The Films of 2023

[tenia]

I indeed didn't like X but thought Pearl was OK, and agree with you in any case they're both more interesting than the recommandations I got.

[reaky]

The horror films that resonate are I think made as horror films first, and their power both yields (perhaps unconscious) thematic content and coaxes readers of them to tease such content out.

I’ve read innumerable pieces setting out the resurgence of the repressed as the core theme of Hammer horror, but I’m fairly sure Fisher, Sangster and Hinds didn’t sit down and ponder how to dramatise such a proposition. And a fiver to anyone who can tell me what was on Dario Argento’s mind when he made Suspiria beyond hammer-and-tongs heavy metal assault.

[knives]

Christopher Landon’s We Have a Ghost is a good movie despite Netflix’s attempt to make it seem like the worst thing ever. It’s a lot younger skewing than his previous efforts reminding me of an overlong SNick pilot at times. It’s also a bit slow to get started with a comically self centered father played as Snidely Whiplash by Anthony Mackie. Lead character Kevin keeps the film alive in these early parts showing wit and humour in performance as well as being incredibly well written. He’s an amazing center to an overextended film that really finally matches that quality once Kevin definitely pairs up with his neighbor for some Scooby-Doo business.

Landon throws some unexpected curveballs in the last hour that beautifully complicate our allegiances and feelings until the film finally becomes as confusing as teen life must seem. The film is Landon’s most dramatically sincere which is a fun change of pace though hopefully he finds a stronger vehicle for that sincerity in a future project.

[Edwardmatthew]

Christopher Murray's Sorcery is a promising film that explores a real-life incident on Chile's Chiloé island, delving into themes of colonialism, heritage, and religion. The story revolves around Rosa, a young teen working for German colonists in the late 19th century, who witnesses her father's brutal murder by a white settler. As her pleas for justice are ignored by the government and church, Rosa questions her Christian beliefs and reconnects with her indigenous roots among the Huilliche people. She is initiated into the world of brujería (witchcraft), seeking the tools for revenge.

The film's strengths lie in its cultural and geographic specificity, as well as its gripping story. However, the storytelling occasionally becomes prosaic, and the production values, despite location shooting on the island, suffer from limited resources in crucial moments. While some of the supernatural scenes are effective, others are undermined by dated visual effects reminiscent of early-2000s TV movies, particularly in portraying fire and animals. This contrast detracts from the overall authenticity of the film, though potential distribution could allow for improvements in these areas.

Despite its flaws, Sorcery is worth seeing due to Murray's patient and understated storytelling, the depiction of a unique place and its cultures, and Valentina Véliz Caileo's compelling lead performance. It is regrettable that Murray opted for more conventional choices in the second half of the film, as the earlier scenes possessed an eerie and unexplained atmosphere that could have been sustained throughout.

[therewillbeblus]

Reality: A claustrophobic nightmare of being on the losing end of institutional power dynamics in a deceitfully-indirect interrogation, Sydney Sweeney expectedly knocks it out of the park as Reality Winner. However, Josh Hamilton's casting is particularly inspired, given that the whole vibe of surreal manipulation most resembles his own disempowerment of Louis CK in the B-scene of the "Dog Pound" episode of Louie's first season. The guy walking in asking, "Is this a room?" is basically his whole shtick from that segment and here, and frighteningly, that means the real FBI's routine as well.. I'd be shocked if that role wasn't directly responsible for him getting this part

[The Curious Sofa]

Influencer is not the movie I feared it would be and a lot better than expected. It’s on Shudder and gets promoted as a horror film about influencers but it’s more of a twisty thriller, where it’s best to go in knowing nothing about the plot. I was afraid this would be a flat satire which takes cheap shots at its influencer characters but they end up more nuanced than expected and thankfully this doesn’t become a shooting-fish-in-a-barrel exercise.

Lead actress Cassandra Naud is a real find and the whole thing is pulled off with style by first time director and co-writer Kurtis David Harder. A few years ago this would have been a mid-budget Hollywood movie starring better known actors. My one quibble would be that the final plot turn is easy to guess but it didn’t impact my enjoyment too much.

[Mr Sausage]

Influencer is not the movie I feared it would be and a lot better than expected. It’s on Shudder and gets promoted as a horror film about influencers but it’s more of a twisty thriller, where it’s best to go in knowing nothing about the plot. I was afraid this would be a flat satire which takes cheap shots at its influencer characters but they end up more nuanced than expected and thankfully this doesn’t become a shooting-fish-in-a-barrel exercise.

