MARTYRS LANE

 

Going in to watching “Martyrs Lane”, I basically knew nothing other than that it was a horror film, and that it had been well received at this year's Fantasia Film Festival. I hadn't watched a trailer nor seen a poster for it, so I went into it as fresh as you could get. By the end of it, I had been totally bowled over by this delicate and subtle ghost story that, while I would still classify it as horror, is really about the fragility of life, and just how hard it is to move on with life when filled with such terrible grief.

Ten year old Leah lives with her older sister and parents at the local church, where her father works. While she has a close relationship with her dad, Leah always feels a distance from her mother. Fascinated by the locket that her mother always wears around her neck, the young girl steals the mysterious keepsake one night when her curiosity becomes too much. When she opens the locket, the precious contents blow out her bedroom window, which is the catalyst for her family's past to awaken once more. Leah is soon visited at her bedroom window by a young girl dressed in an angel's costume, who claims to be Leah's guardian angel. Leah does not believe the angel, who tries to convince her through the children's game of “two truths, one lie”. She tells Leah three things, with one of them being exactly where to find the object she has lost, which begins a kind of treasure hunt for the young girl that will ultimately unlock the past she never knew about.

This is such a beautiful film that I immediately fell in love with it. Whilst I normally try to keep away from spoilers in my reviews for new release films, I think it will be hard to talk about what I found so great about “Martyrs Lane” without going into certain details that would be considered spoilers, so I suggest that if you want to go into the film as blind as possible, then to stop reading this review and only return to it once you have watched the film yourself. In other words “SPOILER WARNING!!”

As I mentioned above, I had no idea what type of horror story I was walking into with “Martyrs Lane”, but it turned out to be the most beautiful ghost story, reminiscent of Guillermo Del Toro's “The Devil's Backbone”. This apt comparison has to do with the fact that the ghosts in both films are not insidious in nature, but are more representations of ghosts of the past. “Martyrs Lane” is the rare quiet and sensitive type of horror film, that is very slowly paced and is more about the unfolding of a mystery as opposed to focusing on blood or scares. It has been beautifully directed by Ruth Platt (who also wrote the film), who has created a magical, fairy tale atmosphere and aesthetic for her film, that suits the story wonderfully. I loved the way she slowly opened up the story to us, as we only learn things about the past as young Leah does herself. The whole thing unfolds so naturally and never feels forced. I also loved the way Platt was able to use misdirection in a way that you kept you on edge as to where the story was going, only to pull the rug out from under you when the truth is revealed. Not only that, but when the truth does come out and you re-evaluate all these other scenes with this new information, you can see that Platt never once cheated with these scenes and that they still make perfect sense. You always sense something is going on, and it feels like that it could involve a cult or something like that, but the truth ends up being much simpler and normal but no less rewarding.

The film is superbly acted by everyone, but especially so by the two young girls who play Leah and her guardian angel (Kiera Thompson and Sienna Sayer respectively). Having two children lead your film, I imagine would be a scary prospect, but both girls are wonderful in their roles. They both have an innocence to them especially when they are giggling and playing games together. I suppose it will be no surprise to anyone that the guardian angel is actually the ghost of the film, and her identity is the core mystery. Whilst it appears to Leah that the games they are playing together are there to help her find the contents of her mother's locket that she lost, in actual fact, the angel is giving her clues that will reveal who she is and what happened to her. It appears everyone has a lot to hide, particularly the mother, as the worry on their faces indicate when these clues and objects start to resurface. I must say that I absolutely loved the design of the angel. She looks dead, broken, decaying and cold, and yet has a sweet fairy tale quality to her too. Ironically, she comes across as the more alive of the two girls. Leah on the other hand has been brought up in a strict, religious household, with her mother being particularly hard on her. Therefore it takes a little longer for Leah to loosen up and have fun with her new friend, but as the movie goes on, the two start playing like sisters. This is clearly something that Leah has been yearning for, as her older sister is at the age where she is just about to leave for college, and thus has little time for her other than to bully or harass her.

The visual side of “Martyrs Lane” is just sublime, with lovely earthy cinematography (again, evoking the fairy tale look). The film is also filled with a large number of mirror shots, either the image being shot off of the mirror, or important objects or people being visible in mirrors within a certain shot. The mirror imagery also has a point to it which is explained via a line of dialogue spoken by the mother late in the film. A personal visual fetish I love in films is curtain imagery, where characters wrap their faces or bodies in sheer curtains almost like a wedding veil, and this film has many of those images which all have to do with the guardian angel. I have no idea why I find these images so beautiful, but they never fail to impress me when they show up in a film. I also thought the production design of the film, particularly the house, was very impressive. It gave the world an old feel, almost like time had stopped still for a while in the house.

