leads the film into a tension-focused thriller. There is inclusion of VHS styled footage throughout, which seems to be a staple for A24 features at this point, off the back of films like Aftersun and Past Lives. The footage works however, crafting some creepy imagery, and explaining some of the film’s mysteries in a smarter way than just holding the audience’s hand through an explanation. Sound design works wonders as well in crafting some gross-out sequences. The Philippou’s have a strong control of the camera, with some fantastic editing that keeps the film tense and humorous at moments. There is a great montage set to a Yoko-Ono song which helps the film to bridge the gap between its sense of awkward humour and its tension-fuelled horror sequences.
Bring Her Back showcases an undeniable staying power for the youtube famous director duo, they show a great degree of control in balancing tone, with a mix of humour, horror and genuine sadness across the runtime. Bridging the world between the possession film and the psycho-biddy film, the film updates an older sub-genre to modern sensibilities, making the horror both gorey and filled with despair. Overcoming grief and the sense of never getting over that grief hangs over Sally Hawkins’ powerhouse performance, marking this as must watch for the 2025 horror summer season.
Madelyn Cline, Chase Sui Wonders, Jonah Hauer-King, Tyriq Withers and Sarah Pidgeon in I Know What You Did Last Summer
The success of Wes Craven’s Scream in 1996 cannot be downplayed, the slasher revitalized the horror genre after the 80s slasher trend finished, and opened the door for more self-reflective features, with postmodern film references all over the filmic landscape in the modern day. One of the things it caused mainly however was a line of clear copycats, just like Halloween spawned films like Friday the 13th and Nightmare on Elm Street, Scream spawned such features like Scary Movie and Urban Legend, continuing the new postmodern formula of Craven’s original feature. Probably the most famous film to come off the back of Scream is 1997’s I Know What You Did Last Summer. Based on Lois Duncan’s 1993 novel of the same name, the film took the mystery novel and turned it into a classic 80s slasher feature, a choice which some critics took issue with, viewing it as an out-of-date feature which falls back on the trappings of 80s horror rather than the positives that came from Scream. However, the movie owes its success to coming out a year after Scream, and even though fairing middling in critical reviews, the film was a box office success and has long since became a cult classic.
The film was even written by Scream scribe Kevin Williamson. Followed a mere year later, I Still Know What You Did Last Summer was a box office success once again but essentially killed the franchise, receiving even worse critical reviews and being criticised for essentially feeling like a remake of the original. In the years since, there has only been small signs of life from Sony’s hopeful cash cow of a franchise, with an unrelated sequel coming direct to DVD in 2006, I’ll Always Know What You Did Last Summer, and a streaming reboot series released in 2021 to Amazon Prime, which was cancelled after one season.
Lead Killer the Fisherman in I Know What You Did Last Summer
It is only naturally that after the success of the Scream franchise coming back to the big screen once again, with successful entries in 2022 and 2023 and another instalment in the works currently, that studios would attempt to bring back their own reflexive slasher properties. Hollywood star Marlon Wayans, and his brothers Shawn Wayans and Keenan Ivory Wayans, have been announced to helm another Scary Movie feature, and Sony has returned to make another I Know What You Did Last Summer feature. In typical legacy sequel fashion, the film is titled the same as the original, and began life in 2014 when Mike Flanagan, famous for his Netflix series like The Haunting of Hill House, and Jeff Howard signed on to reboot the property. Initially pitched as a complete reboot of the franchise, removed from any connections to the original feature or the novel it was based on, the project entered development hell once Flanagan and Howard left the project. Revitalized by a legacy sequel pitch from director Jennifer Kaytin Robinson, the film has finally seen the light of day in cinemas now.
The 2025 legacy sequel follows a new group of friends who become plagued by a hook-wielding fisherman killer after they covered up an accidental murder. 27 years later after a similar incident, the friend group recruits original survivors Julie James and Ray Bronson to help them stop the killer.
Jennifer Love Hewitt and Freddie Prince Jr in I Know What You Did Last Summer
The film sees the return of franchise star Jennifer Love Hewitt to the big screen, with her mainly being seen on television for the past decade, with brief appearances on shows like 9-1-1 and Criminal Minds. A baffling scene in the third act sees the character state that nostalgia is overrated, when the entire backbone of this feature is nostalgia. The choice to see the return of Hewitt and Freddie Prince Jr to the franchise is done to harken back to the originals, the movie follows the legacy sequel trend that 2018’s Halloween and 2022’s Scream started. Hewitt takes the role of Laurie Strode or Sidney Prescott from the previously mentioned features, a background returning character that serves only to remind audiences of the original and appear for the triumphant third act.
