Horror Film Review: Clayface (dir. by James Watkins)


“Even if it kills me, I’ll be better off than I am now.” — Matt Hagen

The most unsettling thing about Clayface isn’t watching a man lose his face; it’s realizing how much of his life was built around having the right one. James Watkins’ take on the DC villain turns that insecurity into a nasty little body-horror tragedy, following someone who has confused being desirable with being worth something. Beneath the collapsing features and increasingly grotesque transformations is a recognizable fear: that losing the thing people admire about you means losing their interest altogether. The film doesn’t explore that idea as deeply as it could, but it gives the horror a compelling emotional foundation beyond the spectacle of a comic-book monster taking shape.

At the center is Matt Hagen, played by Tom Rhys Harries, an actor whose rising career is derailed by a disfiguring attack. His appearance has opened doors for him, and losing it threatens more than his next role. It destroys the version of himself he thought he could count on. Desperate for a way back, he turns to Dr. Caitlyn Corr, played by Naomi Ackie, whose experimental treatment promises to repair the damage. Naturally, the results come with complications. The interesting question isn’t whether the miracle will turn into a nightmare, but how much Matt is willing to overlook once he starts recognizing himself in the mirror again.

That desperation makes Matt more compelling than a character who simply gets powers and becomes dangerous. His problem begins before his body starts changing: he already depends on other people to tell him what he’s worth. That insecurity connects naturally to his profession. An actor who can physically become someone else sounds like a wish fulfilled, until transformation stops being a choice. There’s a cruel logic to giving someone obsessed with recovering his identity a body that won’t hold one. The screenplay occasionally spells things out too neatly, but the central idea gives the nastiness something to work with beyond its shock value.

Harries does a lot to keep that idea grounded. He makes Matt’s appeal believable without turning him into someone whose suffering automatically excuses everything he does. His desperation is understandable even when his choices become selfish or disturbing, and the performance handles that balance well. His humiliation doesn’t immediately become theatrical rage. It lingers, making him defensive, needy, and increasingly willing to justify himself. Even when the movie pushes him toward more recognizable villain territory, Harries preserves traces of the frightened person underneath. Matt doesn’t have to remain likable to remain interesting, and the performance understands the difference between earning sympathy and demanding it.

Ackie gives the film another human connection that it needs. Corr could have been little more than the scientist who introduces the treatment and explains why everybody should be worried. Instead, her warmth complicates a relationship already shaped by unequal needs. Matt wants his life back; she wants her work to succeed. Those desires overlap without being identical, making their connection more engaging than the mechanics of the experiment. The romantic element also gives their scenes a tragic-monster quality. Not every emotional beat lands with equal force, but the performances keep their relationship from feeling like a mandatory break between transformations.

Those transformations are where Watkins delivers the movie’s most immediate pleasures, assuming “pleasures” is the right word for watching somebody’s anatomy stop cooperating. The real discomfort comes from the instability. A face should stay recognizable even when everything else changes, and Clayface makes that familiarity feel temporary. The makeup and prosthetic work give Matt’s deterioration an unpleasant physical texture, encouraging a queasy fascination with damage that’s difficult to look at and harder to ignore. At its best, the body horror feels wet, awkward, and difficult to contain rather than polished into something comfortably spectacular. There’s enough physical nastiness here to give Matt’s desperation a genuinely disturbing shape.

Even without the DC Comics pedigree or the connection to Batman, Clayface would still be a compelling body-horror film. The recognizable name might get people interested, but Matt’s desperation, the disturbing effects, and the tragedy of losing control over his identity are what make it work. There’s no need to know where he fits into Gotham or who he might eventually fight. His story has enough emotional weight and gruesome imagination to stand on its own. The comic-book background adds another layer, but it isn’t holding the movie together. That independence makes it feel like an actual horror story rather than franchise homework dressed up with gore.

For an R-rated body-horror film, though, Clayface plays it surprisingly safe. That might sound odd given the grotesque imagery, but graphic violence and genuinely unsettling ideas aren’t the same thing. There are moments when Matt’s transformation seems ready to take the movie somewhere stranger, only for it to retreat toward familiar revenge-thriller territory. The issue isn’t simply that it needs more blood or more elaborate effects. A more Cronenbergian approach could have pushed further into how his changing body alters his desires, his relationships, and his understanding of himself. The film is willing to make Matt look monstrous, but more hesitant to explore what becoming something other than human might actually feel like.

