Tragedy Girls (5 Stars)

When "Tragedy Girls" was shown at the Fantasy Film Festival in 2017, the festival booklet wrote that it had the potential to become a cult film. But nothing happened. The film was never shown in cinemas, and it was forgotten. Until now, nine years later. Two months ago a mediabook was released by the German boutique label with four different covers.

This is a very strong indicator that Tragedy Girls (2017) has solidified its status as a cult film. While a limited-edition home video release alone isn't a formal scientific metric, the specific nature of Germany's physical media market, and the treatment of this movie by Indeed Film, perfectly aligns with how modern cult status is built and sustained.

Here is why this specific release deduces cult status:

1. The Target Audience of the "Mediabook" Format

In Germany, the mediabook (a premium, hardcover packaging blending a book portion with Blu-ray/DVD discs) is a format designed exclusively for dedicated collectors, cinephiles, and genre enthusiasts. Mainstream commercial hits get standard plastic cases or steelbooks, whereas niche movies with passionate, dedicated fanbases get the luxury mediabook treatment.

2. The Multiple-Cover Strategy

Releasing a movie with three or four different artwork variants (Covers A, B, C, and sometimes a shop-exclusive Cover D) is a marketing strategy tailored to a specific collector psychology. It relies on a loyal "cult" following willing to hunt down specific art, pre-order immediately, or even purchase multiple copies of the exact same movie to complete a set.

3. Extremely Strict Print Runs

The print runs for this specific release are highly limited, with each variant restricted to 444 units. Cult status is traditionally defined by a film that doesn't appeal to the widest possible demographic, but instead commands intense, dedicated devotion from a smaller, marginalized subculture. Selling out tiny, numbered batches of a premium product defines that dynamic perfectly.

4. Re-evaluation by the Horror Community

When Tyler MacIntyre’s Tragedy Girls initially premiered at SXSW in 2017, its pitch-black, neon-soaked social media satire was heavily compared to "Heathers" and the recent Scream films. Over the years, the film's commentary on influencer culture, pairing vibrant teen aesthetics with unapologetic gore, has aged remarkably well. This delayed, premium boutique physical release is the physical manifestation of the horror community embracing it as a modern genre classic.

Misery (5 Stars)

Anyone who watches Stephen King's films must recognise that he has a fascination with writers. "IT", "The Shining" and several other King adaptations put writers at the centre of their stories, but "Misery" contains the most personal horror of all.

I'm not saying that Paul Sheldon is a direct representation of Stephen King, What I mean is that King has created a character that he can relate to and imagine what would be the most horrifying to him as a writer.

Annie Wilkes doesn't just imprison Paul. She forces him to watch his new unpublished novel go up in flames. For a writer, that must be a special kind of horror. It's not simply losing a manuscript. It's watching something you've created being deliberately destroyed while you're powerless to stop it.

This is Stephen King's private horror hidden inside all the more conventional horrors of the story. He writes horror stories for his readers, but in "Misery" he's imagined a horror specifically for himself: not being killed, not being tortured, but being forced to watch his own words disappear in flames.

Brilliant film!

Success Rate:  + 0.3

	Order from Amazon.com
	Order from Amazon.co.uk
	Order from Amazon.de

Snatch (5 Stars)

• Franky Four Fingers arrives in London with a huge stolen diamond, intending to sell it to Doug the Head.
• Boris the Blade wants the diamond and arranges for Franky to be robbed.
• Turkish and Tommy are involved in the illegal boxing business, working for the vicious gangster Brick Top.
• Turkish's boxer gets into trouble, forcing him to find a replacement.
• He approaches Mickey, an Irish Traveller who agrees to fight for money.
• Mickey, however, has his own ideas about how the fight should go.
• Meanwhile, Boris's plans for the diamond become increasingly complicated.
• Sol, Vinny and Tyrone get involved in an attempt to steal the diamond for themselves.
• All the various schemes gradually begin to overlap, with the boxing match and the diamond at the centre of everything.
• By the time the dust settles, almost nobody has ended up with quite what they expected.

I usually complain when a film has a complicated plot, but "Snatch" is a wonderful exception. Everything is remarkably easy to understand while you're watching it. You know what everybody wants and you generally know what they're trying to do. It's only afterwards, when you try to explain the entire story to somebody else, that you realise just how complicated it actually is.

That is one of the film's greatest achievements. Guy Ritchie gives us a huge collection of characters and several apparently separate stories, but somehow never makes the film difficult to follow. Everyone is so distinctive that you quickly know who's who, and every new complication seems perfectly logical at the time.

It's also very funny, but I wouldn't call "Snatch" a comedy. There's a real sense of danger underneath the humour, particularly whenever Brick Top appears. These are not lovable rogues getting into amusing scrapes. They're criminals, and some of them are extremely unpleasant criminals.

The cast is superb. Jason Statham is the closest thing we have to a normal person in this collection of lunatics, while Alan Ford makes Brick Top genuinely intimidating. But Brad Pitt steals the film as Mickey. His performance is hilarious, unpredictable and completely different from anything else in the film.

