Joint Reaction and Review: Trish Matson and Paul Weimer discuss SINNERS
SINNERS (2025)Directed by Ryan CooglerWritten by Ryan CooglerCinematography by Autumn Durald Arkapaw Starring:Michael B JordanMiles CatonHailee StenfeldJack O ConnellWunmi MosakuJamie LawsonOmar MillerDelroy Lindo Trish: The first trailer that I saw last year for “Sinners” was a bit cryptic, but I was excited because it reminded me a bit of a great Actual Play campaign I’d seen on Twitch, based on the Harlem Unbound module for Call of Cthulhu, called Harlem Hellfighters never die, in which Black pilots fresh back from the Great War found that there were even greater horrors lurking back home. Here, the trailer showed some Black men returning to the rural South and facing some kind of horror. And the movie was written and directed by Ryan Coogler, who directed Black Panther and other fine films, and starring Michael B. Jordan, a very fine actor, and numerous other notables! So I was all in for the movie, months ago, tried to avoid further spoilers, and saw it the first chance I got, Saturday of opening weekend. It wasn’t quite what I expected, but it was really great, and I do recommend seeing it in a theater if possible. The plot was gripping, the monsters had some seductive arguments, and the blues music running throughout the movie, and providing and enhancing major plot points, was strong, soaring, pulse-pounding and moving. Paul: For me, this was an unlikely movie to get me to watch. A horror movie, and one that is strongly focused and grounded and centered on music is not something that I normally would have contemplated going to see in the theater, or even renting a stream of. It is completely outside my normal genres on those two axes. I am very glad, however, that I was persuaded to do so. The movie is a slow burn in terms of genre. We get a sense at the beginning, given the wrapping story, that something very bad has happened to Sammie (Miles Caton), driving up to his father’s church wearing bloody rags, clutching a remnant broken neck of a guitar and his preacher father exhorting him to put it down and come to the Lord. Something terrible has happened, but what? The story then jumps back twenty-four hours, and shows us this one-day story. Sammie is a sharecropper on a cotton plantation in the deep south, in 1932, in the Mississippi Delta. He finishes his quota as fast as he is able, so that he can play his beloved music, to the chagrin of his father. Trish: Pastors condemning jazz and blues music as a tool of the Devil is an old trope, of course, about as old as those musical forms themselves. Many a jazz/blues musician has roots in Gospel music, because that’s where a poor Black person would have any opportunity for musical training in rural Mississippi, and many of them have been condemned for turning to “the devil’s music” associated with drinking, dancing, lust, fornication, other sins, and even just staying up late Saturday and missing church on Sunday. Moreover,, Delta blues musician Tommy Johnson claimed to have sold his soul to the Devil in exchange for mastery of the guitar. (Evolving musical forms of rock and roll and their descendants are similarly opposed by fundamentalists.) So the prologue felt very familiar to me, didn’t require any explanation, and instantly provided some worldbuilding references for people who already knew the context. In this case, the preacher was certainly vindicated in his fears for his son, although the danger turned out to be as much on account of Sammie’s mortal peril as for the perils to his soul. Paul: When Sammie’s cousins Smoke and Stack, identical twins ably played by Michael B. Jordan, show up, the plot kicks off. War veterans, former violent enforcers of Al Capone in Chicago, they’ve come back to create a Juke Joint in the Delta, a place for their people to go. So, much of the first act of the movie is Sammie going along with the brothers as they assemble the people they need to make it happen. We get introductions to all the characters that will be central to the drama. Smoke’s estranged wife Annie. Local Chinese shopkeepers and cooks Grace and Bo. Singer Pearline. Pianist Delta Slim, and others, including Stack’s ex-girlfriend Mary (Hailee Stenfeld), who is of mixed race but usually passing for white. The group congregates at a local abandoned sawmill which the twins have bought, with cash, from a local KKK honcho. Tonight, there will be food, drink, and music. MAJOR SPOILERS FOLLOW Paul: Up to this point, this movie is entirely a period piece, soaked in the music of the Blues and of the culture and place of the Mississippi Delta in the 1930s. But the movie starts its slow turn when a mysterious stranger arrives at a farm, claiming that Choctaws were chasing him, and asking to be let in. The couple who own the farm do so. The Native Americans arrive, warn the couple not to let such a dangerous individual as whom they are hunting in, and leave. Meantime, the vampire, for that is what he is, soon turns the couple and the genre part of the movie is off and running, Until the vampires decide to descend on the Juke Joint, the movie shows us our protagonists at their happiest, partying, drinking, eating, having sex, and playing music. One of the more fantastical and mystical and best scenes of the movie for me occurs here. Sammie is invited to play and give his real debut to the audience. We had gotten a voiceover intimation that people who can truly play music can transcend space and time, and this is what actually occurs in this set piece. As the audience dances and sways and reacts to the beautiful and heartfelt music, we see images, flashes of others in the audience, ranging from Africans and Native Americans in the far past, to futuristic costumed individuals beyond even our era of the
Movie Review: “Mickey 17” (2025), directed by Bong Joon Ho
Instead of the cliche of the female character who must be punished or killed for having sex, a la “Troopers”, “Mickey 17” gives us a couple for whom sex is an act centred in being a fun, shared exploration of joy for both people with the mature viewpoint that demonstrates talking and planning and listening to each other does not make things any less enjoyable. Heck, Mickey and Nasha’s joyful sex life is integral to everything not ending up very bad for everyone. I think that’s both pretty cool and wildly different from the kinds of choices so many movies make.
