EVERYTHING OLD IS NEW AGAIN, Vol. 40 - June 2022

Everything Old Is New Again

Vol. 40 - June 2022

By “Doc” Hunter Bush, podcast czar

Howdy one and all, and welcome to Everything Old Is New Again - the monthly column spotlighting Remakes, Adaptations and Legacy Sequels coming to screens great and small in the ensuing month. If you’re unfamiliar with how it works: I will seek out available trailers & clips for relevant projects, give them a watch, and deliver to you a short breakdown of what the trailer looks and feels like, as well as what I know (if anything) about the original source material for the project. And if that weren’t enough, down near the bottom of the column I’ll spotlight a thing or two that aren’t new but still meet EOINA criteria, which I personally recommend.

Horoscopes are fun, right? I’d just like to share the gist of one I read this week. It essentially said “boy howdy, you sure are busy with many exciting things and you’re going to be very happy BUT you’re also gonna be exhausted and you better get used to it”. It’s not wrong, either. There are quite a few irons in my personal fire, but I’ll always put things on the back burner to fire off another EOINA for y’all.

So keep your eyes on MovieJawn, our Podcast Network, and our Patreon in the future for lots of fun stuff coming, but without further ado: let’s talk movies!

<>

PREMIERES

All the new projects coming to screens big and small

June 8th:

Ms. Marvel (6 episode weekly series)

Where: Disney+

Based on the Marvel Comics character created in 2014, Ms. Marvel follows a teenage girl from New Jersey as she discovers she has super powers and will definitely have ties to the larger Marvel Cinematic Universe. I’ve been very upfront with my continued exhaustion at the neverending onslaught of Marvel projects, and to be honest, most of the MCU miniseries output I’ve seen has been pretty underwhelming, serving mostly to get things in place for the next movie (rather than, y’know, developing things organically and over time). But (and there’s always a but) a LOT of Ms. Marvel looks fun. In general the small-scale-ness of Spider-Man has been the stuff that has most reliably worked for me and Ms. Marvel has lots of that. The similarities are there: ostensibly normal high schoolers discovering they have superpowers and trying to balance these two sides of their lives, etc. But Ms. Marvel has a fresh perspective: Kamala Khan (Iman Vellani), a Pakistani American Muslim girl from Jersey City, NJ. who has a family.

You rarely get a female POV in superhero stories, and almost never that of a young girl. DC’s Wonder Woman is not only a living goddess, but a grown woman before her super adventuring begins, while Marvel’s Captain Marvel is an alien, a military pilot and, yes, a grown up. Etc., Etc. Even when characters are dubiously young, they’re usually not kids, so that right away is interesting. The family aspect is likewise unique, as Peter Parker (the closest touch point) is famously an orphan raised by his aunt. Then there’s the tone, which is silly and comics-centric, with word balloons and a general doodling-on-your-binder aesthetic throughout the whole trailer. This matches the tone and feel of Kamala’s comics pretty perfectly from what I remember and, as seen in Into the Spider-Verse, can work incredibly well without removing emotional weight or the feeling of danger.

What doesn’t thrill me is the obligatory It’s All Connected, MCU-ness of it all. Like, obviously this is connected to the greater Marvel Universe; Kamala is obsessed with the Avengers and Captain Marvel, that’s not what bugs me. What I could do without is that it seems like some government types (S.H.I.E.L.D. perhaps?) are going to show up and Kamala will be thrown into a grander scale adventure. I personally don’t need that. Not right away. I’d prefer to see Kamala doing the old school Spider-Man thing of: dealing with threats to her immediate area and then disappearing into obscurity to maintain her secret identity and protect her friends and her lifestyle. Of course, eventually she should join the Avengers and have all kinds of large-scale adventures, but getting to see that escalation is what works better for me.

I’ll give at least some of Ms. Marvel a look and keep my fingers crossed that this time they get the mini series format right and make something that works. But I’m not holding my breath.

