The Lorax (2012)

You know it’s summer when Hollywood unleashes a relentless assault of animated features to enthral the kids and hopefully entertain their accompanying parents during the school holidays, and this year is no exception. Up next in the blitzkrieg is the extravagantly colourful world of The Lorax, based on Dr Seuss’ story of the same name. But does this old yarn-turned-film both bedazzle and amuse, or is it simply a children’s tale set to bewilder and bemuse? Read on dear reader for I shall wage, that the truth is to be found here on Film Phage…

The Lorax (ably voiced by Danny DeVito) for the uninitiated is a story by Dr Seuss essentially telling the tale of the environment vs. corporate greed. I won’t go into the intricacies of the “plot”, but it’s suffice to say that the film tells of how one man (the Once-ler, voiced by Ed Helms from The Hangover) tells a young boy his tale of how his lust for profits rid the world of vegetation and how he didn’t listen to The Lorax: the guardian of the trees. He then entrusts the final seed in existence to this young boy for him to do with as he wishes. If this sounds a bit hokey, then that’s simply because it is. Seuss’ original story is incredibly short and is a bit like a parable; ending on the cliffhanger of “will he or won’t he”. But this is a children’s movie, not the infuriating ending to Inception, so expect no ambiguities… in fact, don’t expect much at all.

What you can expect are modern-day animation staples such as beautiful rendering, celebrity voices and a paper-thin romance. It’s the latter that really undermines the ethos of the film, with Ted (Zac Efron) wanting to find the tree to get in there with his crush Audrey (Taylor Swift). Seuss’ original vision is somewhat bastardised here, as this kid doesn’t really give two Humming-fish about the environment – he’s fulfilling his basic human urges… to get a smooch! C’mon, he’s probably 10, he’s not looking for some hanky panky with a 13 year old girl. Well, that might be the norm in certain districts in a town or city you know, but I’m certain that’s not the case here.

But that’s not all the film does to betray Seuss’ original vision… oh no no… if you live in the US you’ll be fully aware of this advert on your TV, and if you’re not from the US, then watch this bearing in mind that this is a pro-environment, anti-corporation film:

Yes indeedy – the Lorax LOVES a car powered by petrol… made from trees. A confusing message to send out you say? Well that pretty much sums up the entire film: confused. Most of the “extra” material not mentioned in Seuss’ book is simply padding to give context and get to the Lorax part of the tale (and he only sticks around for about 1/2 the entire film). All of these shortcomings just compound how bitter a pill this is to swallow, as it looks beautiful – the animators have rendered Seuss’ world with such loving detail; it’s just a shame that the script has all the charm and charisma of a tin of stale sardines.

The Lorax

Place your bets for a good review… now.

So what about the humour? Surely this film succeeds in that area? Well, I’m afraid not. Whilst I found Ice Age: Continental Drift unexpectedly engaging and genuinely funny in places, I found myself sitting there like the Grinch for this film. And others in the screening reflected this mood. There were muted sniggers from some, and the kids laughed every time a bear or fish made a meaningless squawk, but there was nothing really entertaining about the script. And let’s never speak of those joyless songs. That’s why it’s such a shame to hear that DeVito not only recorded his voiceover in English, but also in Russian, Spanish, German and Italian despite speaking none of these languages: he did it all phonetically. This is a simply mind-blowing approach to voiceover work, which is why it’s so soul destroying to see a film of such lacklustre calibre after all that effort.

I really wanted to like The Lorax, I really did. I always root for an underdog, and after disagreeing with fellow critics’ opinions on Ice Age: Continental Drift, I thought I too might find some green shoots of quality on which to feast, but instead was left with a mouthful of tarmac. If only the Once-ler had obeyed the laws of basic economics and just replenished his supply of trees as he went – he’d have made untold profit and kept the environment going… and also prevented me from needing to sit through 86 minutes of poorly-scripted cinema.

And so dear reader I bring this woeful tale to a close,
as the fable of The Lorax has left The Phage somewhat morose.
Whilst easy on the eye and replete with pure intention,
the story’s dreadfully weak script makes one call one’s sanity into question.
And not even the sublime, multilingual DeVito: the once Oswold Copperpot,
can render this film’s flaws so easily forgot.
For The Lorax is no Horton… Not even a Grinch,
but you can’t help but wonder what next of Seuss’ books Hollywood will pinch.
So lest I end up sounding like old Yoda the Jedi,
I’ll end this little ditty and bid you goodbye.
But I’ll be taking bets on which tale they will next pilfer and pluck…
Or you could be one of those that no longer gives a …

Phage Factor:

Believe The Hype?

