Halloween 2026: September 29th

 

Coherence (2013)
 

Among the “Buffy the Vampire Slayer” cast members, Nicholas Brendon did not have the best post-show career. One can only assume that his well publicized personal problems effected his ability to book steady gigs. Presumably, his related substance abuse issues contributed to his untimely passing earlier this year, at the age of only 54. Though it has become popular to hate on the character, Xander was always one of my faves. Brendon's way with dialogue and easy-going presence was a big reason why. I wanted to honor his memory by watching a film featuring the guy this season. While the temptation to critically re-evaluate “Pinata: Survival Island” was there, I decided to look at the probable high-light of his film career. That would be 2013's “Coherence,” a micro-budget sci-fi indie that got stellar reviews upon release and continues to make brains itchy to this day. 

In the sky, Miller's Comet makes a rare close-pass by Earth. Eight old friends gather at the home of Mike and Lee for a dinner. Emily's cell phone screen shatters as she's talking to boyfriend, Kevin, who is also attending. Two other couples – Hugh and Beth, Amir and Laurie (who used to date Kevin) – also soon show up. What starts out as a casual dinner takes a strange turn when the power mysteriously goes out. A trip outside shows that the entire neighborhood has gone black, save for one house... A house that looks a lot like Mike and Lee's, with a table set for eight inside. Hugh's brother is a physicist and instructed him to call, if “anything strange” happens. That sets up the clear realization that the comet passing overhead has opened up a gateway between alternate realities. The house guests soon begin to question from which realities each of them have originated and the mechanics of the situation they are in. Inevitably, things take a deadly turn.

Films that are described as brain teasers, those motion pictures that present Big Ideas within the context of complex plots, cause me to think of the opening line of Demi Adejuyigbe's Letterboxd write-up of “I'm Thinking of Ending Things.” “Too dumb to understand this.” “Coherence” is not quite as convoluted or layered in its plotting as that film or “Primer,” the other indie sci-fi success it's most often compared to. However, this is still a motion picture that takes its time to explain what quantum coherence is. (Though incorrectly.) The thought experiment of Schrodinger's Cat is brought up multiple times. The film doesn't merely use the concept of alternate realities as a starting point, like most stories concerning the subject does. It sets out to deliberately confuse the audience. The viewer is meant to be as jumbled up and uncertain about what is happening as the characters are. I also suspect that the viewer is meant to catch on to how this works around the same time the characters do. That moment never came to me. The mechanics of “Coherence's” multiverse alluded me. The way it is determined who is from w hat reality or when the switch might have taken place went over my head. I'm not a total idiot. I get that the image in the night sky of the comet breaking into countless pieces represents the infinite directions our life can go in. Nevertheless, I was still stumped by much of this.

The somewhat confusing nature of “Coherence's” script was probably a result of how the movie was made. The film was born of director James Ward Byrkit, a storyboard artist and frequent collaborator of Gore Verbinski, hoping to make a feature as cheaply as possible by shooting within his own home. He had the actors improvise much of their dialogue and many of the scenes, so that the story remained unpredictable. The narrative was then largely assembled through editing, allegedly involving a number of flow charts. It's an interesting approach to filmmaking and I admire Byrkit's chutzpah. However, through it all, maybe he should've worked on defining his characters more. The cast of “Coherence” never quite emerge as individuals to me. When it's actually part of the plot that people can shift personalities or traits from scene-to-scene, it's hard for the audience to say who any of these folks. Trying to figure out their interpersonal entanglements did not always hook me. Too often, “Coherence” amounts to one of my least favorite genre film tropes: Characters picking a moment of crisis to argue about, rehash, or escalate into screaming arguments over petty disagreements and years old resentments. 

While I definitely am dumb, I was able to get a general idea of what “Coherence's” thematic concerns are. Clearly, this is a rumination on the nature of fate. As the different versions of these characters come and go, the little ways in which they are different are reflected on. The only thing separating one version of someone from another is a small selection of choices. What object they put in a box, what number they associated with themselves. At the same time, these minor choices have clearly had an influence on their entire lives. Which presents a frightening possibility: We have no control over our own existences. The choices we make are random, determined not by ourselves but by chance. Therefore, the paths are lives take occur without any input from us. The people we are results from how the dice fall, not from what we do. I think most of us have struggled with this feeling, that the entire universe and our role in it is complete happenstance. “Coherence” comes the closest to meaningfully touching on this idea near its climax. That's when the apparent main character attempts to choose a better life for themselves from a sprawling web of alternate realities. Who hasn't fantasized about that, of a slightly better version of our own lives? Of a version of us that would be happy and successful, if only a few things had gone differently? 

I guess what I'm saying is... I can clearly see that “Coherence” is clever. I like the way it approaches big ideas within the context of a small, simple location. Approaching cosmic horror from this direction, one that threatens to make us go mad by encountering ideas at the edge of scientific comprehension, is probably a more thoughtful approach than just throwing some tentacles and eldritch abominations on-screen. At the same time, the central gimmick of “Coherence” defeats itself a bit. Eight characters is too many to easily track of, much less keep straight in a tumble of possible worlds. Still, there's plenty to admire here. And as an ode to Nicholas Brendon, it's a good one. His role clearly seems to nod towards his own run-ins with alcoholism, while still displaying the incredible charm and verve he had. I'm gonna miss that guy, much the same way I'll miss all the better worlds I could be living in if my choices had been improved. [6/10]
 

Crocodile (1979)

Chorakhe

"Jaws" had a massive impact on the world of cinema. And I do mean the "world." How much of a global success Spielberg's shark thriller was is evident in the wide range of rip-offs that emerged from various far away locations. The Italians, naturally, went hog-wild but filmmakers from Spain, Japan, Australia, India, Mexico, Turkey, Brazil and Greece also threw their hats into the pool. A popular tactic for "Jaws" knock-offs was to simply replace a shark with another water-dwelling predator. Surely, no one will notice the suspicious similarities to a mega-popular blockbuster if it's a movie about an octopus, an orca, a barracuda, piranha, a manta ray, aqua Nazis, and sometimes a bear or a car. The second most cinematic semi-aquatic muncher of limbs is, naturally, the order of Crocodilia. To the point that gator and croc movies form their own subgenre. In 1978, some lunatics in Asia got together to make the first "Jaws" rip-off with a crocodile. "Crocodile Fangs" was directed by Korean filmmaker Lee Won-se in Thailand with a cross-continental cast. The film was then re-edited by notorious Thai filmmaker Sompote Sands, who mixed in more footage from other Thai productions. This version was then dubbed and further recut by American producer Dick Randall to create the motion picture now known as simply "Crocodile." While the original Korean cut is lost, the various international versions survive to be enjoyed by trash devotees all over the world. 

An earthquake rocks Thailand, resulting in a radioactive explosion of some sort. Or possibly the other way around. Whatever the order of events, the result is an ordinary crocodile is mutated to extraordinary size. It begins to terrorize the area, eating swimmers at a near-by beach, disrupting the water buffalo population, causing water spouts, and destroying entire water-front communities. Among the victims are the wives and daughter of Tony and John, two doctors. They meet up with each other and become determined to seek revenge on the oversized reptile. They are joined in their quest by two men: Eccentric fisherman Tanaka and nosy photographer Peter. By using crocodile pheromones, they lure the creature out into the open ocean, where they hope to destroy it... Unless it destroys them first. 