I think the place where people may be disappointed in “Martyrs Lane” is in its classification of being a horror film. After having this discussion many times, I know most people often define “horror films” as ones that are focused on blood, gore and murder. Slasher or body count films seem to be the definitive definition of horror, particularly to those who are not huge horror fans. Personally I believe horror can be so much more than that, and my definition of the genre is much, much broader. However, I believe most people will be disappointed in the fact that “Martyrs Lane” is far less concerned with blood and guts, and more with atmosphere, suspense, and the real life horrors of dealing with grief. This film is often what I describe as “horror-lite” in that it has limited scare scenes, but these scenes are very successful and are so because they happen off-beat. What I mean by this is that, after watching as many horror films as I have, you notice that scares play out like music, in that you know exactly what beat the scare will take place on. However Ruth Platt has brilliantly constructed her scare moments to take place “off-beat”, either just before or after a scare would normally take place, thus catching me off guard and being very effective for it. The only place I feel “Martyrs Lane” makes a mistake, and feels forced, is the two brief moments when the angel becomes somewhat demonic and aggressive. It doesn't feel real within the world that has been set up previous, and almost feels like it has been added only to appease the horror fans. These moments just do not work for me, but they are the only misstep of the film.

SPOILER WARNING! SPOILER WARNING! SPOILER WARNING! I am now going to talk about the devastating truth and ending to “Martyrs Lane”, so again if you do not want to know the truth about the film STOP READING NOW!! While it appears that everyone has something to hide, and there is some big conspiracy regarding the murder of this girl which the church may or may not be behind, the truth is so much simpler, and so heartbreaking because of it. The Angel turns out to be Leah's sister, Rachel, she never knew she had, because she died on the same day Leah was born. Her pregnant mother went into early labour after hearing the terrible news of Rachel's death via a hit/run accident. Having a terrible tragedy occur at the same time as one of the greatest moments of her life (one child died as the other was born), the poor mother had no idea how to react and basically shut down from life, which is the reason why she is so cold towards Leah. The rest of the family decide to no longer talk about Rachel, and to hide the truth from the youngest child, due to the pain it brings with it, which is why they are all so shocked when Leah keeps turning up with objects from Rachel's life. However all the ghost/angel wants is for the mother to say her name again, to not forget her, so she can move on to her next life, which is the whole reason behind the treasure hunt she sets up for Leah. Oh my god! This is the most tragic and painful ending imaginable. You feel this so much more than any silly slasher film! When the mother finally confronts her past and demons, and explains to Leah exactly what happened, she also gives the most perfect description on the fragility of life and how quickly it can all change and be taken away. She explains that life changed as quickly as “the snapping of chalk”, which really resonated with me. The whole film ends with the most devastatingly beautiful montage of Rachel's life, with the objects that Leah finds all being a part of it. END OF SPOILERS!!

Overall, I was so impressed by this little British horror film; I had no idea what I was walking into, but it exceeded my expectations by far. It has a wonderful fairy tale atmosphere to it, and although it is light on the horror, what scare scenes there are, are very effective. Beautifully shot and designed, it is one of those rare horror films that you feel a long time after it is over. While it is technically a ghost story, it is really a family tale with a ghost, but ultimately “Martyrs Lane” is about trauma, the pain of life, and grief. It will not be for everyone, especially due to its languid pace, but for me, I thought it was absolutely brilliant and a very pleasant surprise.

4 Stars.

 

MALIGNANT

 

Early hype around the film “Malignant” was mostly based on the fact that it was going to be director James Wan's return to his roots of low budget horror filmmaking. It is hard to believe that seventeen years ago, Wan (together with his best friend and creative partner Leigh Whannell) was behind the helm of a small film called “Saw”, a then unknown entity that became a moneymaking goldmine for Lions Gate Films. Whilst that series has blown out to a whopping nine entries, Wan was only in the director's chair for that first film. Personally I believe that he is the modern day equivalent of the great horror directors that we had back in the seventies and eighties like George Romero, John Carpenter, Tobe Hooper and Wes Craven. He is excellent at building atmosphere and scares, and has a clean and classic visual style that is his own. I understand that he is not everyone's cup of tea, but surely no one can deny that he is incredibly successful creating no less than three horror franchises himself (the aforementioned “Saw” series, plus “The Conjuring” and “Insidious” films). After his dreadful comic book film, “Aquaman”, I was seriously looking forward to seeing Wan return to horror, especially of the low budget variety where you seem to be able to take more chances in the type of story you can tell. Then word trickled out that “Malignant” was to be a giallo; I was convinced this was going to be amazing!

