REVIEW: Jem and the Holograms

I'd like to begin by saying that I am a tremendous fan of the original Jem and the Holograms cartoon. It's a delightful hunk of 80's cheese that's as catchy and charming as it is oddly compelling; more than half the episodes involve something ridiculous, like time travel or a sabotaged movie set, only for something utterly mundane (like a lawsuit or labor unions) to save the day in the end. When I heard that a film adaptation was in the works, I couldn't wait. Not because I expected anything good, mind, but because I anticipated something that would be a catastrophic failure. Something that would not only completely miss the point of the source material, but would also provide endless comic fodder for me to pick apart and heckle as I watched. And good lord was I ever not disappointed.

The plot focuses on young orphan, Jerrica Benton (Aubrey Peeples); together with her foster sisters (Stefanie Scott, Aurora Perrineau, and Hayley Kiyoko), she forms the titular band and rockets to super-stardom after a video of Jerrica singing (incognito as "Jem", to combat stage fright) goes viral on YouTube. The girls are swept up by record producer Erica Raymond (a man in the original cartoon, here portrayed by Juliette Lewis) and flung into a world of glamour, glitter, fashion, and fame. It's your standard "kids get famous, drama ensues, everyone eventually forgives one another" story that's been told a million times before, only stretched out to fill two hours. Whenever the film isn't focusing on all that well-trodden ground, it diverts to a subplot involving a robot built by Jerrica's father, Synergy. In the cartoon, Synergy was a supercomputer capable of projecting holograms onto the band to alter their appearance (hence the name of the show). Here, Synergy (spelled "S1N3RGY", because of course Hollywood would make a change as stupid and pointless as that) is a diminutive cross between Gizmo-Duck and a Weeble that communicates through beat-boxing and leads the girls on a treasure hunt. Spoiler alert, the treasure is an encouraging message from Jerrica's father that she basically already recieved (and didn't particularly need), making this subplot entirely pointless.

"Entirely pointless" is really the phrase of the day with this film; so little of the plot actually matters. It's two hours long, yet there's hardly any conflict to speak of. The band needs to uncover the secret of Synergy and find out what Emmett Benton wanted to tell his daughters. So they do, without any major problems. They need to break into a heavily guarded building (despite the fact that they all work in this building and therefore would have a perfect excuse to get past security). Although unnecessary, the break-in is successful and they escape without a hitch. The band breaks up after Jerrica decides to sign a solo contract in an attempt to save their adoptive aunt's house. She saves the house, has a little cry about it, and the band is back together about five minutes later. It's baffling to me how the filmmakers could take a cartoon with so much action and imagination and water it down into the blandest product possible. The best scene in the entire movie takes place after the credits have rolled, and it's only because that's the only time in the entire film that the tone begins to get anywhere near as absurd as that of the source material.

I would be remiss if I didn't call attention to this film's blatant use of viral videos. In order to update the story of Jem for the modern era, the band rises to prominence after a YouTube video goes viral, netting them overnight stardom. In keeping with this theme, the filmmakers attempt to integrate YouTube videos of aspiring musicians into the film in the sloppiest way possible. Instead of having an actual soundtrack, the film will occasionally stop, cut to a low-res YouTube video, then cut back to the film. It does this constantly and it's exactly as jarring as it sounds. I'm not sure if I've ever felt direct contempt for a film's aesthetic before, but Jem and the Holograms certainly managed to pull it off.

 You'd expect that a movie about a rock band (based off of a cartoon that had at least two unique, original songs per episode) would be positively lousy with catchy tunes. Instead, I'm not entirely certain this film has an actual soundtrack; it's all lackluster, distractingly out of place viral videos of indie kids drumming on garbage bins or something similarly trendy and unique. There's three concert sequences, each featuring a song that sounds like a bland, generic pop hit from today, rather than the wild 80's glam-rock that the Jem name suggests. It would have been so easy for this film to earn brownie points by giving us a cover of the classic theme song (or even a few of the songs from the actual show), but we couldn't even get that. It just feels like a soulless, cheap production through and through. Travel transitions are done through Google Maps (with copyrights and watermarks clearly visible at all times), montages are littered with unrelated stock footage sloppily edited to make sense in context, and it makes liberal use of YouTube videos of people gushing about the Jem cartoon (which doesn't make a lick of sense, considering the cartoon has a completely different look and logo than the in-film band), but I digress.

