Final Girl (2015)

Good friend of the GGTMC, Stephen Scarlata, helped with the story of “Final Girl,” alongside Johnny T. Silver & Alejandro Seri. Seeing as how they weren’t credited for the screenplay (that honor goes to Adam Prince), I was unsure of how much of their vision made it to screen. I contacted Stephen and he informed me he pitched the idea of a female “First Blood.” That seeps through a bit in the film’s opening act, but Prince’s script drifts into another direction after.

Just because “Final Girl” isn’t the full-blown female “First Blood” that Stephen pitched doesn’t mean that it isn’t good. On the contrary, it’s a fun slice of genre mayhem once it gets past the clunkier elements. Knowing Stephen didn’t pen the script makes it easier for me to criticize it, mainly the characterizations. Some of the lesser characters speak in clichés and contrivances, which may read better than it’s executed. Prince is indebted to on-the-nose dialogue that cripples the drama at points.

Those lesser characters belong to a gang of spoiled rich children who live out their darkest fantasies by abducting women and hunting them in the woods. The gang is led by Jameson (Alexander Ludwig, who was in the similarly titled “The Final Girls” that same year), an 80s teen villain of the highest order: he’s blonde, pompous, good-looking, charming, and a complete asshole. His partners in crime are Shane (Cameron Bright), a stoic near mute whose girlfriend, Gwen (Francesca Eastwood), knows nothing of his murderous hobby; Nelson (Reece Thompson), more of the same sans a weird incestuous attraction to his mother; and Danny (Logan Huffman), an annoyingly over-the-top horndog who can’t keep his mouth shut if his life depended on it (and it will at one point). The four stalk a local diner and pick up women to take into the woods and hunt for sport.

Hot on their trails is William (Wes Bentley), a secret agent so secretive we don’t know who he works for. What we do know is he’s been training Veronica (Abigail Breslin) ever since she was a child to be a cold-blooded assassin. Her first mission is to go undercover as one of the gang’s victims and pick them off one by one. Think of her as a modern La Femme Nikita, right down to the casting of the youthful-looking Abigail Breslin.

Abigail is quite the beguiling actress. While a full-fledged adult, her appearance is still slightly reminiscent of a young teenager, making her perfect for this role! The character of Veronica needs a sense of youthful innocence to combat her icy demeanor, especially when she is to be charming and captivating (which she is in spades). Her attraction to William is meant to be uneasy and is because of the two actors’ performances, not because of the on-the-nose dialogue.

The only real issue I had with Veronica is in her characterization and not Breslin’s rather strong performance. She is set up from the start to be devoid of emotion, having been trained to be an emotionless killer from adolescence. And yet, she is shown to be a compassionate soul who struggles to shoot William on command. By this point, she has been trained for a decade, yet still shows signs of a novice (too much compassion, rusty fighting skills, etc.). Of course, once she’s dropped into her first mission, she’s a certifiable killing machine who only slips up on occasion.

Both Prince’s script and Tyler Shields’ direction suffer from a wonky first act. The setup is flimsy because both men seemingly want to get to the core of the story as quickly as possible. Character and world building comes across as a necessary evil for them. Shields is able to direct his actors with precision, which helps in alleviating some of the weaker mechanics.

Once the core of the story, the hunting of the rich snob murderers, takes center stage, the film runs smoothly. The gang’s pre-hunt ritual, an unsettling variation on Truth or Dare, goes a long way in defining their characters (albeit forcibly so) and setting the mood. Veronica plays a terrific damsel in distress to feed into the gang’s desires, only to turn the tables on them almost immediately. The inclusion of a serum that shows one’s darkest fears seems corny at first, but is quite effective in execution.

The real meat of the hunt is in the showdown between Veronica and Jameson. Breslin and Ludwig work off of each other tremendously, with his cocky attitude and her confident demeanor gelling well. While the other members of the gang play their roles too cheesily and over-the-top, Alexander finds the happy medium between obnoxiousness and contempt. We wanted the others to get their comeuppance solely to extinguish their annoyance. With Jameson, we want to see him get his comeuppance because he deserves it. Breslin plays the perfect foil to his madness.

