The Blair Witch Project

The Blair Witch Project' Premiered at Sundance 20 Years Ago

*Originally written in 2003

The wild hysteria surrounding this movie proves that the majority of the cinema going audience can still be fooled into believing anything they see or hear, or think they do, but that doesn’t change the fact that it is an extremely convincing and effective horror flick. A certain number of people on these boards (written originally on IMDb so refers to IMDb message boards), and who have reviewed Blair Witch Project HATE the film for varying, understandable reasons. When I first watched this, I watched intently, knowing exactly what the directors were playing at, and I found great enjoyment in watching the reactions of those who thought it was real. Did it unsettle me? No. Did it make me jump like the horror movies that rely on loud noises to scare (the recent Ring remake) – no. But it was the first horror movie in a very long time to put a smile on my face, and make me shiver. If you can remember back to when you played hide and seek as a kid – the feeling you had when the person looking for you was 10 feet away and coming closer – that is what this film gives, in a much greater quantity.

It is slow moving, and if you do not enjoy the pace, then you may not enjoy the film, but it compensates this by being short and concise, juxtaposed against how the 3 campers must have felt as the hours dragged by – the point I take from this is that in life we only remember a series of memories, images pasted together to make little sense, and life seems much shorter than it actually was.

The camera use and grainy feel again may be fuel for hatred or love, but it works perfectly – they don’t know what is going on, and neither do we, but that doesn’t matter because in an uncertain and threatening situation, the natural human reaction is to run or fight. Drained, exhausted, paranoid, they run. Ever had a nightmare about running away from something, but not knowing exactly what it was, or why you are running?

The best part of the movie (apart from the hilarious ‘I kicked the map into the river’ scene) is the last few minutes when Michael and Heather enter the house following Josh’s screams. This is perfectly spine tingling, and the ending is excellent as our feelings and fear somehow build and climax  in perfect harmony with what is happening on screen. The actors are clearly convincing, again look at the audience hysteria for proof, and although they are not called upon to do much, they do it well. Few great horror films come along these days, this is one- embrace it, let yourself be sucked in to feel the full effect, don’t be critical, and realize how good it is.

Let us know what you think of The Blair Witch Project in the comments!

Dead Of Night (1977)

Traumafessions :: Doomed Moviethon's Richard on Dead Of Night (1977)

This Halloween, and every Halloween, I try to watch a few portmanteau horror anthologies. Dead Of Night by Dan Curtis bares little resemblance to the Ealing film of the same name from three decades before, beyond the fact that they both offer little segments of horror and mystery for the viewer to enjoy. With only three stories and no wraparound it sets itself apart from many other anthologies, but thankfully the film still works thanks in a large part to the potency of its final piece.

It’s always interesting to me when an anthology film, ostensibly one in the horror genre, starts out with a segment which seems in no way related to horror. This is barely a Twilight Zone episode – one without an overly shocking twist or creep factor, but one which is still charming and watchable in its own right. Starring Ed Begley Jr as a car fanatic who picks up an old car to restore. The car has a bit of history, having been crashed 50 years earlier in a double death tragedy. Taking it out for its first spin, he finds himself somehow transported back to 1926 to learn the truth of the tragedy and maybe call upon some old relatives. It’s a strange, wistful tale which feels a little out of place but is still fun.

The second segment, is full blown Gothic Hammer goodness – creaking old mansions, butlers, sick busty women, and vampires. While this one does indeed have a macabre twist, you can see it a mile away if you’ve seen any horror movies of the last thirty years. It’s one of those segments which reminds me why I fell in love with Horror in the first place – even though it’s outdated and silly and not at all scary, it treats the material, and the vampire seriously – as this truly powerful and deadly threat rather than the lovelorn or easily slain anti-heroes we think of nowadays. It’s a piece which would be perfectly chilling and unforgettable for kids just dipping their toes into the genre. Plus you get Patrick McNee and Horst Bulchoz.

The final segment ‘Bobby’ is one of the most famous segments in all of anthology horror. Written by the great Richard Matheson, it’s the story of a grieving mother trying to raise her son from the dead using the dark arts. With little more than an exasperated sounding husband on the phone, it’s all about Joan Hackett and her attempts to resurrect her dead child. It’s a great performance, a chilling story, and one shot with literal thunderous aplomb – a stormy night becoming increasingly terrifying as Bobby teases his appearance, and proceeds to demand a game of hide and seek. It employs a lot of tricks to raise the hairs on the back of your neck, and it remains an effective and nasty tale.

