Infested (2023)

Original Title: Vermines

Director: Sébastien Vanicek

Starring: Théo Christine, Sofia Lesaffre, Jérôme Niel

Residents of a rundown French apartment building battle against an army of deadly, rapidly reproducing spiders.

I have to mention this at the beginning of this review: if you have Arachnophobia, I definitely don’t recommend ‘Infested’. Ever since I was bitten by a spider a while ago and experienced the worst pain ever, I hate spiders, so I don’t know why I still watch movies about spiders…

Kaleb lives in a run-down apartment building. He has a history of theft and dealing with drugs, but now he makes an honest living selling shoes. He collects exotic pets, which he keeps in his room. One day he buys a small spider. From the film’s opening scene, we know this is no ordinary spider, so this creates nice tension.

When the spider gets out of the temporary box Kaleb keeps him in, all hell is about to break loose in the building as the spider multiplies, and grows. (No spider on earth can reproduce or grow at the rate the spiders in this film do, so yeah, it is exaggerated for the sake of suspense. Just don’t take it too seriously and you’ll have a jolly good time.)

Well, erm, I don’t think “jolly good time” is the correct term to use here. Honestly, some of the scenes were so suspenseful that I could hardly stand it! The director understands (our) fear. He knows what creeps us out and the tension gets under your skin. ‘Infested’ is one of the most suspenseful spider movies I’ve seen!

If you think the spider effects look realistic, this is because 200 real spiders were used for the film! Sure enough, some spiders were CGI, but fact remains there were actual spiders on set for the actors to interact with. This added to the realism of the film.

Although this is not a gory film, this will be a difficult watch for some viewers. As mentioned, if you suffer from Arachnophobia or have a distinct dislike in creepy crawlies, it might be best to avoid ‘Infested’. As the film progresses, there are more and more spiders and the film becomes incredibly tense. This is a very well made film, and I enjoyed the fact the film also concentrated on the characters, allowing us to root for them. Despite being exaggerated towards the end, this is still one of the best spider movies out there. Watch it if you dare!!

‘Infested’ received award nominations for Best Visual Effects, Best First Film, Best Director, and won Best Picture at Fantastic Fest.

In French.

Would I watch it again? Yes.

Reservoir Dogs (1992)

Director: Quentin Tarantino

Starring: Harvey Keitel, Tim Roth, Michael Madsen

When a simple jewelry heist goes horribly wrong, the surviving criminals begin to suspect that one of them is a police informant.

I know I’m in the vast minority here – and you can crucify me for saying this – but I hated this movie. Quintin Tarantino’s movies require an acquired taste, and I guess I haven’t acquired that taste yet. I found this utterly boring and quite annoying, actually.

So, most of the film is set in a warehouse. The Reservoir Dogs are a bunch of thieves. A Heist – which is not shown to the audience – went wrong, and now the thieves are trying to figure out which one of them is the “rat”, who alerted the cops. They suspect one of them is an undercover cop, so the film sees the men talking, yelling, swearing, talking, yelling, swearing, talking, yelling, swearing…oh, whatever, I hated this! I swear, almost the entire movie revolved around these men arguing about who the rat is!! Ugh, enough already; this is so not my kind of entertainment!!

I mean, need I say more? There was nothing else happening here, and very little was actually shown to the audience. For most parts, the viewer had to envision what happened. I quickly loose interest in movies with too much dialogue. Add a couple of swear words in every single sentence and I’m tempted to hit the STOP button on my remote.

When they had that 5-minute conversation in the beginning of the movie about tipping in a restaurant, I should have stopped already. I don’t normally enjoy neo-noir crime movies. Did I enjoy ‘Reservoir Dogs’? Well, the answer to this is obvious: it’s a resounding NO!!

‘Reservoir Dogs’ received 36 award nominations, winning 13.

Would I watch it again? NO.