“Final Girl” may be rough around the edges, but once it finds its footing, it’s a solid little thriller bolstered by strong performances!

MVT: Both Abigail Breslin & Alexander Ludwig. The two complement each other well and make the final showdown, what the film was building towards, satisfying.

Make or Break: The Truth or Dare game. Sets the mood for things to come, easing us into the hunt. Also acts as a turning point for the film, from shaky introduction to sturdy exploitation.

Final Score: 7/10

Curve (2015)

“Curve” is “The Hitcher” meets “127 Hours.” “The Hitcher” aspect comes from Mallory Rutledge (Julianne Hough) being stalked by a hitchhiker, Christian Laughton (Teddy Sears). He seems sweet and innocent at first, helping her fix her broken-down jeep and giving her therapy in regard to her flailing relationship with her fiancé. Then he turns on a dime, making wildly inappropriate sexual remarks and pulls a knife on her. He demands she drive to an abandoned motel where she will eventually meet her demise. Instead, she drives the jeep off a cliff in the hopes of maiming her captor.

Mallory winds up maiming herself, entrapped in her overturned jeep. This is where the “127 Hours” aspect comes into play. Mallory’s leg is trapped between the car door and the tree branch keeping it shut. Her only way of escape is to saw off her leg, which Christian finds wickedly amusing. He made it out of the crash unscathed and is enjoying his target’s anguish. He gets off on his victims’ misery, which is why he’d rather leave her hanging rather than kill her.

I was watching this movie with a friend and we both joked that she should’ve driven off the cliff. This is one of those cases where the movie responds to your request accordingly, and, in Mallory’s case, one of those times when it shouldn’t have. Of course, we suggested she jump out of the car as she drove it off the cliff, so the movie didn’t completely listen to us. Though if it did, it would’ve been over rather quickly. That or it would’ve been a run-of-the-mill cat and mouse thriller in which the hitchhiker would stalk Mallory through the desert.

It’s because of the unique angle the film takes that it works. The arrival to Mallory’s deadly predicament may have been rocky, but it was worth the ride for the destination. Suspense is built wonderfully over whether or not she’ll saw her leg off. If and when she does, there’s still the issue of where she’s going to go for help. The film relies on claustrophobia for its thrills, and Iain Softley’s tight direction reinforces that.

Then there’s the looming Christian, who comes and goes to taunt Mallory. While this could come across as a cheap tactic, it’s written in a way that’s cleverly suspenseful. Kimberly Lofstrom Johnson & Lee Patterson write Christian as unhinged, making sure his unpredictability is always in question. We know the only reason he doesn’t just kill Mallory is because of his affinity for torment, yet we also know that he can snap at any moment. We question how long until he grows tired of playing with Mallory and just offs her.

The film is incredibly well-paced! Softley rightfully slows things down in the middle to highlight Mallory’s plodding agony. He knows just when to speed things up, with a finale that is slightly over-the-top yet satisfying. The only snag he runs into is a scene in which Christian creepily asks Mallory about her first sexual experience. It’s meant to be unsettling, showcasing Christian’s uncomfortable proclivities and Mallory’s willingness to conform to the situation in order to survive, yet it comes off as too corny. It probably read better than it played out on screen.

“Curve” is a taut little thriller! A bumpy one at times, but never without intrigue. A smart script and compact direction guides the suspense suitably.

MVT: Johnson & Lee’s script. While Softley’s direction is strong, he wouldn’t have had a good grip without a smart script to back him up.

Make or Break: The scene in which Christian abandons the entrapped Mallory. It sets the mood and perfectly captures Christian’s lunacy and Mallory’s plight.