Dead Of Night is a nifty little anthology to kick off your Halloween viewing, and a great introduction for younger viewers. Just snuggle up on the sofa and scar them for life, setting out with a gentle opener then racking up the tension until the final moments. Horror films aren’t made in this style any more – gore and swearing and sex free, but still scary enough that anyone can get a kick out of it and easily shared with younger family members who will get the thrill of the genre and hopefully want to explore further. Seasoned horror fans will enjoy the nostalgia factor even if the genre has progressed to deeper scares in the years since, but should still appreciate the dedication Curtis had for the craft.

Let us know in the comments what you think of Dead Of Night!

A Dark Song

A Dark Song - Film Hub Wales | Canolfan Ffilm Cymru

A Dark Song is a film to be nerdy about and one which embraces its nerdy ways. It would be more precise to call the film detailed, committed to being authentic. It’s something rarely seen these days, unless said detail is Product Placement. It’s also another one of those films which I was touted as being ‘the scariest of all time’ which both intrigues and worries me, because horror is subjective and because that’s usually a blurb to cover the cracks of a shitty film. Luckily, it’s not a shitty film, nor is it the scariest ever. It’s a solid, grief driven horror movie more concerned with detail, foreboding, and creating a somber tone – and it largely succeeds in delivering on each of those points.

If you weren’t aware, I always enjoy limited scope films – films with a single set or a very tiny cast or some other limitation which tends to mean filmmakers are more creative to work around those restrictions. A Dark Song is essentially a two character, or two actor movie, and for the most part is set in a single location. That location is a large Country House in the middle of nowhere, and the performers are Catherine Walker (Sophia), and Steve Oram (Joseph). Sophia is a grieving mother who has sought out the Occultist Joseph in order to perform a serious of rituals which will allow her to eventually speak to her dead son. Joseph is angry, bad-tempered, distrustful, while Sophia is guarded and defensive meaning the two clash regularly. Part of the ritual means they must live together in this house for many months, without ever leaving or making any contact with the outside world, following various increasingly difficult rites which bring forth both demons and angels to torment and test the pair. The plan is that if someone is worthy enough to complete these rites, a guardian angel will appear and grant any wish.

The film almost plays out like a Mike Leigh film – if Leigh was concerned with the Supernatural and Occult Rituals. It has that kitchen-sink realism and gritty downbeat British tone, all wrapped up in the overall theme of the lengths we go to with grief and guilt, and propelled along by depictions and discussions of the various exercises one must perform to step through the various realms of Heaven and Hell. These involve sleeping in certain places, types of mental and physical torture, drinking blood, chanting, drawing arcane symbols etc. With the fraught relationship between the pair, and the months of punishing tests, tempers fray throughout the movie and the viewer is never sure if it’s all an exploitative joke.

I’m curious to see how viewers will react to this film – horror fans and non-horror fans alike. For horror fans, you’re made to wait until closer to the end before anything overtly horror related makes an appearance while the first half of the film or so is intriguing enough to me in exploring the characters’ relationship and snippets of the history and background of what is being performed. There is a pay-off, and it mostly worked for me, but I imagine others may be frustrated by the ending. I would argue that the ending is exactly what the character needed, and for the viewer it should be the journey that matters – some questions concerning the mother and son aren’t answered, and people may feel those should have been resolved.

Oram is his usual warts and all self – he’s a physical actor who always seems to be eating or scratching or gesturing, while Walker plays the exhausted woman well. Director and writer Liam Gavin shows a genuine interest in the rituals and mythology taken from the Abramelin books and adds enough open-ended intrigue to make me want to go down the rabbit hole. It’s an assured handling of tension and of whatever scares come later, but he does seem more concerned in the build up and the lore and the emotion, than making a scary movie. It’s his movie, and that’s fine, but the marketing may suggest it’s something that it’s not. For me, it was an enjoyable and thought-provoking film of the sort which is rare these days.

Let us know in the comments what you thought of A Dark Song!