Lead actress Cassandra Naud is a real find and the whole thing is pulled off with style by first time director and co-writer Kurtis David Harder. A few years ago this would have been a mid-budget Hollywood movie starring better known actors. My one quibble would be that the final plot turn is easy to guess but it didn’t impact my enjoyment too much.

Good rec. While I knew exactly what was going on after 5 minutes, and the movie bore that out, its eventual route was surprising and twisty. It both was and wasn't what I expected, which is always nice.

SpoilerShow

It pulled a Psycho, something you really ought to be able to do only once in film history, and yet the film carries it off, and with the cheeky confidence to underline it with some much delayed opening titles. But its cleverest bit is that the movie's not a satire or a commentary, it just uses social media and influencer culture as an exploitable weakness, something predators can use to keep someone's presence alive in the world so that no one looks for them, wonders what happened to them, or questions the purchases made under their name. How creepy.

A fun, confident, ably performed thriller. And yes, best watched without knowing anything.

There have been a few influencer-related horror films recently. Sissi was another interesting one. Maybe not wholly successful, but it married the slasher with with both cringe and splatter comedy, and didn't overdo its blunt satire on the social media wellness industry. Its biggest flaw is maybe lack of ambition; it never pushed its commentary, merely used it as a vehicle for its comedy. But it has one of the funniest, most horrifying, and most realistic falls in horror cinema.

[Brian C]

Elemental

Seemed like the whole world was wanting to dance on Pixar's grave for this one, sight unseen - honestly, me among them, because the trailers for this looked terrible. So imagine my surprise when it turns out to be ... pretty decent?

First off, there's a lot of blame to be laid at Disney's feet here for the way this was marketed. The trailers only barely hinted that this is an immigrant story, for reasons that sure seem to be simple cowardice in a political environment where the loudest right-wing morons are shouting at anything "woke." Disney disregarded the substance of the story here in favor of a string of super lame element jokes in the trailers, perversely somehow managing to capture almost exclusively the least charming moments from the film and creating one extraordinarily unappealing package.

As a result, while I was watching this, it dawned on me that I had no actual idea what this movie was even about in the first place, and it was a genuine pleasure to discover that there's a real story here beyond simply the world's most torturedly high-concept "opposites attract" premise. For some reason, Disney actually wanted audiences to think that they anthropomorphized fire and water just to have them fall in love! No wonder the opening weekend box office returns were so disappointing, you can't blame audiences for thinking that that sounds like the dumbest shit ever.

I don't think that this is one of the great Pixar films, but it's got a heart and a good-naturedness that isn't out of place with the greats, and it's very often a beautiful film to look at - for my money, it's their most original and visually appealing art design since Coco. The biggest problem for me is that about 90% of the jokes are kinda pitiful, honestly - after all, they were able to make a truly dreadful trailer from moments that are actually from the film. If this movie was actually funny when it means to be, I think that maybe the emotional beats would also land with just a bit more impact, and they'd really have something here. But maybe the wit suffers from the nagging underlying realization that, for all the visual invention here, the "city of elements" premise just isn't very sharply conceived, and maybe there's not a ton to work with.

But those limitations aside, it's a huge rebound for Pixar from the repulsive Turning Red and Lightyear.

[MichaelB]

I haven’t seen it, so this isn’t a loaded question at all, but what did you find “repulsive” about Turning Red? I was under the impression that it was pretty highly regarded.

[knives]

I was going to ask the same question. It was probably my favorite film from last year.

[Monterey Jack]

Turning Red was fantastic (Lightyear, considerably less so).

[Brian C]

Been almost a year and a half so I don't remember specifics well enough to get too much into details, but I just thought it was obnoxious and I had a hard time getting through it - I've seen a million movies that treated its child characters with more sensitivity and less condescension, and in general I didn't think any of the characters were very convincing. On the whole, it felt like an adult projecting their own adult personality onto their child characters, which always rings very false to me.

And I thought the central metaphor of the film - the red panda as a symbol of puberty - was really stupid. The thing about adolescence is that it's an awkward if not downright frightening time for almost everyone. But that goes right out the window when you make the character an actual freak who turns into a literal different species! In a weird way that seems like the confirmation of every kid's worst fears, that they really are different and grotesque compared to everyone else, and there's something very cynically Disney about the way they just slap a cute face on it - it's even commodified in the film itself as an act of rebellion against the strict mom, which seemed extremely distasteful to me.