Usually, with a movie like this, I would offer some kind words like "at least it looked like they were having fun" or "they did the best with what they had", but I can't think of anything nice to say here. To be totally fair, no one really gives a bad performance, but the writing is bland, the story is contrived and needlessly complicated, and the entire aesthetic of this film is cheap, sloppy, and effortless. When one looks at the mega-bucks Hasbro pumps into their various other franchises and compares it to Jem and the Holograms' measly five-million dollar budget, it's clear that the studio had no faith in their product from the get-go. And this is a studio that continually allows Michael Bay to make Transformers films. Jem and the Holograms, sadly, is a film for no one. It's too different and spiritless for Jem fans while conversely being too cheap and derivative of other films (like Pitch Perfect) for everyone else. That said, I hope and pray in vain that this gets a sequel, if only to expand upon the fantastic mid-credits scene. This lone, short sequence represents everything that the rest of the film should have been; the absolute worst thing about Jem and the Holograms is that its dismal box office earnings thus far have all but guaranteed that we won't get to see more of what was teased once the credits rolled. Truly, truly, truly disappointing.

REVIEW: A Magic Puppy

I honestly don't know where to begin with this. If you had just experienced what I did, you wouldn't either. I'm one of those people that can appreciate a really bad movie. Even something like The Room has its purpose within the annals of cinematic history, even if it's just as a massive joke. But every once in a while, a film comes along that shakes this belief of mine to the core. A film that makes me question my outlook on the medium, as well as my own sanity. A film that makes The Room look like Taxi Driver. When I dove to the bottom of the Halloween Favorites category on Netflix and decided to watch A Magic Puppy, I didn't realize that I was about to watch one such film.

I hesitate to use the word "plot". The word "plot" suggests some form of structure; a story born from a writer's mind after a kind of creative spark fired through their synapses and inspired them to put pen to paper. A tale that, once imagined, simply begged to be told, to be born unto this world by way of the art of cinema. No, what A Magic Puppy has, in lieu of a plot, is an idea. Not even a good idea, but an idea nonetheless. That idea is, "Eric Roberts turns into a dog". Yes, that Eric Roberts. "Mongul from Justice League, Sal Maroni from The Dark Knight" Eric Roberts. When he's not a dog, he's wishing he was in a different movie. When he is a dog, he provides a voice-over that makes me want to buy him a hot meal. This movie serves to do nothing but make me depressed.

Every single thing here is wrong. This entire movie is an exercise in unpleasantness. I'm honestly finding it difficult to verbalize my displeasure here, this is just the worst thing I've ever watched. I wish I could just end this review at that, but I feel like it would be something of a cop-out. That raises the question, is A Magic Puppy worth the time I would spend writing a legitimate review? Is it worth your time to read whatever I write? These are the kinds of questions a person begins to ask themselves after they survive a near-death experience or watch A Magic Puppy.

I'm a firm believer in the idea that the worst thing a film can be is boring; A Magic Puppy is most definitely boring, but the filmmakers went out of their way to make sure it covers all the other worst things a film can be while they're at it. This entire movie appears to have been shot on a handheld; the frame wobbles about, the microphone picking up footsteps and ambient noise. It makes you wonder what poor fool managed the bad luck of not only being involved with this production, but also being cheaper than a tripod and an external microphone. Everyone here gives an awful performance, even the dog. The opening sequence is five solid minutes of stock Halloween music over animated clip-art and stock dog photos; several of the images are clearly just pictures of Bela Lugosi with his eyes and mouth edited out. This is the level of artistry A Magic Puppy establishes right from the get-go.

If you're wondering where Halloween comes into all of this (considering it's so prominently featured on the poster and opening credits), the movie takes place roughly around Halloween. The main kid who looks and acts just like Justin Bieber (ie. totally unappealing in every way) enjoys Halloween to the point that he's still planning to go trick-or-treating despite appearing to be in his early 20's. His girlfriend also dabbles in Paganism as a "hobby". I was going to say that the best thing I could say about this movie is that it wasn't offensive in any way, but I'd be lying. This is a picture that is constantly at war with whomever dares watch it, doing its absolute best to make the audience regret their decision to press play. The writing is clunky, redundant, and nonsensical; the only remotely strong piece of dialog is lifted wholesale out of Army of Darkness. Apparently the writer loved Army of Darkness enough to blatantly steal the "Klaatu, Verata, Necktie" bit, but not enough to properly pronounce "Necronomicon" (here referred to as "neh-crow-muh-con").