The Gift

The Gift (2015) : Movie Plot Ending Explained | This is Barry

As a seasoned Horror fan, there isn’t a lot out there which truly scares or unsettles me. We all have our thing, that type or subject which gets under our skin, be it jump scares or vampires, or spiders, or home invasion – whatever. I don’t really have a thing, I just enjoy all horror movies – even if they’re bad, there’s probably some funny kills or gore, and even if they don’t scare me, I can love them. The Gift feels more like a Thriller than an outright horror film, and there’s certainly nothing in the film or its synopsis which signalled to me that I would be scare or unsettled in any way. Nevertheless, The Gift made me very uncomfortable at certain points, which is not something I can say about even my favourite movies of the last few years.

Before we get into that – a quick plot description. Jason Bateman and his wife Rebecca Hall, have recently moved back to the suburbs due to Bateman getting a new Executive position, and allowing Hall to chill a little after some undisclosed mental issues. The seem to be back on the right path – new job, new house, a fresh start, and planning for a baby. While shopping, Bateman is approached by Joel Edgerton who claims to be an old school friend. At first not remembering, the penny eventually drops and they exchange phone numbers. Soon, Bateman and Hall begin to receive gifts and visits from Edgerton, who seems more than a little socially awkward, and these increase in frequency and oddity. Do they have a stalker? Is there something more sinister afoot? Is it all innocent?

Unfortunately, to talk about why the film excelled as instilling these levels of discomfort, we have to dip into spoiler territory – skip the rest of the review if you haven’t watched the movie. It’s quite clear early on that Bateman’s character is a bit of a dick. He seems dismissive and controlling of others, yet easily charming when he wants his own way. It’s this sly treatment of everyone around him which Bateman plays so perfectly, and which Edgerton directs so beautifully which really unnerved me. Not that this is particularly personal in any way, but to me Bateman’s character is someone I’ve seen all through life – from School with the privileged kids getting whatever they want and assuming they deserve everything and can trample over others to get it, to Office life where the smarmy insidious ass-lickers will crush those who just want to do their job and forget about it once 5pm hits. The movie does make it clear that this is not a good person, but it rarely makes it obvious if we’re meant to be rooting for him or not. As time goes on and the secrets are revealed, this contradiction becomes less jaded. If there’s one thing I would change in the movie, to even further blur lines between contradictions and blame, it’s in removing some of the more unnecessary moments concerning Gordo, such as learning about his discharge from the Army and his issues with the Law. I would have made Gordo’s character completely straight-laced and innocent, which would have meant re-writing the shock ending which makes us question whether or not a rape took place. Having Gordo potentially committing these acts makes it seem more like he had a plan all along, and therefore was just as capable of evil as Bateman, while I feel like him just being a random innocent weirdo would have been all the more potent.

The Gift is a well acted and directed thriller which has several twists and secrets which play on many tropes seen in past movies, from the likes of Fatal Attraction and Single White Female to Pacific Heights and Arlington Road. There’s always a seemingly happy couple, there’s always an intruder with an agenda who comes to disrupt this happy life, and there are always fatal consequences. The Gift is like those films but with added secrets to unravel, and with a less clearly focused single villain. It’s a film with the power to unsettle thanks to how closely it pinpoints cultural truths and norms, and one which may piss you off for all the right reasons.

Let us know what you thought of The Gift in the comments!

Inoperable

If I hadn’t established this already – I’m a big Danielle Harris fan, ever since my childhood seeing her in things like Eerie, Indiana, and Don’t Tell Mom The Babysitter’s Dead. She’s one of the best child actors ever. She has since been very prolific, more often than not appearing in horror movies and, sadly, more often than not appearing in not very good movies. Given that she usually manages to elevate whatever she’s in, I try to watch as many of her films as possible on the hope that she’ll appear in something as good as her most memorable movies.

Inoperable isn’t one of those. It is based on a fun and interesting premise though – one which was strong enough to pull me in even before I knew she was in it. Danielle Harris plays a woman who wakes up in a seemingly abandoned hospital, dressed like she is about to be operated on. With little memory of why she’s there, she wanders the halls and eventually finds other patients and staff, and catching snippets of weather reports hinting that a major storm will be passing through the area shortly. Also, she seems to keep ‘waking up’ in her car on a busy road – at first she assumes the hospital vision was just a dream, but when she keeps leaping between the two, reality and truth begin to blur.