That restraint becomes especially noticeable as Matt gains control over his abilities. Early on, his body feels like a threat he can’t escape. Later, it increasingly becomes a weapon. The shift makes sense for the story, but it changes the experience from watching someone endure a nightmare to watching him inflict one. There’s nasty fun in that, especially when the film embraces its lurid side, but his inability to trust his own body generates more unease than his ability to make other people afraid of it. As the confrontations become more conventional, the movie sacrifices some of the uncertainty that makes its earlier stretches so effective.

The comparisons with The Fly and Darkman are hard to avoid, from scientific possibility curdling into catastrophe to the disfigured man pursuing revenge. The relationship between appearance and personal value also invites comparisons with The Substance. Those connections help explain the film’s appeal, but they highlight what feels underdeveloped, too. Clayface has an industry full of people who judge surfaces and a protagonist whose surface becomes impossible to maintain. That’s fertile ground. Sometimes the movie digs into it; sometimes it settles for a familiar revenge beat with a more disgusting visual payoff. The latter can be entertaining without being quite as satisfying.

Even with those reservations, Clayface succeeds because enough humanity survives beneath the grotesquerie. Harries gives the film a wounded center, while Ackie helps keep its emotional stakes from disappearing into the effects work. Watkins delivers the gruesome spectacle, but the sadness underneath gives it staying power. The film doesn’t fully realize its strongest ideas, and its reluctance to follow them into truly uncomfortable territory keeps it from becoming something exceptional. Still, its best moments make physical transformation feel painfully personal. Matt can change his appearance, but finding a face he can live with turns out to be the harder problem.

Icarus File No. 34: Carrie (dir by Mike Flanagan, Kate Siegel, Axelle Carolyn, Kyra Sedgwick, Hiromi Katana)


If I had to choose two words to describe Mike Flanagan’s “reimagining” of Carrie, they would probably be “fan fiction.”

In fact, it’s sometimes humorous just how obviously this miniseries is a work of fan fiction. Carrie White (blandly played by Summer Howell) may be a bullied and sheltered girl with telekinetic powers, but now she has a best friend, Emaline (an equally bland Thalia Dudek, who looks less like a 2026 teenager and more like the bassist in a 1990s riot grrrl band), who also has a power and always has the best advice and the snarkiest comebacks! What would Carrie do without her best friend Emaline? And while Margaret White (Samantha Sloyan) is still present as an overprotective and paranoid force in Carrie’s life, there’s now another maternal figure named Adelaide (Kate Siegel) who exists to talk about how those with secret powers are always being held down by a society that’s just not capable of accepting how important they are. Adelaide opens each episode with a monologue that feels like it was written by a 2017 college freshman who has just watched Linda Sarsour on YouTube. Watching the miniseries, one gets the feeling that Flanagan and his writers really wanted to make a show called Emaline and Adelaide and decided to graft them onto Carrie.

Ever since this miniseries was announced, there’s been a lot of talk about how Flanagan has updated the story. In this case, that means there’s an emphasis on phones and social media, as if teenagers couldn’t find a way to hurt each other even before technology caught up with them. In fact, social media is pretty much to blame for everything that happened. The audience is meant to violently roll their eyes at Margaret White for believing in conspiracy theories and religion while, at the same time, accepting a portrayal of the dangers of social media that makes Aaron Sorkin look even-handed and calm. One gets the feeling that if this show had been made just a few years earlier, it would have found a way to blame Margaret White and Chris Hargensen for the January 6th riots. There is a riot in the sixth episode, but it just involves all of the students doing a massive walkout to protest Chris Hargensen’s secret Instagram account. “Death to Hargensen!” the students chant, and it briefly seems like maybe Flanagan is going to make a bigger point about how the bullies can become the bullied, but ultimately, this is too much of a work of fan fiction to delve too deeply into anything that complex. It’s also too much of a work of the streaming era to introduce an idea that can’t be neatly summed up in 15 seconds.

