Thief's Monthly Movie Loot - 2023 Edition

A home invasion is most definitely a traumatic event. Victims have often confessed being haunted by nightmares about the attack, and reliving the events constantly thinking "what could I have done differently that night?" or "how can I prevent this from happening again?". That seems to be what's behind this neat, sleek short film.

A Girl Alone in a House follows Charlotte (Kitzia Jimenez), a young woman still reeling from an attack some time before. When she's asked to house-sit for a friend during July 4th, Charlotte finds herself again alone in a house, haunted by the memories of the past attack and the possibilities of it reoccurring. But this time, she's more prepared.

This is a really cool 18-minute short, featuring some neat camerawork and a committed performance from Jimenez. There is a very effective use of the space of the house and its different rooms. It also succeeds in transmitting the fear of the lead character, but also her resourcefulness to not be a victim again. After all, Johnnie Marat is dead. She killed him.

Grade:

__________________

Warpaint follows a mysterious woman (Kitzia Jimenez) seeking revenge against a man that hurt her. There's something to be said about a 2-minute short that can carry so much inferred story into its short runtime. This is a perfect example of that since you pretty much know everything you need to know about both characters in those 2 minutes.

The camerawork is really effective, but it is Jimenez who sells it as she waltzes through the house in a sort of victory dance. There is a resolve in her eyes that not every actress can transmit. Plus, the few lines of dialogue she has are sharp, fun, and well delivered.

Grade:

Is this MKS’s movie? I think he showed it to me when it first came out. Real solid stuff.

Yeah, those last two are from him. I had seen A Girl Alone in a House before, but I don't think I had seen this one.

For those interested...

I heard the director is a complete whacko, but I agree that the shorts are both very good.

__________________
IMDb
Letterboxd

Here's my summary for SEPTEMBER 2023:

A film from Oliver Stone (born September 15): South of the Border
A film with a punctuation symbol in its title (Nat'l Punctuation Day, September 24): Punch-Drunk Love
A film with a title that starts with the letters Q or R: Red Rock West
A film about pirates (International Talk Like a Pirate Day, September 19): Treasure Island (1950)
A film with Native American characters (Native American Day, September 22): Shimásáni


Other films seen, not for the challenge

Halloween films: Halloween 4: The Return of Michael Myers, Halloween 5: The Revenge of Michael Myers, Halloween: The Curse of Michael Myers, Halloween H20: 20 Years Later, Halloween: Resurrection, Halloween (2018), Halloween Kills
Theater outing: Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles: Mutant Mayhem
Pixar short films: Lifted, Bao
Short films: A Girl Alone in a House, Warpaint
Other watches: Psycho



A lot of stuff, but my favorites were Punch-Drunk Love and Shimásáni. Some good stuff with Red Rock West and Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles: Mutant Mayhem as well. The Halloween binge was surely a rollercoaster, but I would say I was satisfied with the DGG trilogy, even if Halloween Ends didn't fully land with me.

My least favorite was easily Halloween Resurrection, no doubt about it.

Time to share my latest "assignment" episode!

The Movie Loot: The October Assignment (with Lindsay Washburn)

In this one, I'm joined by Lindsay Washburn, actress and YouTube film critic, to choose a set of 5 horrific categories to guide us on what to watch during the month.

You can also see the live broadcast we did via YouTube



...or listen to it through any podcasting platform like Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Google Podcasts, or any other.

Here are the criteria we chose for OCTOBER 2023:

A film written and/or directed by Clive Barker (born October 5):
A film about a reptile (Nat'l Reptile Awareness Day, October 21):
Any film version of Frankenstein (Nat'l Frankenstein Friday, October 27):
A disaster movie (Int'l Day for Disaster Reduction, October 13):
A film from Nigeria (Independence Day, October 1):

Megalodon is an extinct species of shark that measured around 60 feet (three times the size of a great white shark). Thought to have existed 2.6 million years ago, there isn't much evidence about interactions between them and primitive humans, but given their size and strength, it doesn't take a paleontologist to know the end result would be, well, a slaughter. But meg versus Statham? That's a whole different question.