9th:

Jurassic World Dominion (dir. Colin Trevorrow)

Where: in theaters

I have not been a very huge supporter of these latest Jurassic Park films. The first one felt too much like a copy of the original for me, the second had more unique-feeling moments and concepts but seemed to abandon them faster than a tender-fingered chef tosses a hot potato, and they both were just full of the same soulless, boring, unengaging CGI dinosaurs. So I’m not the best person to seek an unbiased opinion on this latest entry. I will say however, that the trailer for Dominion at bare minimum seems to finally be expanding on something rather than merely copying it. In 1993, Stephen Spielberg (with screenwriter David Koepp) adapted Michael Crichton’s 1990 story of genetic engineering unlocking dinosaur DNA for fun and profit and the film, unlike the titular Park, was actually both fun and profitable and everyone, include Stephen Spielberg hisowndamnself tried to recapture that specific magical feeling and (importantly) failed. Your mileage may vary but there’s nothing really memorable or impactful in any of the expanded JP filmography that resonates the same way that most moments from the original did. Jump to 2015 and Colin Trevorrow’s requel (the term for a where it’s a same-enough story to refamiliarize new viewers but not a full-on remake) and, well, my issues are as stated above.

But, as I said: Dominion seems like it’s finally using its strengths in smart ways. Y’know what’s completely impractical to try to do with (infinitely superior) practical effects dinosaurs? A large-scale, dinosaurs-overruning-the-globe story. In this way, tackling something of this scope, the CGI dinosaurs are totally justified. I also, personally, liked that there’s not only at least one feathered dinosaur, but it’s an aquatic one? Nice. I still have zero interest in this franchise currently, it’s not adding anything meaningful to my enjoyment of the original, only treading the same ground, a perpetual motion machine that exists only to keep on existing (and thus collect money).

It’s cool, not everything has to be for me.

17th:

Lightyear (dir. Angus MacLane)

Where: in theaters

In 1995, Toy Story introduced us to Woody, an old-fashioned pull-string, soft-body generic cowboy toy and his shiny new rival Buzz Lightyear, an aggressive plastic, action franchise toy. The differences between the two toys physically underlines the differences between the eras from which they came, which underlines the theme of (I believe) the entire Toy Story franchise: change. Now 27 years later, we’re getting to experience what I would have naturally assumed would be the franchise adventures of this spaceman toy. But y’all know what they say about assuming:

So …yeah… This is the real guy? That the toy? Is based on? Let’s unpack that. Though I didn’t catch a specific year in the trailer, Buzz (voiced by the above Chris Evans) mentions “...star date 3901.” and they clearly have much more advanced space exploration technology than we do now, currently, in real life, ok? Keep that in mind. In this trailer Buzz is launched into space, thru a man-made (or at least not naturally-occuring) transportation gate of some kind and ends up 62 years, 7 months, and 5 days into the future where there are both robots and aliens - the robots might be made by the aliens or may in fact be the alien life forms, it’s unclear (also Zurg, Lightyear’s nemesis from all other BL appearances, is also present but I’m not sure if he’s a robot or a biological entity anyway). Anyway, presumably Buzz will spend the film attempting to return to his own time.

So this is supposedly the story of the real guy that the toy is based on? Yet it clearly takes place in a technologically advanced future? But it must have happened long enough ago that the story has been turned into a toy line and whatever else by 1995? That’s …VERY confusing. And stupid. And that’s all I can think about when I watch the trailer! But. That aside, this looks kind of fun; just a sci-fi action adventure yarn with some comedy and, as an added bonus: not voiced by Tim Allen. Chris Evans is definitely a come-up in that regard. He played Captain America for Pete’s sake! Bearer of America’s ass! Tim Allen meanwhile, is just an ass.

Not going to theaters for this but will check in when it hits streaming.

24th:

The Black Phone (dir. Scott Derrickson)

Where: in theaters

Based on a short story from supernatural horror author Joe Hill (Horns, NOS4A2), this looks quite good. If I have one complaint (which may not end up being the case) the trailer sure feels like it’s giving away the whole damn movie, don’t it? We see a young boy named Finney (Mason Thames) being abducted by a serial kidnapper called the Grabber (Ethan Hawke) - who has a whole magician aesthetic and at home wears a weird sort of comedy/tragedy mask (?) - and waking up trapped in a basement with a disconnected black phone. The phone allows him to speak to the Grabber’s previous (now dead) victims, who are attempting to prepare him for a daring escape. Meanwhile, Finney’s sister Gwen (Madeleine McGraw) is being guided by psychic dreams to where Finney is being held.

