Archons

I usually rate movies worse than the IMDb rating, this is one of the more glaring exceptions. I liked Black Mountain Side from the director and this one is in the same slow building atmospheric Lovecraft subgenre. It's not perfect, actors and pacing could have been better, but Szostakiwskyj creates a one of a kind mood, I very much enjoy, especially in the later half of the movie. I really hope we get more films of this kind from him!

Nick Szostakiwskyj's previous film, "Black Mountain Side" remains one of my favorite horror movies of the past decade, it is atmospheric, scary and interesting, so I was really excited to watch "Archons" and it was a big disappointment. Compared to the previous film, it is a huge falling. I don't know what happened but the writing is bad, the script is terrible and in the end, it doesn't make any sense. Every aspect of the film looks amateurish, and this is not to blame on the low budget, because Black Mountain Side is also low budget and is professional and serious. The look of the "creatures" is laughable, but the fact that they did not use CGI is something to praise. Other than that, there are no good points to talk about, just a big disappointment.

This movie just made me realise that evangelicals, scientologists, and dominionists are all gnostics, even the cult I grew up in and people who believe in the illuminati and aliens. What a permeating thread throughout history. Demons suppressing human and testing them in life and death. What a superstitious world we live in. Carl Sagan was right. Science is a candle in the demon haunted world.

A simple story of dead rockstars in a horrid limbo. I liked it.

I had high hopes for this film - Nick Szostakiwskyj's previous offering, *Black Mountain Side*, is a criminally underrated folk horror. But there's no story here, no continuity or coherence, no attempt to explore the mythology. I'm still not entirely sure what I just watched.

Edit: It is better on a second watch, but only slightly. Yes, it's beautifully shot. Yes, the audio is great. Yes, the actors are on point. I guess I either wanted to know more about the nature of the threat or see less of it.

The ending makes this movie somewhat clear, "Where are your friends?" "I'm waiting for them to catch up.", in the sense of what the writer/director was going for, but the script itself does not work, or is not as clear as they thought or think it is. It's tough for writers to imagine what they see as symbolic or metaphorical is actually perceived by their audience. Sometimes they are "too close" to the work to evaluate it properly. That is why authors let friends/family/editors read or view their works before they publish/release them. If these reviewers are sychophants, then we end up with this kind of work because no one tells the author the truth, that the symbols/ideas need some retooling. There are good ideas here, and I wish the creators had taken more time to get good feedback. It won a best movie award. Why? Because all too often when people don't understand something, they think it must be great because the creator is intelligent. There are serious problems with this film that could be fixed. Maybe those clarifying elements are lying on the cutting room floor. They certainly are not in the final product.