Madison is regularly tormented with terrifying nightmares depicting brutal and graphic murders. Obviously these images disturb the poor woman, but things get so much worse when she finds out that her dreams are actually reality and that she is witnessing the murders of real people. While she cannot explain the reason why, she appears to have a psychic link with the perpetrator of these crimes, and he is fully aware that Madison is watching. Fearing that she herself will be a future victim, Madison attempts to find a connection with her, only to discover that the murdered all have something in common; they all worked at an medical institution Madison stayed at when she was a very little girl, before being adopted by a loving family. Armed with only the killer's name, Gabriel, things take a turn for the strange when Madison visits her adopted mother where she informs her daughter that that was the same name she gave her imaginary friend when she was a child.

Let me qualify this review by stating that I absolutely love the fact that “Malignant” is an original story and not another remake, sequel or cookie cutter copy of the same old things we always get in horror. Thank god this was something different for once! However it is because of all this that it pains me to say that sadly “Malignant” is a bit of a dud and definitely James Wan's worst “horror” film. Also, it is nothing close to being a giallo (although in fairness, Wan did expand on this by saying this film is inspired by the “visuals” of the gialli, not that the film itself was a giallo). Instead what we ended up with was a very silly horror film, with an incredibly goofy story line, delivered in a campy tone, that while deliberate, is just not successful. Wan's second film, the shockingly underrated “Dead Silence”, was also full of camp, but was done in a manner where you would laugh with the film rather than at it, which is what we do with “Malignant”. Also, while the film is very bloody and gory (particularly in its final third), it is never scary for a second, nor does it disturb its audience.

I think the aspect of the film that I was most disappointed in was the visuals and cinematography of “Malignant”. The film was just so dark, shot in bland, dingy and dull colours. For a film that was meant to be inspired by giallo visuals, the lack of colour in it is a shock. The best examples of gialli all embrace colour to the point of over-stylisation (the colour becomes the style), and yet “Malignant” is filled with blacks, dark blues, greys and browns. I will admit that there were a couple of nice shots, namely the Brian de Palma-esque overhead shots above the rooms, and a nice shot through an eye-hole in a door, but overall I was left unimpressed by the visuals onscreen. This was definitely a surprise as this is an area where Wan usually excels in. Even Wan's set ups of his scares felt tired and cliché, reverting back to ideas he used in “Insidious” or “The Conjuring”. I understand he has his own particular visual style, but this time around, it just felt stale. Also his over reliance on flashing lights in an attempt to create fear made me roll my eyes regularly. A scene that most fan's consider the best in this film is the third act massacre at the police station, but again this was a moment I hated due to the way it had been shot. I am totally over modern filmmakers shooting a scene as if it was one shot, but has clearly been manipulated digitally. Wan does that here in this scene, and it just looks like something out of a video game, and nothing like cinema. It is a shame too because this should've been the stand out scene of “Malignant” but I just cringed during it. Another thing that I bemoaned was the constant use of cgi gore and blood because it just does not hold any weight and is easy to pick up on, thus taking you out of any scene that it is used, which in “Malignant” is a lot.

Probably the biggest surprise of “Malignant” though is just how poor the dialogue and line delivery is in the film. I get that the story is at times very wacky and out there, so the actors may have struggled to deliver lines in this environment and make it seem real, but this is another area that James Wan usually excels in. He normally gets great performances out of all of his cast, but here, the majority of the acting is deplorable. The two girls playing sisters Madison and Sydney, Annabelle Wallis and Maddie Hasson respectively, fared the best, but the rest of the cast put in shockers, particularly the pair playing the cops on the murder case. It was nice to see Australian actress Jacqueline McKenzie onscreen again, but even she too is average in the role of Madison's doctor. The very fact that Wan is usually so good at eliciting performances from his actors, makes me consider that these average performances are intentional and meant to add to the kitsch factor of “Malignant”, but if that is the case, it is still a massive fail. The worst offender though has to be Zoe Bell, who plays a butch prison inmate. Thankfully her role is very minor but her acting in this role is some of the worst I have ever seen; it is beyond embarrassing.

