Title: Wasp

Director: Andrea Arnold

Runtime: 26 minutes

Released: August 1, 2003 (Edinburgh International Film Festival)

Available to stream: Exclusively on Mubi

Andrea Arnold’s Wasp is a raw, emotional short film about a struggling single mom. Zoe (Natalie Press) has four kids, no money, and a chaotic life. When she runs into an old crush, Dave (Danny Dyer), things change.

Dave invites her out for a drink, and she jumps at the chance to escape her reality. There’s just one problem though, she has no one to watch her kids. Instead, she takes them along and leaves them outside the pub.

Zoe heads inside to flirt and feel carefree while her kids wait in the parking lot. They’re restless, hungry, and fending for themselves. The tension builds as Zoe’s attempt to relive her past collides with her responsibilities.

A buzzing wasp becomes a symbol for Zoe’s life, trapped, frustrated, and desperate for freedom. Things reach a breaking point when a crisis forces her to confront her choices. In that moment, Zoe realizes what really matters…her kids.

The film doesn’t sugarcoat anything. It shows the harsh realities of poverty and the pressures of single parenthood. Zoe is flawed but relatable, trying her best in impossible circumstances.

The simple plot is carried by powerful performances. Natalie Press captures Zoe’s vulnerability and desperation perfectly. The child actors add emotional weight, showing innocence amidst neglect.

Wasp isn’t polished or uplifting, but it’s deeply human. At only 26 minutes, it delivers quite a gut-punch. This Oscar-winning short will stay with you long after it ends.

If you’ve seen Wasp (2003), I want to hear what you thought of it.

Leave a comment below or reach out to me over on Bluesky!

Of course, as always, you can keep up with everything else that I’ve been watching over on Letterboxd.

The post Wasp (2003) appeared first on I've Scene That!.

Title: The Blue Lamp

Director: Basil Dearden

Runtime: 1 hour 24 minutes

Released: January 19, 1950 (United Kingdom)

Available to stream on: Kanopy

George Dixon (Jack Warner) is a kind and well-respected policeman nearing retirement. His partner, Andy (Jimmy Hanley), is an eager young rookie determined to prove himself. Fortunately, George has taken Andy under his wing, guiding him through the ins and outs of their beat in a post-WWII working-class London neighborhood.

Their routine patrols take a dramatic turn when a reckless small-time criminal, Tom Riley (Dirk Bogarde), sets off a chain of events that shocks both the police force and the community. Riley’s chaotic actions lead to a devastating incident that unites the neighborhood and law enforcement in a determined effort to bring him to justice.

Will they succeed in tracking Riley down? And how will the community cope with the aftermath of his crimes?

One thing is certain about The Blue Lamp (1950): it’s not your typical “cop chases bad guy” film. While it’s a drama, it also carries a documentary-style realism that draws you in and makes the story feel authentic and engaging.

Some might dismiss it as copaganda, and that’s an understandable perspective, one I even initially shared during the opening scenes. However, as the story unfolds, it becomes less about glorifying law enforcement and more about capturing a time when police and communities worked together for the greater good. The film also reflects the post-WWII shift in crime, moving from organized to more random and senseless acts of violence.

The story’s impact relies heavily on its performances, and Jack Warner and Dirk Bogarde deliver brilliantly. Warner’s portrayal of George Dixon is warm and heartfelt, especially in his mentor-like relationship with the younger Andy. Meanwhile, Bogarde is chilling and unforgettable as the unpredictable Tom Riley, bringing a sharp edge to the film’s tension.

If you’re a fan of crime dramas with depth and heart, The Blue Lamp is worth your time.

Now it’s your turn.

If you’ve seen The Blue Lamp (1950), let me hear your thoughts on it in the comments below!

Find me over on Bluesky and keep up with everything else I’ve been watching over on Letterboxd.

The post The Blue Lamp (1950) appeared first on I've Scene That!.

Title: The Substance

Director: Martín Rejtman

Runtime: 1 hour 29 minutes

Released: September 22, 2023 (Festival de San Sebastián – Spain)

Available to stream on: Mubi

Gustavo (Esteban Bigliardi) is an Argentinian yoga instructor living in Chile, where he runs his own yoga studio. For him, the studio is a source of stability.