Philosiraptor says...You read the film was announced, heard who was cast, read the phenomenal previews, saw the trailer and couldn’t wait for ‘your’ film to drop. You’re there first day of release in your seat, popcorn in hand, and two hours later you want to grab the remaining corn kernels, hunt down the director and force them up his/her nostrils to the point it tickles their brain until they apologise for that abomination you just wasted your life on. We’ve all been there. We’ve all bought into the hype of a movie. Why do we do this, and should we continue to buy into Hollywood’s hype machine?

Getting press for your latest upcoming film is something of a no-brainer; publicity’s needed to bring in the customers after all. And nowadays the companies behind your favourite products have capacity to seep into every crevice of your life and expose you to “what’s to come”. But widespread awareness and hype does not a great film make.

Indeed, the same is true for most multimedia, with video games pulling in enormous sales on a yearly basis, especially thanks to blockbuster franchises such as Mass Effect and Dragon Age. Both of which have famously fallen foul of having so much hype surrounding them that they could never live up to expectations. Mass Effect 3 in particular brought in tens of thousands of disgruntled fans who bemoaned the ending of their cherished franchise: not because it was over, but because of how poor it was. Imagine that cardboard box at the end of Se7en didn’t contain a head, but a tube of Pringles that magically carried Freeman, Pitt and Spacey to the moon for a party with Bugs Bunny – that’s how misjudged and down-right weird it was for many. In light of this, the people behind the franchise went as far as amending the ending to suit the public’s demands 4 months post-release. A movie however, is an entirely different beast.

Sarcastic WonkaOne of the most hyped films of 2012 has without doubt been Ridley Scott‘s Prometheus: the long in development spiritual predecessor to 1979’s Alien (I know – it’s aged fantastically for a 30+ year old movie, as has Sigorney Weaver). Every magazine, website and newspaper boy was extolling how great this film was going to be. It was like knowing about the second coming of Christ in some circles. Then when the reviews came out… they were mixed; although it scored a respectable 7/10 with critics and audiences alike, it fell short of many people’s expectations. This was pegged as a “Film of the Year” contender, but it’s clearly not going to get that title any time soon. I mean, sure, we all liked Michael Fassbender acting as an android with scary realism, and liked learning a little about the mythology of the Alien franchise, but the writing sure was haphazard in places; see HISHE‘s YouTube clip below for a brilliant send up. I’d sure like a rewrite on that ending, as opposed to the deliberate sequel-bating that’s so rife right now… but I think I’ll save that rant Opinion article for another day.

Looking for another prime example? How about Star Wars I: The Phantom Menace? Possibly one of the most eagerly-anticipated films ever considering people have been asking “I wonder what happened before Part IV” since it aired in 1977. As I’m sure the majority of you have seen this film it goes without saying that it didn’t live up to the hype… damn you Jar-Jar Binks. And STILL, after we were all bitten by this Ebola-carrying abomination, we still went back again for Episode II, and AGAIN for Episode III. Why? Because we were all promised “this one’s guaranteed to be better” by every publication under the sun. Don’t even get me started on Indy vs. Aliens (commonly called Indiana Jones IV)…

So should we believe the hype, considering how cruelly we’ve been misled by the press in the past? Or do we look to the examples of where the hype was realised, as with Avengers Assemble and Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows? Do we think that Django Unchained, The Hobbit et al., are going to live up to our expectations? Though I must admit, the thought of stretching The Hobbit (a single book) into THREE films probably damages the hype for me. Personally, I think “hype” is great for public awareness of a movie, but shouldn’t be used to gauge quality. We all like to get excited about the latest installment in our favourite franchise / film from our favourite director, but manage your expectations. My advice? Watch a trailer and see the film for yourself… or let The Phage tell you what to think… then watch it.

What do you guys think: is the hype surrounding these massive potential blockbusters merited? Or would you rather go in to a movie blind and be totally surprised by what you see – a bit like walking blind into a dark-room orgy. Sure, it might be fun… but you could come out wishing you were forcing popcorn kernels up your nose, as opposed to forcing **** in your ****, whilst your **** ****s. And no-one likes that.