The Sting (1973)

Director: George Roy Hill

Starring: Paul Newman, Robert Redford, Robert Shaw

I’m beginning to think there’s something wrong with the way I view (older) films. ‘The Sting’ is yet another highly rated movie I found slow and boring. Maybe its just that older movies were generally slower moving than most of today’s films; I don’t know. I suppose films were more about character development back then, and that we – as the newer generation – prefer films to move along at a faster pace. So, yeah, maybe the problem does lie with me. I simply did not find this movie entertaining – or interesting enough – for my liking.

The moment the film started with that instantly recognizable theme music that put a smile on my face, I honestly believed I was going to love this movie. Turns out the best thing about the movie (for me) was just that theme music. Had the film been about 25 to 30 minutes shorter, I might even have enjoyed it more.

The film is about con artist Johnny Hooker (Robert Redford) who attaches no value to money. He spends it just as fast as he steals it. Easy come, easy go. When his partner Luther is killed by crime boss Lonnie Donnegan’s men, Johnny teams up with another con artist, Henry Gondorff (Paul Newman), to take down Lonnie. Corrupt police lieutenant William Snyder (Charles Durning) is also after Lonnie, and Johnny.

Together with a handful of con artists, Johnny and Henry certainly went to quite an elaborate set-up to get to Lonnie. It seemed a bit excessive for them to go to such great lengths when they had more than enough opportunity to capture him – without all their mumbo jumbo make-believe efforts. I just didn’t buy it.

Halfway into the movie I became bored and started watching the clock. This might be a high-rated, multi-award winning movie, but it is so not my kind of movie. I couldn’t get into its premise or the characters. Being con artists, I didn’t really root for them and never viewed them as protagonists.

‘The Sting’ won 7 Oscars: Best Picture, Best Director, Best Screenplay, Best Art Direction-Set Decoration, Best Costume Design, Best Editing, Best Original Score. Interestingly, I seem to agree with these nominations, but as a whole I did not enjoy the movie.

At the time of release the film earned $156 million on a budget of $5.5 million. It was followed by a sequel in 1983.

Would I watch it again? No.

The Wretched (2019)

Directors: Brett Pierce, Drew T. Pierce

Starring: John-Paul Howard, Piper Curda, Jamison Jones

A defiant teenage boy, struggling with his parents’ imminent divorce, faces off with a thousand year-old witch, who is living beneath the skin of and posing as the woman next door.

Although the film’s logline mentions a witch, this antagonist has all the traits of a demon, and I will therefore view and review ‘The Wretched’ as a possession movie.

With so many possession movies out there, I need a movie of the genre to have a quality that sets it apart from the pack. There are so many cliched possession movies out there that it becomes a blur when I try to think of some of them.

Think 2023’s ‘When Evil Lurks’. This film dared to go beyond familiar ground and presented us with an utterly disturbing possession movie unlike I’ve seen in a while. ‘The Wretched’, for me, was just another possession movie in the myriad of movies in the genre. Having said that, ‘The Wretched’ is a well made movie and it is a good one. I just don’t know if I will remember this in time, because there was nothing uniquely memorable here.

When a young woman, Abbie, hits a buck on her way home from the forest, she takes it home to slaughter and to “teach her son meat doesn’t necessarily come from the grocery store shelf”. That night a creature that crawled out of the buck consumes Abbie, and she becomes possessed. Well, maybe not possessed in the true sense; possibly the witch entered her body and now acted as Abbie – which is all the same as possession, anyway.

Our hero is teenager Ben, who lives with his Dad, Liam. Liam works at the marina, and offered Ben a job. Liam and Ben are Abbie’s neighbours, and soon Ben becomes suspicious of the goings-on at the house next door.

There’s some family drama and a few twists. There are some creepy and scary moments. But ultimately ‘The Wretched’ was just another possession movie for me. I also didn’t find Ben a strong enough character (or actor) as the protagonist. And then there’s Mallory who also works at the marina and sort of became an interest (I hesitate saying love interest) to Ben. I couldn’t really place this character, who also, wasn’t really a strong enough character.

