Freaky Tales

Presented in a 4:3 aspect ratio, this film in its presentation emulates an old videotape. Cut-off titles and all. Clearly shot on digital video, I still appreciated the Betamax (not VHS) artifacts. But it finds Inspiration from many direct to VHS (mostly horror) films from the 80's. The "tales" (as in Tales from the Crypt, etc.) in the title promises multiple story segments and this promise is kept. But rarely did period pieces overlap so perfectly with their segments. Worst case: 3 or more short films added together by a narrator. Not here however.

At the same time, it's impossible to view this and not see this as being inspired by the Grindhouse format from Quintin Tarantino and Robert Rodriguez. Both in "retro pulp" and violence terms.

Any criticism? Yep. For non-Americans the second segment is not that interesting. We found ourselves "sitting it out" this part on the strength of the first (imperfect) segment. Only to be rewarded by the third segment. International audiences will be unlikely to make it to the third segment. Thus my "Hizzle for Zhizzle" in the title of this comment. We are Dutch, so associate this subject matter at best with "Do The Right Thing" (and at worst with "The Fresh Prince of Bel Air".

Pedro Pascal "did some acting" and the other well known actor... from Forrest Gump... Tom Hanks... they are in this. Pascal did a descent job. A good one in fact.

This is a film you should see if you remember 1987. And like violence and stuff. Or if you enjoy well made pulp-films.

Decent weekend movie but tries to be like Pulp Fiction. I watch a ton of movies, about 15 per month so I can give a pretty good point of view. Also, I grew up in in the 80's so I had a good idea of what life was like back then.

First off, casting was surprisingly decent for this flick. Ji-Young Yoo is not an outstanding actor but I'm glad she and so many other Asians are getting so many roles in Hollywood. This was a much different role from her last character role on the TV series Expats so it was kind of difficult to see her as an 80's punk rock kid. She's kinda like the up and coming Korean American female version of Steven Yeun, but she's not as good.

As we all know, Pedro Pascal, Ben Mendelsohn, and Tom Hanks are Oscar/Emmy quality actors so having them in the movie helped tremendously. I am actually surprised that Tom Hanks agreed to do such a miniscule role... Everyone else including Jay Ellis were just fillers, and I think they could have found a Too Short impersonator that sounded more like him. Normani and the other girl actually rapped a lot better than the guy acting as Too Short.

The movie format was just like a Tarantino film, multiple different chapters and then all the characters tie into the story at the end. The first 25 mins of the movie is shown in old school 4:3 aspect ratio like TV used to be, but then after that it goes back to normal widescreen.

Overall, the movie was kind of boring up until the last chapter about Sleepy Floyd. And come on, could it be any more like Kill Bill?

If you are looking for a movie to pass the time and were an 80's kid like me, you might be entertained. Just don't expect huge 80's budget sets like Stranger Things(which did the 80's super accurate).

The opening episodes are tired clichés that nearly put me to sleep. The background becomes the main source of narrative, while the flashy, hyperactive style induces genuine yawns. The only interesting segment features Pedro Pascal - everything else is bland, tedious chaos. The film can't focus on anything, trying to be everything for everyone and ending up as nothing. It's a hollow citation of 1980s cinema - all pop, no substance. Good luck falling for this "love letter" to the era. If you want actual storytelling, look elsewhere.

First 40 minutes? Chewed-up tropes: punks vs neo-Nazis, rappers vs the system, blah-blah-blah... The neon aesthetic and soundtrack are just crutches for narrative lameness. Only Pascal's revenge storyline breaks through - mercifully free of postmodern smirk.

No depth. No originality. Just soulless set dressing - style as empty calories. Every episode is vapid posturing without compelling characters or drama. Essentially - a kaleidoscope of colorful shards with zero meaning. Pascal's classical vengeance arc works precisely because it's not another "experiment". This isn't homage - it's nostalgia plagiarism without vision. At festivals it might pass as "bold"; at home it's reheated leftovers. Without Pascal, this mess would vanish among a thousand forgettable flicks. Visual fast food - strip away the 80s neon and synthwave, and you're left with... nothing.

Now you might argue: "Don't all genre films rely on clichés?" "Isn't 80s nostalgia the whole point?" "What if chaos IS the intention?" "Maybe you're obsessing over Pascal?"

Sure! And you're right! But for real 80s kicks, I'll rewatch:

• RoboCop ('87)
• Die Hard ('88)
• Pulp Fiction ('94)
• The Terminator ('84)

...while this one's already fading from memory.

Freaky Tales is like neon wall art: bright but disposable. Hang it up to flex your taste, but stare too long and you'll spot the emptiness.

The filmmakers couldn't decide between parody, drama, or straight action - so we get a lukewarm reference salad. Pascal's the only frame-worthy element. The rest? Pulp fiction in every bad sense.

These are the tales of four strangers whose lives were unknowingly intertwined and changed on a freaky night in Oakland in 1987 when NBA history was made.

This movie is hard to describe or even summarize without spoiling it. The story is told through four chapters, each from the perspective of one of the four individuals. The movie has violence, drama, cameos, and a smidge of history. The story becomes clearer over the one-hour and forty-six-minute runtime, but it is a wild ride throughout. It is an interesting and unique watch, especially when going blind. Stream it when available, if you are intrigued.

It's probably one of those 'you're either gonna like/love it or hate it' situations. It's definitely not a movie to be taken seriously but i think that's pretty obvious before you're even ten minutes into it.

What I'M wondering is how they got some of the people in it to BE in it...i know one of them grew up in Piedmont(Oakland), but still...he's one of THE most popular actors from the last 45 or so years...i think he did it as a favor. A salute to, 'cool that you're doing a movie in Oakland'.

As far as story elements go, the movie is all over the place...but, overall, it was FUN. Of course, having lived in Berkeley for 20+ years helped me to enjoy it. And i liked seeing Angus Cloud again.