His wife, Vanesa (Manuela Oyarzún), who is also a yoga instructor, has left him. Instead of sharing the studio as they used to, she now plans to teach her classes from their apartment, the one she kept after the separation. Though they’re already separated, Vanesa and Gustavo still attend couples’ therapy. Vanesa seems to be going through the motions, while Gustavo appears to believe these sessions might save their relationship.

But Gustavo’s troubles go beyond therapy and his ex-wife. Even his safe haven, the yoga studio, is about to become a source of frustration. During a class, what Gustavo assumes is an earthquake causes a folding screen to fall and knock out one of his students. When she regains consciousness, she has lost her memory. Meanwhile, in an attempt to attract new students, Gustavo offers trial classes. But after one of these sessions, with only one new person present in the class, everyone’s cell phones mysteriously go missing.

A comedy of errors unfolds as Gustavo tries to find peace through yoga, but obstacles seem to follow him everywhere.

Will his luck ever turn around?

Esteban Bigliardi’s performance is the saving grace of The Practice (2023). His portrayal of Gustavo brings a sincere innocence to the character that keeps you engaged throughout.

The film’s concept succeeds as observational comedy, but it quickly begins to repeat familiar tropes. While there are many supporting characters, their storylines aren’t developed enough to keep the narrative feeling fresh. Despite a runtime of just under 90 minutes, the film could benefit from being about 25 minutes shorter, making it more suited to a 45-55 minute short.

That said, there are worse ways to spend 89 minutes. I’m not suggesting you rush to watch The Practice, but if you have some time to fill, give it a watch and let me know what you think.

Have you seen The Practice (2023)?

If so, drop a comment or reach out to me on Bluesky, Letterboxd, and/or Instagram, and let me hear it!

The post The Practice (2023) appeared first on I've Scene That!.

Title: Two Ships

Director: Justine Triet

Runtime: 30 minutes

Released: January 12, 2012 (Angers European First Film Festival – France)

Available to stream on: Mubi (leaving 10 days from the date this is posted)

Laetitia (played by Laetitia Dosch), a comedian, and Thomas, a painter (Thomas Lévy-Lasne), meet by chance at a party. Both feel out of place and uncertain about their success in their respective careers.

Though they hit it off, the party setting makes it hard to find a quiet spot to talk. If only it were that simple.

As they try to spend time together, a series of comedic mishaps keeps interrupting them—whether at the party, at Thomas’ home where he lives with his father, or even in an emergency room. Laetitia and Thomas must work hard to find a moment alone. When they finally do, we see them goofing around on Chatroulette.

But what about the next day? Well, that’s just it. We don’t know.

Justine Triet lets us be a fly on the wall for one night in these characters’ lives. While we learn a bit about them, their futures remain a mystery. For that brief time, we follow them as they drift through the night, only to part ways at the end, like two ships passing.

The film wouldn’t be the same without Laetitia Dosch’s performance. She brings an anxious energy to her character, which is felt throughout. Before Two Ships (2012), I wasn’t familiar with her work, but I’ll be looking to see more of it now.

At a runtime of 30 minutes, Two Ships finds the perfect balance. It doesn’t overstay its welcome, nor does it leave you wanting too much more.

Would I have liked a little more depth to Laetitia and Thomas’s encounter?

Absolutely.

But that’s just not how the random moments in life unfold.

So, if you’ve seen Two Ships (2012), now it’s your turn!

Tell me all your thoughts on it in the comments below or by reaching out on Bluesky, Instagram, or Letterboxd.

The post Two Ships (2012) appeared first on I've Scene That!.

Title: The Haunting

Director: Robert Wise

Runtime: 1 hour 52 minutes

Released: August 21, 1963 (United States)

Available to stream on: MGM+ and Tubi

Hill House, as we learn from the opening narration, has quite the past. Hugh Crain had it built for his wife, but she tragically died in a freak accident when approaching the house for the first time. Hugh remarried and his second wife just so happened to take a fatal tumble down the stairs. Hugh’s daughter lived in the house until her death. Her nurse inherited the house and unfortunately hung herself from a staircase. A distant cousin of the nurse wound up inheriting the house, which has sat empty for some time.