Probably the most immediately noticeable thing about “Crocodile” is the sheer lack of interest in consistently portraying the size and details of things. While this is noticeable during the opening earthquake sequence – stock footage from a film called “Land of Grief” – it is impossible to ignore whenever the crocodile itself is the focus. Footage of an actual, living crocodile gives the impression that it's not that much bigger than a typical specimen. A large prop of its head, sometimes with green or glowing orange eyes, is big enough to bite a crunch on a child or bite a person in half. This is extremely large but within the realm of possibility, as far as recorded crocodilian size goes. Other times, the crocodile is a fuckin' kaiju, crushing boats and devastating entire buildings. This is achieved through putting a real croc alongside miniature reproductions of the locations or using several puppets, all of which look different from each other. 

The result is, to say the least, far from convincing. In fact, “Crocodile” is rather hilariously sloppy in all the ways it's put together. The editing is blunt, scenes slamming into each other with little warning. The miniatures and props are often hysterically fake looking, such as the repeated moments when children's dolls are subbed in for human beings. On a narrative level, “Crocodile” is even more chopped up and slapped together. Characters are introduced suddenly. Certain narratives directions, like who this person is or what exactly their link is to each other, are never clarified. The dialogue is utterly inane. The film often plays like an assemblage of random elements that were popular around that time. A little disaster movie here, kaiju movie mayhem, and random scenes of people swimming or on motorcycles are slapped atop a blatant emulation of the last act of “Jaws.” One of the ingredients of the film is a skin flick too. There's two tracking shots of a woman's ass, one of which concludes with her stripping down. A steamy love scene is quickly followed up with a crocodile attack, in which the camera seems to zoom in on the actress' bikini bottom.

If I'm making it sound like I didn't enjoy all of the above, I apologize for giving that impression. Yes, “Crocodile” is a barely coherent mishmash of random scenes and plot, rolling along without any clear purpose and little clarity. It's also full of insane shit that made me laugh out loud. The city attack scenes is sprung on the viewer so suddenly, and is such a wild blur of violence and unconvincing special effects, that it left me speechless. One of the schemes used to try and stop the crocodile involves putting a giant, “Looney Tunes” style bear trap at the bottom of the river. Which the croc then launches through the air, slicing through several trees. The Quint-like character is introduced wearing suspenders over his bare chest, so that his screamin' eagle tattoo can be seen. The film begins with a solemn voice-over about how man has tried to destroy nature, how nature will strike back, and how all these things may happen some day. By the time the monster is blowing up in the last reel, it's merely the cherry atop this sundae of sleazy, hyper-gory, completely senseless, grindhouse chaos. 

Among those sleazy elements is a scene in which an actual crocodile is dissected on-screen, because what's a seventies/early eighties overseas exploitation movie without a little casual animal cruelty? I read there was more real crocodile gore in the original cut, one of the elements toned down for the international release. That's a good thing, because a moment of such unfortunate actual violence really puts a damper on the hazy, messy, coked-out, and highly entertaining trash pile that is “Crocodile.” I'm sure the proud film industry of Thailand would not be happy to be represented by such unabashed schlock as this. However, sometimes you need to watch a gloriously vulgar collection of insane bullshit to ground yourself as a long time monster movie fan. In other words, I can in no way recommend “Crocodile” based on any merits aside from the fact that it's incredibly, consistently entertaining. Fast forward through the IRL croc slaughter and watch with a beer and/or bong near-by. [7/10]

Dramarama: Snap
 

I've already mentioned this year that anthology programs used to be an institution on British television, every network having several of their own at any given time. Programs presenting stand alone stories were not only popular with the adults either. A number of children-targeted shows of this type aired in the U.K. through the seventies and eighties. "Dramarama" was made for ITV, though each episode was a production of a regional arm of the corporation. It began life in 1983 as "Spooky," telling primarily kid-friendly horror tales, before an inclusion of more whimsical or sci-fi stories prompted a title change in the second series. "Dramarama" still presented a ghost story from time to time though. A notable example is "Snap," from the fifth and final season, which has recently drawn attention from scholars of the currently trendy folk horror classification. 

The story concerns Peter, a young lad given the school assignment of hiking across Romney Marsh Swamp and snapping photographs as he goes. He argues with his dad on the drive down before spotting a mysterious, hooded hitchhiker alongside the road. After getting dropped off, he begins his march, taking photos as he goes... Without noticing that the same hooded hitchhiker is never far behind him. After stopping in an old church being renovated and having some lunch inside an abandoned train car, Peter's distinctive yellow slicker and Instamatic have been stolen. The thief has left behind their saggy, wet robe instead. Peter takes chase after the intruder, beginning a frightening night. 

It's difficult to imagine any modern school encouraging a child to wander across a frequently empty stretch of land, much less assigning it. It's also difficult to imagine a modern children's program airing a presentation as intentionally vague and creepy as "Snap." The episode tells us little about the boy. His interest in photography and inability to connect with his practical, trucker dad suggests he's the sensitive, artistic type. He certainly seems to be in a world of his own a bit, unaware that his presence is bothering the team working on the old church building. Similarly, the nature of whatever supernatural incident he's stumbled into is never elaborated on. Once the ghostly hitchhiker swaps their jackets, I began to pick up on the suggestion that this is some sort of changeling situation. The threat is an otherworldly doppelganger, taking the boy's place and leaving him stranded in some limbo state. But “Snap” doesn't elaborate on any of that. Closest we get to an answer is the ghostly double imploring Peter to “let him in,” the meaning of which is uncertain.

These are not complaints. I actually enjoy how much of “Snap” suggests, rather than explains. In only twenty-four minutes, the episode manages to capture a rather creepy ambiance by existing largely in the realm of the implied. More than a few scenes feel like a dream. Such as when he finds the ghostly boy in the slicker, swinging a billhook threateningly by a fireplace. Peter's snapshots appear on-screen, another artsy touch. At least once, the obscure figure appears in these photos, the kind of creepy tactics filmmakers are still using to this day. This pairs with the typically desolate English landscape. When paired with the scarecrow that shows up a few times – surely a shout-out to Dr. Syn, Alias the Scarecrow? – and an uncredited Tom Baker reading a bit from “Rhyme of the Ancient Mariner” at the beginning and end, the conclusion that this is another story about modern life accidentally encountering ancient worlds is unavoidable. Only a somewhat distracting musical score and the copy on Youtube being almost unwatchably dark at times sapped my enjoyment of “Snap,' which is so good that I can hardly believe it was made for the eight-to-twelve crowd. [8/10]

 

Friday the 13th: The Series: The Quilt of Hator: The Awakening

Here's another reason for me to resent the highly serialized nature of modern television: Kids today no longer know the simple joys of the two-parter, when a regular installment ended on a cliffhanger and a premise ran longer than a mere hour. Frank Mancuso Jr. must have paid a lot for that custom quilt because “The Quilt of Hathor” was a story too big for one episode. (Which also resulted in that hilarious awkward naming format above. How many colons can you squeeze into one title?) “The Awakening” picks up with Ryan, still insisting that he's a Pentitite solely in the hopes he can get into Laura Granges' linen prairie dress. After a member of the community informs him that Effie Stokes is still in possession of the cursed quilt, that Micki left town with a copy, the old lady mysteriously dies. Reverend Grange is under pressure to find himself a wife and, finally putting things together, secretly marries Effie... Not because he wants to lock the evil quilt up but because he hopes to use it against his own enemies. Naturally, he pins the in-coming murders on Ryan, the outsider making goo-goo eyes at his daughter. 