Prince Jr continues the archetype started by the return of David Arquette’s Dewey in 2022’s Scream, a grizzled and saddened version of the character we once knew who returns to bring wisdom to the new characters and to inform them on the rules of the franchise. Just like every other legacy sequel, the film follows the exact same formula of the original, essentially acting as a remake but with returning characters. The newly added elements also just make the film feel like a spoof of Scream, the whodunnit nature is more present here, with various potential killers rather than just the one of the original. Red herrings are present throughout, and there is an attempt to have a postmodern conversation about nostalgia, but it all falls flat when the movie is falling back on nostalgia itself.
Freddie Prince Jr in I Know What You Did Last Summer
The movie is relatively safe in its narrative, if you have seen the original, then you have also seen this film. There is a bold attempt at subverting legacy sequel tropes in the third act, but it is choreographed well ahead of its reveal and will only serve to presumably annoy people who enjoy the original feature. Hewitt and Prince Jr give serviceable performance in their screen time, but the biggest pitfall of the newest legacy feature is how little it gives its new characters. Each new character is given an archetypal role that boils down their personalities and gives them very little else, giving newcomers Madelyn Cline, Chase Sui Wonders, Jonah Hauer-King, Tyriq Withers and Sarah Pidgeon very little to work with. When attempting to undertake a narrative like a whodunnit, it is important to make the characters memorable, and this film fails to follow through on that. They all feel like characters that would be found comfortably in an 80s slasher, whose only purpose is to become part of the body count.
Editing inconsistencies also plague this film throughout, the lead killer seems to be able to teleport in sequences where it is clear moments have been stripped away in the edit, and there are scenes where characters seem to be changing attire in the same scene. The end tease for a potential sequel also seems to be based around a removed scene that was in an earlier screening of the film, with this line inclusion now seeming out of place with that scene removed. The entire plot of the film also hinges on an accident that does not make much sense, with screenwriters Sam Lansky and Jennifer Kaytin Robinson writing themselves in a corner with how to explain the killer’s motivations and the guilt of its central characters.
Kills are brutal and creative throughout, with Robinson’s direction shining when making the use of shadows and making the use of impressive sound design in engaging kills. It is one of the clear standouts of a confused and middling script, but it cannot save a film which is struggling to stand out from the shadow of the Scream juggernaut. 2025’s I Know What You Did Last Summer feels like a late entry into the legacy sequel trend, a film irking of the success of much better slasher films in the last decade, and reflects the failings that can come from this once-dead genre.
Madelyn Cline, Chase Sui Wonders and Sarah Pidgeon in I Know What You Did Last Summer
Stephen King is one of the most popular horror authors of the modern day, publishing almost 60 novels since the release of his first novel in 1974, known as Carrie. Though, most known as a horror author, it’s the author’s non-horror works that have made the biggest splash critically when being translated to the big screen. Director Rob Reiner’s 1986 film Stand By Me, based on short story ‘The Body’, and Frank Darabont’s pair of releases, 1994’s The Shawshank Redemption and 1999’s The Green Mile based on the short story and novel of the same name, stand as prime examples of the success of adaptations of King’s more dramatic pieces of work.
Director Mike Flanagan has already had tremendous success working with King, adapting two of his horror novels, Doctor Sleep and Gerald’s Game, into features released in 2019 and 2017 respectively. The director is also most known for his horror works, starting with his low budget feature Absentia in 2011, and most probably known to a general public for his horror Netflix television series, notably 2018’s The Haunting of Hill House, 2020’s The Haunting of Bly Manor, 2021’s Midnight Mass, 2022’s The Midnight Club and 2023’s The Fall of The House of Usher. Before he returns to the worlds of horror, with the director attached to a new Exorcist film and a Carrie television series for Amazon Prime next, Flanagan has sought out a lesser-known King-drama short story to adapt, The Life of Chuck.
Carl Lumbly and Chiwetel Ejiofor in The Life of Chuck
Told through 3 separate chapters, that tell the life of Charles Krantz, known as Chuck to his friends, as the film explores the character’s life backwards. Starting with the end of his life, and beginning with his coming of age, the film and original short story showcases how the people in his life shaped him to the man he is, exploring the multitudes of life and memory.