Meanwhile, Dr. Markway (Richard Johnson) is a paranormal investigator who wishes to investigate the alleged haunting of Hill House. The current owner insists that her heir, Luke (Russ Tamblyn), be allowed to join. Markway then sends out invitations but ultimately, only two people respond, a psychic by the name of Theodora (Claire Bloom) and Eleanor (Julie Harris), a woman looking for her place to belong who also claims to have previously experienced poltergeist activity.

Soon after they arrive, the group begins to sense that something is decidedly off about Hill House. The walls, for instance, are built at strange angles, creating perspectives that feel unnervingly off-center. As they roam through the house, part of the group claims to hear loud banging on the walls, while others insist they hear nothing at all. During their exploration, they even come across a giant marble statue that eerily resembles each of them.

As time passes, it becomes increasingly clear that Eleanor, in particular, seems to be the primary target of Hill House’s strange and unsettling phenomena.

Is it all in Eleanor’s head?

Or is there a haunting in Hill House?

It’s absolutely wild to me that Robert Wise wrapped West Side Story and immediately went on to tackle this film.

The craft of The Haunting (1963) is what truly makes it stand out. Shot in black and white, it instantly makes Hill House feel even more isolating and menacing. Robert Wise and cinematographer Davis Boulton’s use of wide-angle lenses portrays off-center perspectives, giving the sense that Hill House is slowly engulfing its inhabitants.

And then, there’s the sound. Whether it’s a door creaking or banging noises from down the hall, you hear every sound explicitly, each one building an unnerving level of tension. This atmosphere continues to intensify throughout the entire runtime.

Part of what makes The Haunting (1963) so captivating is that it’s all about what you don’t see. We’re never spoon-fed jump scares or told what to believe. Instead, everything is left to your imagination, leaving you to fill in the blanks.

If you love your horror smart and atmospheric, The Haunting (1963) is exactly what you’re looking for.

Well, now it’s your turn!

If you’ve seen The Haunting (1963), leave a comment below or reach out to me on Bluesky or Instagram and tell me what you thought!

As always, you can keep up with everything else that I’ve been watching over on my Letterboxd page.

The post The Haunting (1963) appeared first on I've Scene That!.

Title: The Babadook

Director: Jennifer Kent

Runtime: 1 hour 34 minutes

Released: January 17, 2014 (Sundance Film Festival), May 22, 2014 (Australia)

Available to stream on: Mubi, Shudder, Netflix, Criterion Channel, and/or Kanopy

Amelia (Essie Davis) is a widowed single parent, just trying her best to keep her six-year-old son, Samuel (Noah Wiseman), out of trouble. We quickly learn that Amelia’s husband was tragically killed in a car accident while driving her to the hospital to give birth to Samuel, a trauma that haunts their lives even now.

As a result, growing up without a father figure has taken a toll on Samuel. He’s been acting up in class, causing issues with and between family members and neighbors, and most recently, he’s fixated on an imaginary monster that he’s training to defeat.

One night, Samuel picks a new book for his mother to read to him at bedtime, a pop-up book titled Mister Babadook. Although Amelia is initially uncertain of this new book that seems to have appeared out of nowhere, she agrees to read it. While reading, the disturbing content makes Amelia even more uncertain about this new book. Meanwhile, Samuel becomes absolutely convinced that the Babadook is real.

After reading the book, strange events begin to unfold. Amelia blames Samuel while Samuel insists that it’s the Babadook’s doing. Frustrated, Amelia throws the book away, only to find it reappearing on her doorstep. As Samuel’s outbursts grow more intense, she turns to a doctor for sedatives to calm him.

But as the line between Samuel’s imagination and reality blurs, Amelia finds herself questioning who is truly unraveling: her son, or herself.

My biggest issue with The Babadook is Samuel’s character. He’s intended to be unruly and challenging, but the portrayal sometimes goes overboard. His behavior becomes so exaggerated that it risks pushing the audience’s empathy away, to the point where you might find yourself half-wishing he’d be the Babadook’s next victim.

