Movies
[Review] Hulu’s ‘Books of Blood’ Creates Strange New Anthology Inspired by Clive Barker’s Works
Clive Barker‘s Books of Blood short story collection launched his career in horror. Many of Barker’s film adaptations come from this six-volume series, from Candyman to Rawhead Rex and many in between. For Hulu’s Books of Blood, writer/director Brannon Braga (Salem, Star Trek: First Contact) and co-writer Adam Simon use the short story “The Book of Blood” as a base framing device to create a new world of gruesome terrors. The result is a strange twist on the anthology format that works best as a setup for a potential ongoing series inspired by Barker’s works.
Books of Blood opens with a prologue, in which a mercenary, Bennett (Yul Vazquez), is on a mission to retrieve a book reputedly worth an unfathomable amount of money. Bennett sees this as his last job, hoping to retire from the wealth it’d garner him, and he’s willing to do anything to acquire the book. His story serves as the connective tissue between the two larger tales in this not-quite anthology.
Much of the runtime is dedicated to the development of Jenna (Britt Robertson), a troubled college student. She’s stuck at home- a luxurious beachfront property- after suffering an undisclosed mental break at school. Tired of being micromanaged and treated like a problem, Jenna runs away and winds up at a small town, where she rents a room at a college from a sweet, older couple. Naturally, their welcoming attitude belies more sinister designs on their boarders.
Lastly, Mary (Anna Friel) is a college professor that debunks psychics and the paranormal. She’s challenged by the arrival of Simon (Rafi Gavron), who convinces her that he can talk to the dead, including her deceased young child.
These three separate tales overlap and intersect at varying points through Bennett’s story, but it’s the nonlinear way in which Braga tells them that’s most curious. Bennett’s tale more or less bookends the film, yet Jenna’s adventure picks up and drops off at random. Just as things are getting intense in her segment, it abruptly ends and quietly moves into Mary and Simon’s intro. Just when you think that’s all there was to Jenna’s story, it returns to her to fill in many of the blanks that led her to that point. The jarring transition deflates much of the buildup in tension.
The performances are strong. Robertson is forced to do much of the heavy lifting, as the film spends most of its time with her character, and she luckily keeps Jenna interesting throughout the winding trajectory of her arc. It’s Friel who threatens to steal the film, though, if only the narrative would let her. Friel’s Mary is an icy, formidable woman thawed by her profound grief. Opposite her, Gavron’s Simon is the precise type of calm conman that sets up a thrilling battle of wits between the paranormal mediator and a professional skeptic. Fans of Barker’s short story will know precisely where these characters are headed, yet the actors are so good that they reel you in wholly, wanting to see this one expanded upon most of all.
There are moments of horror, violence, and gore, though nowhere near what Barker’s fans likely expect. Braga is more interested in exploring the characters’ traumas, sprinkled with moments of spooky scares, than outright unsettling dread. There’s a restraint to the horror. While polished and full of engaging performances, Books of Blood ultimately feels like a backdoor pilot to an ongoing series rather than a standalone film. This feature looks ahead, presenting an introduction to a world filled with evildoers and the paranormal, rather than the present. Barker serves as executive producer, but this is Braga’s vision. His take on the anthology doesn’t quite achieve the unity attempted, and the format doesn’t quite work either. Still, when broken down piecemeal, there’s plenty to like about Books of Blood to warrant a continuation, especially if it involves Mary and Simon.
Books of Blood releases exclusively on Hulu on October 7, 2020.
Movies
‘Cinderella’s Revenge’ Review – Horror Adaptation Returns the Fairy Tale to Its Gruesome Roots
Fairy tales, in their undiluted forms, need no help when it comes to being creepy and horrifying. However, the Disneyfication of these classic stories makes it rather easy to forget their morbid beginnings. In the case of Cinderella, most modern adaptations of this quintessential rags-to-riches tale rarely bring up the violent aspects. All of that has been long removed in favor of safer elements, such as fairy godmothers and anthropomorphic mice. Yet, when reimagining the flaxen servant-turned-princess as someone who seeks “bloody vengeance,” Tom Jolliffe looked to the past; the Cinderella’s Revenge screenwriter found inspiration in the character’s gruesome roots.
The Brothers Grimm did not come up with Cinderella (or Aschenputtel) all on their own, but their familiar variation provides part of the source material for Cinderella’s Revenge. Charles Perrault is also credited, seeing as his French version (Cendrillon) was the first to feature the fairy godmother, the pumpkin carriage and the slippers. Directed by Andy Edwards, this film is the merging of two worlds; it carries over the violence from the Grimm retelling, all while sprinkling in those now obligatory ingredients introduced by Perrault and immortalized by Disney. Of course, a few adjustments make this new take more fitting for the horror genre. In the opening, masked killers murder Cinderella’s father at the stepmother’s command, forcing the protagonist into years of hardship which, eventually, fuel her murderous rampage.
Before getting around to the biggest appeal of this film, Cinderella’s Revenge has to get the basics out of the way: meaning, how the maltreated namesake (played by Lauren Staerck) toils away as her cruel stepmother (Stephanie Lodge) and two stepsisters (Beatrice Fletcher and Megan Purvis) take delight in her suffering. And when her family goes to the prince’s ball, Cinderella is aided by a wish-granting fairy godmother; this one is played by Natasha Henstridge of Species fame. More in tune with the wisecracking genie from Aladdin than her noble, granny-like counterpart in the 1950 animated film, this godmother is flippant and pop culture-savvy. She’s also not British and has access to a world and time outside of this story’s universe.
For instance, the godmother brings up Hammer pants at one point, much to the confusion of her latest client, and she summons (actors portraying) Tom Ford, Vidal Sassoon, Christian Louboutin and Elon Musk to help with the magical makeover. These might all be considered anachronisms, but this is a fairy tale, after all. Anything is possible — even an orange Tesla taking Cinderella to the ball. Yes, really, that happens here.
Once it finally comes time for Cinderella to take her revenge, the mayhem is more calculable than shocking. Staerck dons a scary but generic mask while picking off those who’ve wronged her character — it doesn’t take a genius to figure out who will make up the body count — and she does so in slasher fashion. It’s all very predictable. On the bright side, Cinderella’s carnage is amusing, at least on a surface level. A bit graphic as well. Edwards and Jolliffe have fun with the Grimms’ contributions to the overall Cinderella mythology: namely the mutilation. The voluntary disfigurement of one’s foot in order to fit into that glass slipper is included along with some eye gouging. These gory nods to the German source material are also achieved by practical means.
Had Cinderella’s Revenge gone even further with its concept and execution, it might have become a new schlock classic. Instead, it’s never as wild as promised. The potential is certainly there, but the end product feels uninspired. When all is said and done, both this film and its literary basis have that mandatory happy ending after putting the principal character through so much hell. The former just so happens to be bloodier. Does that make it better, though? In its current form, no. There is still something far more unsettling about the Brothers Grimm version that these lurid adaptations can’t quite capture on screen.
Cinderella’s Revenge is now playing in select theaters.
Pictured: Poster for Cinderella’s Revenge (2024) provided by Quiver Distribution.
Dev Patel’s ‘Monkey Man’ Is Now Available to Watch at Home!
Five Underseen Vampire Horror Movies to Stream This Week
‘Stream’ – Horror Movie from the Team Behind ‘Terrifier’ Sets August Theatrical Release
‘The Blair Witch Project’ – Original Stars Release a Statement Asking Lionsgate for Residuals & Recognition
‘Mountain Man’ – Joe Manganiello Will Battle Zombies in Upcoming Horror Movie
You must be logged in to post a comment.