[brundlefly]

Influencer is not the movie I feared it would be and a lot better than expected. It’s on Shudder and gets promoted as a horror film about influencers but it’s more of a twisty thriller, where it’s best to go in knowing nothing about the plot. I was afraid this would be a flat satire which takes cheap shots at its influencer characters but they end up more nuanced than expected and thankfully this doesn’t become a shooting-fish-in-a-barrel exercise.
Lead actress Cassandra Naud is a real find and the whole thing is pulled off with style by first time director and co-writer Kurtis David Harder. A few years ago this would have been a mid-budget Hollywood movie starring better known actors. My one quibble would be that the final plot turn is easy to guess but it didn’t impact my enjoyment too much.

Good rec. While I knew exactly what was going on after 5 minutes, and the movie bore that out, its eventual route was surprising and twisty. It both was and wasn't what I expected, which is always nice.
A fun, confident, ably performed thriller. And yes, best watched without knowing anything.

I’ll join the vote with the qualification that “better than expected” may be the ceiling, here, so manage information intake and expectations accordingly.

I didn’t see where it was going immediately…

SpoilerShow

I suspected Naud was the lead scout for a Hostel type set-up.

…and even though it ended where I thought it would, it didn’t do so with hard punctuation and didn’t underline a final irony.

SpoilerShow

CW managed to take Madison’s place once again! But there’s no guarantee CW dies or Madison makes it back alive, well done.

I do wonder if the movie is admirably spare and functional or just basic and limited in what it has to say about social media and online life.

SpoilerShow

Its foundation is that nothing you see online is true with the corollary that everyone who looks happy on social media is really unhappy and alone, and it doesn’t really complicate that. The characters are fooled by online activity, but I don’t think there are any screen-based revelations for us (maybe Jessica and Ryan's Instagram communications count, though that's mainly to frustrate CW that something online is happening without her control.) It’s a strength that characters use the internet in practical ways without comment, and I too am happy the targets weren’t caricatures. But for something called Influencer you’d think there’d be some substantive commentary or an ominous abstraction beyond an ironic switcheroo.

SpoilerShow

It pulled a Psycho, something you really ought to be able to do only once in film history, and yet the film carries it off, and with the cheeky confidence to underline it with some much delayed opening titles. But its cleverest bit is that the movie's not a satire or a commentary, it just uses social media and influencer culture as an exploitable weakness, something predators can use to keep someone's presence alive in the world so that no one looks for them, wonders what happened to them, or questions the purchases made under their name. How creepy.

SpoilerShow

Imagine if in the first Psycho you started rooting for Norman to get away with it and keep killing! Naud is good, and a very striking presence; at first I thought her birthmark a tribal tattoo, and I don’t think you can root hard enough for someone who looks as she does who has decided to try to make a living with her face. Her appearance is also well-integrated, as no one questions why she might not want to have her picture taken. (Though when people started calling her “creepy” I both admired the lack of clarifying dialogue and defensively wanted some.) She doesn’t like to be seen, even completely by us, unnaturally covering up in situations where she’s naked. (Naud was also a producer on the film, so I’m assuming she’s okay with everything included.)

CW has both the superior skills (for a thriller, at least) and is naturally disadvantaged in pursuing the lifestyle on which she preys. I like that we don’t know anything about her race or class background and no backstory’s blathered out, we just observe her. And I like how intriguing it is when Ryan suggests her birthmark makes her unique and marketable. That she chooses two blonde, blue-eyed women as targets is commentary enough. She’s more Tom Ripley than Single White Female/Ingrid Goes West, a definite strength. I suspect were they couched in a thriller where we were exposed to their disadvantage, the proverbial Nigerian Prince might seem a hero.

But as far as using “social media and influencer culture” as “something predators can use to keep someone's presence alive in the world so that no one looks for them” – I think that’s both limited (CW might be pathological, but she’s already done a sign-off post for Madison and moves on to a new target once she milked her credit, only reviving the account to deal with Ryan’s presence) and already becoming a standard beat (something AI will only accelerate, on screen and in real life). I’ve seen it done recently in Fresh and Cam

CAM SPOILERSShow

in which the malevolence isn’t even human, but automated and indifferent, which I find far creepier

and expect it’s become a regular feature in stuff like Criminal Minds and Law and Order.