The fact that both the kids have some kind of psychic, supernatural abilities leads me to believe that it’s a family trait and not some kind of random happenstance. It would be pretty cool if there was a twist that this Grabber was somehow doing the lord’s work, eliminating evil psychic children, but that would be pretty grim I guess. But as I said, the trailer seems to be giving me the whole layout of the film. Of course, I don’t know how everything ultimately shakes out, but it feels like I have a decent idea.

I seem to remember an earlier trailer that let the reveal that the phone isn’t connected to anything, and thus that the ringing and conversations are then technically impossible, play as a small reveal and if that’s an accurate memory, that seems a much better way to play it, to me. And again, this might all just be the first and second act of the movie with an entirely secret, wild third act that they’re keeping close to the vest. I have no idea. It just sure feels like they’re showing a LOT.

Regardless, I’m definitely interested in this one. Cannot wait to stream it. Hope I can avoid any spoilers.

SPOTLIGHT

Older EOINA-appropriate projects that get my personal thumbs up

The Kids in The Hall (2022) (8 episode series)

Where: Amazon Prime

Holy hell, ya’ll. The Kids in The Hall, a Canadian sketch comedy troupe made up of Dave Foley, Bruce McCulloch, Kevin McDonald, Mark McKinney, and Scott Thompson had a fantastic sketch show that ran on HBO from 1988 - 1994 (and later in reruns after Saturday Night Live, with which they shared a producer in Lorne Michaels) before they burned out on that kind of schedule. They attempted to copy the Monty Python model of longevity by making a film every few years, but their initial attempt (1996’s Brain Candy) was not only a commercial flop, but due to the discordance of interests and personal goals of the Kids themselves, ended up effectively ending their partnership for a handful of years.

Then they did some touring together, a Canadian miniseries in 2010 called Death Comes to Town, and now: they’re back! I covered this return in last month’s column, but that was before I’d seen any of it and y’all, I am delighted to say: It’s hilarious! There are a bunch of callbacks/returning characters but not in a way that you NEED to have watched the original series (the best way to do it) BUT if you do watch the 8 episode series and enjoy yourself, I’d suggest checking out the documentary Comedy Punks (also on Prime) which explains the story of the Kids in great detail (and with a TON of early Kids footage!).

Personally, after doing both of those things, I was itching to dive back into The Kids in the Hall. The original series is available on Prime as well (some seasons w/commercial interruption via whatever “Freevee” is) but I recommend tracking down the dvds as I did long ago, for an uninterrupted viewing experience.

<>

Well that’s it for this month. There’s just always SO MUCH content, I’m sure I’ve missed/overlooked something, and if I have: let me know with a comment below. Likewise if you end up checking out anything I’ve covered and wanna share with me your two cents; I’d love to hear it. I don’t write this column because I just L-O-V-E remakes, adaptations, and/or long-gap sequels so much, I do it to start conversations. Let’s talk about movies!

Everything is varying levels of bad lately (there are few moments, across few days where I don’t feel like I’m actively under the weight of some truly depressing and grim event or reality), but movies - as the famous pizza proverb goes - even when they’re bad, they’re good. Watching movies remotely with my MovieJawn pals (and some non-Jawnies as well) is a highlight of my week and by putting out this column, I hope I can provide a similar outlet and relief for any of you.

Thank you for reading and thanks to MJ for hosting a posting. You can find me on twitter, insta, or letterboxd, and if you’d like to hear some more of my movie opinions, I cohost the Hate Watch/Great Watch podcast w/Allison Yakulis. June in Pride month, so we’re covering specifically LGBTQ+ films, and as it happens we’ll have 3 episodes so we’re kicking things off on the 1st with The Babadook (Jennifer Kent’s 2014 Australian horror flick starring the titular gay icon) with guest Nicole Krecicki. Then on the 15th we’re joined by Krystal T.L. Brackett to talk about an annual Mt. Mausoleum watch: The Birdcage (Mike Nichols’ 1996 remake of the 1978 French farce), and closing out the month with Bound (the Wachowskis’ pre-Matrix heavily queer heist noir scorcher) on the 29th with our guest Gabby Reeves! We hope you’ll join us!