A Magic Puppy is a hateful film. Take the amateur camerawork, inane script, and lifeless performances from a mediocre porn flick, remove the sex, and add a puppy. I despise this film with everything that I am and I can't help but feel that the film feels the same way about me. Only something with a malevolent consciousness could have wrought such a film upon the world. If you're looking to hurt yourself this Halloween, skip the razor-bladed candy apples and just watch A Magic Puppy.

REVIEW: The Taking of Deborah Logan

As much as I love horror movies, it's rare that I find a film that I actually find to be scary anymore. Sure, there's movies that are well put-together or that happen to make those midnight trips to the bathroom slightly more harrowing, but I haven't seen many things lately that have actually had me curled up in my seat, my spine seemingly filled to the brim with liquid dread. Fear is, of course, a subjective thing (so take the following statement with an appropriate amount of salt), but I personally found The Taking of Deborah Logan to be one of the scariest movies I've ever seen.

Framed as a documentary about Alzheimer's, the film follows a production crew of grad students as they record the daily life of Sarah Logan (Anne Ramsay) and her mother, Deborah (Jill Larson). As is the case with such movies, things appear normal at first, until Deborah's sporadic behavior implies that something much more sinister may be afoot.

It's hardly an original premise, but the film's worth lies mainly in the execution of the concept and the performances of its cast. The documentary facade is truthfully never really that believable; some of the cuts and angles are just a bit too clean for college students filming on a handheld. However, this framing device works to the benefit of the atmosphere. When a character is filming in a dark room, our field of vision is greatly hindered; you never quite know what is lurking just outside of your periphery, and the first-person shots really help to immerse the viewer in the creepy happenings on screen. It's safe to say that, had this movie been shot in a traditional fashion, it would have totally fallen flat. It's also worth noting that it rarely falls into the classic pitfalls of the found-footage genre; while it does dabble in stuttering shaky-cam, this only comes into play during the tense climax, adding to the feeling of disorientation and discomfort.

Everyone here gives excellent performances, but the stand-out star by far is Jill Larson, as the titular Deborah Logan. She exhibits such a wide range of emotions throughout this entire movie, switching from sweet and docile to sinister and crazed in the blink of an eye. When we first meet her, she could easily be anyone's mother or aunt; as the movie progresses, her condition only deteriorates more and more to the point that she's hardly recognizable by the end of it all. She's totally unpredictable, keeping the audience on edge whenever she's on screen. Before the supernatural elements are even suggested, her behaviors and episodes are wholly convincing, establishing a tragic, uncomfortable atmosphere before things begin to get terrifying. This is a movie where the audience is never allowed to relax; even when nothing bad is really happening, there's a distinct undercurrent of dread that keeps the tension from ever really dying.

I must also praise the special effects on display here as well; this is not a flashy movie by any means. Far too many horror films these days are all too eager to show off their gore and monsters, the logic of course being that all the money and work that went into the effect warrants it being clearly shown to the audience. This is a film, however, that holds back. When something terrifying happens, we're given just the slightest glimpse; before we can fully process what we've seen, it's gone, and our brain fills in the gaps. It's a commitment to subtlety that I can wholly respect and which pays off majorly in the film's benefit. There was one instance of gore that, thanks to the way it was shot, remains one of the most squirmifying effects I've ever seen out of a modern horror film.

The Taking of Deborah Logan is a film that, by all rights, shouldn't be as effective as it is. The premise is standard fare and it does have its share of cheats, where the scare is delivered via a loud noise or a sudden movement (or occasionally both at the same time). It is by no means a movie without flaws; however, I feel that it definitely works around these flaws thanks to its strong camera work and even stronger performances. Granted, it won't give you anything revolutionary or mind-blowing, but then I feel that that wasn't what the film set out to do. The film set out to scare the hell out of people; I can only speak for myself, but I think it most definitely succeeded. It's the cinematic equivalent of a haunted attraction; at times, you can see the cracks in the facade, but chances are you'll spend the majority of the next hour and a half getting your pants scared off. It may not leave much of a lasting impression, but it certainly did its job. It's basically a haunted house, but a damn good one at that.

REVIEW: Crimson Peak

Of all the films to be released in 2015, there were few I was as excited for as Guillermo del Toro's Crimson Peak; from the fantastic Hellboy series to the loads-of-fun Pacific Rim, del Toro has become one of my favorite directors, displaying a sheer knack for paying tribute to the films and aesthetics of bygone eras presented in his own unique style. Still the question remains, did Crimson Peak match the standards set by my excitement? The answer is yes, though most definitely not in the way I had expected.