The Meg follows Jonas Taylor (Statham), a rescue diver that has gone into exile after a previous mission resulted in the death of two crew members. But when a team of researchers led by some of Taylor's former co-workers stumble upon a living megalodon, Taylor has to jump back into action mode to kick some shark's ass.

That's more or less the amount of thought you can expect was put into the film. Just a bunch of people trying to stop a big shark from eating a bunch of people. Sadly, the film doesn't seem to fully commit neither to the serious biological aspects of the premise, nor to the chomp-chomp, silly angle it could've gone with, which leaves the film in a weird middle ground that's not very satisfying.

The Meg is not without its moments. There are a few thrilling sequences in the water, but they are mostly scattered with some lulls in between. Also, if you're looking for chomping gore, there is little of it as most of the kills come as a result of sudden gulps of entire humans. This results in a lot of unexpected jumpscares, some of which are more effective than others.

Finally, although the cast is decent and there is some good banter between them, Statham doesn't really have a lot of chemistry with his female leads. I also find it funny how we are led to believe that Statham has become a "drunken loner" after the events of the prologue, only to brush that aside as soon as he hits the water because, of course, he's Statham and we know that meg versus Statham isn't a fight... it's a slaughter; a meg slaughter.

Grade:

This is part of a seemingly mundane conversation about relationships between strangers Tess (Georgina Campbell) and Keith (Bill Skarsgård) as they get to know each other after they've been accidentally double-booked in the same rental house. We don't know much about Keith, but we do get some hints that Tess might be dealing with either a breakup or a problematic relationship, which prompts the above response from Keith. But as we dig into the film real plot, there is certainly more to that quote than we might think of.

Barbarian is split in four acts. The first follows Tess and Keith, while the second one introduces a third character, AJ (Justin Long), to the equation. The third act is a brief flashback that ties with the events in the present time, while the final act just wraps things up. It is a very effective narrative structure for this story that keeps you a bit on your toes as you try to figure out what's happening.

To talk more about the film would be a detriment because I think the film works best when you walk in a bit blind, but let's just say there are several instances of characters projecting "some kind of dynamic" onto others because it serves them in some way. It's up to these characters if they "want to play ball or not", but it's interesting to see the dynamics between the characters as they try to figure out whether or not they want to "play ball", and what are the consequences of them doing so.

Director Zach Cregger, who already had a career as a comedian and had co-directed two features with partner Trevor Moore, certainly turned some heads with this. The film might feature some common tropes, but it is still smartly written and cleverly structured. And although there are some things in the last act that might require a bit of suspension of disbelief, you'll probably be too deep in the hole already. It's up to you to play ball or not.

Grade:

That is the statement from Roderick Usher (Jean Debucourt) in the opening act of this silent film, as he finds himself immersed in painting his young wife Madeline (Marguerite Gance). Usher finds himself so absorbed in this painting, apparently a family tradition, that he sees it as a way to capture Madeline's "life". Ironically, one can say that it is this obsession which leads to Madeline's illness.

The Fall of the House of Usher follows the obsessed and tormented Roderick as he first struggles with this fear of death; something that he seems to cope with through this painting. But when tragedy falls on the House of Usher, we follow his torment as he tries to reckon with the events. Halfway through the film, he looks at the painting and declares "It is *there* where she truly lives"; a marked difference from the initial statement which ironically signals the distance between them that results from this obsession to "keep her alive" in some way.

Directed by Jean Epstein, the film presents a surrealist atmosphere focused on the dread and mental state of Usher. It is a very effective atmosphere conveyed by the use of lights, shadows, and the impressive set design. The camerawork is also pretty good, especially for a film from this era.