Until next time - Long Live the Movies!

EVERYTHING OLD IS NEW AGAIN, Vol. 39 - May 2022

Everything Old Is New Again

Vol. 39 - May 2020

By “Doc” Hunter Bush, Podcast Czar

Howdy, howdy, one and all and welcome to Everything Old Is New Again! Seeing as this MAY be your first time reading the column, I MAY as well explain how it works around here. If a movie or TV series is debuting or returning in the coming month, I’ll write a little about it provided it is based on some previously existing idea. So if it was originally a book, an older movie, or maybe something more esoteric, like a song (it happens) - it’s EOINA material.

My reviews work like so: I watch any & all trailers available, explain what (if anything) I know about the core intellectual property and say whether the trailer gripped me at all or not. Then down at the bottom of the column, I’ll recommend one or two recent additions to streaming services that meet EOINA criteria, even if they usually aren’t exactly new releases.

We like to have fun here, as they say, so if I say something disparaging about a property or person you’re fond of, know that I rarely mean any harm. I’m just venting.

<>

May 2022

PREMIERES - Films or series coming to screens great & small that meet EOINA requirements

2nd

Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness (dir. Sam Raimi)

Where: In theaters

I’ve made no secret of being kind of very tired of the clockwork schedule of Marvel’s MCU releases and the increasingly insular nature of their storytelling and world building - in short it’s just exhausting. BUT. I do love me some Sam Raimi. Baring in mind that (thanks to that clockwork production schedule) most of the large scale scenes and moments have been pre-visualized and begin production before a director is even chosen sometimes, it’s hard to wrap your head around how much flavor a director can possibly bring to one of these movies. But Raimi gave us the original modern Spider-Man films, thereby helping to codify the visual DNA of the current blockbuster landscape, so hopefully he’s better suited to an undertaking of this size than anyone else?

There also seems to be quite a lot of outright horror elements on display here, and the most recent trailer certainly heavily implies that the main antagonist will be frequent Strange nemesis and other-dimensional nuisance Nightmare which would be a perfect fit for that tone. But I’m getting ahead of myself. Doctor Strange the character was created in 1963 by Steve Ditko and Stan Lee. An arrogant surgeon who loses the fine motor function in his hands via car accident and after exhausting all other options, turns to mysticism for a cure, Stephen Strange becomes the Sorcerer Supreme for our dimension, protecting it from the magical dangers and beings that would put our world at risk.

Since the character’s debut film (2016, dir. Scott Derrickson) he has saved the world multiple times but has also, in 2021’s Spider-Man: No Way Home (dir. Jon Watts), fractured the multiverse, allowing (in that film) multiple Spider-Men to exist in one dimension. Fun! But you can’t unring that bell as they say, so now some of those other-dimensional baddies are a-coming to wreck our shit.

I’ve always dug the Doctor Strange comics, because they were weird, wild, psychedelic, and pretty varied. So I caught references to a handful of comic book characters that might be appearing: the aforementioned Nightmare (evil ruler of the Realm of Dreams), Rintrah (a green minotaur), America Chavez (played by Xochitl Gomez - a member of the Young Avengers) and most notably Shuma Gorath (a kaiju-sized eyeball with tentacles). On top of that, they’re folding in storylines and characters from the wider Marvel films, such as Mordo (Chiwetel Ejiofor - a rival sorcerer), Scarlet Witch (Elizabeth Olsen - a mutant witch and magical pariah), Christine (Rachel McAdams - Strange’s fellow surgeon and love interest), and thanks to Strange’s shattering of dimensional barriers (and corporate lawyers) Professor Charles Xavier (Sir Patrick Stewart - mutant telepath and head of a school for similarly gifted youngsters). That is, I’ll admit, pretty exciting!