The film concerns young Edith Cushing (Mia Wasikowska), an aspiring author and daughter of a well-off industrialist (Jim Beaver). After falling in love with the mysterious Baronet Thomas Sharpe (Tom Hiddleston), Edith finds herself married and whisked away to England, living in the Sharpe family home of Allerdale Hall with Thomas and his shrewd sister, Lucille (Jessica Chastain). Once Edith arrives, however, a number of mysterious happenings suggest that all is not what it seems, uncovering the grisly secrets which lie within the walls of the decrepit estate. 

It is very important to note, I feel, that this is by no means a ghost movie. This is a movie which happens to contain ghosts; it is not a Conjuring or a Poultergeist, where the characters are terrorized by supernatural forces. If anything, I would say that the film is most clearly influenced by The Shining moreso than anything else (an influence that I felt became increasingly evident during the stellar final act). The spirits found in this movie look and act appropriately terrifying (thankfully appearing as grisly practical effects, subtly touched-up and enhanced through the use of CGI), but they are not the primary focus of the film. Anyone entering the theater expecting a fast-paced horror film that will make them jump and shriek will surely be disappointed; the director himself has referred to the movie as a "Gothic romance" rather than a horror film. It's a classification I find to be wholly accurate; it's got excellent tension, atmosphere, and scenery, but a creepy, jumpy ghost flick it is most certainly not.

The cast here is all-around excellent, though I would be lying if I didn't say that Jessica Chastain's Lucille Sharpe didn't completely steal the show. The character is played with such an intense air of mystery; she's a complete blank slate, impossible to read or predict. For the majority of the runtime, she remains the lone wild card in the cast, her motivations, history, and actions constantly in question. That's not to say that the rest of the cast is composed of open books; this is a very mysterious film after all, but Chastain plays the part perfectly. To say much more would delve into blatant spoiler territory, so I will simply say that Chastain provided one of my absolute favorite performances out of all of 2015.

As much as I enjoyed Lucille, however, my favorite character in the film by far was the setting of Allerdale Hall itself. With its cavernous hallways and ancient service elevator, it's a strong contender for "most evil-looking house ever committed to film". This is a movie that is positively dripping with character; the set design is worth the price of admission alone. If anyone was ever not convinced that del Toro possessed a distinct talent for visual design and aesthetic (which would be somewhat baffling, considering he made Pan's Labyrinth), this is the film that will convince them. It's simply a gorgeous movie, a picture with a distinct and iconic look to it that will surely be remembered for decades to come. The set design, contrasting colors, and gorgeous score all work in tandem to create a magnificent tone; it is this tone that makes this movie work. Strip away the atmosphere and you've got a handful of strong performances at play within an intriguing mystery, but the aesthetic that this film possesses is what makes Crimson Peak into the movie that it is.

While I wouldn't exactly call it a horrifying thrill-ride, Crimson Peak most definitely won me over with its stellar cast, engaging plot, and superb atmosphere. It's a respectable throwback to the Gothic horror films of the past, drawing the audience into its world of macabre and mystery without ever once resorting to a single jump-scare. If you're looking for something a little more chilling than thrilling this Halloween season, I highly recommend you head to the theater and take a visit to Crimson Peak.

REVIEW: Sleepy Hollow

It's a shame that these days I find myself almost wanting to refer to Tim Burton as a "guilty pleasure" of mine, considering his work used to be so genuinely good. Looking at his filmography from the 80's and 90's, it's clear that the man was an artist who, like George Lucas, should never have been allowed access to a computer. Because his catalog of work is so black and white (both literally and figuratively, in some cases), I really didn't know what I was going to get when I decided to watch 1999's Sleepy Hollow.

Taking place at the end of the 1700's, the film follows Constable Ichabod Crane (Johnny Depp) as he attempts to solve the mystery of a series of grisly beheadings plaguing the quiet village of Sleepy Hollow. Upon arriving and familiarizing himself with the town's influential citizens (all played by fabulous British actors and Jeffrey Jones), he is told that the culprit behind the killings is none other than the Headless Horseman (Christopher Walken), the vengeful spirit of a ruthless Hessian mercenary who was killed during the American Revolution. With more and more townspeople turning up headless, it is up to Crane and a young orphan named Masbeth (Marc Pickering) to get to the bottom of things and restore order in the Hollow.