What I would have liked to see is that CW had automated all her victims’ accounts so they’d devolved – as Ryan hints – into pure spam, courting product placement opportunities and subsisting off those. But again, the movie keeps things limited, for better and worse.

Finally, and this cannot be said enough to filmmakers: If you are going to put important information on phone screens, please have close-ups of the text. 99% of your movies are not going to ever be seen on a big screen outside of tiny festivals and some of us don't watch movies on our laptops.

[yoloswegmaster]

Bottoms:

Holy shit, I had low expectations for this considering my dislike of Shiva Baby, and somehow this fails to even meet those expectations. I can’t recall the last time I’ve sat thru something so debilitating and deadening and is easily one of the most painfully unfunny films I’ve seen. The biggest problem with this is that it doesn’t feel very genuine or authentic to itself, in that it doesn’t know if wants to be a biting satire or a loving homage to the teen comedy genre. Is this a feminist film or a film that is critiquing modern-day feminism? I honestly don’t know, and I would wager that Emma Seligman doesn’t either. The comedy is nowhere near as edgy as it makes itself out to be and there is way much emphasis on how quirky and random the jokes are, which leads to quite a few of the jokes not making much sense. An example of this is towards the end of the film where a joke is made about Zamani Wilder’s character being a black Republican, but the joke doesn’t make sense as there are no prior implications of her character being a Republican.

The only time that the film was able to get anything close to a snort out of me was when Marshawn Lynch makes a fucking “Deez Nuts” joke during the end credits where they show the bloopers. It doesn’t help that the 2 leads have virtually no chemistry with one another, as
Rachel Sennott continues to be an uncharismatic black hole (she also is severely miscast in the sense that she looks nothing like a high-schooler), and I’m baffled by the praise that Ayo Edebiri is getting, as she does a poor job of playing the straight-man. After this, I think I'm ready to write off Emma Seligman for good.

[Walter Kurtz]

High Heat is a stunning effort that easily tops anything done recently and may end up being the film of the decade. This instant classic features Olga Kurylenko displaying her versatility by not playing her standard repertoire of KGB agent or ex-KGB agent or a KGB agent-in-training but instead playing the owner/chef of a ritzy NY fine dining establishment with a rave review in the NY Times. Did I say playing? Olga doesn't play. Olga becomes. She looks quite svelte in her chef smock as she wheels around the kitchen showing her command of all things culinary.

But lo and behold... some bad guys come into the kitchen and start shooting it up with loud and noisy automatic weapons whereupon Olga whips off her smock to display a nattily-attired and very form-fitting black sweater and leather slacks combo that allows her to provide a slim profile for the assassin's bullets as she brandishes her handgun and quickly dispatches a covey of very nasty men with icy cold (or should I say icy HOT-!) precision.

I have to admit that this early twist where Olga is also a trained KGB something or other in addition to being a touted NY chef had me totally fooled. What an awesome movie! I hope Vinegar Syndrome puts out a 4-disc box set with a lot of outtakes especially if one of them has something weird or maybe even a monster in it.

Also starring Don Johnson.

[The Curious Sofa]

I had great hopes for No One Will Save You as it's the second film directed by Brian Duffield, whose debut movie was Spontaneous, which I loved (I wrote about in 2020 thread). This has a tense, if derivative, first half but then drops the ball in the second half. It turns out to be yet another genre movie where

SpoilerShow

the entire plot is constructed around having the lead character come to terms with a past trauma, it's alien invasion as a drastic form of therapy.

The main gimmick is that the film has no dialogue (only two lines are spoken in the entire film) which is a shame as one of Duffield's strengths as a writer was the snappy dialogue of Spontaneous. Otherwise the movie is reminiscent of many other alien encounter movies, the set piece which makes up much of the first half feels like an extension of the alien abduction scene from Close Encounters, complete with appliances going wild when the aliens are near and we've already seen a global alien invasions from the limited perspective of a rural farm house in Signs and the A Quiet Place movies. Kaitlyn Dever gives it her all and

SpoilerShow

the final gag redeems to flashback happy past-trauma section of the second half slightly

but otherwise I found this disappointing.

[Tuco]

Let's get commemorative! From...1923!

https://www.google.com/search?client=fi ... tc9JI,st:0

[Lemmy Caution]

Taylor Swift breaks record for most profitable concert film in history ... a week before its release
Sky News should improve its headline writing. But I thought this was interesting. Recorded music has become largely free, so musicians have to mostly make a living from live performances. Live concert demand has fueled ultra high ticket prices and a lot of tour hype. So concert films can satiate pent up demand at a much lower price point. Which works well since movie theaters are having a hard time. Not sure how many acts can go this route successfully, but Beyoncé is reportedly planning her own concert film. Is this a significant music/film trend we'll see more of, or just a temporary cash in?