It sounds like I am being overly harsh on James Wan and his film “Malignant”, that you are probably wondering if there was anything I liked about the film at all. As I mentioned above, I loved that this was a new original property and not a remake or sequel of something that has come before. Aside from that, there were a few things that I liked about the film too. Whilst I think it was sadly underused, the Seattle Underground location was fantastic and created a creepy mood missing from most of the film. I also thought that the dissolving transitions of Madison's visions were well down and the visual highlight of the film. Again, while I didn't think it was realised as well as it should have been, I got a kick out of how bonkers and batshit crazy the third act of “Malignant” ultimately becomes. My favourite part of the whole film, though, was the reveal of Gabriel; the who and what he is. It is cheesy as all hell, but I had the biggest smile on my face during the reveal, as it just harkened back to the goofy horror of the 80's that we all know and love, and I just loved that Wan embraced this moment for what it was, despite how silly it all is. The fact that Wan didn't use cgi in regards to Gabriel and his movements (using a contortionist to perform the bizarre motion) also impressed me.

Overall, I think “Malignant” is a bit of a dud and certainly director James Wan's worst horror film within his impressive oeuvre. It has a myriad of problems, not least is the fact that it is very easy to work out what is going on and thus the audience is often ahead of the film itself. This causes the film to drag as it catches up on what we already know. I also think that the film has been under-cooked in areas, particularly when it comes to Gabriel's supernatural aspects in regards to electricity and technology. The film is poorly acted, and ugly to look at. Sadly, despite being very bloody and gory, “Malignant” is neither scary nor disturbing. However, the fact that it is so silly and off the wall at times, gives me hope.....(wait for it).......that I will like this a lot more in the future. I went into “Malignant” hoping for a modern giallo classic, and got nothing of the sort, so I am sure my negative reaction to the film is partly down to expectations. That said, I have to be honest and after my first viewing of “Malignant”, I ultimately thought it was overlong, silly, and a major disappointment.

2 Stars.

 

CENSOR

 

“Censor” is an excellent new independent horror film from the UK and is the directorial debut from Prano Bailey-Bond, who judging from the quality of this one film, may turn out to be an exciting new voice in the world of horror. As the title suggests, “Censor” tackles the world of censorship both in regards to art, as well as self-censorship, looking at what the brain does to cope in extraordinary circumstances.

The film takes place in Britain in the early 1980's during the height of the “Video Nasties” era. Our protagonist, Enid, is a censor for the government, whose day consists of watching violent and gory horror films, determining what scenes need to be trimmed or cut for it to see a release, or whether the film is to be banned entirely. She takes her job very seriously, believing that what she is doing is ultimately protecting the public. However her carefully curated world is turned upside down one night during a family dinner with her parents. She is rocked to her core when they explain to Enid that they are issuing a death certificate for her younger sibling, Nina, who disappeared when the two girls where children, and has never been found. When Enid tries to convince them that Nina could still be out there, her parents explain that they need to do this to be able to move on and live their lives again. Enid leaves the dinner distraught, and combined with a recent controversy that has exploded at work, she finds her mind slowly start to break. Harbouring guilt over her sister, due to the fact that they were together on the day she went missing, Enid finds it increasingly hard to cope and focus on her job. However one day when all seems lost, while watching yet another horror film, she notices an actress who is a dead ringer of her sister Nina. Attempting to bring control back to her life once more, Enid goes in search of the actress, but will this bring her the happiness and closure she needs, or will it send her down a rabbit hole of madness and despair?

Leading up to the release of “Censor”, the majority of the press I had seen about it had focused on the “Video Nasty” aspect of the story. This was a time, around the introduction of the VHS, where horror films were being banned in the UK, under the guise of protecting its citizens from the evils within these movies, wherein the truth was that these movies reflected the violence and immorality that existed in real life, particularly in Thatcher's Britain of that time. While “Censor” certainly does look at this era and makes a statement on how ridiculous it was, (with every violent crime being blamed on movies), and how dangerous censorship of art can turn out to be, personally what I think the film is really about is repression. Things we hide from ourselves and bury deep within, (ie. “self-censorship”), so that we can continue to live our lives day by day. However, no matter how deep we bury these things, if we do not deal with them properly, they ultimately end up resurfacing in the future, normally with devastating results, until we then force ourselves to look at what we have been hiding right between the eyes and deal with it front on. I think the key line of dialogue in “Censor” is “you can be surprised what the human brain can edit out when it can't handle the truth” which is spoken by one of Enid's workmates.