Ice Age: Continental Drift (2012)

Ice Age

No thaw in sight…

Do you remember learning about the Ice Age in school history lessons? How about plate tectonics and the phenomenon of “continental drift” in geography and geology? Remember them happening at the same time? Well, depending on how kind Father Time’s been to your grey matter over the years, you may or may not. Hell, some of the kids watching this movie probably think you’re old enough to have been IN the Ice Age if you’re over the age of 26. And as with the inevitable passage of time and the joys it brings, here comes the the fourth instalment in the Ice Age franchise. But is the ice beginning to crack beneath its feet, or is there a *ahem* (faux-Austrian accent) “freeeeze cahming“?

If you recognised that Batman & Robin reference, then you may be one of those perceived ancient “Ice Age” dwellers like myself. But that isn’t the audience that Ice Age: Continental Drift (aka Ice Age 4) is primarily aimed at is it? It’s a film choc-full of slapstick comedy, regurgitation and silly voices, with that sickly sweet undercurrent of a “message”. You probably think I’m winding up to deliver a one-two haymaker filled with bile and scathing opinions about this film right? If you looked at the Rotten Tomatoes score, you’d probably expect that too. But I’m going against the grain here. No, this movie isn’t going to revolutionise cinema as we know it, nor does it represent the second coming of Christ, but it is a genuinely enjoyable romp for the most part.

Ice Age 4

The boys are back in town!

In case you’ve been living under a rock for the past 10 years, the series of films follows the exploits of a mammoth, sloth and sabre-tooth¬†tiger, voiced by Ray Romano, John Leguizamo and Denis Leary respectively. It’s a typical animated series in regards to the fact that its formulaic in its outlay: all’s well, a problem occurs, whacky adventure ensues and everything ends happily. These adventures have consisted of returning a human child to its parents, avoiding global warming and saving Sid (the sloth) from a land of the dinosaurs. Hey, no-one said this series was historically accurate! Last I remember, animals didn’t speak English either. They spoke Afrikaans, everyone knows that. And that only began in 1826. Indeed, this series doesn’t disappoint in terms of a whacky, inaccurate theme – yes, the continents are splitting apart super fast to form a geographic pattern we recognise, leading to our crew embarking on an adventure. With Pirates. Like The Pirates! In An Adventure With Scientists! but supping from the crazy juice.

So why am I not tearing this film apart? It genuinely made me smile and laugh. Maybe this is a reflection on me, but it was echoed by the rest of the audience too: from the young to the elderly. Sure, it doesn’t have the *nudge nudge, wink wink* subtly adult themes and humour of animated movies like Shrek, The Incredibles or Monsters Inc., but it has flourishes, such as Sid breaking the fourth wall and reflecting on the fact that the dinosaur plot from Ice Age: Dawn of the Dinosaurs made little-to-no sense whatsoever. The film also featured an ape “Pirate Captain”, voiced by Peter Dinklage (currently featuring in Game of Thrones), which was originally intended to be voiced by Hawkeye, aka Jeremy Renner. Now this ape doesn’t do anything particularly funny – he’s just the big bad guy that gets slapped around. But what I did find funny was how similar it looked to Ron Perlman. An odd aside, but I found it somewhat amusing.

Ron Perlman & Gutt

Separated at birth? Don’t get me wrong, I love Ron Perlman, but there’s something there right? No offence Ron… and Gutt.

Maybe the film was entertaining as it reminded me of being a child and watching Wile E. Coyote chase Roadrunner, which was slapstick comedy at its finest back in the late 80’s. Regardless, the film made me smile, and I was in no way bored when “the gang” were on-screen. The same goes for the “new” additions, such as a genuinely funny Flynn the elephant seal; ably voiced by the fantastic Nick Frost. ¬†However, the film was simplistic, and anything that revolved around Manny’s (Romano) daughter Ellie (Queen Latifah), was mind-numbingly tedious and drawn out. Whilst mentioning Queen Latifah, it’s also interesting to point out that the casting directors must have really wanted a well sung credits song, employing the voice talents of Jennifer Lopez, Drake and Nicki Minaj as various animals. I really have to mention Nicki Minaj, as her often schizophrenic singing intonation¬†is perfect for animated films. Seriously. Put this girl in more of these films, I’m being genuine.