Another significant issue is the film’s structure, which feels divided into two distinct halves. In the first, the tension builds with genuinely eerie scenes, amplified by excellent sound design and cinematography that create a palpable sense of dread. However, the second half loses momentum, taking a more meandering path to the conclusion. At just over ninety minutes, the film could have benefitted from tighter pacing. Somewhere around seventy-five to eighty minutes might have maintained the tension more effectively.

That said, I still enjoyed the experience overall. The Babadook (2014) relies on psychological tension and uncertainty, rarely revealing the “monster” fully. This ambiguity forces both the audience and characters to grapple with reality and perception. Is Samuel truly responsible for the chaos, or is Amelia’s mental state deteriorating? The film keeps you guessing, leaving open the question of where the truth really lies.

Ultimately, the reveal of what the Babadook symbolizes underscores Jennifer Kent’s success in crafting a smart, layered horror film. Through The Babadook, she captures the struggle of processing trauma and grief, emotions that don’t simply disappear but must be acknowledged to avoid becoming all-consuming.

If you haven’t yet seen The Babadook (2014), consider this a strong recommendation. It’s a unique horror experience that resonates with emotional depth as well as plenty of chills.

Seen The Babadook (2014)? Now it’s your turn!

Share your thoughts in the comments below or connect with me on Bluesky and Letterboxd!

The post The Babadook (2014) appeared first on I've Scene That!.

Title: Knives and Skin

Director: Jennifer Reeder

Runtime: 1 hour 51 minutes

Released: February 9, 2019 (Berlin International Film Festival)

Available to stream on: Mubi and Shudder

Lisa (Marika Engelhardt) is searching the house for her daughter, Carolyn (Raven Whitley), all while holding a knife. When she barges into Carolyn’s room, she realizes that Carolyn has snuck out.

Meanwhile, Carolyn heads down to the lake with a jock from her school named Andy (Ty Olwin). Andy thinks he’s about to get lucky, so he doesn’t bat an eye when Carolyn asks to carve her initial into his forehead. However, when he realizes that nothing sexual is going to come of this, he shoves Carolyn to the ground, hops in his car, and speeds off.

Carolyn bleeds from her head, screaming for help as she struggles on the ground. This is the last time we see Carolyn alive.

As the search for Carolyn begins, we quickly realize that everyone in town seems to be hiding a secretive side of themselves. But who is hiding the secret behind Carolyn’s disappearance?

The only thing more upsetting than starting a horror movie and seeing “Blumhouse” is seeing “IFC Films”.

Unfortunately, that remains true with Knives and Skin (2019).

We have main characters with absolutely zero depth to them. There are multiple stories of townspeople that add nothing of value and ultimately go nowhere. There isn’t a lot here plot wise to justify a run time of nearly two hours.

Things don’t get much better when we get to the acting and dialogue. Everyone seems to be acting in their own separate movie when on-screen together. Nobody seems capable of speaking in a natural manner or matching anyone else in terms of tone or emotion.

The whole thing is a frustrating mess.

While I won’t recommend that you drop what you’re doing to go watch Knives and Skin (2019), I won’t tell you to not watch it either.

Maybe you give it a shot and find out that it’s your jam.

Or maybe you’re like me and just want an hour and fifty-one minutes of your life back.

If you’ve seen Knives and Skin (2019), tell me why you agree or disagree with my take on it in the comments below or anywhere across social media.

The post Knives and Skin (2019) appeared first on I've Scene That!.

Title: Bride of Frankenstein

Director: James Whale

Runtime: 1 hour 15 minutes

Released: April 19, 1935

Available on: Criterion Channel and Peacock

Picking up from where Frankenstein left off, we see that both Dr. Frankenstein (Colin Clive) and the Monster (Boris Karloff) have survived. While Dr. Frankenstein is trying to move on with his life, the Monster finds himself wandering the countryside, desperately searching for companionship. Each interaction reminds him just how alienated his existence feels.