Unfortunately, I saw this on YouTube and the print was pretty bad, which ended up being distracting at times. The captions from the French intertitles weren't also properly synchronized so I had a bit of a hard time handling it, which I think might have hindered the overall effect. The film lasts a little over an hour, but I felt it dragged a bit, especially once Madeline is out of the picture.

The presence of a friend of Usher (Charles Lamy) also seems to carry on without little explanation. Even Roderick himself seems to be mortified by him, but he sticks around for apparently no reason. Finally, I don't feel like Roderick's harmful obsession was properly addressed in the end. Still, I found this to be quite an eerie watch, anchored in some pretty good production values and a pretty solid ambience.

Grade:

Creep follows Aaron (Patrick Brice), a struggling videographer that accepts a one-day job to record a client, Josef (Mark Duplass), during his various daily activities. Josef claims that he was recently diagnosed with a brain tumor and that the video is meant to be a "video essay" for his unborn son. However, as the day progresses, the interactions between the two characters grow weirder and creepier.

The entire film is told through the lens of Aaron's camera (i.e. "found footage") which adds to the weirdness of the situation. The voyeuristic aspect makes these initially mundane and private interactions to feel more awkward and off-putting. These go from their first recording, which is Josef's "tubby time", to one where he shares the story of this weird wolfmask he had when he was a kid, which he called "Peachfuzz".

This is a film that was recommended by a good Internet friend a while ago, as we were talking about weird films, and weird it is. Although classified as "horror", it is more awkward and what-the-**** than it is gory or violent. Duplass, who co-wrote the story with director and co-star Brice, carries the film magnificently with a performance that keeps you guessing all the way to the end. Is he a creep, or is he just an eccentric oddball?

The main drawback that I might have is that Brice's performance isn't on the same level as Duplass. This is made more evident in the second half of the film, which mostly focuses in him dealing with the aftermath of his first meeting with Aaron. He's not bad, but he's just a bit wooden. Still, he excels with his direction delivering some genuinely eerie moments as the film reaches its climax.

Much like Aaron, the film is a bit of an oddball. This is not your typical "found footage" psychological horror, it lacks the cheap jumpscares and violence that we might expect from some of these films, but rather relies in how much we get into this weird dynamic between these two characters. It is not the most conventional, but it is certainly effective.

Grade:

Yeah, this was just too funny not to write up. Shake Hands with Danger is a safety training short film for operators of heavy equipment and machinery in factories and similar workplaces. A couple of weeks ago, I went down this rabbit hole of safety precautions videos, real and parodies, and ended up stumbling within this one and it was too hard to resist.

The short is directed by Herk Harvey (director of 1962's Carnival of Souls) and presents different scenarios in which employees might get injured while working with heavy equipment and power tools. But the thing is that it does so in relatively gruesome ways, at least by the standards of your typical safety training videos, which I think sets it apart as some sort of interesting curiosity.

Now, I work IT but in a warehouse for a multinational company where power equipments and safety measures are daily routines, so I was definitely intrigued by the video from that angle as well (I might consider presenting it to our EHS Supervisor as a training option ) But I also found it to be competently made and overall engaging.

Grade:

Frankenstein follows Dr. Henry Frankenstein (Colin Clive) as he embarks on the risky quest to create life. The above is his exuberant claim when he apparently succeeds at it. The result, however, seems to be far from a human and closer to a monster, which is how he is called. The Monster (Boris Karloff) is a towering and menacing figure, which goes against his seemingly innocent mind and behavior. Nonetheless, his existence is seen as a threat to the people around them.

I hadn't seen this in a while, so I was glad to finally revisit it. The film is iconic for a reason. There are a bunch of characters, images, and narrative beats from this film that have, rightfully, served as inspiration for other films. The film is exceptionally well shot with some really impressive wide shots as Frankenstein and his assistant Fritz (Dwight Frye) dig up bodies or later when the Monster is created and first seen; and finally during the climatic confrontation at the windmill.