So will this be the last entry in the Ice Age franchise? Well, I’ll ask you this: did the recent Ice Age occur at the same time as the dinosaurs, where there was mass global warming AND the separation of Pangaea? No. No it did not. And nor will this be the last we see of these characters. Where next? I’m putting my money on the table for one of these scenarios: Ice Age: In Space, Ice Age: Time Travelling to the Future, or the grim Ice Age vs Predator

Overall, this film obviously has its pro’s and con’s. If your interest in the series is waning, this’ll do little to breathe frosty life back into the dying mammoth that is your passion, but if not – get out and see it for some light-hearted humour. If you have kids, they’ll probably enjoy this, and you will too – animated features have come a long way since the pre-Toy Story era. And if they don’t laugh, I’m sure they’ll just be entertained by the flashy bright colours and how funny it is to kick the backs of the chairs of the row in front at the very least. And you can put money on seeing Manny & Co. in another year or two. Hopefully with Ron Perlman again.

Phage Factor:

3 Star

Magic Mike (2012)

An entertaining, but predictable magic trick…

If you asked me to list some movies that revolve around the age-old profession of stripping, it’d be no problem whatsoever. Of course, you have Showgirls and Striptease from the mid-90’s, whose VHS cassettes were the equivalent of gold dust to every teenage boy of the day; back when a) VHS was the standard, and b) this was the ultimate in semi-accessible titillation… hell, these movies pre-dated 56Kb modems for most! If you preferred a more male-centric clothes-shedding tale then there’s the British classic The Full Monty where a motley crew of unemployed guys from the UK city of Sheffield star in their own strip show. It also made Donna Summer’s Hot Stuff the sexiest song of 1997 and made Post Office queues that little bit more exciting; albeit briefly.

So now we come to Hollywood’s late rebuttal to the UK’s men’s strip show film. I wasn’t aware that a rebuttal was needed, but here it is nevertheless. Magic Mike follows the tale of the eponymous Mike (Channing Tatum) – an “entrepreneur” who dabbles in tiling roofs, building unique furniture… oh, and getting down to a thong as “Magic Mike” for the gathered throngs of women baying for flesh on Thursdays through Sundays. Though Tatum is a key player in the film, it really revolves around Adam (Alex Pettyfer; I Am Number Four, In Time) who’s introduced to the business through Mike. What follows is an enjoyable, occasionally lighthearted, if not lightweight tale of the underbelly of the stripping business.

“What did you say about my shirtless tie outfit?”

The strongest asset of this film is without doubt Tatum himself, who was once upon a time a part-time stripper. Whilst he gets to use some of his dance moves from his days in Step Up, he really showcases his abilities as an actor. In particular, his one-on-one scenes with Adam’s sister Brooke (Cody Horn) are particularly poignant; coming across as effortless and genuinely authentic – the mark of a true actor. The other “top billed” name on the posters, Matthew McConaughey, fares just as well playing Dallas: the club’s owner / MC / dancer, and primary antagonist of the film. What’s so remarkable is that Dallas is instantly dislikeable; you know from the outset that he isn’t a nice guy. Indeed, I found McConaughey‘s character in Killer Joe (reviewed here) – a guy who forces someone to perform oral sex on a KFC drumstick – to be more likeable than Dallas. It’s great to see these two actors again expanding their repertoire and avoiding the clich√©d roles they’ve become synonymous with in recent years, as I’ve discussed previously.

Where the film loses its way is the fact that some of the plots seem too railroaded and scripted – you can see the eventual incidents coming from a mile off. You could predict the third act of the film before the fourth thong-clad rear is on-screen. A few decoys are deployed where you expect the plot to go down a certain alley; but overall this isn’t an example of effective smoke and mirrors. A golden era M. Night Shyamalan film this is not. And for those curious about the nudity in the film, yes you’ll see a lot of bethonged rump and guys will have that feeling that they did watching 300: “damn, I need to work out!”. McConnaughey in particular, who’s now cruised past 40, looks in remarkable shape.

Who else is going to be sporting this fetching yellow crop top at the gym this summer? Just me? Damn…

Overall, Steven Soderbergh‘s (Ocean’s Eleven, Contagion, Haywire) film has its heart in the right place, but falters due to a predictable storyline. It also irritatingly leaves a number of plot threads deliberately open for the already talked about sequel. Personally, I feel that Magic Mike needs a sequel about as much as Contagion (a phage’s favourite film – the virus is the star!) does. But then again, this is Steven Soderbergh, a man who is a more than capable director, but he’s also the man that brought you the uncalled for Ocean’s Twelve and Thirteen. However, it’s great to see Channing Tatum flourishing into a well-rounded actor who’s deviating from GI Joe-esque roles. The future is very bright for this guy, but you didn’t need me to tell you that.