My main takeaway from this episode? Scott Paulin plays Reverend Grange. He's a character actor who has been in a bunch of stuff, ranging from the asshole in “Teen Wolf” to the Red Skull in the supposedly secretly great Albert Pyun “Captain America” movie. With the mutton chops, beard, and simple black clothes in this episode, he looks like an insane Abraham Lincoln. He bulges his eyes out in indignation when one of the community elders suggest he find himself a wife already, as if he hasn't become a widower twice over in the last two weeks. Once he gets the power of the evil quilt – now that's a funny sentence, isn't it – his performance goes further over the type. By the time of the finale, the character has graduated fully to scheming super-villain. This is the pride that goeth before the literal fall. By which I mean Reverend Granges suffers a very silly final fate. That moment is a capper on a rather silly episode, which also includes someone clownishly threatened with a barbecue fork.

That moment occurs before a rather graphic eye gouging, which I guess speaks to the weird back-and-forth in this show. Generally, it's hard to take the stakes here too seriously. Not because an evil quilt is silly. That's no sillier than any of the other Artifacts of Doom. It's more that we don't believe for a minute that Ryan is actually going to abandon his main mission for some random lady. I don't think deciding to become Amish in your thirties is a thing that happens very often. The crux of the episode's most dramatic moment, when the Reverend's deception is revealed before a crowd, also comes from this minor guest star and not one of the main cast members. Makes that less powerful, you know? I do like the sight of Ryan strung-up and about to be burned at the stake. That was a fun image. Also, who decided to name the evil murder quilt after the Egyptian cow goddess of motherhood and fertility? [6/10]

Halloween 2026: September 21st

Backrooms (2026)

In May of 2014, an image of an empty room from a future Wisconsin Hobby Lobby location was posted to 4chan. The photo of identical walls senselessly leading into each other, dull lighting overhead, soggy looking carpet below, and piss-yellow wallpaper between was accompanied by some short text. It described "noclipping" out of reality and into a place called the Backrooms, a labyrinthine dimension of identically drab locations that are seemingly empty except for when it suddenly, malevolently isn't. The author of this piece of fiction has never stepped forward but their post quickly became a foundational text for the growing internet subgenre of "liminal space" horror. Among the many resulting fan projects was a series of found footage short films, made by a sixteen year old former Minecraft LetsPlayer named Kane Parsons. This became extremely popular and Parsons soon had major Hollywood studios interested in developing his work into a feature film. A24 and Atomic Monster won out and Parsons' "Backrooms" movie opened this past May to massive box office and positive reactions from critics and fans. What this means for the future of Hollywood has already been debated endlessly, meaning "Backrooms" is easily 2026's most discussed horror release. Naturally, I must weigh in on it during the Halloween months. 

At the start of the nineties, failed architect Clark is currently managing a furniture store called Cap'n Clark's Ottoman Empire. To deal with his divorce and alcoholism, Clark is seeing therapist Mary Kline, who has lingering issues of her own. Annoyed by the store's high electricity bills, and baffled by a strange switch on the circuit box, Clark investigates the basement show room... And notices a sliver of light in the wall. Upon investigating, he falls through the wall into another world of self-replicating rooms arranged in a random, endless order. Clark becomes obsessed with these back rooms, calling upon his two employees to record an exploration with a video camera. However, the further into the strange nature of this world Clark goes, the more he learns how dangerous it can be. It's only a matter of time before Mary Kline is pulled into the Backrooms as well. 

The eeriness of liminal space imagery arises from its lack of people. The visuals are familiar. Indeed, part of what made the initial Backrooms post stick in the brain so much is that nearly everyone has seen a room that looks something like that. It could be the back of an aging department store, a weird hotel, your old high school, a relative's apartment. You know this place but it’s bereft of human connection, so lacking in distinctive touches that it feels like a moment in a dream. As for why this appeals to the modern generation so much, I think it has to do with the death of communal spaces. Some have observed that the current crop of teenagers grew up when malls and other traditional gathering places for youths were starting to die off, making distant memories of public but strangely empty locations a cultural touchstone perhaps. In “Backrooms,” Parson repeatedly draws a parallel between these dead spaces, whether it be the titular extra-dimensional complex or Clark's failing business, and supposedly warmer areas like living rooms, therapist’s offices, or an outdoor apartment complex. All the places in “Backrooms” seem artificial, impersonal, and they all end up a part of the titular labyrinth eventually. 

It dovetails with a growing sense of cultural isolation and alienation. (Also, there's a brief lingering shot of phone lines and an ever-present electric hum in the film, which probably isn't a shout-out to dissociated from reality classic “Serial Experiments Lain” but I'm gonna say it is anyway.) These are all symptoms of late-stage capitalism, of individual connection being squeezed out by soulless mass production driven by corporations demanding ever-more growth and profit even as it chokes the life out of the society around it. This is perhaps why the imperfect echoes of people and places seen in the Backrooms recall the close-but-not-quite-right visuals of modern day generative A.I. The walls, doorways, and eventual residents of the Backrooms look perhaps familiar and logical from a distance but, a closer look, reveals nightmarish visual glitches. “Backrooms” takes place in the nineties and its ending implies that, whatever the Backrooms are, they are growing and spreading. Which means, thirty-six years later in 2026, we might as well all be living in the Backrooms. Inhuman intelligences have, indeed, attempted to replace agreed-upon actual reality with an eerie simulacrum and we're all fucking stuck in it. In the press tour after the film's release, its director would express his disdain for generative A.I., suggesting it was on his mind while making the movie. 

These are the thoughts and feelings “Backrooms” invoked in me but maybe I'm treating all that yellow wallpaper as a Rorschach test. Parson's film smartly avoids providing an origin for the titular phenomena, where the Backrooms came from and to what purpose it exists remaining mysterious. Which doesn't mean that the movie avoids telling us what it's doing. The opening line is Mary Kline talking about how maladaptive coping mechanisms form, how the human mind repeats what is familiar to it. A key monologue describes what the Backrooms does as like a faulty memory of an experience. Blurry MRI scans of the brain, comparable to the winding rooms, crop up at one point. Probably the hackiest part of Will Soodik's screenplay is Dr. Kline's back story, which includes a mentally ill mother. She carries around the literal last remaining piece of a troubled childhood home, some loaded visual symbolism that naturally gets a key role in the climax. I probably could've done without that stuff but Parsons' film, at the very least, doesn't belabor this element too much. 