The make-up and contortion effects were excellent, and definitely the film’s highlight. ‘The Wretched’ is still worth a watch if you’re into the genre, but for me this is going to be forgettable.

Would I watch it again? No.

The Swimmer (1968)

Directors: Frank Perry, Sydney Pollack

Starring: Burt Lancaster, Janet Landgard, Janice Rule

A man spends a summer day swimming as many pools as he can all over a quiet suburban town.

In a plush neighbourhood where everyone has sparkling beautiful pools, Ned Merrill (Burt Lancaster) impulsively decides to ‘swim’ home – as a matter of speaking, off course. The idea is to go to every house on his way home and swim in their pool.

As he does so, we meet many characters along the way. With each character, we learn more about Ned, who he is, and who he might have been once. At first glance, he comes across as a happily married family man, who looks after himself. He is fit and athletic and in excellent shape for his age. With every character, though, we realize there is more here than the carefree façade.

There are also many heartaches along the way, which in fact increases as he gets closer to home. Once he gets home, we finally discover the truth behind the man. The film does not spoon feed the audience, so you have to read between the lines to understand the situation Ned is in. The ending was heartbreaking in many ways.

But let’s talk about Burt Lancaster. Man, he was perfectly cast in this role. With his great physique and those muscular long legs, he was the perfect candidate to portray Ned. Hell, this man is absolutely yummy! From beginning to end he wears nothing but tight swim trunks – well, and nothing at one stage! He is a feast to the eyes and the film is worth watching just to drool over that body!

Would I watch it again? Yes!

Pulp Fiction (1994)

Director: Quentin Tarantino

Starring: John Travolta, Uma Thurman, Samuel L. Jackson

The lives of two mob hitmen, a boxer, a gangster and his wife, and a pair of diner bandits intertwine in four tales of violence and redemption.

We (thankfully) all view movies very differently and have our own perceptions and opinions. Fact remains, when we watch a movie, we want to be entertained. Take this highly acclaimed, multi-award winning movie for instance: I hated it. I know I’m in the vast minority here, but I was not entertained and I couldn’t wait for the credits to roll. My main issue with ‘Pulp Fiction’ is WHAT THE BLOODY HELL WAS IT ABOUT???

The film plays like an anthology, but its not. It plays like a non-linear film, but its not entirely. The scenes are just scrambled to confuse the hell out of the viewer, and hoping for it to all make sense in the end. To a certain extent (but not entirely) it did link up in the end when the opening scene connected with the ending, but to sit through 154 minutes watching a bunch of dysfunctional characters with questionable actions just for the final 10 minutes to serve as conclusion, is not my idea of being entertained.

Ok, so what was the movie about? That’s the thing; I just don’t know! It was about drugs, that I do know. Plenty of it. So, its about doing drugs, smoking and (senseless) chit-chatting…did I miss something? What’s the story? Some scenes were so dragged out; if you were to get up and pour yourself a drink, you wouldn’t miss a darn thing. There was nothing to miss. There was so much dialogue in this movie, you could easily do whatever you wanted to and just listen to the movie – like a radio show. Ask me in a month what the movie is about and I’d probably have forgotten that I’ve actually watched it! Yawn, yawn, yawn… This highly acclaimed movie bored me to death.

I suppose the antagonist was Marsellus, but its hard to tell. There are no protagonists and no-one I rooted for. I didn’t care about any of the characters. My favourite character – if I had to pick one – was Jules Winnfield, played by Samuel L Jackson. Of all the actors I could understand him the best (and I don’t mean his character actions, I mean I could clearly HEAR what he was saying), and he saved the day in the end, so yeah, he was my favourite.