Yes, this is a new version of Carrie. If King’s novel and De Palma’s film gave us a Carrie White who was never happy until that one prom night and who lashed out after that happiness was stolen from her, the Mike Flanagan miniseries gives us a Carrie who becomes the most popular girl in school even before prom night. No longer does Tommy (Joel Oulette) ask Carrie to prom as a favor to his guilt-ridden girlfriend, Sue Snell (Siena Agudong). Instead, he asks Carrie as a friend. Carrie’s no longer sheltered and shy. Instead, she’s somewhat smug and annoying. She sneaks out of the house many times before prom night. She goes to a party. She goes to the junkyard and curses like a sailor while showing off her powers. Her best friend Emaline is impressed. What would Carrie do without her best friend, Emaline? Of course, by changing all of this, Flanagan robs the story of all of its emotional power. This is probably the first version of Carrie where I’ve actually found myself getting annoyed with Carrie as a character. Towards the end of the miniseries, she just becomes so smug and self-righteous, like the girl at school who used to sweetly pull you aside to tell you that your skirt was too short. This is a version of the story that lets Carrie off the hook. Emaline is the one who suggests that she use her powers to get revenge. Adelaide and her dumbass cult are the ones who accidentally set fire to the school. Carrie dances in the street with Emaline and, for a few seconds, you actually find yourself wishing for the calming hand of Ryan Murphy.

Yes, I know that Stephen King has endorsed Mike Flanagan’s changes. That doesn’t mean that I have to. The fact of the matter is that Stephen King has consistently shown that he will endorse just about anything, and it’s also been a while since King has written anything that can match the power of his earlier work. There’s a world of difference between the youngish and struggling writer who originally wrote Carrie and the wealthy boomer who is now probably better known for his angry tweets than his more recent literary output. As well, it’s obvious that King likes Flanagan. Flanagan is the ultimate fan. And yet, considering that Flanagan’s best film, Hush, was also his simplest, one can’t help but feel that Flanagan would do well to stop adapting his heroes and maybe just try to focus on creating unapologetic suspense.

It’s the curse of elevated horror. Right now, the critics who hate entertaining horror love slow-moving elevated horror. They go on and on about the subtext, as if there wasn’t subtext to be found in the horror movies that were made in the past. The truth of the matter is that the subtext is usually the least interesting thing about these films and series. Making a film or a show that is critical of capitalism and religion is hardly the radical act that the critics seem to think it is. There’s nothing particularly interesting or special to be found between the lines when it comes to this version of Carrie. Indeed, for all the time and effort that the series puts into villainizing Margaret White and Chris Hargensen, they’re ultimately the most interesting characters because Samantha Sloyan and Alison Thornton are the only two performers who are allowed to break free from the show’s rigid ideological structure. (Samantha Sloyan especially deserves a lot of credit for finding a hint of reality in her portrayal of Margaret.) Chris and Margaret are compelling because they’re the only characters who don’t just parrot the accepted lines and the accepted thinking. They’re the only characters who seem to have a life and an outlook that was formed by something other than the demands of the show. We’re meant to shake our heads when Margaret becomes an online celebrity with a podcast, but instead, we’re interested and almost happy for her because Margaret is actually doing something unexpected and making an effort to take actual control of her life. It’s hard not to feel that this version of Margaret White deserved a better ending than what the show gave her. In the end, Margaret feels less like a villain and more like a victim of the show’s writers and their own feelings about religion and politics. (One wonders if the writers realize that their show ultimately makes the case that all of the tragedy could have been avoided if the government had simply stayed out of it and just allowed Margaret to continue to homeschool her daughter.) If previous versions of Carrie seemed to be designed to appeal to shy outsiders, this version of Carrie is designed to compliment self-styled victims who don’t have the self-awareness necessary to realize that they are now the bullies.

In the end, Carrie feels like a forgotten Showtime series from 2018 and, if it had been made by anyone other than Mike Flanagan, no one would care.

Previous Icarus Files:

  1. Cloud Atlas
  2. Maximum Overdrive
  3. Glass
  4. Captive State
  5. Mother!
  6. The Man Who Killed Don Quixote
  7. Last Days
  8. Plan 9 From Outer Space
  9. The Last Movie
  10. 88
  11. The Bonfire of the Vanities
  12. Birdemic
  13. Birdemic 2: The Resurrection 
  14. Last Exit To Brooklyn
  15. Glen or Glenda
  16. The Assassination of Trotsky
  17. Che!
  18. Brewster McCloud
  19. American Traitor: The Trial of Axis Sally
  20. Tough Guys Don’t Dance
  21. Reach Me
  22. Revolution
  23. The Last Tycoon
  24. Express to Terror 
  25. 1941
  26. The Teheran Incident
  27. Con Man
  28. Looker
  29. 1776
  30. Here
  31. The Adventures of Brisco County, Jr.
  32. The Cable Guy
  33. A Chorus Line

 

Brad’s favorite horror thriller of the past decade…HUSH (2016)!