Through his previous two works adapting the horror author, it was clear to argue that King and Flanagan almost felt like they were made for each other, the connection between King’s introspective dialogues and Flanagan’s wordy monologues is palpable. The same can be said for The Life of Chuck, a short story that seems like it was made to be adapted by Flanagan. Flanagan makes the genius decision to give this film a voice-over narration, with Nick Offerman doing the voice-over duties, delivering narration directly from the novel word-for-word. This helps the narrative for sure, some of the strongest emotional beats come from Offerman’s delivery and words and helps to bring structure to such a weirdly structured film. Delivering accurate narration onto the big screen is not the only thing pulled from the short story, the film essentially brings everything from the story onto the screen, favouring expansion to some elements than removing any. Narrative-wise, the story of this film leans a lot more on the emotional side of the King adaptation filmography, its overly sentimental and wordy in its messaging, a choice that will not work for every audience member but works well for people used to Flanagan’s dialogue-heavy previous projects.
Mark Hamill in The Life of Chuck
Flanagan’s Netflix series, mostly Midnight Mass, would be criticised commonly for its lengthy dialogue sequences, with many conversations between characters ranging between 3 to 5 minutes in length. These scenes could be argued as an example of show, don’t tell, featuring characters discussing the themes of the show, exploring topics of religion, greed, death and the meaning of life, but the writing was so well-realised and moving that it could be ignored for its lengthy inclusion. This film is a treasure-trove of lengthy monologues, the film being held together by the people that come in and out of Chuck’s life, imparting wisdom on him and then leaving the narrative. Running just under two hours, viewers who would criticise Flanagan’s meaningful but lengthy dialogue sequences may find the inclusion here more meaningful and emotional in their frequented but shortened inclusion.
The themes that the director explored in his long-running series also make appearances here, from discussion around religion, the fear of death and the meaning of life, all explored in new ways through both the characters and the central narration. The narrative also being in reverse chronological order allows for a central mystery to build, opening with characters dealing with the end of the world, and how this end links to a man they barely know, Chuck. Through the reverse chronological narrative, the film becomes more complex and denser as the narrative moves on, revealing answers and a central twist as Chuck’s life becomes simpler and more mundane, from adult to child.
Karen Gillan and Chiwetel Ejiofor in The Life of Chuck
Flanagan’s film has delivered an incredibly surprising cast, with most of its biggest names being in small scenes and essentially cameos. Flanagan mainstays, that have populated his casts for a decade at this point each get a moment to shine, notably Rahul Kohli, Carl Lumbly, Kate Siegel and Samantha Sloyan. David Dastmalchian and Harvey Guillen share a fun singular sequence each which brings some welcome levity to the proceedings. Scream and now-Five Nights at Freddy’s star Matthew Lillard has a memorable sequence that will tug at the heart strings, and Nightmare on Elm Street’s own Heather Langenkamp makes a notable return to the big screen. Starting the film off with people reacting to Chuck outside of meeting the character ourselves, welcomes Chiwetel Ejiofor and Karen Gillan into essentially being the opening acts main characters and they handle the focus perfectly. Newcomers to the worlds of overlong monologues, they seem naturals at talking about the meaning of life and death itself. Mark Hamill and Mia Sara give heartbreaking performances as Chuck’s grandparents, bringing some realistic humanity to such a fantasy-esque narrative.
Benjamin Pajak in The Life of Chuck
The titular character has been marketed as being played by Tom Hiddleston, but the Marvel-star is in very little of the film. Chuck’s most common actor is newcomer Benjamin Pajak as the 11-year-old version of the character, and he delivers the true heart of the movie through his performance. The entire narrative reveals itself through his impassioned performance, reflecting himself through Hiddleston’’s short tenure as the character, selling the positivity of the character amongst all the pain he encounters, his love of dance and the teenage angst that comes at that age.
The Life of Chuck stands strong next to some of King’s most successful adaptations. Mike Flanagan just knows how to breath the cinematic language into the author’s texts, delivering a scene like a man and woman dancing to a reggae beat which any other director could make silly or heartless, but it ends up on the screen as a heartfelt and moving sequence. It may be overly sentimental at times, but the heart is in the right place, it’s a movie which feels like a lifetime, filled with so many characters and actors giving a moment of wisdom. Each sequence feels better than the last, feeling like a film designed perfectly for fans of both Flanagan and King.