Magic Mike proves to be more of a daytime TV magician than a David Blaine, Penn & Teller or Criss Angel: his tricks are a bit too transparent. The film’s respectable and earns its place, but it’s not playing with the big boys out in Vegas thanks to that plot. But maybe I just prefer a bit of Donna Summers’ Hot Stuff in my strip scenes, as opposed to the latest Skrillex wub-wub-athon… Now where’s my VHS player…?

Phage Factor:

3 Star

The Dark Knight Rises (2012)

The Dark Knight Rises… and Soars.

No-one can question the monstrous popularity of Chris Nolan‘s take on the wealthy guy with the gruff voice, cape and penchant for telling women his secret identity. So with the final entry in Nolan’s trilogy rolling into town, can the film live up to its hype to surpass the success of its predecessors and the other tentpole superhero movies of the summer?

Let’s just skip the formalities and foreplay and bare all – this is a stunning film and a fitting climax for the current iteration of “The Batman”. Without explaining anything substantial about the plot, this essentially picks up the story some years after the events of¬†The Dark Knight¬†and follows Bruce Wayne / Batman (Christian Bale) as he contends with Bane (Tom Hardy) – the new bad boy on the scene, who’s got a number of plans for the city of Gotham. That’s all I’m going to say about the plot, so safely read on…

Casting was once again spot on. Just as with Heath Ledger‘s casting announcement in The Dark Knight, Anne Hathaway‘s selection as Catwoman was a bit peculiar for some, myself included. But it worked. It really worked. But for me, it’s the role of Bane that held the movie together, with Tom Hardy proving a great choice. ¬†His role in last year’s criminally overlooked Warrior showed his physical capabilities and he’s clearly trained hard to achieve the juggernaut-esque build of Bane, much like he did with Bronson.¬†Thankfully the ‘roid raging, grunting imbecile in a luciador’s mask from 1997’s¬†Batman & Robin¬†is no-where to be seen; this one is far smarter, more devious and more sinister.¬†Kudos to¬†Nolan and his wardrobe team as the costumes, especially Hardy‘s, just worked so well. The only real under-used element is actually Bale himself for reasons that will become apparent when you watch the film. For a guy with such fantastic acting skills (The Machinist, The Fighter) it’s a shame, but that’s the nature of the beast that is Batman. A further honourable mention has to go to Joseph Gordon-Levitt who continues his run of form from Inception and 50/50 and really rounds out the lead cast despite his lack of cowl, mask or “I’m in disguise”-voice.

Batman and Bane tussle over which is more fashionable: cowl with ears or ventilator.

Sure, the film had its flaws and plot-holes, such as a teleporting Bruce Wayne and a seemingly unclimbable rope (like the one from your gym class when you were 12), but it’s called the ‘suspension of disbelief’. Maybe it’s a compliment to Nolan‘s world that we pick up on these inconsistencies as you almost forget that this is a comic book tale. It’s not a documentary, don’t treat it like one – the guy’s dressed as a bat gallivanting around New York (Gotham) afterall…

People will inevitably ask “Ok Phage, who is the better villain? Ledger‘s Joker or Hardy‘s Bane?” and “Oi, Phage, which is the better comic book movie of the summer? Avengers Assemble or The Dark Knight Rises?” And if you weren’t, you probably are now. Or you’re at least mildly curious. Well, I’ll ask you – what do you prefer: breathing or eating? Unless you have a grudge against staying alive, you’ll say both because they’re things you can’t choose between or compare, and the same is true here. The two villains are stylistically and ideologically distinct and both Ledger and Hardy do those characters real justice. You’ve also got to take into account that¬†Hardy’s Bane wears a huge piece of breathing apparatus on his face – you’re not going to get nuanced facial ticks – it’s all based off of physical presence, dialogue and manner of delivery (I truly loved the King of the Gypsies-inspired accent). Similarly, Marvel and DC’s summer blockbusters are worlds apart in tone, with Avengers Assemble arguably sticking more to the ‘comic book’ template than Nolan‘s grounded take on the Bat. Both are great examples of adapting comics for the silver screen.

