Oct '23
I had heard this was in the works. Then one day... it was already on streaming. This is a prequel, but what is canon and what isn't? I think it wants to be related to the original 1989 film, because that 2019 remake wasn't nearly as effective, coming across as abundantly pointless. But the timeline doesn't quite add up, so it ends up as its own thing really.
So our "prequel" is set in 1969, following young Jud Crandall, played by 27-year-old Jackson White. Are we to believe that in 20 years, this Jud becomes the 63-year-old Fred Gwynne version of the character? If he ages 35 years in 20 years, the stress of this movie's events must have been really tough on him, as I assume he didn't do much between movies and probably never went back to the burial ground until he met the Creeds. Yet the story we're told here isn't the same as the post-WW2 story we're told in the original movie. So you might as well not bother comparing them for inconsistencies, because it's all inconsistent so far. They traded in the original backstory for the 60s backdrop, striving for that Stephen King feel, even going as far as to include Henry Thomas (Desperation, Gerald's Game, Doctor Sleep). But does it actually hit its mark?
We also have David Duchovny in this movie. He's awesome in general, so with him and an otherwise decent cast, a lot of blood and gore, and a well-made and an overall good looking movie... we're somehow given a movie that just isn't very engaging. I never really cared about most of what was going on in this retread of an old story, and it lacks the dread and creepiness of that first movie. I'm not asking for more Zelda (God knows they couldn't top the original on that one, so why bother?), but subtlety can go a long way. Movies these days like to show too much too soon, assuming that us horror and gore-hounds can't appreciate a more classy story, if they knew how to craft one.
In the end, this is simply another piece of streaming content. Not worthy of a theatrical run, but then again, what is these days? As the first movie had Jud's backstory as prequel material, this movie has yet another earlier incident as further prequel material, because franchises and brand names are all that it's about these days. I'd rank the original 2 movies as the reigning champions, and this is maybe better or at least tied with the remake, which isn't saying much. As for this "franchise", sometimes dead is better.
So our "prequel" is set in 1969, following young Jud Crandall, played by 27-year-old Jackson White. Are we to believe that in 20 years, this Jud becomes the 63-year-old Fred Gwynne version of the character? If he ages 35 years in 20 years, the stress of this movie's events must have been really tough on him, as I assume he didn't do much between movies and probably never went back to the burial ground until he met the Creeds. Yet the story we're told here isn't the same as the post-WW2 story we're told in the original movie. So you might as well not bother comparing them for inconsistencies, because it's all inconsistent so far. They traded in the original backstory for the 60s backdrop, striving for that Stephen King feel, even going as far as to include Henry Thomas (Desperation, Gerald's Game, Doctor Sleep). But does it actually hit its mark?
We also have David Duchovny in this movie. He's awesome in general, so with him and an otherwise decent cast, a lot of blood and gore, and a well-made and an overall good looking movie... we're somehow given a movie that just isn't very engaging. I never really cared about most of what was going on in this retread of an old story, and it lacks the dread and creepiness of that first movie. I'm not asking for more Zelda (God knows they couldn't top the original on that one, so why bother?), but subtlety can go a long way. Movies these days like to show too much too soon, assuming that us horror and gore-hounds can't appreciate a more classy story, if they knew how to craft one.
In the end, this is simply another piece of streaming content. Not worthy of a theatrical run, but then again, what is these days? As the first movie had Jud's backstory as prequel material, this movie has yet another earlier incident as further prequel material, because franchises and brand names are all that it's about these days. I'd rank the original 2 movies as the reigning champions, and this is maybe better or at least tied with the remake, which isn't saying much. As for this "franchise", sometimes dead is better.