Karloff nicely fits the role of the Monster in terms of movement, posture, and overall stature, but Clive is also pretty good as Henry; especially during the first act when you see him truly unhinged and obsessed with this creation. Unfortunately, the rest of the supporting cast isn't as strong. Mae Clarke doesn't really shine as Elizabeth, Henry's fiancée, and the introduction of Victor (John Boles) as Henry's friend who also seems to be in love with Elizabeth, is clumsy at best.

Overall, the film shines during the scenes where Henry and the Monster are present, but kinda fall apart when it cuts to all the bits with Elizabeth and Frankenstein's family. This is not helped by an odd editing which seems to break the pace and momentum of the film at certain climatic moments. For example, cutting to Frankenstein's home right after it is revealed that he succeeded in his experiment.

Much like the Monster, Frankenstein, the film felt like an odd creation for me, with some parts working extremely well and others not so much; with a plot structure that I don't think was broken in the most effective way and some subplots that weren't that well executed. And yet it is still one of the most iconic horror films out there, full of chilling visuals, an eerie atmosphere, and some great characters which – even 90+ years later – have left their mark in cinema. It's alive, indeed.

Grade:

In 2003, Rob Zombie jumped from heavy metal into filmmaking with his debut, House of 1000 Corpses, introducing the Firefly family and splattering everybody with its excess of blood and guts. Some would say it was an "achievement in horror filmmaking", some would say he's doing the "devil's work". Either way, anybody that sees it, or any of his films, will know he's not one for a "sanitized" point of view.

The Devil's Rejects came out 2 years later, following up on the Firefly family as their three main members: Baby, Otis, and Captain Spaulding (Sheri Moon Zombie, Bill Moseley, Sid Haig), are on the run from the law. Right on their heels is Sheriff John Wydell (William Forsythe) who is obsessed and determined to capture them since the family is responsible for his brother's death in the previous film.

So it's worth highlighting that what you're getting from this film is pretty much along the lines of what you got from the first film. I do think this film is somewhat tamer, but it still relishes in the gore and the torturing of its characters in both sides of the law. The fact that it pretty much follows the antagonists' point of view is an interesting twist, and is clear that the three main actors are having fun with it, especially Haig and Mosely who are wicked good in it.

On that note, those performances are probably the film's best assets, paired with Forsythe's scenery-chewing performance. But the truth is that I just wasn't caught up in the film in any way. As violent as it was, I don't think it was as gory as it could've, the film's not scary in the sense of making you jump, and the story is thin to say the least. So it's just a matter of following the beats of the film go to the places you already expect it to go, and that's it. There are pretty much no surprises in it.

Still, something that I said after I watched the first film is that as unsubtle as Zombie might be, he is not a hack. He has a talented eye and his penchant for homaging other horror or fugitive films is evident and done with a certain style. So if all, or some of that is for you, then maybe you'll see this as an "achievement in horror filmmaking". If it's not, then you might see it as "the devil's work".

Grade:

Some SPOILERS included

That's the warning issued by the town sheriff after it is found out that the 3,000 year old mummy, Kharis (Lon Chaney, Jr.) has come back in this follow up to The Mummy's Hand. Set 30 years after the events on that film, The Mummy's Tomb follows the efforts of Kharis and its new handler, Mehmet Bey (Turhan Bey) to seek revenge against the Banning family that defeated them in the previous film, notably Steve (Dick Foran) and his partner Babe (Wallace Ford).

I watched The Mummy's Hand a couple of years ago, but I didn't know how closely related this film was. I thought it was an interesting approach to the story to have the antagonist (i.e. the mummy) come back and essentially kill the heroes of the previous film halfway through, even if it wasn't 100% properly executed. That results in Steve's son, John (John Hubbard) taking the baton to fight against the mummy.

