A B

I am late to the show, but what a deplorable slasher film. The inserts of gore scenes were only tasteful to the audience but incredibly irrelevant and immaterial to the plot. I understand the demon arch - that makes sense, but to not have that illustrated, to incorporate characters simply to mutilate them with a (my opinion) sexualised undertone and make no impression on the demon arch plot other than simply confirming that, yep, the demon narrative is still a thing is not a great way to spend 2 hours. Everything was cliched and predictable (which is fine) but the main character who was targeted by the antagonist made ZERO progress … wait what was her character trend exactly? I mean, it was not like she wasn’t invested in addressing the issue of the antagonists resurrection at hand or rectifying her past or ignoring it? It was hinted that she and her brother were going to make a practical step to figuring it out made evident based on her discussion with her brother on the phone prior to his arrival, but nothing ever came to fruition in the final scene? Something? Anyway, ZERO progress which is (my opinion) what the 3rd of a trilogy SHOULD be - see the ‘Saw’ movies for example. I do not get the jumps or threads in scenes either. The stitches were poorly delivered - it felt like I was watching two different movies at the start of the movie that were of two different genres. I think that if you want to pull off an incredible gore film with an emotionally compelling plot about a character, you need to work the gore into reason - not just for us to squirm at. Otherwise, it’s so distasteful. It’s just there. See ‘The Fly’, ‘The Thing’, or ‘Braindead’ for some greater comparative gore films. The only positive was the gore and torture choices of the antagonists (for what it was worth) was smack in your face, which I didn’t mind if that was all I was ranking.

Decent film but the ending killed the rating.

SPOILERS Movie adaptation of my favourite Stephen king novels and I feel so disappointed. The movie adopted a linear timeline which was nothing like the novel. The novels timeline eased us into Charlie’s power, teasing us about Andy’s fears and his motive for travelling so often with Charlie through a non-linear timeline (flashbacks). I found that the slow transition into the intensity of the story was a phenomenal way Stephen explores how Andy & Vicky met & developed a distrust in the organisation. a key part of the novel. It all was very smooth and the movie just rushed it. I couldn’t feel settled. They didn’t need to include the two rural characters. They could’ve just been arbitrary, helping them get from place to place at most and nailed focusing on Charlie’s relationship with her father. Couldn’t care less he didn’t make it. Also, extremely cringe. Why make the technician at DSI talk about his pregnant wife for him too… die? It is just a fishing competition at this point. And as for Rainbird and Charlie’s relationship, utterly appalled. Their relationship was profound in the book. Movie does not give this credit and ruins the ending. It’s not justifiable she would resort to being with him, she can defend on her own based on her destructive and confident behaviour we have seen at the end. Lastly, SHE DID NOT GRASP HER POWERS THAT QUICK. Took her quite literally the entire book to really harness her power. Not some spare moments in the woods.