Late 70's/early 80's, there were concert film which played mostly as midnight movies, boosting theater revenue. The Last Waltz kind of kicked off more high profile iterations, followed by The Wall, Rock & Roll High School, Stop Making Sense. Then it petered out, likely due to MTV.
I'm not too well-versed in this, so likely someone could add more.

The current music scene seems too fragmented to sustain many such concert films on a national level. Some exceptions: Swift, Beyonce, maybe Rihanna and Miley Cyrus, JayZ, Drake, Billie Eilish? I don't know much modern music ...

[hearthesilence]

Taylor Swift breaks record for most profitable concert film in history ... a week before its release
Sky News should improve its headline writing. But I thought this was interesting. Recorded music has become largely free, so musicians have to mostly make a living from live performances. Live concert demand has fueled ultra high ticket prices and a lot of tour hype. So concert films can satiate pent up demand at a much lower price point. Which works well since movie theaters are having a hard time. Not sure how many acts can go this route successfully, but Beyoncé is reportedly planning her own concert film. Is this a significant music/film trend we'll see more of, or just a temporary cash in?

Late 70's/early 80's, there were concert film which played mostly as midnight movies, boosting theater revenue. The Last Waltz kind of kicked off more high profile iterations, followed by The Wall, Rock & Roll High School, Stop Making Sense. Then it petered out, likely due to MTV.
I'm not too well-versed in this, so likely someone could add more.

The current music scene seems too fragmented to sustain many such concert films on a national level. Some exceptions: Swift, Beyonce, maybe Rihanna and Miley Cyrus, JayZ, Drake, Billie Eilish? I don't know much modern music ...

In Swift's case, it's a great alternative for those who couldn't get tickets or were reluctant to spend that much on a concert. I do like Swift, but not nearly enough where I'd be willing to go through the trouble of landing high demand tickets, so seeing this in a theater is kind of perfect for me. Beyoncé seems like a good bet for that reason too, and it helps that their shows are huge spectacles. boygenius would be great since they're THE band of the moment. SZA could be great - she put out the best album of the past 12 months, and her show sold out pretty fast. I'd love to see one from Kendrick Lamar - his shows are amazing - though it would've been better if they had done that ten or even six years ago.

[beamish14]

Taylor Swift breaks record for most profitable concert film in history ... a week before its release


Late 70's/early 80's, there were concert film which played mostly as midnight movies, boosting theater revenue. The Last Waltz kind of kicked off more high profile iterations, followed by The Wall, Rock & Roll High School, Stop Making Sense. Then it petered out, likely due to MTV.
I'm not too well-versed in this, so likely someone could add more.

The current music scene seems too fragmented to sustain many such concert films on a national level. Some exceptions: Swift, Beyonce, maybe Rihanna and Miley Cyrus, JayZ, Drake, Billie Eilish? I don't know much modern music ...

Urgh! A Music War was sort of the public access antidote to MTV’s expanding grip on pop culture at the time, as it overlapped more with the USA Network’s Night Flight and New Wave Theatre . You’re definitely right in that after Laurie Anderson Home of the Brave, Tom Waits: Big Time, and Rattle and Hum that these pivoted to video-only releases, which is a shame.

Dead Can Dance: Toward the Within and Gift (the unbelievably bizarre Jane’s Addiction postmortem from 1993), are probably among the last two to be shot in 35mm and get theatrical releases

[Persona]

The Roald Dahl collection from Wes Anderson on Netflix is some of his finest work. It's like his conceits and affectations found new, singular purpose in adapting Dahl. Each short is a concise volley of inventiveness, imagination, and poignancy. As storytelling they are equal parts experimental, entertaining, and effective. Wonderful stuff.

A good couple weeks for the streamer, as I also really enjoyed FAIR PLAY.

Pretty fantastic as a feature debut for writer-director Chloe Domont, though it starts to slip towards more generic ideas as it goes along. Still, a strong, sharp film that is pretty precisely calibrated in its direction and effective in its performances.

It tries to maintain a certain balance of perspectives as it explores the parallels of sexual and capitalist power dynamics, but can't help but let things start to skew as the belittled Luke's ego starts really lashing out--which, while plenty truthful, I'm sure, doesn't feel quite as interesting as the film's first half.