Movie Discussion: Children of the Pines (2023)
About Children of the Pines: Daniel: Without even reading the synopsis, the title of this movie brought to my mind Children of the Corn, or something from the folk horror vein. I was a bit surprised then to find this to a be more of a psychological horror of dysfunctional family dynamics that spends more time with college-age Riley and her parents rather than the children. Aside from Riley, the adults in this movie are far more creepy than the children, particularly given that the problems of the adults are formed through their choices and desperation, rather than strictly genetic. Shaun: Surely they were aware that the casual and well-versed horror fan would make that connection with the title. And since I made the same connection, I started to think about what they had hoped to evoke in that name. Both films have a cult narrative at the core, though Pines seems to verge heavily into the new religious movement side of cults whereas Corn seems more linked to the evangelical revivalist movements. Thus, there is a modern retelling here, one linking an otherworldly spiritualism to modern psychiatry, as evidenced by the way Pines centers the adults’ narrative around what appears to be a therapy session with strange undertones and later unveils spiritual proceedings reminiscent of cult gatherings as frequently imagined in film. The psychiatry, thus, becomes the gateway to the spiritual (and, naturally, the horror). Structurally, then, this is a dramatically different film from Corn, but thematically, there are some connections that don’t seem accidental. Daniel: I’m with you on the switch here from evangelical revivalist cult to a new-age sort of cult, but the link between modern psychiatry to the supernatural consists of just using the airs of psychiatry or therapy to trap them within the cult. What was interesting to me was that the parents are never really interested in the work or change required for familial redemption or healing. They’re after an easy solution that doesn’t really require for them to change, a magical solution without the discomfort of facing problems. Actual therapy would of course be all about them actually delving into the issues and facing things. A big theme of the movie as I read it revolves around the issue of people being willing to change or not – or even the capacity for actual change. Riley at least seems somewhat open to the idea that her parents might be able to change. She decides to come home. But she quickly comes to regret this as she sees how her parents and former boyfriend are living under the power of this cult, this shared delusion that they’re going to make things better. Shaun: This is actually where I had some issues with the film. It seemed to me that this film wanted to be about quite a many number of things that it didn’t have the runtime or budget to present. The opening sequence clearly sets up a domestic violence narrative, with Riley’s father verbally abusing his family before bursting into the closet where young Riley and her mother are hiding (make no peeps…) and, we have to assume, physically attacking them. Yet, there is also a narrative here about lost loves and refusing to let go, correcting the past (or redemption), the disturbing world of cult violence and its impact on converts, and various sub-narratives around these. While I think the film’s interest in correcting the past is its most compelling story, especially when coupled with the overt domestic violence narrative at the beginning, I think it moves too far into “too much” territory when it tries to use flashbacks to show the cult at work or Gordon’s confession of love to Riley in their youth. In other words, the story gets a bit muddled, both because I lose track of what the film is trying to be about and because the film doesn’t quite stick the landing for all of the stories it is trying to tell. Daniel: Exactly! What really stuck out for me in terms of it making everything seem muddled were those scenes back to the cult, particularly with Zoe and Marie. I have to confess I still don’t quite understand their point to the overall movie or the plot. The cult flashback scenes seemed to be there to add some supernatural horror, a smattering of violence/gore that a viewer might expect from the movie. There’s no time/space to devote to the background and story here of the cult and these other girls. Sticking to the core Riley portion of the story in the present would have worked better, also because I think Kelly Tappan gives such a great performance as the character. The other characters are almost cartoonish, which can work if one wants to chew the scenes with a bit of horror campiness. Donna Rae Allen does a phenomenal job in this as Lorelei in the intro to the movie with her false smile and