Immaculate

Rating: 2 stars out of 5
Starring: Sydney Sweeney, Álvaro Morte, Simona Tabasco, Dora Romano
Where to watch: Amazon Prime Video
To watch or not to watch: No, for the love of God, no

The opening foreshadowing shot shows a nun sneaking out from a convent in the middle of the night, and running away from that place, only to be caught by a group of nuns at the gates and her legs broken.
Cut to: Sister Cecilia (Sydney Sweeney) is a novice who has moved to a convent in Italy from a small town in The USA at the behest of Father Tedeschi (Álvaro Morte). Her belief in Christianity began at a young age when she was rescued from a frozen lake and died for 7 minutes. This rescue was understandably covered in news and got a bit of virality. And her faith and fate sealed for Christianity. At the convent, she goes about her life normally, making friends and trying to do good, but she also has glimpses of something sinister going on, and it involves the higher-ups (because, of course).

Have you seen Rosemary’s Baby? Yes? Then you have watched this film. Goodbye and good night.
If you haven’t, then watch that rather than this. This movie is the rehashing of same old faith vs fanaticism, where good Christian women are used and abused, and for some reason virginity and purity are equated and highly revered. While this genre of movies is supposed to use the concept of objectification of women as a source of horror, they at the same time unironically do the same thing. In this case for example, Sydney Sweeney regularly received comments about her good looks, is shown bathing with the fellow nuns, etc. “You either die a hero or you live long enough to see yourself become a villain”.
If that was not enough, they have eerie shadows, abruptly cut scenes, and mockery of science (which is the biggest sin of all). Can we please collectively as a society decide we don’t want to weaponise nor demonise religion anymore? Thank you.

The only reason this movie is not a hot pile of stinking garbage is the lead, Sydney Sweeney. She has single-handedly carried the story, to the point where it became apparent she was trying antics to fill the spaces. There are too many scenes filled with screams, needless to say, unwarranted. She was carrying on the movie so she was over-doing things. Sad but forgivable. There is nothing particularly horrifying in this movie, and nothing we haven’t seen before. It takes a different path from Rosemary’s Baby but it is not impactful enough that it redeems itself, because by that time we have waded through a lot of scene-there-heard-that. Its 1.5 hour runtime feels at least twice as long, and it is no wonder it has a current rating of 2.9 on Google and that tells you everything you need to know. Don’t listen to anyone who says it is good, because it is not. Don’t bother.

Why The Autopsy of Jane Doe Is Good and How It Could Have Been Saved

Rating: 3.5 stars out of 5
Starring: Brian Cox, Emile Hirsch, Olwen Catherine Kelly
Where to watch: Lionsgate Play
To watch or not to watch: It is a new concept and well done. Though it has its failings, it is worth checking out

Tommy (Brian Cox) and Austin Tilden (Emile Hirsch) are a father-son duo who own an operate a morgue and crematorium in a small town. The place has been with the family for generations but Austin doesn’t feel comfortable working with the dead all day long and is looking for a way out. One day, the town’s sheriff comes to their workplace rather late with a dead body of an unidentified female in her early 20s. She was found in a home where there were multiple homicides and bodies buried in the backyard. Hers was the only body they could not account for, she had no clothes on and no identification. As the father-son start working on the body, they find many inconsistencies – her blood flows from her body even though she is dead, her fingernails have peat under them which has not been found in that part of the country for centuries, her joints are broken but there are no external injuries, her lungs are scarred, but again no external injuries. In fact, they couldn’t account for any of her conditions without going beyond the obvious. They do continue the work despite the difficulties for humanity’s sake, only to find that maybe humanity is not always a virtue.

The concept of the movie is very fresh. It is also a masterclass in making a naked female in full view non-sexual! It is sometimes shocking to realise that there is a naked female on the table (an actual table) and there is no focus on sexuality. Kudos to the team for this.
The horror of the movie comes in slow waves, till it crescendos and ends – it starts with the disconnected finds on the Jane Does eternal body and really takes off when the autopsy reaches her internal body, where they find scar tissue on her lungs, completely blacked out lungs, flower of dathura (a hallucinogen) wrapped in a scribbled cloth, her tooth etc. It is jarring and the audience is left wondering about her life. The movie is also largely a two-parter shot mostly in a claustrophobic environment of the autopsy room. It adds to the creepiness and makes for an uncomfortable watch. In a good way.
There are still problems with it, and that’s unfortunate. The movie is filled with jump scares. For an idea which is this elevated, the jump scares are a cheap ploy (they are a cheap ploy nonetheless). There are some unexplained points, like what really could have happened to her, what is the end goal, what are her powers, and all. That would have made the movie stay on the subject matter. There is also this unnecessary short story of Austin’s love life, which takes about 10 minutes and add absolutely 0 to the movie.