Pretty much every positive review of “Backrooms” complimented the evident talent the young director displayed here. While I have no doubt that Osgood Perkins providing his usual cinematographer, editor, sound designer, and set dresser probably deserve some thanks, “Backrooms” suggest that Parsons knows how to make an effective horror movie. While the Youtube shorts were made in Blender, physical sets were built for the feature, making the surreal environments properly tactile. An overall eerie vibe is successfully captured. Several long sequences are done in the found footage style, effectively extending the sense of disorientation the characters feel to the audience and furthering the feeling of a half-remembered, off-putting nightmare. The highlight found footage moment ends in a well-done bit of visual misdirection. Parson is so adapt at generating a creepy feeling and a sense of tension that I'll forgive the film for its somewhat disappointing lapse into more traditional monster movie antics in the last act. 

Despite a kind of lame formative trauma for its heroine and a finale that maybe leaves behind the material's more interesting ideas, “Backrooms” is good. I would say it's at least the second best A24 film based on an internet meme, depending on how you feel about “Zola” or the Nic Cage “This Man” movie. (Aside from the obvious, Parsons pays homage to at least two other notable works of internet-based horror here, which is hopefully not an indication of some creepypasta cinematic universe forming or whatever.) Chiwetel Ejiofor is one of 2026's more relatable Toxically Masculine Lead in a Horror Movies, channeling a bit of Jack Torrance. Renate Reinsve does the physical stuff nicely as Dr. Kline. How the script essentially hands over protagonist status between these characters at one point is a bit odd but the pacing rolls with it. It doesn't feel lumpy. Overall, I would say young filmmakers getting scouted from Youtube to make well done new horror movies is an overall good thing for both the genre and the film industry and I'm curious what this guy will do next. [7/10]

Diablio (1992)

West Africa is home to over one hundred distinct species of snakes. This, naturally, means the slithering reptiles frequently appear in the myths of the local people. Serpent deities represent rebirth, eternity, fertility and creation in many stories. Pythons are considered sacred animals in several belief systems. Snakes are often feared as well and many erroneous beliefs about the animals proliferate. They are also associated with witches and warlocks. This is still a very real concern in modern day Ghana, paranoia around witchcraft leading to persecution and isolation. For one example, there is the obayifo. This is a vampire/witch like creature said to wear skirts made of snake or transform into them. Which brings me to “Diabolo,” a Ghanaian horror movie made in either 1989, 1991, or 1992. (Sources vary.) The film is an example of how myths about snakes and sorcerers survive into the modern day. It's also an example of so-called “Ghallywood” filmmaking, extremely low budget productions made by unprofessional crews and spoken in English, whether or not the actors are fluent in the language or not. Which means we are going into some wild and weird territory here. 

The plot of “Diabolo” is both threadbare and repetitive, to the point that it's hard to call it a plot at all: A man picks up prostitutes at parties and lure them back to his home with large amounts of cash. He drugs them, lays them on his bed, and undresses him. Upon which he transforms into a python and slithers between their legs. Sometimes, this causes the women to vomit up money afterwards. Usually, it results in their deaths the next morning, as they stumble home. The Diabolo Man keeps this up until someone decides something must be done. A shaman is enlisted to help fight this evil but it's ultimately up to the women the Diabolo preys on to stop the monster.

That straight-to-the-point synopsis doesn't really explain what watching “Diabolo” is like though. The film begins with a lengthy sequence set at a night club. At one point, a one-legged dancer named Lewis Pee is introduced with on-screen text. He does, indeed, break dance despite only having one leg. Another draw-out moment is devoted to a stage magician doing his act in full. A subplot of some sort concerns men wrongfully accused of the Diabolo's crimes, thrown into prison and brutalized by the cops. Other times, “Diabolo” simply watches people walk from location to location or just hanging out. Such moments are often scored to popular, unlicensed music. The version available on YouTube actually has to mute the audio during these sequences, so as to avoid the website's copyright detection system. 

If that doesn't make it clear, “Diabolo” is not a slick production. The sound mixing is atrocious, dialogue often hard to decipher over the blaring music or blowing wind sounds. That music is usually either stock music or the film' theme song, a jazzy Casio keyboard pre-set with Atari 2600 explosion sounds interlaced with the title being shouted. What dialogue can be heard is often difficult to understand, owing to the thick accents of the actors. The camera work is frequently shaky, going out of focus a few times. The shadow of a boom mic lingers on-screen for several minutes during an early sequences. The acting is wooden, lines stiltedly shouted or mumbled. The performers often are reduced to flailing around on the ground. The special effects are, unsurprisingly, crude as hell. The opening credits feature pixilated computer fonts flashing around on-screen. The final scene brings the image of a snake with a human head – a reoccurring concept in African mythology – to life by burying an actor up to his ears and laying a dead snake behind him. 

Yes, a dead snake. As previously observed, animals being endangered or killed are not a concern in West African cinema. A ritual involves a real chicken being decapitated. The finale has a cat menaced by a python. (And, thankfully, left unharmed.) The movie seems determined to generate fear mostly by having real snakes slither around on top of people. That should make it clear that “Diabolo” is a pretty sleazy motion picture. One of its earliest shots is a lingering close-up on an actress' ass. Despite repeatedly featuring women being drugged and sexually assaulted with a reptile, the film also doesn't contain any nudity or on-screen sex. Thus, a movie with an extremely fucked-up premise is also too guarded to depict that fucked-up premise on-screen. The result is a motion picture that vacillates between unintentional hilarity and extreme discomfort. One minute, you're laughing at actors spasmodically rolling around or the hilariously bad editing. The next, you are seriously afraid that an animal is about to be killed. Or watching a witch doctor pull what I think is rope out of a woman's orifice, a scene I did not understand the significance of. 

All of that is bordered by quite a lot of tedium too, during those scenes of people just walking or dancing or sitting in a room. My closest point of comparison is the Nigerian “Witchdoctor of the Livingdead,” which was similarly crude and childish. That movie had an infectious spirit of anything-can-happen nuttiness to it, which the sluggishly paced “Diabolo” cannot summon. It's a film that shifts between being a Bleeding Skull mind-melter, a hilariously amateurish outsider production, and feeling like it could become a real snuff film at any minute. I'm genuinely not sure what to make of it. People in Ghana seemed to have liked it though. Star/writer/director Bob Smith Junior became so associated that he became professionally known as “the Diabolo Man” or “The Snake Man.” It seems to have gotten at least one, maybe two, sequels. I can't say the film didn't bore me. I also can't say that it wasn't interesting. “Diabolo” is certainly a deranged, baffling experience. [6/10]

Tales of the Unexpected: Number Eight

The minute I found out there was an episode of “Tales of the Unexpected” featuring Brad Dourif as a potentially murderous hitchhiker, that shit shot to the top of my watch list. An unassuming man, with a bucket hat and a gold watch, drives down a road. He impulsively picks up a wild-eyed hitchhiker. The radio plays a news story about an on-the-loose serial killer, nicknamed the Will-o-the-Wisp Killer, that has claimed seven victims so far. The supposed description of the killer matches the appearance of the hitchhiker. The passenger grows increasingly unhinged, as he berets and goads and threatens the driver. They eventually end up at a lonely road-side diner, only a waitress and two women inside. The hitchhiker's behavior grows more intense, the driver and the other occupants of the building feeling increasingly certain that they are in danger. 