The film’s narrative might be described as ‘unique’, but I found it confusing as hell and completely unnecessary. And why do Quentin Tarantino insist on throwing around the ‘nigger’ word in his films as much as he does? I hate that! I could barely sit through this. The all-star cast couldn’t even save it for me – not even Bruce Willis (although it was nice seeing him in ALL his glory!!)

‘Pulp Fiction’ earned nearly $214 million on a small budget of only $8 million (Why??? I seriously missed something!). The film received 141 award nominations, winning 69 including an Oscar for Best Screenplay. It also received Oscar nominations for Best Picture, Best Lead Actor, Best Supporting Actor, Best Supporting Actress, Best Director, and Best Editing. (Ok, I definitely missed something here…!)

Would I watch it again? No. No. No. And no.

976-Evil (1988)

Director: Robert Englund

Starring: Stephen Geoffreys, Patrick O’Bryan, Jim Metzler

People who dial 976-EVIL receive supernatural powers and turn into satanic killers. When Spike dialed 976-EVIL, he knew it was an expensive toll call, but he didn’t know that he’d have to pay for it with his soul.

I must be honest, I initially had a difficult time understanding what the movie was about. The film’s first few moments had several random events that seemed unrelated, and characters I couldn’t fully grasp. I didn’t even realize Spike was supposed to be the film’s protagonist.

During the first half an hour or so, there are quite a few characters who doesn’t contribute to the film in any way and might as well have been eliminated in the final cut. Even some of the events could have been cut. The film only starts making some sort of sense once Spike’s cousin Hoax becomes possessed after dialing 976-Evil, a service that reads callers their horoscope and then somehow gives them powers. I also never realized Hoax would become the film’s antagonist.

Hoax was being bullied at school and I did like the fact he managed to get his revenge on the bullies. Although the film did get better after the halfway mark, this is by all means still a B-movie. For a protagonist, I must say Spike was absent for far too long during the second act.

Director Robert England obviously wanted a ‘Nightmare on Elm Street’ feel to the movie, but in my opinion he did not succeed, although some moments were indeed nightmarish in true Elm Street style. The effects were cheap, but hey, so many of the 80’s horror movies had cheap effects and they were great! Although the effects here are not all that great, it also wasn’t all that bad and I enjoyed the climax.

Would I watch it again? If I do, I think I’d skip the first few minutes.

The 400 Blows (1959)

Director: François Truffaut

Starring: Jean-Pierre Léaud, Albert Rémy, Claire Maurier

A young boy, left without attention, delves into a life of petty crime.

It’s very rare for me to not make a single note during a film’s first 30 minutes. Fact is, there simply was nothing interesting happening, or anything that excited me. For most of these first 30 minutes we watch kids in a classroom. They occasionally cut to show us the home environment of young Antoine Doinel.

At first Antoine’s Dad comes across as a really likeable and cool guy, while his mother is …well, the opposite. During the course of the movie their character actions are reversed, so in that sense I suppose it was good character development. As for Antoine, his character pretty much remained the same throughout the entire movie. Despite what he was going through – and this might sound cruel and insensitive – I didn’t find myself rooting for him. He came across as a trouble maker, and appeared to be enjoying it.

When Antoine hears his parents fight over him one night, he decides to run away, and skips school. Believing school to be a waste of time, he wants to start working to earn a living, but in the meantime he has to steal to get by. Off course, this gets him into a lot of trouble.

Yawn! ‘The 400 Blows’ is an insanely slow paced movie and there truly never is anything interesting happening. The synopsis to this film doesn’t even sound interesting, and the only reason I decided to watch it, is because of its high acclaim. Critics, it seems, do enjoy slow and boring movies. This has been proven to me so many times before. Maybe I just don’t see the significance of the film, but when I watch a movie I want to be entertained. With ‘The 400 Blows’ I was not entertained; I was bored to death. In fact, this is one of the most boring movies I’ve seen in a while.

‘The 400 Blows’ received an Oscar nomination for Best Screenplay (oh, whatever, yawn…)

In French.