There is something wrong with the people who make horror movies (excluding Peele, Ari Aster, A24 productions, and all). Or the genre might be difficult to execute, people who are in the business would be better equipped to comment on this. Given the tripe we have been served, the latter might be true. It is easy to fall into the trap of crescendo music which culminates abruptly, dark corners with a hint of something lurking behind it. The one movie which plays with shadows well would be Hereditary aided a million times by the perfect acting by Toni Collette. The fact that someone has taken a great concept of an alleged witch semi-dead wielding her powers, and made a lukewarm movie off it, is sad and disappointing. Maybe somewhere down the line someone decides to revive this movie with a remake and does it right. Also, can we please pick good concept movies executed badly and make them better? And not do the vice versa? Thanks.

The Undoing and what’s wrong with Nicole Kidman

Rating: 3 stars out of 5
Starring: Hugh Grant, Nicole Kidman, Noah Jupe, Matilda de Angelis, Donald Sutherland
Where to watch: HBO Max and JioCinema (India)
Seasons and episodes: 1 season, 6 episodes, 50 – 60 minutes per episode
To watch or not to watch: Watch it if you must. This can be a decent thing to pass time, nothing spectacular

Grace Fraser (Nicole Kidman) is a psychotherapist, married to pediatric oncologist named Jonathan Fraser (Hugh Grant) and they have a son Henry (Noah Jupe). They have, for all intents and purposes, a perfect life, with successful careers, well-behaved son, wealth, home in the Upper East Side which reduces the school run to a stroll across the Central Park. The couple has also maintained the spark in their marriage, with most of the credit given to Nicole Kidman’s apparent sex appeal. Their schedules are quite busy but they do manage to squeeze in time for their social events, including the school functions for their son (Grace’s wealthy father is a huge donor). To complete the picture of the perfect American family, Grace is a part of the fundraiser committee of mothers for school events. There she is introduced to Elena, who is a not-yet successful artist and whose son goes to the same school as Henry on scholarship. On the day of the fundraiser, things start to unravel for Grace from the time she finds a disturbed Elena crying in the bathroom. The next day Elena is found dead in her art studio, which causes an uproar with the parents of the school. Grace is unable to reach Jonathan on his cellphone for a few days and as the police discovers clues to the murderer, things start coming closer to home for Grace.

The protagonist of the series is essentially Kidman, but Hugh Grant is charm made flesh. We have seen this version of him in A Very English Scandal and The Gentlemen, but imagine if the whole personality of such a character is only charm. Impossible not to simper. He brings his inherent sarcastic and self deprecating nature to the fore, which is in a high contrast to the way upper echelons of New York is shown to behave. Then we have Matilda de Angelis and Edgar Ramirez who have more than deserved to work in a high value production. And there needs to be special recognition for Noah Jupe who is very promising.

The plot of the series feels quite similar to Big Little Lies, even when it is not. They both have affluent parents playing a major role in their kids school events, and they have high powered jobs which provides them with privilege the rest of us will need 9 lives to attain. Both series have a much less affluent female protagonist who is mysterious and trying to fit in with other mothers. Not to mention, both series are book adaptations. But while Big Little Lies did a fantastic job of balancing the drama with the thrill, The Undoing is totally lost in trying to find its vision. The makers were torn between showing privilege but not really, resulting in a murk where opportunities to show some key elements of the story were lost, while focus on glamour took center stage. Glamour is not a story and has a shelf life of approximately 12 seconds.

This brings us to the reason which inspired this post – Nicole Kidman and where acting is victimized by sexual appeal. Take Big Little Lies for example – it is centered around Kidman. She had some character traits, primary being clueless about what people closest to her are doing, ultimately being a “victim” to them. In Undoing, she is supposed to be a psychiatrist with close to 2 decades of experience and couldn’t figure out there was something wrong with her husband??? Then she is not a good psychiatrist, not earning as much, dependent on her father to provide for her, and her whole character strength falls away. The compliments paid by her well-wishers is that she is strong, beautiful, cleans up well, has expensive clothes and is successful in her chosen career. But in the series, she is totally lost, depends on her father to clean her mess, is unable to take decisions which affect her son, and as cited above, not really a good psychiatrist. This leaves us with her being pretty and attractive. This is one of the biggest reasons her husband is with her.