And then there's the style. The editing is fast without making the story incomprehensible, the dialogue is packed with memorable lines and the whole thing has an energy that carries you through the increasingly tangled plot.

It's probably the best gangster film I've ever seen. And remarkably, despite its complicated plot, I never once felt lost.

The problem is that if somebody asked me to explain exactly what happens in Snatch, I'd have absolutely no idea where to start.

Success Rate:  + 6.4

	Order from Amazon.com
	Order from Amazon.co.uk
	Order from Amazon.de

Broken Oath (4½ Stars)

After her father is murdered by a group of men and her mother is imprisoned, Liu Chieh Lien is born in prison and eventually sent to a Buddhist temple, where she's raised and taught martial arts. As a young woman she proves to be an exceptionally skilled fighter, but her violent nature eventually causes her to be expelled.

Learning the truth about her family's past, Chieh Lien sets out to find the men responsible and exact her revenge. Her quest soon draws her into a larger conflict involving rebels and government agents, but her main objective remains the same: to avenge her parents.

Angela Mao must be the most beautiful and talented actress who's ever lived.

Every Day's A Holiday (2 Stars)

Mae West is always worth watching, but unfortunately "Every Day's a Holiday" gives her very little to work with. The story of a wanted criminal getting involved in a mayoral election is extremely dull, and I found the film a struggle to sit through.

Go West, Young Man (4 Stars)

"Go West, Young Man" is a simple little comedy, but I enjoyed it more than the other Mae West films that I've seen so far. Mae plays Mavis Arden, a famous movie star whose Rolls-Royce breaks down during a publicity tour, leaving her stranded in the country and staying at a local boarding house. There she takes a fancy to Bud Norton, a handsome young mechanic and inventor played by Randolph Scott, whose ambition is to develop a device for synchronising sound and film. Mavis sets about trying to seduce him, while her press agent Morgan does his best to prevent her from causing another scandal. It's a fairly slight story, but the film moves along nicely and has enough comic situations and Mae West one-liners to keep it entertaining.

Gladys, one of the maids at the boarding house, is a huge fan of Mavis Arden and is thrilled to have her idol staying there. Gladys is played by Isabel Jewell, who I found gorgeous. Even in a relatively minor role she outshines Mae West whenever she's on screen. Mae, of course, has the bigger personality and the film is built around her, but Isabel has a natural screen presence that I found much more appealing. She made more than 60 films in her 40-year career, but always in supporting roles. It's a shame she never became a big star.

Carrie [2013 version] (5 Stars)

This is the fifth time I've watched the 2013 version of Carrie, which makes this review difficult. I said most of what I wanted to say about the film in my previous reviews, particularly in 2019. But having watched it again, there's one thing I want to emphasise.

I still think it's a very good film. In fact, I still prefer it to the 1976 version. Chloe Grace Moretz is excellent as Carrie and, for me, gives a better performance than Sissy Spacek. Julianne Moore's Margaret is even more deranged than Piper Laurie's version, and I like the way the new film gradually develops Carrie's telekinetic powers rather than suddenly revealing what she can do when the story reaches the prom.

The prom sequence itself is another improvement. It lasts longer, giving the film more time to build up to the inevitable disaster. I also prefer the way the film moves almost immediately from the destruction at the school to the aftermath at Carrie's home. The whole thing feels more continuous.

Nevertheless, I don't think the film needed to be made.

When a film is remade, I think there are two things it has to achieve. It has to be close enough to the original for us to recognise the story, but it also has to be different enough to justify making it again. There should be something new to say or a different way of telling the story.

Carrie 2013 doesn't fulfil that second condition.

It was described as a new adaptation of Stephen King's novel rather than a remake of the 1976 film. Technically, I suppose that's true. But having watched both films several times, I find that distinction difficult to accept. The 2013 film is remarkably close to the earlier one, right down to individual scenes and snippets of dialogue. It's been modernised, with smartphones and social media replacing the technology of the 1970's, but that isn't enough to make it feel like a genuinely new interpretation.

And that's what makes my opinion slightly contradictory. I think the 2013 Carrie is better than the 1976 Carrie, but I also think the remake was unnecessary.

There are certainly differences, and some of those differences are precisely why I prefer this version. Moretz is a superb Carrie, Moore gives Margaret an appropriately disturbing quality, Carrie's powers are better developed and the prom sequence is more substantial. Miss Desjardin is also more appealing in this version. I particularly like her wild dancing at the prom.

But when I watch it, I can't escape the feeling that I've seen it all before.

Perhaps that's inevitable when two films are based on the same novel. But there's a difference between telling the same story and making the same film. I would have liked the 2013 version to take King's novel and do something substantially different with it.

Nevertheless, after five viewings, I'm still very fond of it. The fact that I can complain about its lack of originality while giving it five stars tells you everything you need to know about how much I enjoy the film.

So many films, so little time.

Success Rate:  + 0.8

	Order from Amazon.com
	Order from Amazon.co.uk
	Order from Amazon.de