Attentions will now turn to Nolan‘s next turn at being (partially) involved with a superhero: Man of Steel, due in June 2013 (check out the trailer here). Will lightning strike twice and it now be the turn of Superman to get his moment in the sun? Or will Zack Snyder oversaturate the screen, add some little skirts and put the whole film in slow-mo? Time will tell. Until then, we have the hero we need right now up on our screens.

Nolan‘s Batman began, became a knight and has risen to unassailable heights at the cinema, but you can’t help but have mixed feelings about his¬†final entry in the Batman franchise. On one hand it’s a fantastic slice of cinema and is what summers were made for, but on the other… what can we next expect from the world of Batman, which the public has clearly taken to heart? Hopefully Warner make some good decisions before we see the inevitable reboot in 5 years time.

And in a summer choc-full of superhero shenanigans, people will argue over which was the “hit” of the year, regardless of box office figures. Ultimately, the only winner is the general public getting two great, must-see movies in a summer (and Spider-Man…); unless you’re a Marvel (Avengers etc) or DC (Batman etc) fan-boy then you’ll blindly argue that ‘your’ film was best and the other was ‘bloated and predictable’… A bit like your comments.

Enjoy the comic book adaptation Golden Age!

Phage Factor:

5 Star

Killer Joe (2012)

Finger Lickin’ Good…

So often¬†nowadays do actors become type-cast into particular roles and genres. You’re going to see a Michelle Rodriguez movie? Well, you know she’s not going to be wearing a dress and brandishing a sterling British accent. You’re going to see a Jason Statham movie? Well, likewise, you’re not going to be getting an engaging story about how one man battles adversity and discrimination to be taken seriously as a Spanish teacher in downtown Madrid. Unless by “adversity” and “discrimination” you mean “pimps” and “drug runners”, and by “Spanish teacher” you allude to “mean bad-ass”…

Joe… not a man you want to disappoint.

That’s why it’s so great to see an actor break out of their shackles and surprise you, like Jonah Hill in last year’s fantastic Moneyball, or Channing Tatum flexing his comedy chops in 21 Jump Street. So when someone throws the name Matthew McConaughey at you, I’d presume you’d think of the latest “first date” fodder film, such as How To Lose a Guy in 10 Days¬†or The Wedding Planner, and not his fantastic turn in¬†A Time To Kill. Well, chalk this one up with McConaughey‘s “non-rom-com” films… and also rack it up as one of his best.

Briefly,¬†Killer Joe follows the exploits of a family in the backwoods of Texas as they scheme to off someone for a lucrative life insurance premium. So who do they turn to? Joe (McConaughey): the detective who moonlights as a killer-for-hire of course. As the family can only pay after the contract has been completed and the insurance claimed, Joe chooses to take a “retainer” just in case he doesn’t get his cash, and that retainer is Dottie (a captivating Juno Temple) – the young, naive daughter of the family. What ensues, for those unfamiliar with the award-winning theatre production, is an undeniably enthralling number of twists and turns as we learn how the tale of this desperate family unfolds.

What’s so great about this film is the same “just one more page” compulsion you get with all the best novels: you’re dying to know what’s coming next, due in no small part to the fantastic cast and sharply delivered dialogue. McConaughey and Temple are ably backed up by¬†Emile Hirsch as the¬†indebted son Chris and Thomas Haden Church as the good-for-nothing father Ansel, whose world-weary one liners provide some much-needed comic relief during some of the most intense scenes of the film. And believe me when I say “intense”. When this film chooses to get dark, it’s like wandering into a cave. At night. With a blindfold on. It can make The Dark Knight Rises look about as diabolical and dark as The Smurfs. My mind immediately leaps to parallels with 2011’s fantastic¬†Drive, which whilst fantastic, didn’t shy away from some graphic beatings. However, Killer Joe¬†also delves into sexual depravity on several occasions – something not seen in Drive, but don’t let that perturb you; it’s worth it.¬†And¬†if nothing else,¬†I can guarantee that you’ll not look at a KFC drumstick the same for a good few weeks…

An enthralling, yet deeply sinister story of murder in darkest Texas. The entire cast shines in what surely must be one of the must see’s of the summer if you love a character-driven tale. Maybe not a film for those that are faint-of-heart or have a particular affection for the Colonel’s fried chicken…

Phage Factor:

4 Star