Right off the bat, the movie looks fantastic; if there's one thing Tim Burton knows, it's visual design. Aside from a few instances of poorly-aged CGI, the film is by and large a tremendous treat to look at. Burton's use of washed-out backgrounds with contrasting elements of color make for a great Gothic aesthetic, perfectly establishing the tone and time period. It's not fantastical enough to feel like a fairy tale, yet not grounded enough to look like an account of history; it's the ideal balance for the look of an American folk tale taking place in the late Autumn. Danny Elfman's score works in perfect harmony with Burton's visuals (as always) to immerse the viewer in the story being told.

That said, it's worth noting that Burton had nothing to do with the screenplay; visuals can only go so far, and while the story is both interesting and engaging, the script tends to be a little muddled here and there. Names and titles are dumped out with such fervor that we hardly have time to match them to a face. Aside from Crane and Katrina (Christina Ricci), the entire cast is totally static and given no amount of characterization. Despite the artful visuals, this is, at its heart, a simple slasher film. Outside of the protagonist, everyone else is merely a prop for the Horseman to potentially behead while Ichabod scrambles to solve the mystery. Speaking of, I do wish that the mystery of the Horseman was kept unsolved for longer than it was; at first, no one is certain whether or not the killings are in fact supernatural in nature or not. It's established that it is possible for an average man to dress up as the Headless Horseman and chase people down, so it may or may not be a genuine haunting. However, the question is explicitly answered less than halfway through the runtime; granted, another mystery is raised in its place, but I really enjoyed the mystique that followed the Horseman legend.

The Horseman himself is a cool, if not particularly deep, villain. He's got a threatening presence about him when he hasn't got a head, though I find Christopher Walken to be an odd casting choice. He still looks like Christopher Walken, so it gets to be distracting when he shows his face. Furthermore, he doesn't do much acting aside from baring his teeth and going "AAAARRHHH"; the Headless Horseman does not have a single non-yelling line in this entire movie, which is a shame considering he's easily the most fascinating element of this entire movie.

On the other hand, Johnny Depp is by far the highlight here. While the other members of the cast all do well (particularly the cabal of town leaders played by Michael Gambon, Richard Griffiths, Ian McDiarmid, Michael Gough, and Jeffrey Jones), none of them hold a candle to Depp. He completely disappears into the role of Crane, coming off as inquisitive and hilariously cowardly while thrust into the role of protagonist. It's a credit to Depp's talent as an actor when one compares his role as Ichabod Crane to a character like Jack Sparrow. While his attempts at comedy all work (mainly because they're for the most part subtle), the rest of the film doesn't fare as well; there's several moments where the excellent tone is completely shattered by some odd attempt at humor. For example, there's an otherwise great scene where Ichabod witnesses the Horseman murder someone right in front of him. As the Horseman's sword connects with his victim's neck, the head spins around comically before rolling down a hill and landing mouth-first over Johnny Depp's crotch. It's kind of baffling that a scene with such a strongly-established tone would be interrupted by a bizarre attempt at comedic relief in a film that doesn't really require it at all.

Despite a few cracks in the otherwise stellar tone and a somewhat bland script, Sleepy Hollow is still an entertaining time. It's an interesting mystery showcased within a masterfully crafted Burton aesthetic; while it's not particularly deep, it's manages to be an enjoyable slasher flick with a really fun Johnny Depp performance. If you're looking for something to watch that compliments the fallen leaves on the ground outside, you could definitely do a lot worse than Sleepy Hollow.

REVIEW: What We Do in the Shadows

If there's one thing I'm sick of, it's modern vampire movies. Not to reach for the extremely low-hanging fruit, but I feel the concept has lost its teeth in recent years, shifting more onto the "tragically sympathetic romance novel protagonist" side of things. Like with zombies, it seems that vampires have become a bit too popular for their own good as of late; everything has become sort of homogenized and bland aside from the real standout examples of originality. As the zombie movie has Shaun of the Dead, so too does the vampire flick have What We Do in the Shadows.