By 1984, Brad Dourif was still four years off from playing his most iconic character but was still well on his way to being typecast as a psychopath. I guess that happens when you have a wiry frame, intense eyes, and get good at projecting an aura of menace. That's exactly what he does in “Number Eight.” At first, he strikes the viewer as merely eccentric, cracking jokes at the driver's expense and generally being overly familiar with someone he just met. Yeah, he does a cackling laugh that sounds a lot like the Chucky laugh too. However, Dourif does an excellent job of slowly upping the implicit threats, the distressing behavior. What starts as awkward flirting with the women at the restaurant escalates to personal boundaries being crossed. He keeps referencing a “party” he's planning, which feels like more of a sickening promise of inevitable violence than a mere gag the longer the episode goes on.

Now, this is “Tales of the Unexpected.” Every installment of the series is predicated on the story having a twist ending. Do you believe that the man acting like a dangerous nut case is truly more dangerous than the quiet, submissive man he's traveling with? The other leading man of this story is Dennis Christopher, also a physically slight character actor with distinctive eyes and a quiet intensity. He had played a murderous loner already by this point too. Yet Christopher makes a good foil to Dourif. He does a good job of playing up the guy's nerves, obviously because he's stuck in a very tense situation and not because he's hiding anything. Alright, so the ending for this tale might be quite expected. That doesn't make watching two beloved performers bouncing off each other any less rewarding to watch. “Number Eight” is tense, secluded, and completely compelling. [8/10]

Friday the 13th: The Series: Faith Healer

David Cronenberg was coming off the biggest hit of his career in 1988, the remake of “The Fly” pushing the King of Body Horror as far into the mainstream as he'd ever go. I don't know why he randomly directed an episode of “Friday the 13th: The Series” at this time. Perhaps out of Canadian solidarity. The titular “Faith Healer” is Stewart Fishoff and, obviously, he's a fraud. Skeptic debunker Jerry exposes Fishoff in front of his audience, who angrily chase him into an alleyway. That's when the guy stumbles upon today's Cursed Object. It's a silk glove that can transfer a sickness from one body to another, healing one person at the cost of giving another an amplified version of the same disease. Jack enlists the help of Jerry to get close to Fishoff, who is now very rich and powerful. There's a problem though: Jerry is dying of a terminal illness and sees this magical glove as a chance to cure himself and finish off on an old enemy.

If you're wondering whether Cronenberg's trademarks would manifest at all when applied to a weekly TV show, “Faith Healer” doesn't wait long to answer that. One of the irate victims Fishoff ripped off is an old woman, walking with crutches and with scars on her face. The effects of the magic glove causes the fake healer's hand to break-out in hideous sores. What ailment Jerry is suffering from exactly is never specified. It causes his chest to break out in large, pulsating black nodes. Maybe he has some strain of Bubonic Plague or especially aggressive leprosy. I don't know if Cronenberg was sought out to direct this one because the script was heavy on the body horror or if he brought that element to the episode himself. Either way, it marks this an especially grisly installment of the show.

The conflict being between a religious fraudster and a skeptical debunker also inserts a theme of science versus faith. That too feels like a distinctly Cronenberg-ian choice. If Dave's work has always been about the internal becoming external, Stewart Fishoff's rotten character manifesting as mutated skin despite his squeaky-clean public image is fitting. Jerry also makes a joke about bending spoons, turning this into Cronenberg's take on the James Randi/Uri Gellar rivalry. That seems like the kind of thing that would interest Dave. The last act involves a tense shoot-out between two guys that look a bit like Michael Ironside, in a city that's clearly Toronto, invoking “Scanners” as well.

In fact, “Faith Healer” feels enough like a David Cronenberg movie that it doesn't feel much like an episode of “Friday the 13th: The Series.” Micki and Ryan have a fairly small role here. Jack is an old friend of Jerry's, the scenes of them talking being a highlight. However, most of the episode revolves around the faith healer and the skeptic, two characters never seen before or since. Was a horror auteur allowed to essentially do his own thing here or did it just work-out that Cronenberg's episode happens to stand alone from the rest of the series well enough? Whatever the reason, there's enough twisted flesh and scientific themes to please fans of the director. [7/10]

CHUCK’S ROUNDHOUSE: Agent Recon (2024)

Following the non-event that was the 2005 release of “The Cutter,” Chuck Norris would essentially retire. He strapped on the cowboy boots for a small role in “The Expendables 2” seven years later. He provided a voice-only cameo in a 2015 episode of “The Goldbergs” before actually appearing on-screen in an episode of “Hawaii Five-0” five years after that. Mostly, Mr. Norris would amuse himself during his golden years by appearing in commercials. He hocked products like Mountain Dew, multiple video games, a Czech bank chain, United Healthcare, T-Mobile, Toyota and Mike Huckabee’s doomed presidential campaign. Almost all of these ads played more off the internet based Chuck Norris Facts than his actual action movie credentials. Which shows you what the guy was by this point: A dead meme that only amused the hyper-normies at ad agencies and their target audience of old people. Not the most graceful retirement for an action star but better than what happened to Seagal, I guess.  

This was before, in 2024, it was announced that the former Walker, Texas Ranger would be making a return to the world of cinema. That’s right, he was going to play himself in a jokey Czech horror/comedy in which Vanilla Ice gets top-billing. As of this writing, the sure-to-be future masterpiece “Zombie Plane” remains unreleased. However, Chuck also lent his talents to something called “Agent Recon” around the same time. To what do we owe this sudden re-emergence? Well, perhaps Chuck was aware that he wasn’t long for this world and wanted to add to his family's nestegg or something. Maybe he simply got bored in his old age. My personal theory is that his right-wing friends convinced him to dump all his savings into Crypto and, after that bubble popped, grandpa had to go back to work. 

It is a question worth asking but it is not, in fact, the question you should be asking about “Agent Recon.” The more pertinent quarry around this mysterious motion picture should be: Who is Derek Ting, the writer, director, producer, and star of the film? “Agent Recon” is actually the third entry in a series of science fiction/action movies Mr. Ting has similarly self-produced. It follows 2017’s “Agent,” which starred nobody famous, and 2021’s “Agent Revelation,” which at least roped in Michael Dorn. Unlike most low budget action stars on-the-rise, Ting’s background does not appear to be in competitive martial arts or stunt work. Instead, a cursory Google search informs me that he’s a former CNN producer, tech writer, and consultant for DoubleClicker and Mercer. He is not the CEO of free-mobile phone service TextNow, who happens to share his name. At first I thought maybe this was an example of some tech start-up guy trying to buy himself a low-budget movie career. No, it would seem that the Ting in question is a self-made guy trying to manifest a life as a direct-to-video action star. 

One suspects that Ting figured more people would see “Agent Recon” than its two prequels, which is why the film begins with a lengthy synopsis of previous events. Not that this makes the plot much easier to follow. As far as I can tell, “Agent Recon” is the story of Jim Yung, a once ordinary guy who gained superpowers after being exposed to an alien infection known as Ash. He combined this with an ability to manipulate the vital human life force known as Mana to gain more extraordinary abilities. He has used these powers to fight a shape-shifting alien race known as the Kinians, run from a secret government unit devoted to hunting aliens, and battle some sort of untrustworthy artificial intelligence. His mentor, Alastair, was seemingly killed. Now, Yung and his friends have somewhat reluctantly aligned himself with Colonel Green, a grizzled veteran searching for his daughter after an alien assault at a secret base in New Mexico. Along the way, an A.I. based on Alastair’s consciousness is uploaded into an android body. 