The film mixes mystery and horror – why is any of this happening to her? How come some of the other people she meets seem to remember her, yet at other times forget? How come some of the hospital staff seem intent on murdering her? What is the significance of the weather? It’s part slasher, part Groundhog Day, part some more confused Lynchian nightmare. Unfortunately, it loses much of its early intrigue due to quite a lot of repetition and too many shots of running through corridors. There’s a good movie in year, but it’s hindered by what I can only perceive to make a lack of experience and innovation in the writing and direction and an uncertainty over how to wring the most tension and intrigue out of the premise while leading us towards a satisfying ending. Harris is fine, though spends much of the film in a confused and empty state, while the rest of the cast are adequate in mainly minor roles. It’s been at least a couple of years since I watched this so some of the finer details have probably been lost, but my most abiding memory of the viewing experience was being frustrated by the execution living up to the potential of the idea. Still, if you like films which bounce around in a non-linear way and ask mind-bending questions, or if you’re a Danielle Harris kinda person, it’s worth a go but I can’t see it earning many uber-fans.

Let us know what you thought of Inoperable in the comments!

The Wisdom Of Crocodiles

*Originally written in 2003

Decapitated Zombie Vampire Bloodbath: #101: The Wisdom of ...

A moving, beautifully told, and original vampire movie, and one which has vanished into the unknown. Jude Law, probably in his best performance, is a modern day vampire. Naturally, this being a modern movie which strives to be original, Law’s character has few of the vampire traits we would recognise; he can live in sunlight, crucifixes hold no power over him, he cannot transform into other animals, he does not have fangs. However, he is semi-immortal, and must drink human blood to survive. Indeed, it is this fact which drives the story, and it is a tragedy rather than a horror. With great acting, beautiful and subtle camera-work, a touching story and a fitting soundtrack, The Wisdom of Crocodiles bears all the markings of a good movie; unfortunately it is little known, and of course has flaws which likely hindered it from becoming more widely seen.

Law is Stephen, an attractive, clever, charming young man who happens to be a vampire. In his quest for the ‘perfect’ woman who can save him from his torturous life, a strong woman with the ability to love him, literally changing her blood. All the women he has found in the past have been scared of him, so he has killed them. When he does this, he takes a fang like object from them. In his desperate search for love he finds Anna, (Lowensohn) a beautiful young woman and they begin to fall for each other. She is enchanted by him, but is also cautious, and when he saves her from a gang of muggers she becomes scared. The truth soon comes out in parts, and all the while the police are interested in Stephen’s involvement in the death of his ex-girlfriend. The story builds to a suitable emotional climax, and never at any point can we predict what will happen.

The film failed at the box-office because it is very downbeat, and only features one big name star. The director is also little known, but shows immense talent and gets the best from the cast. Hoffman’s script has some of the best dialogue in years, clever, and full of metaphor and depth. It is definitely a film crying out to be rewatched as you will find something new with each viewing. There is imagery to suit the script, and Law’s charismatic performance could not have been bettered. Lowensohn is also very good, her intensity growing as she finds out more about Stephen. Of course, as a vampire movie people will expect blood and scares. Here there is little blood shed and few scenes of violence, though all are handled suitably, and of course it is not that kind of film. The cop storyline adds further depth, but for some the proceedings will be too slow. The film has its own pace, and rarely gets out of first gear, but this is the way it should be. An underrated film, but as Jude Law’s stardom rises hopefully he will not forget this, and his fans will discover it.

Let us know in the comments what you think of The Wisdom Of Crocodiles!

Knock Knock

I’ve mentioned it before on the blog, but I’ve had a love/hate relationship with Eli Roth. I love his enthusiasm, and the films he makes are generally made with love and have solid ideas driving them, but the execution is almost always lacking and he seems to give up part way through and inject unnecessary humour. I have nothing against humour in horror, but his always falls flat. Knock Knock is a remake of the notorious, yet little known 70s exploitation film Death Game – but is it a film which allows Roth’s strengths to overcome his weaknesses?

The film begins promisingly enough – Reeves is playing a wealthy husband and father who lives in a post modern glacial home. One night, while his family is out of town, two unfathomably sexy young women knock knock at his door claiming to need help finding a party. One thing leads to another and before long we are treated to a sleazy threesome. In true Bunuel style, the girls don’t seem willing, or know how to leave – all the more troubling when neighbour Colleen Camp stops by disapprovingly and when the girls destroy some artwork in the house. As matters progress, the sleaze and nonsense increase to silly levels.