From what I can gather from the various trailers, Strange has just royally screwed up whatever barriers existed between our universe and all the others, so all kinds of things and folks are coming here for whatever reason(s). There also seems to be some of Strange traveling to other, worse universes including one where a bunch of Ultron robots (the antagonist character motion-captured by James Spader in the 2nd Avengers movie) imprison Strange with sci-fi handcuffs preventing him from doing his magical hand gestures. My theory is that this is the universe that America Chavez is from/in, one where the Avengers we’re familiar with are gone/defeated/dead and Ultron/somebody else(?) is in charge, leading to the formation of the Young Avengers - a group of kids inspired by the Avengers to rise up. Just a guess, but it makes sense.

Enough rambling from me. I’m excited for this. Excited for a new Sam Raimi film, and the inevitable appearances from Bruce Campbell and an Oldsmobile Delta ‘88 that this all but guarantees. Real ones know.

13th

Kids in the Hall (series)

Where: Amazon Prime

A new KITH series? Debuting on Friday the 13th? Huzzah! The Canadian good boys of comedy (alphabetically Dave Foley, Bruce McCulloch, Kevin McDonald, Mark McKinney, and Scott Thompson) are back and they seem to be just as weird as they always were. Some fan-favorite characters may be returning (McKinney’s “I’m crushing your head” guy) but the thing I always loved most was the rapid-fire goofiness and self-deprecation, which seems to be as present as back in 1989 (the original series ran until 1993 on various channels, followed by the movie Brain Candy in 1996).

The tone of the trailer at least seems to match what I’ve loved about the Kids in the Hall since I first saw them airing after Saturday Night Live in the ‘90s - like adult-sized children given full control of the playpen, things looks horny, silly, violent, and goofy all with a satirical, self aware edge to them.

I don’t know what else to say, except to quote one moment from the trailer: “That cat has my gun!”

Firestarter (dir. Keith Thomas)

Where: Peacock

Based on the novel by Stephen King (which I have never read) and therefore sharing source material with the 1984 film starring a young Drew Barrymore (which I have actually never seen all the way through) - I think this looks great! Now before you decide that my opinion matters less having neither read nor seen these previous versions of this story, I should clarify that not only am I a huge Uncle Stevie fan but obviously I’m aware of Firestarter through cultural osmosis if not exactly recollection. My thing with King (that rhymes!) is that he’s one of my absolute favorite authors, so I prefer to keep some of his work unread to look forward to. Same with Neil Gaiman, Laird Barron, and China Mieville among others. As authors they have yet to let me down, so if I’m ever completely in need of a specific literary experience, I know there’s something of theirs out there. I saw (let’s say maybe) most of 1984’s Firestarter (dir. Mark Lester) years and years back on maybe the SyFy Channel (?), but there were commercial breaks and I had trouble staying invested, so I bailed.

If you’re even less familiar with Firestarter, in brief it’s about a young girl named Charlie (Ryan Kiera Armstrong) who manifests supernatural forces when in a state of distress. Her father Andy (Zac Efron) believes that she can learn to control her abilities and live a normal life, but as she begins to enter young adulthood, and her emotions and powers grow stronger and less predictable, she begins to pose a greater threat to those around her. Not only that, but a mysterious organization that Andy already knows about becomes aware of Charlie and sets out to capture her.

Now let’s get back to how good this looks (and sounds!) - the direction, as much as can be seen in a trailer, seems to keep things small and close not only to contrast with larger shots of Charlie’s powers, but maybe to help the audience empathize with Charlie’s child-size perspective. Smart. I don’t recall Charlie’s powers in the original being anything besides heat/flame related (which is called pyrokinesis btw) but there’s definitely some comparatively regular degular telekinesis (moving objects with one’s mind) on display in this trailer. But, for sure, the fire effects are the draw here and they also look fantastic: big jets of flame, people’s heads igniting like strike anywhere matches, metal objects melting like wax - it all looks great and maybe largely practical effects (?) which is super exciting to me.