I may be contributing to our annual Horrorthon here at TSL, but I’ll be the first to admit that I’m not as knowledgeable about the horror genre as the rest of the crew. Most of the horror films I watched growing up were the edited versions that would play on my favorite local channel, Fox-16 out of Little Rock. If not there, I’d see scary movies at my friend’s bunking parties when I was in grade school or junior high. That’s how I first saw the FRIDAY THE 13TH series, and I even remember seeing Fulci’s HOUSE BY THE CEMETERY (1981) at one such party. I didn’t have a clue who Fulci was at the time, but I do remember a victim’s throat being ripped out! I’d go home and have a hard time sleeping. I’ve never been good with gore, and I’ve always preferred action films. With that said, I’ve been trying to up my horror game over the last few years. I try to take part in the weekly #ScarySocial live tweet event, and I’ll watch horror films periodically that my friends tell me about or that seem interesting for some reason. I’ve still got a large backlog to get through, and I’ll never watch the classic gorefests, but I know way more now than I did a few years ago. Horrorthon is an amazing place to learn more.

I came across a horror movie ten years ago that I loved, and I still watch it every year. That film is HUSH, which I see as more like a nightmarish thriller than a straight on horror film. The setup is incredible as our lead character Maddie, who’s both deaf and unable to speak, finds herself being stalked at her remote home. There are some early visuals that illustrate the psychopathic evil of “The Man” (John Gallagher, Jr.) as he turns his attention towards Maddie, while also showing us how vulnerable her inability to hear or speak make her in this situation. There’s also a sequence involving the Man sending current pictures to our heroine’s laptop that show her being watched. It’s here that she first realizes something horrific is going on, and it’s a truly chilling scene. The movie hooked me right there, and I was completely invested as the psycho played his cruel games with her.

I thought Kate Siegel was exceptional in the lead role. I didn’t know a thing about the actress going into the film all those years ago, and I’m not sure I’ve watched any of her work since, but I still don’t think anyone could have been better. She proves herself to be smart, resourceful, and not near the fun, easy target our killer thinks she’s going to be.  After being put through hell both physically and mentally over the first couple of acts, I can only describe her character as a total bad-ass as the film races towards its conclusion! She also co-wrote the film with its director, Mike Flanagan, which helped me appreciate her work even more as she helped craft the amazing character. John Gallagher, Jr. is effectively creepy as the killer. This character could have walked straight out of an 80’s horror film, as we never understand why he’s so evil, which makes him more terrifying as far as I’m concerned. I don’t have to understand his motives to want him to die by the end.

As a warning for the more squeamish viewers like me, some of the violence is extremely difficult to watch, with various hands and necks being the most susceptible to extreme harm. The violence is realistic and personal, and I still look away because I know it’s coming and can’t really handle it. It also is one of the reasons the movie stays with me year after year. Just writing about it now is making my toes curl up a bit.

If you’ve seen HUSH before, I hope this makes you want to watch it again. If you’ve never seen it, I’ll let this serve as my recommendation that it’s a movie I love and think you probably will too. And if you want to know even more about the film, check out Lisa’s REVIEW from when it first came out back in 2016. It has more detail about her own personal reactions to the film, as well as her unique critical insight.

Things are heating up in the trailer for Mike Flanagan’s Carrie!


It’s not always easy to adapt someone else’s work. 

Stick too close to the source material, and you end up with Gus Van Sant’s Psycho. Veer just a bit away from it, and you may end up with surprises like Stanley Kubrick’s The Shining or Frank Darabont’s The Mist. Tossing out the source material or rushing the story gives you Nikolaj Arcel’s The Dark Tower. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn’t. Even Stephen King had a rough time adapting his own work to film with Maximum Overdrive. 

So seeing that we have yet another adaptation of King’s first novel, Carrie, I was a little confused and surprised when Mike Flanagan’s name came up. I know I haven’t kept up on everything online these days, but wasn’t he working on an adaptation for The Exorcist? Either way, we have it, and it looks like it has the potential to be pretty great. Flanagan’s no stranger to King’s works, having adapted Gerald’s Game and Doctor Sleep.