The connections go a bit further than that because, as far as quality goes, The Mummy's Tomb isn't that far from The Mummy's Hand. It is nice to see the mummy taken out of its usual desert environment and have it transferred to Massachusetts, I do think the pace of the film is a bit better and it does get things going a bit faster than the previous film, and I appreciate the more serious and darker tone.

However, despite these positive aspects, the performances aren't that great, the script is somewhat lacking, and the way characters react to certain things isn't that believable or the best. The film is a bit better than the previous film, but it is still a bit lethargic and stale; but I guess those are the facts and we've got to face them, because the creature has been alive for over 3,000 years.

Grade:

Lake Placid follows a group of people trying to find and stop a giant crocodile that's terrorizing a lake in Maine. The mixed group includes Fish and Game officer Jack Wells (Bill Pullman), paleontologist Kelly Scott (Bridget Fonda), eccentric millionaire Hector Cyr (Oliver Platt), and the town sheriff Hank Keough (Brendan Gleeson). All of them, and Betty White is still rooting for the crocodile!

This is a film that I really don't know why I missed back in the day, but I finally caught up with it and I had a lot of fun! The film falls in that line between horror, thriller, and comedy, and I think it handles all of them pretty well. It reminded me a bit of 1950s creature features, or even more "modern" stuff like Anaconda in terms of tone and vibe, with the ensemble cast and the focus on the creature.

And although the focus is indeed in the creature, to the point that one of the characters is actually rooting for it, the banter between the main cast is pretty good. It is weird because, even though they're trying to ship Pullman and Fonda, they don't have chemistry together; and yet, the group banter is so good, especially between Platt and Gleeson.

The special effects are decent and there are a good amount of jumpscares, and although there is a certain goofiness to it, the film never tries to be anything else. This is, first and foremost, a film about a giant crocodile terrorizing people in a lake. Your best choice is to just sit back and enjoy the crocodile carnage. I mean, is that a crime? To root for the crocodile?

Grade:

That's how scientist Harold Medford (Edmund Gwenn) describes the threat that giant ants might present. Amazing when they're little, terrifying when they're the size of a car, Them! follows the efforts of Medford, along with a group of law enforcement agents, to stop them from spreading across the nation. But can they avoid their natural instinct and savagery in order to succeed?

I've been reading and hearing about this film for a long time, but somehow I had never seen it. I have to say that, for the most part, I was pleasantly surprised. The film's starts with a dread-filled first act as we see the aftermath of various attacks from the creatures. We then follow our two main characters, police sergeant Ben Peterson (James Whitmore) and FBI agent Robert Graham (James Arness) as they try to figure out the nature of the attacks.

First, it was nice to see Whitmore in something other than The Shawshank Redemption. Moreover, he probably had the best performance from the bunch delivering good dialogue and witty retorts. Arness played Graham a bit more straight, but their back-and-forth was effective. Gwenn and Joan Weldon were also pretty solid as the two scientists sent to assist law enforcement.

I had some issues with the pace and how, after the great first act, the film decides to turn the whole second act into a fairly extended search for the creatures. Like a lot of similar films, this whole sequence is full of military talk, news flashes, and press conferences with very little thrills in it. However, the performances and interactions between the four main characters keeps things more or less afloat.

Fortunately, they managed to stick the landing with a pretty good last act as the group track the queen ants to the Los Angeles sewer system. As it is, Them! manages to set itself apart from all the vast array of creature features of the 1950s. We can say it makes most of the others look feeble by comparison.

Grade:

Before Halloween ends, make sure you check out the latest episode of The Movie Loot, The Vampire Loot, where me and our friend and filmmaker Tyler Jones talk about those pesky, bloodsucking creatures. We talk a bit about the evolution of the genre, as well as share our Top 5 Vampire Movies. Check it out here:

The Movie Loot 94: The Vampire Loot (with Tyler Jones)

Also available on Spotify, Apple Podcasts, Google Podcasts, and other streaming platforms.

Have fun!