koltonbrett

When it comes to vampire movies, it seems people are hard to please. I personally think vampires are cool when done well, and I liked what they did with this film. I'm a fan of Stephen King stories in general, and Salem's Lot is one of my favorites of his. If I remember correctly, Salem's Lot was the first Stephen King book I ever read. It was also among the first horror novels I read. It was years ago but this movie felt like a similar experience to reading that novel, so it was a little nostalgic for me.

There is good atmosphere, cool scene transitions, and some creatively creepy shots. I was immediately a fan of the setting and characters. I would have loved a whole limited series of this story. It felt so much shorter than it should have been. These characters were interesting enough that I wanted more of them, but there was no time. But the cast did a great job giving us likable and authentic-feeling characters in such a limited runtime.

Other than feeling rushed and getting a little sloppy with its climax, I don't have much to complain about. It gave me a lot of what I wanted. I've seen quite a few vampire movies but I can't say they typically frighten me. This Salem's Lot managed to put me on edge and even made me jump once or twice. I loved the appearance of the vampires. They were truly chilling as they floated outside of widows and appeared out of nowhere on rooftops. I enjoyed the juxtaposition of the horror with a bit of humor. If I had to compare this to another vampire movie, it would be 1985's Fright Night.

Gladiator 2 is both good and disappointing at the same time. It's no classic like the original. It's entertaining and does some interesting things storywise. It manages to avoid being a repeat of the first. There are some callbacks, and as a big fan of the original, they worked on me as they were intended to. It was good seeing returning cast and characters. The cast, new and old, is the movie's strongest aspect. The movie is full of talented entertainers, and they entertain better than the story itself. After going so light on the action with his Napoleon movie, I thought surely Ridley Scott would thrill us with tons of exciting action in the sequel to the action-packed Gladiator. I was sad to see that it too is rather light on the action compared to the original.

The movie makers knew they had a fantastic cast, so they focus mostly on them. Denzel Washington and Joseph Quinn are the highlights. It felt like Denzel improvised almost the entire movie. I never knew what bizarre thing he would say or do next. It kept me engaged. While the characters are handled well, there's a lot of them that get a lot of attention. This means Paul Mescal feels like a much smaller protagonist than Russels Crowe's General Maximus. There are a few other aspects of the movie that weaken it slightly. The political messaging is about as subtle as feminism in a Greta Gerwig movie. It tended to jolt me out of the setting, one that was so immersive in the first Gladiator.

The score is nothing special. Aside from Han's Zimmer's original Gladiator theme, I would describe the music as inconspicuous and unimpactful. This was disappointing as Harry Gregson-Williams is the composer of my favorite movie soundtrack. Lastly, the movie is visually less convincing than the original Gladiator. I'll credit the CGI for this. For example, I thought the scene with the sharks in the arena would be cool but it ended up looking cheesy. The bottom line is, Gladiator 2 kept me entertained, but failed to whisk me away completely. I didn't need it to be the masterpiece that was the original, but I was hoping it would be a great movie able to stand on its own, and it comes close, though falls just short of satisfying.

Goodness gracious, I think I'm sweating. That was intense to say the least. I've seen my fair share of horror films but Smile 2 is one of the most brutal l've sat through. Like, I hope Naomi Scott is okay after filming this movie. She committed 110% to this role and I can't imagine it didn't affect her in some way. The whole movie is 2 hours of her in constant destress and horror as she is being broken down psychologically. It's a performance I won't soon forget and I think people are finally realizing the star that she is.

I didn't rewatch the first Smile before diving into this sequel, but I remember feeling that it was really good. Sequels tend to be lesser in every way, but Smile 2 seemed to go harder and bigger in every way. There are some great displays of creativity. Director Parker Finn is one to watch. He has proven that he knows how to make a mean horror film. He has an eye and imagination for what is truly horrifying.

My favorite horror films tend to be the more subtle ones. Horror can feel cheesy to me when they try to show too much or get too crazy. However, Smile 2 wasn't concerned with holding back and it worked. There were a couple of times when I thought to myself, "This is about to get dumb." And that thought was immediately followed by, "Nope, that's actually terrifying." There were at least a couple of good jump scares that got me, but it's not the jump scares that will leave you freaked out. Parker Finn set out to disturb us and chill us to the bone while telling a story that's really interesting.

I thought the ending could have been more clever, and it didn't do any future sequels any favors. Honestly, I don't see how they could make a sequel to this. It used all its tricks. But it works as its own thing and it was nice seeing a horror sequel created by talented people who meant business.