I will make no accusations against Derek Ting’s personal demeanor. (I’ll leave that up to the creators of this Change.Org petition that want to sue him for wasting public funds on his shitty movies.) If I had the means and drive to do so, perhaps I would also try and fashion an action hero status for myself. Nevertheless, “Agent Recon” does seem to be the self-serving fantasy of some guy, eager to build a comic book-like cinematic universe around himself with a convoluted lore. A lot of “Agent Recon” is devoted to explaining the movie’s back story and its various events. There’s a lot of chatter about DNA, A.I., aliens, conspiracy theories, this “Mana” thing, and the new and established characters’ histories. It’s all relatively incomprehensible, playing as the sort of thing an overly enthusiastic kid writing a fan fiction about the totally bad-ass new addition to his favorite anime or superhero team would come up with. In other words, the dense mythology of the “Agent” series is needlessly convoluted, endlessly talked up, and utterly meaningless to anyone that isn’t Derek Ting. 

That Ting’s film is so eager to describe the history and events of his universe is at odds with what we actually see on-screen. I’m not only referring to the obviously limited budgetary resources of “Agent Recon.” The movie’s aliens are mostly guy in gas masks. Its military bases look like generic Eastern European cities. The cast is small, the special effects are deeply unimpressive, the cinematography is heavy on aerial drone shots, and the editing is shaky. I’m pretty sure the big alien lair in the finale was created by generative A.I. As much as the script talks about the specifics of these extraterrestrial races and superpowers, the film mostly seems to be stapled together from unimaginative genre stock parts. The Kinians intruders are referred to as zombie-like, with their weakness being their livers instead of their brain, but act like the fodder in any low budget action movie. For all its ambitions, the film is mostly devoted to scenes of guys in military fatigues walking and shooting through darkly-lit buildings and forests.

Plot is not always important in action flicks, as long as the fights are good. Similarly, a derivative sci-fi or horror script can overcome those limitations with a properly energetic execution. Unfortunately, “Agent Recon” doesn’t have any of these things. Ting is so invested in his self-made mythos that a lot of the film is devoted to expanding on it. Because he has neither the money nor the imagination to properly depict these cosmic events, we get one tedious exposition dump after another. I was lost almost immediately but, by the time side characters are hacking into foreign networks and reading up on alien experiments, I was really lost. 

As for Ting’s abilities as a leading man and kick-puncher… Well, his website describes him as a martial artist. It’s fair to say that he’s a lot more adapt at fighting than an average slug like I am. He seems capable of pulling off a kick, punch, or swinging ax blow. However, there’s still an unavoidable awkwardness to his moves, a result of either the low budget production or Ting’s own inexperience. A scene where he rolls to the ground to pick up a shotgun is a good example of how “Agent Recon” desperately wants to convince us that Derek Ting is a total bad-ass but falls short of actually pulling that off. It’s hard to dismiss the feeling that this entire enterprise is the result of the man’s own ego. Especially when the film he wrote, directed, and produced has him inexplicably throwing Kamehames – he does the hand motion and everything – or intimidating bigger guys and generally depicting him as the most important human being in the universe. 

But the majority of people who watch “Agent Recon” aren’t going to care about any of that shit. They hadn’t heard of this Ting guy before watching it. No, what about Chuck Norris? Norris plays the result of some top secret alien engineering, an 84 year old man apparently being the robotic form that was decided upon. He first appears as an awkward held static shot of his face, the actor obviously having been photographed before a green screen. When he finally speaks, he sounds every bit like an old, old man whose frail and ancient body is barely holding itself together. He mostly says inspirational quotes to Ting’s character, the auteur casting one of his personal heroes as his own mentor. Several shots of Chuck from behind are clearly of an unmoving mannequin, suggesting he was only available to the production for a few days. Despite that, he does get some action beats to himself in the last act. In the finale, senior citizen Norris walks around and blasts indistinct aliens with a plastic-y looking chain gun. He looks off into the distance, a Joe Biden-esque sense of confusion on his face, as his not-exactly-whip-crack instincts have him very slowly pivoting around. I guess Chuck wanted to prove that he still “had it,” as he does do some fighting. Extremely awkward, sluggish fighting that amounts to some slow-mo punches and a few karate tosses, all of which are cut away from before we see Chuck himself and not a faceless stunt guy finish the blow. 

It is, in other words, about as embarrassing as you’d expect a great-grandfather still trying to be an action hero to be. Somehow, Derek Ting looked at an octogenarian Chuck Norris and decided that was the perfect guy to play an unstoppable cyborg. I guess Chuck has frequently been accused of being robotic. Norris is not the only washed-up action guy in this movie. Former “Beastmaster” Marc Singer plays Colonel Green. While no less insanely grizzled and wrinkly than Chuck, Singer does get more screen time. Not that you’re going to care about it, as the emotional plot of his daughter being rescued is hastily introduced half-way through and extremely sloppily executed. I will say that Singer is obviously a clear professional, delivering the bullshit dialogue he was given with, if not high energy, at least some degree of conviction.

During the press for the film, Ting insisted that Chuck Norris read the script in one session and loved it so much that he immediately agreed to participate in the project. This same anecdote also mentions that Chuck’s wife, a woman named Gena O’Kelley that is 23 years younger than him, sat the laptop before him on a flight. Which, when combined with Singer’s also rather sickly looking appearance, makes me wonder whether elder abuse isn’t the real culprit behind these guys appearing in a movie like this. Needless to say, the behind-the-scenes questions of “Agent Recon” are much more interesting than the largely boring, deeply inessential, mostly incoherent motion picture itself. I guess I can’t criticize Derek Ting for trying to fulfill his childhood dreams of being an action star. Go for it, my dude, I guess. However, he lacks the insane vision of an Edward D. Wood or Neil Breen. “Agent Recon” is kind of weird and a little funny but it’s never very entertaining or interesting. [3/10] 

[THE CHUCK OF NORRIS: 1 outta 5]

[X] Facial Hair

[] Jumps or Kicks Through a Window or Wall

[] Performs Spin Kick or Spin Punch to Enemy's Face

[] Shows Off His Hairy Chest

[] Sports Some Cowboy Getup

CHUCK'S ROUNDHOUSE: The Cutter (2005)

By 2005, Chuck Norris was too old for this shit. “Walker, Texas Ranger” ended in 2001, after a nine season run that is frankly hard to believe. A mere four years later, there was an attempt to relaunch the show as a series of TV movies that did not get beyond the first installment. Chuck was well into the twilight of his career, doing shit like founding a short-lived fighting league, putting his name on books, and getting ironic cameos in big comedies. This was right before the internet turned him into a meme, signaling that he was truly a jokey relic of the past. The former Lone Wolf would basically retire after that... But not before starring in one more crappy, direct-to-video action movie. The story behind “The Cutter” is interesting but not that interesting. The film spent a decade in development before ending up at Avi Lerner's Nu Image/Millennium Films. One presumes this is how the story of a diamond cutter who survived the Holocaust got transformed into a low budget Chuck Norris vehicle. It would, for many years, be the final starring role for the once Karate Champ. 