saccharine delivery to lure Kathy in. But Riley is the moral voice amid all the madness of everyone else in the film. Tappan gives an authority and emotion to her arguments and pleas, and she gives some really good well-articulated lines of how screwed up the familial situation is. Why that is an issue and why she needs to step out of it. On the downside, that strong performance and delivery of the script I thought contrasted harshly with other parts of the script that seemed less well written, particularly the voice-over narration given to Tappan as Riley. It comes across as cold and unfeeling, unnecessary and jarring. Shaun: I’ll admit that the voice over narrations had me rather perplexed. They were somewhat philosophical but didn’t feel grounded to the story we were there to see, especially the one that eventually unfolds. One line that stuck out to me in this regard concerned small towns and their tendency towards stagnation (same people and same buildings). On the one hand, this lines
Movie Discussion: Things Will Be Different (2024)
About Things Will Be Different: Shaun: Billed as a lo-fi, high-concept science fiction tale, Things Will Be Different rather surprised me because I hadn’t expected a work that, from a film perspective, was so polished. From shot selection thanks to director Michael Felker to the cinematography from Carissa Dorson to the editing by Felker and Rebeca Marques to the music by Jimmy LaValle and Michael A. Muller, this is well-designed film — and that without the VFX expectations of your modern blockbuster (again: lo-fi). Immersing myself into the story — and into growing complexities of that story — was a fluid process almost from the opening credits and certainly by the opening shots in the diner. Daniel: Yes, I really enjoyed the glacial build of this and uncertainties regarding the plot and what was going on because of the careful mise-en-scène and strong acting by Adam David Thompson and Riley Dandy. Despite a crime having occurred, with main characters being on the run from the law, everything about the start of this film is just focused on the mundane: the scenery, eating at a diner, family talk, living quiet lives holed up on an isolated property/safe house. But amid these prosaic elements are the odd little details that pop up in conversation and their actions. And of course they then adjust the clocks, step into that room, dial the phone, and step back out to a changed house and countryside. You’re held by the mystery of all the unexplained strangeness, and the general tensions formed by things being just not right. Shaun: It dawns on me that much of the film’s runtime is also dedicated to comparatively mundane matters. This comes across as quite deliberate: we don’t need a filmed backstory for these siblings because their relationship (and troubles) will become clear to us either through what they say or how they act. Thus, the strength of those performances are essential here. Without Thompson and Dandy to build a mountain of character upon, we’d be left with either a story with poorly developed stakes or a bloated film that spends more time on its science fiction premise than necessary. Things Will Be Different is, I think, well-paced and invites a second viewing to uncover more of the subtle character details in the first half’s montages and snippets of sibling conversation — plus all that whiskey! It might also be a film hiding clues about the strangeness to come later on (and you just know there will be strangeness because their escape from the law using weird time-manipulation is entirely too clean). Daniel: For reasons of my schedule and then streaming issues with the site where the screener was hosted, I ended up watching this movie restarting twice. So I had that chance to rewatch the beginning and pick up on more of those details, which I then also remembered more clearly upon finally getting through the end of the movie and its call-backs to its start. I’ll echo what you said about the strengths of acting by Thompson and Dandy. Their performances are indeed essential to the pacing and narrative uncertainties for the viewer. And those performances are just stellar. Also as you mentioned in your intro above, the cinematography and the music go a long way to accompany those performances in creating the creepy otherworldly atmosphere of the sibling’s predicament. Shaun: I agree completely that the music does a phenomenal job supporting the film’s otherworldly atmosphere. The score by Jimmy LaValle (also known for The Album Leaf) and Michael A. Muller is deliciously electronic, with grinding and whining synths and, at times, pounding and intense. It reminded me of Ben Frost’s work on Dark and likewise ended up on my horror writing playlist. I’m glad we get a chance to talk about scores here because I think this