Somehow even more exciting is the score. Way back in the ‘80s, John Carpenter was considering directing Firestarter but was ultimately dropped from consideration after The Thing’s commercial failure. Now he’ll at least get to leave his mark in some fashion, via contributing the score along with his son and frequent collaborator Cody. Let me tell you that whatever the piece of music in the trailer is, it sounds a-m-a-z-i-n-g in headphones! Hear for yourself! Needless to say, I will absolutely be checking this out when Friday the 13th rolls around!

20th

Jackass 4.5 (dir. Jeff Tremaine)

Where: Netflix

Twenty damn years ago, a perfect storm of stupidity struck and pop culture was never the same. And while it might not ultimately be a Good Thing all told, I sure am glad that Jackass brought these lovable goofballs into my life. Combining sports video tricks and skits with physical challenges and pranks, Jackass usually has something that will appeal to almost anyone.

In the wake of the release of Jackass Forever earlier this year, my house - Mt. Mausoleum - have been revisiting the old MTV series. Sure, some of the segments haven’t aged well (they were juvenile to begin with and it was 20 years ago) and boy Bam Margera is hard to take, but some things are just fun and harm no one (other than whichever Ass is directly involved). I was glad to see, in Jackass Forever, that as much as things change (the crew are folding in some new blood so that longtime fans don’t have to watch silver foxes Johnny Knoxville and Steve-o do themselves even more bodily harm) the more they stay the same (we actually do see those things happen in Forever, easily the least fun and most uncomfortable moments).

Jackass 4.5 follows in the tradition of the previous Jackass films by releasing a .5 version with footage cut from the main release. Not just parts of segments, but entire bits. The teaser for this release relies primarily on a deleted segment where performers in mascot costumes ride a treadmill past others on a swing set, hoping to avoid being kicked by their pal mid-swing. As with all Jackass outings as I get older, I hope nobody got hurt, but I hope they almost do? It’s weird, I admit.

27th

Top Gun: Maverick (dir. Joseph Kosinski)

Where: In theaters

Once, long ago, I wrote a very positive write-up of the Top Gun: Maverick trailer on the eve of its release. Then at literally the last minute, they changed the release date a-g-a-i-n and we had to cut it. So here we are again. Kind of fitting I suppose because that’s how TG:M feels - familiar. Based on the 1986 film (dir. Tony Scott) which was itself based on a California magazine article, OG TG was the story of Pete Mitchell, callsign Maverick (Tom Cruise), a cocky pilot with the skills to back it up. Along the way he romanced Charlie (Kelly McGillis), lost his best friend and co-pilot Goose (Anthony Edwards), pissed off rival Iceman (Val Kilmer), stumbled from a war game scenario directly into an actual air battle and most importantly played some very homoerotic volleyball.

Minus the volleyball, this looks like it hits very similar beats. This time, at the behest of Iceman (who has achieved some kind of status in the intervening years), Maverick is brought in to teach a class full of aspiring pilots, your assorted Tops Gun, including Goose’s son played by Miles Teller and NOT Ryan Gosling for some reason. I mean, c’mon!

Anyhoo. This looks a little too close to the original if you ask me, and by continuing to read this paragraph, you do. It even seems like the class (and Maverick) will end up in an air battle (but like, of course they would - it’s a jet pilot movie, what are they gonna do, karate? So I’m wondering if this is all an intentional mislead. Maybe the trailer was cut to showcase the more familiar aspects of Top Gun, to draw fans back, but secretly has more story waiting in the wings (pardon the pun).

This actually looks excellent. Joseph Kosinski previously brought us Tron: Legacy (which kind of did the familiar trailer/secret story payload thing I’m describing actually) and Tom Cruise sleeper sci-fi banger Oblivion, so the flick is in good hands. Plus fighter jets are very fast and go very high, so slapping a camera on one of them bad Larrys is gonna net you some exciting footage! I’m not going to theaters for this, but I’ll keep an eye out for it on streaming eventually.