This is not a Kidman bashing, but this is apparent in the two roles she has done recently, which are getting attention of audience and news media alike. This peaks through in her other works like Nine Perfect Strangers and older works too. The problem is that through Kidman women are still being reduced to objects of physical appeal. Women are still not seen enough to fight their battles, but always have to be a victim and rely on the men in their lives. Their female friends are also done a disservice where their lives are around how their more popular friend is doing. Haven’t we had enough discussions on this toxicity, how unreal and harmful this portrayal can be? Is the best thing a woman can bring to the table her feminity? Is there nothing more to a female character? Are other females supposed to be in service of the victim queen? C’mon, we have moved from this discourse a decade back. Bring more to character building than just one easy thing.

Barbarian – Breaking the 4th wall differently

Rating: 4.5 stars out of 5
Starring: Georgina Campbell, Bill Skarsgard, Justin Long, Matthew Patrick Davis
Where to watch: Prime
To watch or not to watch: A must watch for all the thriller lovers, and non-thriller lovers. Will need a tolerance for violence

Tess (Georgina Campbell) has booked an AirBnB in Brightmoor, Detroit, only to find it double booked with Keith (Bill Skarsgard) already staying there. Since it was late, raining heavily and most hotels booked because of a convention, Tess decides to stay in the same house, albeit reluctantly. Keith is all thumbs trying to make Tess comfortable, going as far as to open a wine bottle only in front of her, in case she is suspicious of adulteration. They have a nice chat and the evening ends on a good note. The next day while inspecting the basement, Tess discovers a labyrinth of tunnels, a (creepy) room with a bed, video recording equipment and a bloody handprint, and encounters a vicious, ferocious creature, which looks like it slipped in the evolution after Homo erectus. In another world, AJ (Justin Long) is a struggling actor who has recently been accused of raping a fellow actor, which he vehemently denies. To pay for his legal fees, he decides to sell off his property, which is the same AirBnB.

This is a difficult review to write, difficult to know where to begin. It falls under the “Monster” category of horror movies. But, it is not the monster in the traditional sense, not even in the sense pictured in the movie. There is an adage “show, not tell” which makes a movie good. This one surpasses even that, in that that the true monster is actually to be perceived by the audience, from all the instances shown in the movie. Let me explain…

The movie has the regular tropes – a single, vulnerable girl in a house on a deserted street with a strange man who has previously portrayed predatory characters successfully. The house also has a basement, which leads to untold (perceived) horrors, with doors which have suspicious and irregular opening and locking mechanisms. The girl gets locked in the basement where the monster lives. And that’s the end of the tropes. What is truly beyond brilliance is the way the tropes have been used to blind the audience, to create a pre-conceived notion, only to be shown something so extraordinary that anyone would be horrifically surprised. This is how the movie and the director break the fourth wall. Spoilers ahead…

We have Bill Skarsgård, who is the stranger in the double-booked rental with Tess. He is terribly awkward and tried too hard to make Tess comfortable, almost as if he has no good intentions on his mind. He also has a lanky, towering visage, sunken eyes, added to he popular role of Pennywise which he portrayed with aplomb, we are predisposed to associate him with ill-will. We are inclined to believe the source of horror to be Bill Skarsgård.
Cut to: a carefree Justin Long cruising along a shore in a red convertible with top down, singing along to a beat-filled song. He gets a call to inform him that his female coworker has filed rape charges against him. He denies vehemently, and tries gather his already dwindling resources to pay for a lawyer. And, we as audience are rooting for him. After all, he is the one who played a lovesick boyfriend in Going The Distance, a sympathetic listener in He’s Just Not That Into You, he has to be the good guy.
Zach Cregger uses these already implanted notions and break the fourth wall. He is telling the user “You think Keith is evil. You think wrong”.

This goes beyond the actors, in truth. It is also questioning what we experience as regular people in our daily lives. A man with clear skin, charming smile and the gift of glib can be as big a threat, if not more, as someone who is apparently out to get us. And the female-attributed traits of acquiescence, quiet and caution are needed for survival in the world with monsters made by men. The real monsters are the men who use their powers to inflict pain on women and they end up creating bigger monsters than who they are themselves.