Taking the form of a documentary, the film follows the afterlives of a group of vampires living together in a New Zealand flat; Viago (Taika Waititi), Vladislav (Jemaine Clement), Deacon (Johnny Brugh), and Petyr (Ben Fransham). Together they stalk the Wellington night life scene in search of fresh victims. Despite the many perks to being an undead prowler of the night, the group also has to deal with the various trials and tribulations that come with a group of guys sharing a flat; getting the chores done, keeping blood off the furniture, and dealing with the constant threat of sunlight and vampire hunters. They also must deal with the addition of Nick (Cori Gonzalez-Macuer), a would-be meal who ends up joining the ranks of the predeceased. It's a concept that is positively brilliant in its simplicity; the myth of the vampire has grown and changed over the ages, providing no shortage of jumping off points for hilarious scenarios. They're typically portrayed as such brooding, dramatic creatures that it's just funny to see them having to wash the dishes or asking to be invited inside of a bar. It's a very simple form of humor that works out perfectly thanks to the performances of the main cast. There's an abundance of improvisation at play here and the film is all the better for it. It gives everything a raw, organic feeling that just makes things so much funnier as a whole; it's one thing to write a scripted scenario where vampires get into a drunken altercation with some werewolves, but a whole other thing to give that scenario to some really hilarious actors and tell them to just go with it. 

The special effects on display here are all very minimalist, but I feel as though that works to great effect with the humor. Something about actors being tugged around on wires to give the illusion that they're floating will always be amusing; that said, there's also some shots that really get creative and work surprisingly well within the extremely low budget (for example, a fistfight that was shot with the use of a rotating hallway set). The most important thing, however, is that it all looks consistent. When it comes to low-budget movies like this, it's not uncommon for the filmmakers to overstep their bounds with the special effects, attempting to show the audience too much. Fortunately, this film never runs into such an issue; it would have been very easy to take a concept like "vampires sharing a house" and shoehorn in some big, flashy, immersion-breaking effects shot that the production couldn't really afford (see Knights of Badassdom). Through some nifty camera tricks and clever techniques, the film avoids anything that takes the viewer out of the experience; it knows exactly what it's got to work with and it uses it well.

Horror-comedy is a tricky genre to nail down; in anything that's a comedy hybrid, it's safe to assume that there will be some form of satire or parody involved. Satire and parody are not exactly the simplest forms of humor to get right, requiring certain degrees of cleverness and subtlety. Some films grasp this quite well (Shaun of the Dead, Tucker and Dale VS Evil) while other films do not (Scary Movie V); thankfully, What We Do in the Shadows is by far the former. It's a hilarious flick that I already can't wait to watch again; definitely don't pass this one up.

REVIEW: The Monster Squad

I absolutely love October. Thanks to Halloween, we get an entire month of candy and costumes and horror movies, all before Christmas begins to loom over us like the holly jolly monolith it is. To celebrate, I've decided to review something appropriately spooky each week of the month, starting with a cult gem from the 80's, The Monster Squad.

The plot plays out like a Goonies Halloween Special; a group of kids obsessed with classic monster movies come into the possession of the diary of Dr. Abraham Van Helsing. The book describes a magical amulet with the power to cast the forces of evil into Limbo; naturally, the aformentioned forces of evil want to get their hands on it. Count Dracula (Duncan Regehr) assembles a crack team of creatures, summoning Frankenstein's Monster (Tom Noonan), the Wolfman (Carl Thibault), the Mummy (Michael MacKay), and the Gillman (Tom Woodruff Jr) to help him retrieve and destroy the amulet. Truthfully, the technical aspects of the story don't hold up in the slightest. Was the Wolfman just a normal guy before Dracula appeared, or did he always know he was a dormant werewolf? Why doesn't Dracula have an accent of any kind? Was the Gillman just hanging out in that lake for the past however many years until Dracula summoned him? He gives Frankenstein's Monster life and threatens the Wolfman with a silver cane, but why do Mummy and Gillman obey him? There's a lot to nitpick with this one, but if you're nitpicking The Monster Squad, then I'm afraid you've missed the point entirely.

This is by no means a profound or groundbreaking film; one of the protagonists is literally referred to as "fat kid" half the time and the magical amulet is about as oddly specific as a plot device can get. However, the picture more than makes up for it in sheer amounts of fun. Every little thing about this movie is totally endearing, from the surprisingly competent child actors to the classic look of the monsters. The special effects range from fantastic creatures made by Stan Winston to charmingly classic bats on strings. The set design takes us everywhere from suburban streets to Gothic haunted houses and castles. It's like if someone made a movie based entirely off of the Halloween decorations found in an elementary school classroom, it's just classic spooky fun. It manages to be a complete and utter 80's time capsule while feeling somehow timeless altogether.

The Monster Squad is just a delightful movie from beginning to end. While it doesn't have much to offer in terms of depth, I feel it's definitely worth its weight in fun. An often overlooked throwback from a time when childrens' movies were full of blood and swearing, The Monster Squad is an all-around good time; if you're looking for something more kooky than spooky this Halloween season, I highly recommend you give this one a watch.