As always, Flanagan’s invited some of this friends to join in on the fun. For me, the standout returning actor is Samantha Sloyan, who previously worked on Hush, Midnight Mass, and The Life of Chuck, among others. Samantha’s playing Margaret White, and while Piper Laurie’s portrayal in Brian DePalma’s 1976 classic still scares me, I’m excited to see how this will turn out. Additionally, we have Midnight Mass‘ Michael Trucco and Rahul Kohli on hand. Of course, Flanagan production would be complete without his Hush lead actress, muse and wife, Actor/Director Kate Siegel. Matthew Lillard (Five Nights at Freddy’s) and Amber Midthunder (Prey, Novocaine) are also featured, with Summer H Howell (Night of the Reaper) as Carrie. 

Carrie premieres on Amazon Prime early this October, just in time for Halloween. 

Review: The Fall of the House of Usher (by Mike Flanagan)


“If pain and suffering were the kisses of Jesus, then he kissed the living fuck out of my mother.” — Roderick Usher

The Fall of the House of Usher delivers Mike Flanagan’s signature blend of gothic dread and modern moral reckoning, reimagining Edgar Allan Poe’s tales as a savage family implosion tied to corporate excess. This Netflix miniseries unfolds over eight taut episodes, framing the confessions of a pharmaceutical tycoon as his bloodline meets grisly, poetic ends. It balances sharp satire with emotional undercurrents, though its heavy-handed messaging and repetitive structure occasionally blunt the impact.

Roderick Usher, now a hollowed-out patriarch, recounts his empire’s collapse to a relentless prosecutor in the crumbling family mansion, flashing back to decades of ambition, betrayal, and supernatural intervention. His twin sister Madeline, the brains behind their Fortunato Pharmaceuticals fortune, shares equal narrative weight, their pact with a enigmatic figure sealing a curse that claims each heir in turn. The setup echoes Poe’s original story but explodes it into a sprawling anthology, with every installment riffing on a different work from the author’s macabre catalog. This structure keeps the momentum high, turning personal flaws into fatal traps, yet it risks formula once the pattern of vice-reveal-demise becomes predictable.

A standout early episode channels The Masque of the Red Death, where a debauched heir’s orgiastic gala spirals into carnage, blending excess with infectious horror in a sequence that’s equal parts thrilling and grotesque. Later, Goldbug skewers influencer wellness culture through a sibling’s pyramid-scheme downfall, its tech-glitch kills inventive and on-theme. These Poe-infused vignettes shine when they lean into visceral spectacle—impalements, immolations, animalistic frenzies—elevating routine family feuds into something operatic. However, weaker entries, like those fixated on lab accidents or courtroom paranoia, feel more procedural than poetic, diluting the supernatural menace amid procedural tangents.

Flanagan’s direction thrives in the atmospheric details: opulent sets that rot from within, shadows pooling like guilt, a score that swells with mournful strings underscoring inevitable doom. Performances anchor the excess, with Carla Gugino’s shape-shifting Verna stealing scenes as a devilish facilitator—charming one moment, apocalyptic the next. Bruce Greenwood lends Roderick a defeated majesty, his monologues on greed and legacy landing with gravitas despite their length. Mark Hamill’s fixer adds gravelly comic menace, a cold pragmatist navigating the Ushers’ moral sewer. The younger cast fares variably; some heirs pop as vicious caricatures—the coke-fueled playboy, the ruthless scientist—while others blur into interchangeable privilege.

Thematically, the series wields Poe’s obsessions—entombment, madness, retribution—against Big Pharma’s sins, drawing parallels to real-world opioid scandals without subtlety. Roderick and Madeline’s rise from rags via a addictive painkiller mirrors ethical shortcuts in pursuit of immortality, their “house” both literal estate and dynastic delusion. Verna embodies karmic balance, not mindless evil, her interventions exposing how wealth insulates sin until cosmic debt collectors arrive. This critique bites, especially in rants decrying humanity’s commodification of suffering, but preachy asides can halt the dread, turning horror into TED Talk territory. Flanagan fans will recognize his grief motifs, here twisted into generational poison rather than personal catharsis.

Pacing falters in the midsection, where flashbacks to the Ushers’ origin drag against the ticking present-day trial. The frame narrative, while elegant, withholds twists too long, making early hours feel like setup over payoff. Gorehounds get inventive set pieces, from pendulum blades to heart-pounding pursuits, but scares prioritize irony over outright terror—less Hereditary shocks, more Final Destination comeuppance. For a one-season arc, it wraps tightly, circling back to Poe’s raven as a symbol of unending loss, though the finale’s revelations feel more intellectually tidy than emotionally shattering.

