"All right, kids. This is the part where you get to do the things the grownups don't wanna do anymore. Door to door on foot. Knock-knock, 'have you seen this man?' Just like in the movies. Partners have already been assigned so no one will get hurt feelings. Suspect likes to visit a certain kind of neighborhood. He's a middle-aged Caucasian male and not likely to go quietly, so let's always assume he's armed. We'll go alert and careful. That's all."

But that's really just the beginning. Writer/director Osgood Perkins has created one of those serial killer films that is bound to draw comparisons with some of the best of those films and most certainly Silence Of The Lambs. Let me just get that out of the way fast. This is a pretty solid film that deserves some attention, and is absolutely worth a look. It isn't anywhere as good as Silence Of The Lambs, and that appears to bother some folks. I'm not one who thinks if you can't make a classic that stands up to the best ever, you shouldn't be making movies. It's not as good, and I'm very OK about that. Longlegs has its moments, to be sure.

"I just love children's imaginations. What I don't like is when they get so violent."

Blumhouse is one of those horror factories that have changed the way horror films are created, seen, and marketed. There have been some powerful horror films to come out of those doors. When I think of Meg3n, the first couple of Paranormal Activity films, and even the Purge franchise, I see clever and innovative films. But the production house can be a bit feast-or-famine, and there have been a number of famine films on the bill.  Among the famine list of films you'll find Truth Or Dare and the crazy horror/hybrid take on the old Fantasy Island series. What do both of those films have in common? They were directed by Jeff Wadlow. So imagine, pun intended, my surprise when the latest collaboration between Wadlow and Blumhouse, Imaginary, turns out to be yet another disappointment. For Blumhouse there are more hits than there are flops. For Jeff Wadlow? He's 0-3.

"Let me tell you a story. A story of a great king."

Let me begin by admitting that the original 1994 classic animation feature film The Lion King has remained my all-time favorite animated film. It wasn't just the Elton John/Tim Rice songs, but that didn't hurt. I've been an Elton John fan as far back as I can remember. There was just something special, something timeless, in that film. Since that time I regard it as the very last breath of the Walt Disney Studios classic animation. It started the studio's last string of hits, and it was the end of an era. So that film has become somewhat bittersweet for me. The animated sequels were low-budget made-for-video quality, and the more recent "live action" version did not impress me with anything more than the technology it displayed. The heart has been gone for a long time. With the release of Mufasa, Walt Disney is attempting to pull on the heartstrings of people like me who love the original. Sometimes they pulled it off. Sometimes they did not. The film has its moments, and it certainly has its flaws. With all of that said, I expect it will generate pretty good box office numbers, and while its legacy won't last half as long as that of the 1994 film, it's good family entertainment, which has been missing from Walt Disney Studios for nearly a decade. Maybe the studio has learned something of late. If that's true, I welcome what is yet to come, and Mufasa is a pretty solid start.

I always found it a bit funny when Hollywood churns out movies that have similar plots to compete against each other. Back in the 90s Armageddon dueled the same year with Deep Impact, when disaster films were all the rage. 2024 had the same situation, though not in the form of big blockbusters, but this time in the form of two horror films about nuns and strange pregnancies taking place within the confines of the convent. The prequel to The Omen was better than I had anticipated, and when Immaculate was released, I just never got around to seeing it … at least until now. While The First Omen is a slow burn that actually pairs well with the first film, Immaculate I feel is the more bloody and popcorn-friendly romp that I feel fits into the sub-genre of nunsploitation (something I wouldn’t object to seeing more of).  So is this film worth congregating in front of the television for 90 minutes, or is this a hard pass in a year that seems to flourish with quality horror films, but not much of anything else?

Cecilia (Sweeney) is travelling from the States to live in Italy, where she is going to take her vows to the church. She’s been devout to her faith ever since she survived falling through the ice and nearly drowning. We don’t really get much more about her life back in the States, and that’s fine. The film does a good job of quickly establishing who Cecilia is. She’s sweet but naïve; you know, basically catnip for those with bad intentions in a horror film. The first friend Cecilia makes at the convent is ironically a nun with a bad-girl streak who joined the church more out of convenience than out of faith. Of course there are other members of the church. Most are just used to be ominous figures, but mostly the focus is on Cecilia and the main priest at the convent, Father Sal Tedeschi (Alvaro Morte).