The Bob’s Burgers Movie (dir. Loren Bouchard, Bernard Derriman)

Where: In theaters

Bob’s Burgers premiered on Fox back in 2009 from creator Loren Bouchard (of Home Movies fame) with tons of charm, an endearingly wacky and open-minded heart, and lots of funny names for burgers. The Bob’s Burgers Movie seems to check all the boxes the show is known for: financial trouble for parents and restaurateurs Bob (H. Jon Benjamin) and Linda (John Roberts); Goonies-like adventures for kids Tina (Dan Mintz), Louise (Kristen Schaal), and Gene (Eugene Mirman); and also maybe a UFO, robots, trap doors, magic powers, and musical performances - though to be fair some of those are definitely going to be elaborate fantasies, another hallmark of the series.

All I know of the plot for sure is that Bob is distraught as they only have seven days to make an important payment and also a huge sinkhole opens up in the street out front of the restaurant. But like, it’s Bob’s Burgers, whatever happens it’ll kind of be adorable and fun, right?

My only question is - why a movie? What will be accomplished in the feature film format that Bob’s couldn’t tackle in the half-hour format they’ve been so successful at? Visually the only noticeable difference is that the film seems to have much more dramatic lighting than the show. But I suppose we’ll see. Again, I’m not visiting theaters for this, but can’t wait to catch it streaming later in the year.

SPOTLIGHT - Not new, but recommended EOINA material

1st

Candyman (1992) (dir. Bernard Rose)

Where: Shudder

The original Candyman is pretty much a stone cold masterpiece. The pacing is incredible, the ways in which it adapts and updates Clive Barker’s original short story “The Forbidden”, the performances, the amazing score (by avant garde composer Philip Glass), and of course Tony Todd’s iconic performance as the titular being. I love this flick and always recommend it to people who haven’t seen it.

Bonus Rec: The 2021 Candyman remake (dir. Nia DaCosta), which updates the themes of this film for a modern POV and folds the previous trilogy’s mythology into its world in a really fascinating and intelligent way. Seek it out. 

The Rage: Carrie 2 (1999) (dir. Katt Shea, Robert Mandell)

Where: Amazon Prime

I’ve actually been meaning to rewatch this for a while now. The incredibly long-gap sequel to 1976’s Carrie (dir. Brian De Palma - based on the novel from the aforementioned Uncle Stevie), I remember watching this once, long long ago, drunk in a basement one Halloween night in my college years and kind of bad-movie enjoying it? I then immediately cast it from my mind and never thought about it after. Then a few years ago, on the eve of the modern Stephen King resurgence in adaptation popularity and pop cultural presence, I was reminded that it even existed.

In case you don’t know, the original Carrie is about a high school aged girl who has telekinetic powers which are exacerbated by the hormonal changes in her body and famously sets her whole prom on fire after being routinely ridiculed and humiliated. Good for her I say. The Rage: Carrie 2 follows Carrie’s half sister who also has telekinesis and uses it to avenge her best friend who was driven to suicide by abuse and bullying.

I can’t give this the kind of strong recommendation that I usually like to within this space, but please - consider joining me in giving this truly baffling oddity a (re)watch and just maybe we’ll have a good time.

<>

My hope with EOINA is that MAYbe I’ll turn one of you on to some project that you weren’t aware of, or that you MAY be more inclined to check out with more knowledge of its legacy. If that’s the case, drop a comment or seek me out online. Same goes for if you end up watching one of these flicks and wanna talk about it: comment here or find me on twitter, insta, or letterboxd.

Thanks as always to MovieJawn for hosting and posting, and to YOU for reading! If you’d like more from me, I co host the Hate Watch/Great Watch podcast with Allison Yakulis. We’ve just finished up a five episode miniseries on the films of Baz Luhrmann and we’re cooling things down with episodes on 1998’s raunchy comedy Dirty Work (currently available here, with guests Tina Dillon & Michael Chalfin), 1995’s Jackie Chan comedy/action piece Rumble in the Bronx (drops on May 4th) and another Uncle Stevie adaptation, The Shawshank Redemption (available May 18th, with guest Bryan Bierman) before heading into Pride month! If you’re so inclined, give a listen and if you like it please like, share, comment, heart, star, horseshoe, recommend, fave, and smash that subscribe button or whatever because it all helps expand our reach and helps more people find us.

Until next time - Long Live the Movies!