Ernie Hudson, Bill Murray, Harold Ramis and Dan Aykroyd star in Ghostbusters
Released in 1984, a film about four down-on-their-luck working class men who start a ghost-catching business to make money became the start of a long-running multimedia franchise. Ghostbusters, the brainchild of star Dan Aykroyd, was originally conceived as a big-budget project featuring Aykroyd and John Belushi as they hunted down supernatural threats across time and space. After the death of the former and director Ivan Reitman joined the project, the film was downsized to the New York-set supernatural-comedy hybrid that it is remembered fondly for now. It is hard to argue against that Ghostbusters was a lightning-in-the-bottle film, releasing in the height of the careers of Aykroyd, Bill Murray and Harold Ramis after their stints on Saturday Night Live, and capturing a moment in Hollywood where blockbusters and franchise cinema were becoming a hot-commodity.
A film that spawned the future of big budget comedy features and set in a very specific time in America which formulated the narrative, and it’s a film that is hard to replicate. The popularity of the film spawned one of the pillars of multimedia merchandising, off the back of the success of Star Wars’ similar turn in 1977, launching the follow-up animated series The Real Ghostbusters in 1986 and its sequel, Extreme Ghostbusters in 1997. The theme song ‘Ghostbusters’ by Ray Parker Jr was a number one hit for 3 weeks, spending 21 weeks on the charts, and starting the trend of film-artist theme song collaborations. Reitman would return for a sequel in 1989, and a third film was eventually cancelled after the death of Ramis in 2014, instead being followed by a reboot in 2016, and a direct-follow-up to the original directed by Reitman’s son, Jason Reitman, in the duology of Ghostbusters: Afterlife in 2021 and Ghostbusters: Frozen Empire in 2024. Each subsequent film has been a success of course, successful enough to warrant continuations, but never has the franchise hit the peak of the original, with the first sequel seeing diminishing returns instantly, seeing negative reviews on release and a drop in box office, earning a worldwide gross of $215.4 million against the original’s $282.2 million.
Behind the scenes with director Ivan Reitman
Director Ivan Reitman found success with his collaborations with star Bill Murray in comedies Meatballs in 1979 and Stripes in 1981, with his prior work being the horror-comedy feature Cannibal Girls in 1973. This collaboration between the pair would come as one of the biggest strengths of the feature, as the passion project of Aykroyd became a star vehicle for Murray, playing lead character Peter Venkman. Both star and director’s background in comedy lent the film a comfortable edge in bringing alive the SNL-like comedy that would be absent from the sequels. The ghost-catching business the protagonists would take part in would be a clear spoof on exterminators, capturing the reactions of the everyday working-class man as a blockbuster hero, while also making time for the scientific backdrop that Aykroyd was so interested in. Murray plays his role with deadpan expressions, playing the character as a suave conman who is straightened out by a romantic encounter with Sigourney Weavers’ Dana Barrett. Aykroyd’s Ray Stanz is the fanatic of the group, one of the two scientists that make up the cast as the character reflects the actor’s obsession with the supernatural.
Ramis’ Egon Spengler serves as the straight man of the group, a colder and more serious scientist whose comedic input comes from his own deadpan delivery, a character favoured by Ramis when he co-wrote the script with Aykroyd. Ernie Hudson’s Winston Zeddemore joins the central cast late into the runtime and serves as the film’s ‘normal’ man of the group, just a man trying to make money with no scientific backdrop. These four characters are central to the film, using the supernatural elements as a backdrop for situational comedy and allowing the actors to bounce off one another. One of the key sequences to show this is the Ghostbusters’ first job, with the central three bouncing off each other in a still middle shot in the elevator. Once Egon turns on Ray’s proton pack, Egon and Venkman scoot further away from him, eyes raised high as they hope it doesn’t explode. They become startled once they exit the elevator, shooting a maid and her trolly with their proton packs as they scream in terror, and would soon follow that mess with destroying the entire interior of the building they are trying to save from Slimer. Scenes like this showcase the importance of the actors’ heightened performances and situational comedy to the success of the original feature.
Harold Ramis, Dan Aykroyd and Bill Murray in Ghostbusters
Sequels struggled with continuing these comedic threads, with one of the major complaints of Reitman’s initial sequel was that the comedy was made more family-oriented in response to the success of the animated series. The film’s plot was also critiqued for its similarities to the original, replicating the events of the original and resetting most character’s arcs for the beginning of the film. 2016’s reboot made a return to the comedy of the original, but with a swapped gendered cast it became a controversial film on the internet. Both late sequels by Jason Reitman reflected two separate looks at the franchise, as Afterlife took focus as a serious-drama dealing with the brand as almost mythological, and then Frozen Empire being easy to be described as a live-action version of an animated series episode. This mismatch tones led to the former film to be seen as a failure critically and at the box-office, reflecting how far the franchise has strayed from the original. Ghostbusters becoming a franchise has become one of its major weaknesses in some regards.