As adaptation, it honors Poe’s spirit over fidelity, cherry-picking motifs from tales like The Tell-Tale Heart, The Black Cat, and The Pit and the Pendulum to fuel a contemporary revenge saga. Purists might chafe at the liberties—Poe’s claustrophobic intimacy traded for ensemble sprawl—but the result captures his misanthropy, updating crumbling aristocracy to cutthroat capitalism. It’s Flanagan’s angriest work, swapping supernatural melancholy for gleeful vengeance, yet retains his humanism: even monsters get poignant final beats, hinting at redemption’s flicker amid ruin.

The Fall of the House of Usher polarizes like much of Flanagan’s output—loved for audacity, critiqued for indulgence. Its ensemble and kills draw praise, but detractors note tonal whiplash between camp and sincerity. For horror enthusiasts craving literary flair over found-footage tropes, it’s a feast; casual viewers may tire of the lectures. Compared to Flanagan’s Hill House or Midnight Mass, it’s less introspective, more punitive, trading tears for dark laughs at the mighty’s tumble.​

Ultimately, the miniseries succeeds as pulpy prestige, a bloody valentine to Poe that indicts modern excess without fully escaping melodrama’s clutches. Its highs—Gugino’s tour de force, baroque deaths, thematic ambition—outweigh the bloat, making it binge-worthy for gothic fans. In Netflix’s crowded horror slate, it stands out for wit and wickedness, a flawed but ferocious reminder that some houses, and legacies, deserve to fall.

Catching Up With The Films of 2025: The Life of Chuck (dir by Mike Flanagan)


The Life of Chuck is a story told in reverse.

The world is ending and teacher Marty Anderson (Chiwetel Ejiofor) wonders why he keeps seeing signs that announce, “Charles Krantz: 39 Great Years! Thanks, Chuck!”  Marty’s ex-wife (Karen Gillan) calls him and tells him that, at the hospital where she works, she and her co-workers have taken to calling themselves “the suicide squad.”  It would be an effective moment if not for the fact that the film’s narration (somewhat predictably voiced by Nick Offerman) had already informed us of that fact.  Everyone wonders why the world is falling apart.  Why has the internet gone off-line?  Why has California finally sunk into the ocean?  Why are people rioting?  Several characters say that it’s the end times before then adding that it’s not the same end time that the “religious fanatics” and “right-wing nuts” always talk about.  Thanks for clarifying that!  It’s nice to know that, at the end of the world, people will still talk like an aging Maine boomer.

Nine months earlier, a straight-laced banked named Chuck Krantz (Tom Hiddleston) comes across a busker playing her drums on a street corner and feels inspired to start dancing.

Years earlier, a young boy named Chuck Krantz is raised by his grandmother (Mia Sara) and his grandfather (Mark Hamill).  Young Chuck (Jacob Tremblay) inherits a love of dance from his grandmother but, after she dies in a supermarket, his grandfather turns to drinking.  His grandfather keeps one room in their house locked.  (There’s even an absurdly huge lock on the door because The Life of Chuck is not a subtle one.)  Eventually, Chuck discovers what is hidden away in the room and it shapes the rest of his life.

Occasionally, solid genre craftsmen will fill the need to prove that they’re actually deeper than people give them credit for.  In 2020, Stephen King published a novella called The Life of Chuck.  In October of 2023, director Mike Flanagan announced that he had begun filming on his adaptation of The Life of Chuck.  Both King and Flanagan are better-known for their contributions to the horror gerne, though, around 2017, King apparently decided that he was also meant to be a political pundit.  (No writer, with the possible exception of Joyce Carol Oates, has done more damage to their reputation by joining twitter than Stephen King.)  There are elements of horror to be found in The Life of Chuck.  There’s the world ending during Act One.  There’s the locked rom in Act Three.  There’s the terrible acting of the woman playing the drummer in Act Two.  But this definitely is not a horror film.  Instead, it’s King and Flanagan at their most sentimental, heartfelt, and ultimately simplistic.

It’s ultimately a bit too self-consciously quirky for its own good.  Flanagan seems to be really concerned that we’ll miss the point of the film so he directs with a heavy-hand and, at times, he overexplains.  Sometimes, you have to have some faith in your audience and their ability to figure out things on their own.  The scenes of Chuck’s childhood are so shot through a haze of nostalgia that they feel as overly stylized as the scenes that don’t necessarily take place in our reality.  For the most part, the narration could have been ditched without weakening the film.  That said, the film is hardly a disaster.  There are moments that work, like the joyous scene of Tom Hiddleston dancing.  The film tries a bit too hard to be profound but there’s joy to be found in the performances of Hiddleston and Jacob Tremblay.  Chucks seems like a nice guy.