Although that promising start eventually dissipates into a watered down tables turned version of Funny Games, with a lot less to say, it’s still stupidly watchable in the same way most exploitation movies are. The cast is a lot of fun, even if it is a little cringe-inducing seeing some of the things Reeves gets up to in the movie. There are many moments when the girls’ plan could have been foiled or come crumbling down, but silly contrived circumstance gets in the way. I’m not sure what precisely the film is trying to say, but it comes off as both hating men and women equally while still glamourizing the hollow and violent nature of both sides. It doesn’t come close to being a horror movie, and it’s not particularly funny to be considered a comedy – exploitation and a mish mash of genre tropes mean it’s more like a sleazy morality tale where the lesson seems to be ‘Don’t Talk To Strangers’. Still, for all its faults, its more enjoyable than a lot of the po-faced horror out there, and it’s brief enough that you’re not sacrificing much by giving it your time.

Let us know in the comments what you think of Knock Knock!

Zombieland

Ever since the trio of Shaun Of The Dead, Dawn Of The Dead Remake, and 28 Days Later, zombies have seen a resurgence in media that hasn’t really gone away since. We’ve had a number of big budget movies and shows, and an even larger number of low budget and indie titles. Zombieland falls into the former category, and even though I’m a self-confessed zombie and horror junkie I didn’t get around to watching it until 2017. So, how does it fare against the myriad other horror comedy crossovers?

It fairs quite well. Make no mistake – I’m no great fan of Abigail Breslin, Emma Stone, or Jesse Eisenberg but none of them managed to irritate me during the course of the movie, and everything which the cast and crew attempted, worked amicably. There are laughs, both visceral and script based, the gore isn’t overloaded so as to put of sensitive non-horror fans yet present enough and wrapped up in entertaining action to appease those who like a bit of red on them.

The story and structure is all quite tongue in cheek – both mocking and paying skewed reverence to the genre. There has been an outbreak which has led to zombies everywhere, and one geek loner is travelling through the US and surviving following his self-made rules. As any zombie fan will attest – we all have our own rules for surviving our own imagined apocalypse. Along the way he meets Woody Harrelson’s character – a piss-take composite of several prior Harrelson creations and the conniving sisters played by Stone and Breslin. Part Road movie, part Crime caper, part comedy horror, the disparate parts rarely feel like they are pulling in opposing directions and the highlights are of course the Bill Murray cameo sequence and the finale set in an Amusement Park. If you know me, you’ll know I love movies set around or involving Amusement or Theme Parks.

At the time of writing, I haven’t yet watched the sequel but based upon how much I enjoyed this one I imagine it won’t be long before I catch up to it. Let us know in the comments what you think of Zombieland!

Pandorum

Horror movies set in space inevitably draw comparisons to the Alien Franchise – what else is there to compare to? Jason X? Somewhere between that zenith and nadir lies everything else. It’s a sub-genre or setting which has seen some resurgence in the last decade, but one which nevertheless feels underused. I would assume the very nature of the setting would send budgets skyrocketing. Pandorum is somewhere closer to Event Horizon on the scale and like that 90’s cult hit it raises a lot of ideas and questions, yet tends to frustrate more often than it delights.

Pandorum is a film which ultimately frustrates more than it delights. While it seems to know what it wants to be, the clashing of genres and ideas along with a few unusual choices, prevent the film from being entirely coherent and enjoyable. Starting off with the casting, we have Dennis Quaid – an everyman actor who most wouldn’t consider to be an A-Lister, but someone who has plenty of hits under his belt and is respected. Playing alongside him is Ben Foster, who I consider to be the finest actor of his generation yet seems fated to never break through to the mainstream or critical recognition he deserves. The film largely follows this pair for the bulk of the film, with a couple of curious cameos to keep things from being too stilted. Both actors carry the film well, but based on their names alone it would be difficult to pull in a huge audience.

Looking next at the story – you’d be forgiven for thinking this is an all out space horror movie, with scares, monsters, action – but it’s both more claustrophobic and appeals to the internal rather than the visceral. There is action, but it’s spread unevenly between bouts of dialogue, philosophy, and procedure – there is horror, but it’s closely knit to those moments of action. It’s part survival, part mystery, and I wasn’t convinced that the two mesh successfully. I’m fully prepared to stand in the minority on this and I know there will be plenty of dedicated fans after watching – for me, I wanted a little more tension in both the survival and action aspects. The script has a lot to say, but traps its more interesting aspects under what is ultimately an unsatisfying story more dependent on its central twist. Again, it’s difficult to see what sort of audience the film was meant to draw.