Socio-political commentary precedes over the narrative of Ivan Reitman’s original feature. The film reflected the new free market that came after the 1970’s financial turmoil that inspired the look of a grungy and uncomfortable New York that preceded over films like Taxi Driver and Escape From New York. The grunge was still present moving into the 1980s, but Ghostbusters reflects the freedom that comes from new President Ronald Reagan’s sweeping reforms, reflecting a feeling of togetherness and comfortability for the working-class people. Reaganomics focused on limited government spending and the removal of state regulations, in favour of a free market provided by the private sector and private businesses. The incoming movement of free markets and mass-consumerism because of so, is reflected in the film commonly, from Ray being unable to think of anything other than a consumerist mascot in The Stay Puft Marshmallow Man, or the first encounter with Zuul being in a stocked fridge. Ghostbusters’ draws its comedy from being a satire of American way of life moving into this era, spoofing the academia and intellectuals of the upper classes, governmental officials and tax officers, and the average New Yorker.
Slavitza Jovan joins the cast of Ghostbusters as Gozer
The entire plot is based around the private business owned by the four protagonists, as the governmental official, Walter Peck, played by Willaim Atherton, causes more problems for them. Peck’s involvement in trying to close this private business leads to the ghosts being freed and the eventual freedom of lead ghost antagonist Gozer, marking Peck as the true antagonist of the film. The movie sparks a connection to the new working class that had finally been given a leg over in making money, as the government is incapable of containing the threat, while the private sector comes in to save the day, working for a fee, however. The mayor picks a size in the conflict; paying for the Ghostbusters to save the day once he realises his own backers cannot do much to help and Peck reveals himself to be useless, and after being reminded that his choice will help to save millions of registered voters that could help him stay in power. It is a still cynical look at America, reflecting government officials only doing what is right, only helping the private sector when it benefits them as well.
Removed from this political context, the cynical nature of the first film is lost in the sequels. Ghostbusters II reflects the commercialisation of the franchise at the time, but in less of a spoof and more leaning into becoming a product. It’s central plot around a river of slime appearing in New York which is leading to New Yorkers becoming more hostile to one another feels more cartoonish in nature. There is still political commentary, with the Ghostbusters institutionalised after being outspoken around their ghost encounters, being forced to give up their jobs by the government that looked like fools because of them. They are only brought back into action when the government lift their ban to save the day when the government once again fail in containing the threat, reaffirming the private sector’s importance against governmental bonds.
Behind the scenes of Ghostbusters, designing the Stay Puft Marshmallow Man
What becomes the problem is that the film is mainly just reaffirming the political context of the original, copying the events and doing them just again, but this time in a less serious manner and with more childish antics. The Ghostbusters are locked away in the first film as well, with the franchise running out of ideas from its first sequel. 2016’s franchise reboot would see the same series of events happening, with governmental officials stopping the now-female Ghostbusters from doing their work, but removing the political context of the original, it just feels like an imitation. Similar could be said with 2024’s Ghostbuster: Frozen Empire, which brought back Peck to threaten the Ghostbuster’s with closure once again, ticking one more of the franchise’s tropes off the list.
In the years after the release of the original Ghostbusters, the popularity of the film’s mise-en-scene would transcend the original context of the film. A film about working class pest controllers who save the day because the government cannot stop the pests, and they save the day for a quick buck, would be remembered for the pop culture toys that hit the zeitgeist. Slimer, the Stay Puft Marshmallow Man, the Proton Pack, the Ecto-1 would all become the face of the franchise, morphing the franchise from one which placed comedy foremost other its blockbuster qualities, into one that would market itself as the newest summer action blockbuster. The newest entry, Frozen Empire, seen the entirety of New York encased in ice as an end-of-the-world threat, with almost eight Ghostbusters assembling to stop the threat. The days of the franchise being a simple situational comedy, using ghosts as backdrop, has long gone, but the original film remains as an important touchstone in cinematic history, a lightning-in-a-bottle feature.
Ernie Hudson, Harold Ramis, Bill Murray and Dan Aykroyd behind the scenes of Ghostbusters