In the Sinai dessert, an archaeological team uncovers the mythical, bejeweled Breastplate of Aaron. Shortly afterwards, a man lands in a private glider, kills the dig team, and steals the holy relic. Meanwhile, in Spokane, Washington... John Shepherd is a private detective who specializes in finding missing people and rescuing kidnapped individuals. After a botched rescue attempt of a teenage girl results in her death, he feels immense guilt. Through a series of encounters, he makes the acquitance of Elizabeth Teller. She is the granddaughter of Isaac Teller, a Jewish jeweler and Holocaust survivor. While imprisoned in the camps, he was forced by Nazi officers to design a new gemstone cut formation. Now, decades later, the last surviving officer at the camp and his younger associate, the murderer from earlier, captured Isaac and demands he cut the twelve fabled stones of Aaron. Shepherd and his team are on the case. 

"The Cutter" is, from most perspectives, a fairly shoddy motion picture. Chuck's "Hero and the Terror" director Bill Tannen came back for this one. While Tannen's career isn't the most prestigious, he was still an industry veteran directing his tenth feature here. Despite that, an aura of cheapness floats over all of "The Cutter." I mean, how many action movies can you think of set in Spokane, Washington? Many scenes seem to take place in unassuming homes, apartments, and buildings. The climatic moment happens in a single room, a generic warehouse setting, while another prominent fight occurs at the back of a city bus. The film features some extremely annoying editing, indicative of the early 2000s, with many sped-up montages  in-between scenes set to fast paced music. There are whooshing sound effects, frantic cuts, and shifts between color and black-and-white. It feels like a desperate attempt to make a low budget and unambitious project seem much more trendy and stylish than it otherwise obviously is. The film ends on a literal freeze-frame shot, like the old TV shows it actually has much more in-common with than "2 Fast 2 Furious." 

"The Cutter's" low budget cheesiness veers towards unintentional hilarity very quickly. The aged jewels of brilliant color and clarity that the plot revolves around look a lot more like plastic toys. The sound design is amusingly cheap, every firearm making one of two different gunshot sounds. The first proper fight ends with the hysterical sight of a guy launched through a window and doing the Howie Scream, a stock sound effect rendered hilarious by both its instant recognition and tendency to seem out-of-place in any context. Inevitably, you quickly notice that this melee filled shoot-em-up seems to revolve around mostly older people. The title character is a Holocaust survivor who can't be any younger than eighty. (Performed by, of all people, Bernie Kopell.) The secret final boss of the movie is a similarly ancient man, played by actual Holocaust survivor and long tenured character actor Curt Lowens. The leading lady has grey hair but still gets a sexy shower scene, making me wonder if "The Cutter" was specifically made with the AARP crowd in mind. 

No old guy is more prominent in "The Cutter" than Chuck Norris, who would've been about sixty-four at the time of filming. His action scenes seem to involve a lot of him mostly standing stationary, punching or shooting at someone right in front of him. The bigger stunts he does do, like jabbing an attacker in the temples or rolling over a stone wall, look awkward. He is often replaced by a stunt double wearing a noticeable wig whenever the story requires him to kick higher than his hip or fall backwards. We aren't quite in Charles Bronson in "Death Wish V" levels of embarrassment here but the disconnect between the star's age and the expectations of the action genre are still unavoidable. Chuck spends a lot of this one sitting down, drinking tea, talking on the phone, or displaying an inexplicable knowledge of Biblical history.  A car chase amusingly features him only in quick cuts, clearly not actually behind the wheel of a speeding automobile. The climax, once again, has him disarming a bomb rather than delivering a killing blow. Probably the most unfortunate moment occurs during his trademark shirtless scene, his once taunt and muscled arms looking rather skinny and his famous manly chest now peppered with liver spots. 

While "The Cutter" is definitely a Chuck Norris vehicle, in the tradition of many geezer teasers to come, it does feature a younger actor in an equally big role. That would be Daniel Bernhardt, the man you get when your action movie is too shitty for even Jean-Claude Van Damme's lax standards. Bernhardt is the bad guy, a good use of his talents. He gets to put on a variety of different accents, sneers villainously at his opponents, and wears a number of disguises. Including, most incongruously, a kippah. Bernhardt hams it up nicely, enlivening an otherwise listless production. In fact, if you watch a lot of crappy action movies, there are a number of people here you'll recognize. Norris regular Marshall R. Teague is his contact on the police force. Chuck's brother Aaron has a bit part, getting to unexpectedly thrown out some fast punches of his own.  Tracy Scoggins has some belligerent sexual tension with Chuck in a few scenes. Former American Gladiator Deron McBee gets karate chopped in the throat. How much value a movie making you say "Hey, I know that guy!" when some mildly recognizable character actor walks on-screen is debatable but it further brightens up "The Cutter." 

Another kind of familiar face is Todd Jensen, a regular in movies made by Avi Lerner's Nu Image/Millennium Films slop factory. Lerner's fingerprints are on the film in another way. Having picked up the baton left by Golan and Globus, Lerner is also an Israeli nationalist whose low budget action schlock doubles as white-and-blue propaganda. "The Cutter" is not quite as blatant as "The Delta Force" but, like earlier Nu Image production "The Order," it does take the Exodus myth as historical fact. Having the Breastplate of Aaron be the main MacGuffin and Nazis be the bad guys make me wonder if this was, at one point in its long development history, another "Indiana Jones" rip-off. But Nazis always make good villains, the film's backstory of the Holocaust only seeming odd because it was made and ostensibly set in 2005. This is not a Zionist screed. It's a standard Nu Image, in the other way: Being really cheap and kind of bad. However, watching a senior citizen action star fumble through familiar beats while surrounded by enough funny, intentional or otherwise, moments and one or two Guys I Like doesn't make me regret watching it. [6/10]

[THE CHUCK OF NORRIS: 3 outta 5]

[X] Facial Hair

[X] Jumps or Kicks Through a Window or Wall

[] Performs Spin Kick or Spin Punch to Enemy's Face

[X] Shows Off His Hairy Chest

[] Sports Some Cowboy Getup

CHUCK'S ROUNDHOUSE: Bells of Innocence (2003)

The 1960s saw evangelical fundamentalists, Biblical literalists who rejected modern science and changing social ideology, grow more influential within American Protestant congregations. Their tenets include the spreading of the gospel, the conversion of non-believers, that every good thing that happens to you is an act of God, the end times are upon us, that Satan and his demons are active in the world, and the adoration of Christ and Him alone. This necessitated the creation of a Christian media, in opposition to a secular – and therefore sinful – media. What we now call the "faith-based" film industry began to take shape at the start of the seventies. While apocalyptic oddities like "If Footmen Tire, What Will Horses Do?" and "A Thief in the Night" soon emerged, this style of filmmaking has mostly been defined by banalities like "The Cross and the Switchblade." 