Where the film does mostly succeed is in its interior designs – the craft itself is slimy and dark, labyrinthine, and filled with endless corridors and connecting pits and crawlspaces. Director Christian Alvart does his best work in the scenes of our survivors traversing the giant ship in various fetch quests, allowing the sense of mammoth scale to collide with the ironic claustrophobia of being alone. Effects wise – it’s not a huge budget film, but both CG, practical, and make-up are good for what they could achieve.

While I don’t think the movie is ‘good’, I don’t believe it deserved the critical and commercial drubbing it received. It’s fine as a cult film and it’s strong enough that it has and should continue to find fans – at the very least it should have made back its budget, but whether or not it is deserving of the rumoured sequels or prequels I’ll leave up to you. It’s another interesting space-horror film which doesn’t hit the mark, but which is worth catching for Sci-Fi fans still hoping to fill that post-Alien, post-Pitch Black void.

Let us know in the comments what you think of Pandorum!

Girls Against Boys

I know, I’m slacking with the movie reviews at the moment. Which is only shooting myself in the foot as those were always what gave me the most traffic when I started the blog. It’s just that, recently, the music posts are taking my interest and they’re much easier to write. With the music ones, I’m just listening and typing, while the movie reviews I put 5% more effort into. Of course, I’m still posting all of the lists and writing a lot in the background which is zapping my creative juices. Having said that, I do have a tonne of old movie reviews written in the early 2000s that I haven’t yet published here – they’re not the most enlightening and I can’t be arsed updating them – so catch#22 – do I bother posting them and risk ridicule, or take the time and effort to update them when I’m a lazy bugger? Having said that, I also have a load of less old album reviews which I could be posting too. For whatever reason, I just keep pumping out new crap instead of old.

Girls Against Boys then. Yes, this is a movie review for anyone who hasn’t been scared off by that unrelated intro. I’m planning to post a few more movie reviews, that’s all I’m saying. I can’t recall where I first heard about Girls Against Boys, but it had been on my radar for a few years. Starring Danielle Panabaker (possibly why it was on my radar) as Shae, a Student who is having a relationship with an older, married man. When he scorns her, she drowns her sorrows at a bar and meets colleague Lu and bunch of standard Bro scumbags. One of the scumbags doesn’t take no for an answer and rapes Shae. If there’s a common thread running through the film, it’s that people are scumbags – men, women, single, married, young, old. I’m sure that’s not the intent and that the film was designed to be an empowering rape revenge feminist film, but the message is muddied to prevent it from being meaningful.

The film’s central problem doesn’t lie in the handling of the sexual assault, or the subsequent violence, but more in the handling of the two protagonists. Lu is clearly unhinged from the beginning but rather than being some powerful avenging angel, she instead devolves into a crazy white woman trope – an obsessive just as evil as the clueless men she kills, except more calculating. She comes across as someone who will attack at the merest sniff of male sexuality; yes, those she attacks are, at best assholes with boners and at worst, serial rapists, but the fact that she attacks with little provocation in some cases, and ultimately that she is revealed to want Shae for herself paints her as just another collection of tropes shoved inside an alluring body. Shae seems a little to easily led along the path of destruction – from the outside I can understand the desire for revenge, but there is little inner anguish or display of such drive or emotion. Neither actress is at fault here, rather the writing and direction – muddled when it should have been clear, and focused on violence instead of turmoil. The flawed cherry on top is the nailed on ‘shock’ ending which closes the film suggesting Shae is now the obsessed, or the possessed, even though she has no reason to be. It’s a tacky, groundless ending which serves no purpose other than to further muddy those already churning waters.

Elsewhere the movie works. As mentioned, the two leads are captivating while the assortment of side characters play up to their roles as Type A to Type Z scumbags efficiently. There are a couple of exceptions to the scumbag rule – again no complaints with the performances, and one character does elicit a drop or two of sympathy. Director Austin Chick doesn’t dwell on the sexual assault – this is in no way in the same league as something like Revenge or I Spit On Your Grave in terms of graphic depictions or exploitation which makes the film all the more frustrating – this could have been a more powerful piece dealing with how women are viewed in society, with how such crimes are investigated or ignored, and how the victim is often made to feel guilty or forced into finding justice outside of the law. Instead it feels like Single White Female for a new generation, but without the conviction or smarts to decide what it wants to be or say.

Let us know in the comments what you think of Girls Against Boys!