Thankfully, the film doesn't rest until its final seconds, wherein Domont is able to wrangle a pretty provocative conclusion out of its generally weaker third act. She is going to be one to watch, for sure.

[The Curious Sofa]

A Haunting in Venice, which I hoped would be an agreeable Halloween watch, is the most ugly looking film I have (partially) seen in ages. I can't remember the last time I hated the way a film was directed so much, that I didn't make it past half an hour. Not only has Kenneth Branagh never come across visual cliche he doesn't love, he then repeats it over and over and over. Long repressed memories of Dead Again and of his Frankenstein came flooding back, I threw in the towel and watched James Whales' The Old Dark House instead.

[beamish14]

A Haunting in Venice, which I hoped would be an agreeable Halloween watch, is the most ugly looking film I have (partially) seen in ages. I can't remember the last time I so hated the way a film was directed so much, that I didn't make it past half an hour. Not only has Kenneth Branagh never come across visual cliche he doesn't love, he then repeats it over and over and over. Long repressed memories of Dead Again and of his Frankenstein came flooding back, I threw in the towel and watched James Whales' The Old Dark House instead.

It took me at least 3 tries to barely finish Death on the Nile. Branaugh’s Christie adaptations are horrific

[Soy Cuba]

'Joyland' is pretty good, if a little rough around the edges. Saim Sadiq's debut follows a Pakistani man (Haider) in a rather sullen, arranged marriage who is looked down upon by the patriarch of the family for being weak and unemployed and not giving the family any children, especially male children. Haider is played superbly by Ali Junejo, and the performances are all noteworthy - particularly Rasti Farooq, who plays Haider's wife Mumtaz.

Haider looks for work and ends up being part of an erotic dance troupe at the town's theatre. There he meets a woman who he becomes infatuated with. The dance scenes are a little coarse and the film has a slight tone that leans towards the awards season. But other than that it’s a very good drama which has tension, romance, comedy and tragedy and is centrally a film about unfulfilled desires in a strict regime of conformity. The themes of family and cultural oppression / sexual taboo are strong enough to see this film still banned in it’s own country, so kudos to the film-makers for sticking their necks on the line. It’s also produced by Riz Ahmed and Gemima Kahn. Haider’s plight is explored and in the end we are left wondering a little of his future but the emotion is enough to make the film a very watchable 2 hours of story-telling. The cinematography of urban Punjab is also really well shot.

Solid drama – 7.3/10

[TechnicolorAcid]

So I saw the FNAF movie.
Honestly I tried, I've been waiting for a while and over the years I have consumed a bit of the FNAF lore and it's definitely one of those games that just seemed right for a movie adaptation. You could explore grief, family dynamics, moral conflicts, possibly the investigative and judicial side of the whole FNAF lore, or the tragic tale of a man coming to terms with what a monster his friend truly is. But no, outside of the first 3 (which aren't as fleshed out as they should be in a setup like this), there are no themes to explore. What could be a dark twisty tale or a tragedy disguised as a horror picture is instead a generally bland time with occasionally memorable moments for the fans (there was one waiter performance that absolutely shook me silly and the Balloon Boy moments were genuinely chuckle worthy if you're involved in the fanbase somewhat and get the reference). The worst parts though are that they lack the horror of the franchise, there's some suspense but nothing invoking the sheer panic of something like FNAF 2 or the subtle atmosphere and sound design of the original game which obviously you're gonna lose some of that without playing it but then it turns into a kids film. For god's sake they do that thing where they stare at the ceiling or something like it's a Hallmark movie or something. It just feels odd for this animatronic murderers to just be acting all innocent. Also there isn't even that much focus on the nights until Night 4 because for most of the movie it's just watching this man battle for custody of his sister could work, in anything other than a FNAF movie. Point is, and I'm rambling too much here, it lacks what made the games interesting and creates a pitiable film in the process. Just watch the Battington FNAF tapes or the Squimpus tapes or the Spectre tapes or just play the games, really do something besides watching this sad attempt at a FNAF adaptation that lacks the identity of the originals. Also why do they change the name of William Afton, the others I get, but like, William is the antagonist and Springtrap, the original creator wrote this there isn't any copyright problems at play so what happened?
But hey that's just amateur criticism, a FILM AMATEUR CRITICISM.
1 and a half stars out of 4 (The technical side is really good)