 

The modern Christian movie functions a lot like fetish pornography. It exists to serve its intended audience what they want to see and are already familiar with, at the sacrifice of complex narratives, quality acting, and realistic dialogue. (Also the budgets are usually comparable.) A year before "The Passion of the Christ" gave cinematic proselytizing its biggest moment, a much less notable Christian film was released straight-to-video for the intended audience of church goers, youth pastors, and blind grandmothers. "Bells of Innocence" would be of little notoriety for anyone outside this demographic if it wasn't for its top-billed actor. Chuck Norris became "born again" sometime in the mid-nineties. He began incorporating conservative Christian hysterics into "Walker" shortly after this, so it's not surprising he ended up in one of these. The film also starred his son Mike, his granddaughter Gabby, and frequent "Walker" guest star Marshall R. Teague, so I guess it was a family affair. 

The film follows the improbably named Jux Jonas, a man whose young daughter died after being hit by a car. That loss shattered his faith in God and now he's a suicidal alcoholic. Despite that, his devout friends Conrad and Oren talk him into flying them into Mexico, where they will distribute Bibles at a small ministry. Their plane breaks down in the middle of the Texas desert and they wander into a town called Ceres. The locals seem totally unaware and cut off from the outside world, react strangely to visitors, avoid all physical touching, and bare distinctive marks on their arms. Only a solitary rancher named Matthew offers any assistance. Jux meets Lyric, a little girl that reminds him of his lost daughter, and she beckons him to stay. That's because Ceres is actually run by demonically possessed humans, town elder Joshua being a literal minion of Satan. A war between good and evil has been playing out there for decades. Now, the fate of Jux's immortal soul is the latest battle in this conflict. 

I am, usually, a fan of films made outside of the Hollywood system. I have, from time to time, praised movies made by largely unprofessional crews that lack the polished attributes of your bigger budgeted productions. I admire the can-do spirit of artists with more of a dream than experience or money, pursuing it anyway. Any resulting jank usually becomes part of the charm of such a motion picture and the best of these can reach the level of stupefying outsider art. I suppose this same attitude could be applied to movies like "Bells of Innocence." Cinematographer Hamid Shams was a camera assistant on "Evil Dead II" and "Death Wish 3" and done some lo-fi TV stuff, so he wasn't exactly an amateur. Nevertheless, "Bells of Innocence" has a flat, colorless visual style that, on several occasions, lapses into shaky handheld work. A chase scene has the camera flipping back and forth, for one example of this awkwardness. This is emphasized by blunt editing, the cuts between scenes being so abrupt as to often become unintentionally funny. This is apparent from the very first scene, a mostly unconnected sequence of people running in the dark from some villains on horseback and running into Native Americans doing a ritual of some sort, that is incoherently assembled. (There's a smattering of indigenous characters in the film, so the Norris family hasn't totally let go of that fixation yet.) Director Alin Bijan, his second feature after an un-faith based 1995 skin flick, does not distinguish himself. 

More than any other technical deficiency, two factors make "Bells of Innocence" an especially difficult watch. The acting is quite poor, distressingly so. Mike Norris is a wooden actor who does not have the screen presence of his father. His delivery of dialogue is awkward and unconvincing. His attempts at bigger emotions feel stilted and forced. This is largely true of the rest of the cast. Carey Scott gives a very annoying performance as Oren, acting in a childish, mawkish fashion that honestly makes the character seem unaware of certain social cues. His reoccurring trait of telling a joke he never gets to finish, because people start randomly laughing before he gets to the punchline, is a very questionable choice. David A.R. White as Conrad always feels like he is reading a prepared speech from the pulpit, trying to invest it with deeper emotions he cannot summon, than someone acting out a character. This is true of most of the acting in "Bells of Innocence" and partially what marks it as an unprofessional, church basement production. You know something has gone very wrong when Chuck Norris gives the best, most relaxed and natural performance in your motion picture. 

This points towards the biggest problem with "Bells of Innocence" and the majority of so-called "faith-based" film making. This is not so much a movie as it is a sermon. The narrative is not told with the intention of invoking certain feelings or ideas in the viewer. The goal is not fleshing out characters, experiences, themes or moods. Instead, it's preaching, telling you exactly what it means and what you should think about these events, with no room for ambiguity or personal interpretation. The message relayed in "Bells of Innocence" is that the devil is real and apocalyptic war with the forces of evil is inevitable, Luckily, all you have to do to be on the winning side is accept Jesus Christ as your Lord and savior, no matter what bad things happen to you. Jux's grief upon his daughter's senseless death would seem to present one of the most complicated aspects of faith: How can you believe in an all-good and all-loving God if life just constantly grinds you down and takes away the people you love? Rather than address this idea, such events are presented as temptations by Satan and his minions. Jux's faith is turned like a light switch, from Questioning God's Plan to Jesus Loves All the Little Children, during the key points in the film. The subtext, that it is God's will that people die and lives get ruined, is never addressed simply because he chooses God over the Devil. Why? Ostensibly because his experience in Ceres has proven to him that Jesus is the way but, in execution, it looks more like he simply changes his mind. To evangelicals, is faith just God saying "Trust me, bro, it'll all make sense" and taking him at his word? It is an attempted persuasion without nuance. 

Moreover, "Bells of Innocence" delivers this idea in as didactic a fashion as possible. Before the trio arrives in town, we get several scenes of the town's sinister elders discussing what is to happen. When the gang takes shelter in Chuck Norris' cabin, he flatly explains that he is an angel, the history of the town, and what this all forebodes. The heroes outright proclaim their faith in God, against the demonic villains' statements. With such a hamfisted approach, it is unsurprising that the film has no grasp on the subtleties necessary to create an effective horror movie. The film seems to think having someone's eyes glow red and a red skull appear over their faces is the height of terror, alongside other thoroughly unimpressive CGI effects. The script is generally inconsistent, how much the people in the town can or cannot touch an outsider seeming inconsistent, and is totally unable to build up any tension at all. After all, we know that God is Good and Jux's soul will be safe, so there's not much in the way of suspense. 

It should probably be unsurprising that "Bells of Innocence" also does not feature much in the way of the Chuck Norris action you might be hoping for. The most exciting thing he does is talk down a crowd of demonic meanies, projecting a bolt of light from his finger and making a guy groan and grimace. This is, admittedly, one of the fewer moments that made me laugh here. Otherwise, he shows up in a few scenes, hangs out with the protagonists, and drones out some exposition. I went into "Bells of Innocence" hoping it would make me chuckle more often but it is mostly a tedious affair. The first act is extremely slow, as the film takes far too long to get all its characters in place, has them wait around for a while, before the plot finally begins to move. The film seems to reach its climax before chugging forward to a proper ending, the story heading into the credits with little drive or energy. While I'm sure some films made within the Sunday School approved method feature better acting, sturdier writing, and zippier pacing than this motion picture, my impression of the genre is that it's mostly stuff like this: Preachy and limp and boring, with one or two actors who were once semi-relevant but got saved and are now doing shit like this. I like my Chuck Norris movies with more punching and kicking than preaching. [3/10]

[THE CHUCK OF NORRIS: 2 outta 5]
[X] Facial Hair
[] Jumps or Kicks Through a Window or Wall
[] Performs Spin Kick or Spin Punch to Enemy's Face
[] Shows Off His Hairy Chest
[X] Sports Some Cowboy Getup