Meanwhile, Dr. Frankenstein hasn’t been the only one experimenting with bringing a creation to life. Dr. Pretorius (Ernest Thesiger) is fascinated by the idea and winds up visiting Dr. Frankenstein. During the visit, Pretorius pressures Frankenstein into giving it another go, this time creating a female companion for the Monster.

While Frankenstein is initially hesitant to participate, things change when Pretorius goes to the extreme and kidnaps Frankenstein’s wife. In fact, he used the Monster for his own nefarious bidding in kidnapping her.

Now with both doctors hard at work, the companion for the Monster is looking more and more like a reality. However, we’ve seen what can happen with one monster. What will unfold with two of them roaming freely?

I knew Bride of Frankenstein (1935) picked up where the original left off, but the sharp left turn in tone still surprised me. While the original had a much more serious tone throughout, we see a campy comedic twist here in the sequel. By no means is it a slapstick comedy, but it does its best to try and squeeze in comedy where it can. Pretorius layering in the campiness in his performance was arguably a bit too much. While the comedy is effective, personally, I was hoping for a more serious outing.

That being said, Bride of Frankenstein (1935) still offered up plenty that I quite enjoyed. For example, being able to further explore the Monster’s journey into self-discovery. We get to see Karloff portray him in a way that shines a spotlight on the fragile humanity of the monster. And for what it’s worth, despite only being on screen for maybe 4 minutes all total, at the very end of the film, Elsa Lanchester delivers an unforgettable performance.

The film revisits many of the same themes from the original, such as loneliness, alienation, and playing God. Honestly, the film doesn’t cover much new ground or explore the themes more deeply, but I still enjoyed how it addressed them while blending in comedic elements.

The true standouts for me were the cinematography and use of lighting/shadows. Does it all hold up almost 90 years later? Eh. But you have to be able to appreciate what Bride of Frankenstein (1935) was able to accomplish and pull-off given the technical abilities of the time.

If, by chance, you have not seen Bride of Frankenstein (1935), I wouldn’t recommend dropping everything to go and watch it. However, it is the perfect time of year to cross it off your watchlist.

So, if you have seen Bride of Frankenstein (1935), I want to hear about it. Let me hear your thoughts in the comments below or by reaching out to me on social media.

As always, you can keep up with everything else I’ve been watching over on my Letterboxd page.

The post Bride of Frankenstein (1935) appeared first on I've Scene That!.

Title: Humanist Vampire Seeking Consenting Suicidal Person

Director: Ariane Louis-Seize

Runtime: 1 hour 30 minutes

Released: September 3, 2023 (Venice Film Festival)

Available to stream: Exclusively on Mubi

If you happened to be a vampire, I’d imagine that one of your favorite things would be to feast on the blood of humans. That is, unless you happen to be young Sasha (Lilas-Rose Cantin). You see, Sasha is a vampire that actively avoids inflicting harm. While a dying human brings out the blood lust in her family members, for Sasha it brings out deep levels of compassion.

Does she still like the taste of blood though? Absolutely. In fact, she loves to drink it out of blood bags like it’s a juice box. But the act of obtaining blood, that’s where Sasha draws the line. We see this early on when, for Sasha’s birthday, her family invite over a clown to perform…and to become a feast. As the clown pivots to magic tricks, he crams himself into a trunk. With the trunk closed and the clown struggling to get out, Sasha’s family urges her to do the deed. However, Sasha refuses which absolutely enrages her mother.

While her father has always been supportive of her humanist ways, Sasha’s mother firmly believes that Sasha needs to grow up and start hunting. Ultimately, her mother eventually wins out and forces an older Sasha (Sara Montpetit) to hunt for her own blood.

So now with her survival dependent on doing the one thing she vehemently opposes, how will Sasha manage to survive?

Surely there has to be an ethical way for Sasha to maneuver this precarious situation…right?

I will admit that I went into Humanist Vampire Seeking Consenting Suicidal Person (2023) uncertain of what I was about to experience. Luckily, this happens to be one of those scenarios where I walk away from a movie feeling glad that I gave it a chance.

A coming-of-age story that also includes a teenage romance and is sprinkled with dark humor throughout isn’t necessarily something that sounds like it should work. However, Louis-Seize shows, in her feature directorial debut, that she is going to be a force to be reckoned with. She pulls off and executes the genre word salad perfectly.