is a sometimes neglected aspect of film, yet without LaValle and Muller’s work on Things Will Be Different, I think the film’s slow and almost methodical move towards its first major twist and its shocking conclusion would have less impact. Film is about everything: character and story, acting, cinematography, and the score. And this is a great score (I’m listening to it as I write this and enjoying every second). When you combine this soundtrack with the cinematography, you get a film that builds its strange premise into an unsettling experience. The location shots (filmed in Indiana instead of the originally-intended Michigan location) of an overcast, semi-secluded farm — presumably dim and drab because most of the film occurs in some kind of alternate dimension — conveys that tone remarkably well. It is well shot film indeed! Daniel: We’ve spent most of the time here talking about all the things that Things Will Be Different does so well, but I think we both agree that there are aspects to it that miss the mark. For me they’re things that keep the movie in the realm of ‘good’ where it otherwise might have reached ‘exceptional.’ And what’s a bit frustrating is that I think many of those issues could have been fixed with some minimal additions or alternate editing on the part of the director Michael Felker. The issues boil down to character and plot development, but I do want to make clear that I’m fine with the film having unresolved elements after its conclusion. I don’t want to spoil with details here, so we’ll have to tread lightly, but I appreciate the open questions and room for interpretation that Felker provides the audience both in terms of the estranged siblings (Joseph and Sidney) past and future, as well as the exact nature of the group controlling or at least overseeing ‘passage’ to this safe house. However, watching the film it is very hard to decipher how things are working, who characters and voices are, and how they exactly relate. It’s meant to be a puzzle, but stronger connections are needed to help the audience navigate without confusion and frustration. How
Episode 55 — Torture Cinema Meets The Wicker Man
http://media.blubrry.com/skiffyandfanty/dts.podtrac.com/redirect.mp3/www.archive.org/download/TheSkiffyAndFantyShow4.2–TortureCinemaMeetsTheWickerMan/Sandf–Episode4.2–TortureCinemaMeetsTheWickerMan.mp3Podcast: Play in new window | DownloadSubscribe: Apple Podcasts | Spotify | Android | iHeartRadio | Podchaser | Podcast Index | Email | TuneIn | Deezer | RSSYou picked it, and now we have to talk about it for thirty minutes. Thanks for that. This month’s Torture Cinema features brings us face to face with the remake of The Wicker Man. Tune in and listen to us desperately try to find something good in this film… Note: If you have iTunes and like this show, please give us a review on our iTunes page, or feel free to email us with your thoughts about the show! Here’s the episode (show notes are below): Episode 55 — Download (MP3) Torture Cinema Meets The Wicker Man (0:00 – 33:22) The Wicker Man (IMDB) Our new intro music is “Time Flux” by Revolution Void (CC BY 3.0). That’s all, folks! Thanks for listening. See you next week.
Episode 43 — Torture Cinema Meets Dungeons & Dragons
http://media.blubrry.com/skiffyandfanty/dts.podtrac.com/redirect.mp3/www.archive.org/download/TheSkiffyAndFantyShow3.1–TortureCinemaMeetsDungeonsDragons/Sandf–Episode3.1–TortureMeetsDungeonsAndDragons.mp3Podcast: Play in new window | DownloadSubscribe: Apple Podcasts | Spotify | Android | iHeartRadio | Podchaser | Podcast Index | Email | TuneIn | Deezer | RSSWe’re back with another edition of Torture Cinema! This time we look at the awful Dungeons & Dragons (2000) monstrosity. The great thing about this episode is that you don’t have to watch the movie if you don’t want to. We’ll do the dirty work for you! The episode is sure to bring some laughs, so tune in and enjoy! (Sorry for the late episode, folks. I didn’t have time to edit the episode until late on Sunday and decided to push the release until Monday. Thanks for your patience!) Quick note: Please donate to the Red Cross for relief efforts in Japan. They could really use our help, folks. $1. $20. Whatever you can manage. Just help. Feel free to shoot us an email at skiffyandfanty [at] gmail [dot] com, leave a comment, or follow us on Twitter. We hope you enjoy the episode! Note: If you have iTunes and like this show, please give us a review on our iTunes page, or feel free to email us with your thoughts about the show! Here’s the episode (show notes are below): Episode 43 — Download (MP3) Intro and Torture Cinema: Dungeons & Dragons (0:00 – 36:07): Dungeons & Dragons (2000) (IMDB) Our new intro music is “Time Flux” by Revolution Void (CC BY 3.0). That’s all, folks! Thanks for listening. See you next week.