Thanks, Chuck!

8 Things To Which I Am Looking Forward In October


Welcome to October!  October is a big month here at the Shattered Lens.  It’s the month when we devote the majority of our time to the horror genre.  It’s time for our annual Horrorthon!  Last year, we had a record number of Horrorthon posts.  I’m hoping that we break that record this year but, even if we don’t, it should still be a lot of fun!

Here’s what I’m looking forward to in October!

  1. Killers of the Flower Moon — So, technically, it’s not a horror film, though it does deal with a horrific incident in American history.  That said, Martin Scorsese’s latest is the film that I have most anticipated getting to watch this year.  I know that I’m not alone in that.  We’ve all read the rapturous reviews.  We’ve seen the enigmatic trailers.  This month, on October 20th, we’ll finally get a chance to see it for ourselves!
  2. The Killer — One week after we get a new Scorsese film, we’ll be getting a new film from David Fincher!  Again, it may not be a horror film but it is a movie from one of our best filmmakers.
  3. The Holdovers — If you can’t get into David Fincher’s latest film, you can check out the latest from Alexander Payne, The Holdovers!  Along with Killers Of The Flower Moon, Barbie, and Oppenheimer, The Holdovers is expected to be an Oscar contender come awards season.
  4. Pain Hustlers — And if you can’t get into The Killer or The Holdovers, you can check out Pain Hustlers.  2023 is the year of Emily Blunt!
  5. The Caine Mutiny Court-Martial Trial — The final film from the great William Friedkin is scheduled to be released on Paramount Plus and Showtime on October 6th.
  6. Horror Movies, Horror Movies, and more Horror Movies! — If you can’t enjoy watching horror movies, classic and otherwise, in October, when can you enjoy watching them?
  7. The Fall Of The House of Usher — Mike Flanagan’s upcoming Netflix miniseries promises an update to Edgar Allan Poe’s classic tale of gothic horror!
  8. Halloween — It’s my favorite holiday!  I can’t wait to see all the decorations, all the parties, and all the costumes!

October’s going to be a great month and those of us at TSL can’t wait to celebrate it with you!  What are you looking forward to in October?

Here’s The Trailer For Mike Flanagan’s The Fall Of The House of Usher


With October approaching, it’s time for yet another Mike Flanagan-directed horror miniseries to premiere on Netflix.  This year, he’s bringing us what appears to be an updated version of The Fall of the House of Usher.  Here’s the trailer.  The series itself is scheduled to be released on October 12th!

4 Shots From 4 Horror Films: 2019


4 Or More Shots From 4 Or More Films is just what it says it is, 4 shots from 4 of our favorite films. As opposed to the reviews and recaps that we usually post, 4 Shots From 4 Films lets the visuals do the talking!

This October, I’m going to be doing something a little bit different with my contribution to 4 (or more) Shots From 4 (or more) Films.  I’m going to be taking a little chronological tour of the history of horror cinema, moving from decade to decade.

Today, we take a look at 2019!

4 Shots From 4 Horror Films: 2019

Doctor Sleep (2019, dir by Mike Flanagan, DP: Michael Fimognari)

The Dead Don’t Die (2019, dir by Jim Jarmusch, DP: Frederick Elmes)

Us (2019, dir by Jordan Peele, DP: Mike Gioulakis)

Midsommar (2019, dir by Ari Aster, DP: Pawel Pogorzelski)

4 Shots From 4 Films: Special Ewan McGregor Edition


4 Shots From 4 Films is just what it says it is, 4 shots from 4 of our favorite films. As opposed to the reviews and recaps that we usually post, 4 Shots From 4 Films lets the visuals do the talking!

Today is not just Christoper Walken’s birthday!  It’s also the birthday of another one of my favorite actors, the only and only Ewan McGregor!  And you know what that means.  It’s time for….

4 Shots From 4 Ewan McGregor Films

Trainspotting (1996, dir by Danny Boyle)

Moulin Rouge! (2001, dir by Baz Luhrmann)

T2: Trainspotting (2017, dir by Danny Boyle)

Doctor Sleep (2019, dir by Mike Flanagan)