Sasha is a late bloomer, and an outsider in her own family, that is trying to find her way. The introduction to her compassionate side won me over instantly. Same with Paul, a young man who isn’t certain where he fits in and sees the ultimate way out as his only path forward. You feel for the inner turmoil they both are suffering through and want to see them succeed individually and as a pair. The chemistry between Montpetit’s Sasha and Bénard’s Paul just oozes out onto the screen. Those two are incredible together and offer up a tender young love that doesn’t come off as contrived.

Yes, all of that sounds like it makes for a fairly heavy watch. However, Louis-Seize masterfully sprinkles in some rather dark humor all throughout. It’s never enough to distract you from what’s happening, rather just enough to help keep things light…in a dark way.

If you’re looking for a vampire movie that doesn’t exactly follow the paint-by-number structure of vampire movies, Humanist Vampire Seeking Consenting Suicidal Person (2023) is exactly what you’re looking for.

Well, now it’s your turn.

If you’ve seen Humanist Vampire Seeking Consenting Suicidal Person (2023), let me hear your thoughts on it in the comments below!

Don’t want to leave a comment? Then find me across social media and let me know your thoughts.

As always, you can follow me over on Letterboxd to keep up with all of my other viewings.

The post Humanist Vampire Seeking Consenting Suicidal Person (2023) appeared first on I've Scene That!.

Title: Goodnight Mommy

Directors: Severin Fiala and Veronika Franz

Runtime: 1 hour 40 minutes

Released: August 30, 2014 (Venice Film Festival)

Available to stream on: Mubi and Tubi

Elias and Lukas (played by real-life twins Elias Schwarz and Lukas Schwarz) are practically joined at the hip. The two are always together, whether they’re playing outdoors, collecting bugs, or doing chores around the house. They are eagerly awaiting the return of their mother (Susanne Wuest) who has undergone facial reconstruction surgery as the result of an accident.

When she does come home, the boys are happy, but something just feels off. This woman looks like their mother, but Elias and Lukas are not convinced that the person who went in for surgery and the person in their home now are not the same. Things seem even weirder to the boys when their mother begins to only speak to and acknowledge the presence of Elias, completely ignoring Lukas as if he didn’t even exist.

Unfortunately for both Elias and Lukas, there isn’t an easy way for this woman posing as their mother to convince them that she is who she claims to be. In fact, the boys already demanded to see the birthmark their mother has, surely that’d be a simple way to clear all of this up. That is, until the woman refuses to play their silly little games.

Will the twins be able to convince themselves that they were wrong?

Or is there an actual stranger now posing as their mother?

Well, that was certainly something.

Personally, I’d like to know where the movie is that we were promised in the trailer. Because what the trailer shows us and what we actually got could not be more different.

Whenever you see kids in a horror movie, one of two things are about to happen. Either the kids are going to die, or they are going to be some of the most sadistic kids you’ve ever seen. That is, unless they’re the kids in Goodnight Mommy. Yes, there is an overwhelming sense of uneasiness that kind of hangs over you throughout the viewing. But there isn’t anything here to really push that feeling over the top. There’s not much of a score to help build/create tension, there’s very little creative use of shadows and/or lighting, and there’s very little given to the audience to allow them to fully invest in the wellbeing of anyone.

The “twist” is revealed rather early on in a way that suggests the directors didn’t ever intend to keep it much of a secret. As a result, I sat there just waiting for a second twist to happen…except it never came.

That’s not to say that there needed to be a second twist. However, for things to work effectively with only one twist, we needed a ton more backstory. Not just on one specific thing though, we needed more about the mother, the brothers, the family dynamic, and the unfortunate accident.

Without this added backstory, Goodnight Mommy borders on being painfully slow and plodding. It would have worked better as a thirty-to-forty-five-minute short film.

Well, what about you?

If you’ve seen Goodnight Mommy (2014), sound off with your thoughts on it!

Leave me a comment below or reach out to me across social media!

The post Goodnight Mommy (2014) appeared first on I've Scene That!.