One of the things that I love about “Censor” the most is that it is a film that asks questions, but doesn't always give us answers to those questions, particularly in regards to the character of Enid. Enid is someone who takes life and her job, very seriously. Her appearance is very kept and proper, with never a hair out of place. She is very straight laced and appears to have little to no sense of humour. Her entire focus is that she has to get the job right; she needs to protect the public. The entire way that she holds herself gives off the illusion that she is in control. However, the brief glimpses of her home life indicate that she is very lonely and detached from the world. While she and her parents regularly talk, all the conversations are banal in nature. They are filling the space with noise, rather than actually talking and listening to one another, and this is mainly due to Enid and her inability to move on after her sister's disappearance. Tiny cracks start to appear in her illusion of control through her constant tight and aching back, and the way she keeps picking at the skin under the nails of her fingers. It doesn't take much to understand that this is a girl racked with guilt over what happened to her sister and her part in it (if any), all those years ago. However she has repressed the details to the point that she begins to question exactly what happened, how it happened, and even if there is some evil within herself that caused the disappearance. This further gets brought into question when the media dub a recent murder as the work of the “amnesiac killer” due to the fact he cannot remember the crime in question. Enid doesn't understand how someone could forget such an act, but is that because she is worried that she herself may have killed her own sister? This is further hinted at later on, when viewing a “video nasty” that she believes is based on that night in her life and comments “...but that's not how it happened”, which seems to indicate Enid knows exactly what happened, but it is just buried very deep inside her. However, the brilliance of “Censor” is in director Prano Bailey-Bond's decision not to let us in on the truth. We never find out what happened in the past, rather we become a witness to Enid's mental breakdown of the present.

The performance from Niamh Algar as Enid just screams “future star” and you cannot see that not happening if “Censor” gets the exposure it deserves. Algar is just outstanding. From the opening scenes of the quiet, prim and proper Enid, to the totally demented and unhinged quality of her performance at the end of the film, Algar always gives Enid an emotional core that we the audience can hang on to. You can feel this is a very troubled woman, and understand the reasons that may have led to where she is by the finale. I have watched “Censor” twice now, and both times I was devastated by how emotionally painful the ending is and it is all thanks to Algar's removed-from-reality performance and the look of euphoria on her face. It is so damned sad! Whilst there are other characters in the film, Algar's performance is so strong that it feels like a one woman play. She dominates the film. That said, I must give a quick shout out to Michael Smiley who is memorable in a small but pivotal role playing a particularly sleazy B-movie producer.

It is clear early on that “Censor” is director Prano Bailey-Bond's love letter to 80's horror movies. Thankfully, she shot the majority of the film on 35mm, which was the only choice to give it that authentic 80's feel. It feels of the era which is important. While the film's early moments at the censor's office are done in a non-flashy way, filled with a muted colour pallet, when the finale in the woods takes place, “Censor” suddenly expands into an “Evil Dead” aesthetic, and neon colours start to bleed into frame from the sides. And while there isn't a huge amount of blood and gore, no doubt “Friday the 13th” fans will be standing and applauding a late movie decapitation that is a perfect redux of Mrs. Vorhees demise in the original film. I must make mention of the use of video footage too, which I would normally rebel against, but this fits the story here perfectly and the execution of its use is spot on. I absolutely loved the brutal flashes of reality against fantasy at the end, which was achieved via editing through the tracking lines on the picture. It is just brilliant. The other thing I must mention in regards to the visuals, is the change of aspect ratio during Enid's continual descent into madness as she struggles to determine what is real. Beginning in the wide 2:35 aspect ratio, the screen continually shrinks the deeper Enid succumbs to her madness, until it ends up the 4x3 square size that all VHS's used back in that time. Enid no longer can tell if what she is seeing is real life or movie, and Bailey-Bond explains this perfectly via this visual trick.

Overall, I was really looking forward to seeing “Censor” and it thankfully did not disappoint. Many times on this blog, I have admitted my love of movies that explore the mental breakdown of a character and this film now sits favourably with classics of the genre like “Repulsion”. My biggest fear is during this era of COVID-19 that “Censor” will not find the audience it deserves because I think that both its director and star deserve to become huge from this. “Censor” is a wonderfully disturbing film, that doesn't answer all the questions it poses and I love it for that. It also has the most brutal and devastating (from an emotional standpoint) ending imaginable that has destroyed me both times that I have watched the film. I am a huge fan of Prano Bailey-Bond's “Censor” and recommend it wholeheartedly to horror fans everywhere.

4 Stars.