Would I watch it again? Absolutely not.

Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels (1998)

Director: Guy Ritchie

Starring: Jason Flemyng, Dexter Fletcher, Nick Moran, Jason Statham

Eddy persuades his three pals to pool money for a vital poker game against a powerful local mobster, Hatchet Harry. Eddy loses, after which Harry gives him a week to pay back 500,000 pounds.

I know I’m in the minority here, but I did not like this film. Maybe this is mainly due to the fact I can’t relate to British humour. And when they start swearing in that English accent and it becomes “fooking this” and “fooking that”, I cringe.

Let me get this straight: ‘Lock, stock and two smoking barrels’ is a movie about con artists, and they play poker. When one of them takes a risky bet and loses, he has one week to pay back the money. The film takes a look at the events of that week. Did I find it interesting? Between all the foul language, confusing character actions and hard to understand English accents and lingo, I couldn’t really tell. I believe I was just lost.

Yes, I did find some of the dialogue funny . Yes, there were a few good scenes. But no, the story nor the characters interested me. Off course I enjoyed Guy Ritchie’s unique style, but as a whole this was just not my kind of film. To put it bluntly, I got bored. Yup, I said it. I film referred to as “one of the most entertaining films ever made” bored me, and I was not all that entertained.

And why would tough guy Hatchet Harry just happen to have a huge black dildo on his desk? Make no mistake, I’m not judging, but it just felt like they were trying too hard to be funny, and resulted in slapstick. Just my opinion. And this is just one example. On the subject of trying so hard to be funny, they definitely overdid it on the dialogue… Oh, call me a grump already; I did not like this picture!

At the box office, ‘Lock, stock and two smoking barrels’ earned $28.4 million on a small $1.4 million budget.

Would I watch it again? No.

La Haine (1995)

Director: Mathieu Kassovitz

Starring: Vincent Cassel, Hubert Koundé, Saïd Taghmaoui

24 hours in the lives of three young men in the French suburbs the day after a violent riot.

‘La Haine’ is yet another highly acclaimed film I found pointless and quite boring, actually. The synopsis tells us the film is about a day in the lives of three men after a riot. Unfortunately, I found it neither eventful nor interesting.

Police brutality in which a teen, Abdel, was severely beaten sparked riots by youths. During the riots, a policeman lost his gun, and was found by Vinz. The film then shows us a day in the lives of three friends Vinz, Saïd, and Hubert. These three along with some of their friends are a bunch of disrespectful trouble makers – kids I didn’t care about and therefore didn’t root for any of them. They are unpleasant, foul-mouthed, unsavoury characters. Every single character was just bad, and with no protagonists, how could I possibly enjoy this movie?

The film finds any excuse to make up time without anything of interest happening. At times it felt like there was no script; as if the cameras were simply left rolling while the actors went about their day. It was just pointless chatter. There’s no character development whatsoever. And why is the film in black and white?

Reading up on the film after watching it, it is said the film was shot while rioting still continued and filming took place in the ‘war zone’. It also states the following: ‘Some of the actors were not professionals and the film includes many situations that were based on real events.‘ Interestingly, the main actors used their real names in the film, as if it was a documentary.

‘La Haine’ is a film that will appeal to and resonate with the French. For someone like me who can’t attach any value to the events or characters and simply wanted to be entertained, I’m sorry to say I wasn’t and this was not a pleasant viewing experience. The events are no doubt relevant to the French and considering the circumstances under which the film was made, I can – to a certain extent – understand why some would refer to ‘La Haine’ as a masterpiece.

As for me, I hated it. The film’s title summarizes my feelings towards the movie. I hated every moment, and found it one of the most pointless films I’ve seen in a while.

‘La Haine’ received 23 award nominations, winning 8 including Best Foreign-Language Film, Best Director, Best Film, Best Editing and Best Producer.

In French.

Would I watch it again? Ugh, just no!