Final Score: 7.75/10

We Are Still Here (2015)

Twenty minutes or so into “We Are Still Here” and I was struggling to see what the hubbub was about. For the past year, all I’ve heard is how good of a ghost story it is. Yet, I found the buildup to be too pedestrian. A married couple, Paul & Anne Sacchetti (Andrew Sensenig & Barbara Crampton), move into an isolated house in New England following the death of their son. Pictures of their son begin to crack, the floorboards creak, and the cellar smells like smoke and is always burning up, despite there no signs of reason.

Once the reasoning is revealed, the film is still rather pedestrian. The townsfolk reveal the former denizens of the Sacchetti’s new home hid dead bodies in the cellar, selling some to universities for study and others as a secret ingredient in the town’s food establishments. Once word got around, the family was ambushed by an angry mob and killed. The family still haunts the
place, awakening every thirty years to feed.

Paul & Anne just so happen to have friends who perform séances, despite Paul’s skepticism. Those friends are Jacob & May Lewis (Larry Fessenden & Lisa Marie) and not only are they invited, but so is their son, Harry (Michael Patrick), and his girlfriend, Daniella (Kelsea Dakota), for the sole purpose of building a body count. For as much as this is a ghost story, it’s also a slasher flick at heart. Characters are introduced in order to move the story along and to be ghost fodder.

A better comparison would be to state that “We Are Still Here” is like a Lucio Fulci movie. The story itself is formulaic, using the mechanics of a common story to accompany Lucio’s trademarks. The ghosts are represented as human charcoal and are as fierce as a demon. There’s no shortage of bloodletting, with characters being badly burnt, having their hearts ripped out, and their heads lopped off. It’s all grimy and intense.

The only difference in Ted Geoghegan’s direction is his slow build approach. He takes his time setting up the characters and paranormal activity, which is both a good and bad thing. A good thing because it develops tension and makes the events all the more impactful, as they’re not crammed down one’s throat throughout. The bad thing is it’s too vanilla to hook the viewer, causing some to give up before the film picks up.

Once it does pick up is when I realized why people are so gung-ho about this film. Get past the pedestrian aspects of the story and you’re in for a treat! The aforementioned Lucio Fulci influences help spice things up and pique one’s interest. However, it’s Geoghegan’s writing and direction that eventually puts this film on the map.

While the general flow of the film is threadbare, Ted incorporates many nice little touches to make it move smoother. Little touches such as having Paul constantly drinking (practically in every scene) but never drawing attention to it. He develops the fact that Paul has resorted to alcoholism to deal with his son’s death without being too overt with it. It shows great restraint on his part and allows the audience to connect with the characters without anything being forced upon them.

What really helps set the film apart is its little twist in the formula. A house needing to be fed every thirty years isn’t altogether new, but the gimmick hasn’t been used to such intelligence as it was here. Geoghegan uses the gimmick to explain away the downfalls that normally plague ghost stories. Paul & Anne aren’t going to immediately leave due to Paul’s skepticism and Anne’s belief that it’s their son communicating with them beyond the grave. Even when they decide it’s time to leave (in timely fashion, no less), the townsfolk won’t let them. Dave McCabe (Monte Markham), the leader of the town mob, reveals that, if the house isn’t supplied a family every thirty years, the spirits escape and can overtake the town. This adds significant threats all around and is a good excuse as to why everyone is entrapped by the house. It also coyly explains why, early on in the film, one of the ghosts is able to escape the house and hunt down Daniella.

“We Are Still Here” suffers from its formula, but Geoghegan is able to overcome those shortcomings with clever writing and tight direction. It may take a little while for him to find his footing, but once he does it’s smooth sailing.

MVT: Ted Geoghegan. His script and direction helps set the film apart from other ghost stories. Once the shit hits the fan, he does an excellent job of keeping a tight grasp on it all.

Make or Break: The reveal that the townsfolk are purposely sacrificing families to the house. This helped in not only moving the story along, but providing sufficient drama, tension, and reasoning for everyone’s actions.
Final Score: 7/10