Tag reviews

The Great Popcorn Popoff

jasonmorrison Leave a comment

Frank Butters you up – Canadian Tire – 150g – $2.49 ($0.016/g)

Not bad, but not great. The flavour is very mild and the seasoning seems inconsistently applied, which isn’t really what you want when you buy something explicitly labelled as butter flavoured and shows cartoon characters in a movie theatre. The kernels are fairly small or broken and had a lot of the hull got stuck in my teeth. My wife thought it lacks flavour and likened it to eating packing peanuts and would not buy it again. 2 out of 5 kernels.

Compliments – Pop Simple – IGA – 190g – $3.99 ($0.021/g)

This is the only one in our test that isn’t “Movie Theatre Style”. Compliments makes one, but I couldn’t find it at any of my local grocery stores that carry the brand. Like the name states, the ingredient list is simple. Popcorn, vegetable oil and sea salt. That’s it. I think because of this, the very mild saltiness is evenly distributed and it allows the corn flavour itself to come through. The kernels are large and fluffy, so while the suggested serving size is the same 50g as Frank, they approximate the volume to be 6 1/2 cups, while Frank’s is 3 1/2 cups for the same weight. My wife had no complaints about it, but she added salt to her bowl. If you are watching your sodium intake, or want to eat less in a bowl the same size as you usually do, I would recommend this one. 4 out of 5 kernels.

Great Value – Movie Theater Butter Flavoured – Walmart – 150g – $3.93 ($0.026/g)

My wife liked this one. “Finally one with flavour” she said. I did not enjoy it though. I found it did not taste like butter at all but reminded me more of cheese. “Tastes like nutritional yeast.” Was my wife’s opinion, I suspect the “modified milk ingredients” is the culprit, but it could also be the “may contain soy or mustard” on the ingredient list. Mustard? Where are they making this? Also, more expensive per gram than both Compliments and Frank, so the value isn’t really great, despite the name. The kernels are medium sized, mostly rounded with very few broken or undersized ones but still, I was happy when we finished bag and I could move onto the next one. 1 out of 5 kernels

Orville Redenbacher – Movie Theater Butter – IGA – 150g – $4.79 ($0.032/g)

There was a TV series on History Channel I really liked called “The Food that Built America”, I remember the episode they did about Orville Redenbacher and I was impressed by the man’s dedication to breeding the best strain of corn, just for making popcorn. I like their popcorn generally. The fruits of Mr. Redenbacher’s labour is a nice round fluffy popcorn that is easy to grab and leaves very chaff, compared to others. I didn’t like this specific one though, as it appears to use the same “modified milk ingredients” as Great Value. So while I generally have a high opinion of their corn, I can’t rate this one high due to really not liking the flavor and it being the second most expensive popcorn in this review. 2 out of 5 kernels.

Imperial Popcorn – Movie Cinéma – Dollarama – 300g – $3.50 ($0.011/g)

I couldn’t review my previous favorite, Bad Monkey, because the company went bankrupt and Imperial bought them. I think they only did so for the facilities though because this didn’t taste as good as Bad Monkey did. Sad face emoji. That being said, it isn’t bad. It doesn’t attempt a fake butter flavour, just salt and artificial yellow color, by way of Beta-carotene, making for a mild, medium salty popcorn. Not my favorite, but I didn’t actively dislike it, and being the cheapest out of all of them (slightly over a penny per gram) it’s a better value than Great Value, so I gave it 3 out of 5 kernels.

French Cancan – Movie Style – IGA – 150g – $5.29 ($0.035/g)

I liked this one, it reminded me the most out of all of them of movie theater popcorn. Didn’t really taste of butter like the package promised, but it also didn’t remind me of cheese like some other brands did. Probably down to “natural flavours” being in the ingredient list and not “modified milk products”, it also wasn’t overly salty like real movie theater popcorn is. I also liked the large kernel size. One down side to this popcorn is the price tag. This was the most expensive of the brands I tried and while it’s not on the packaging, research showed me that this is made by Imperial and is their “upscale” popcorn brand. I think I now know what they did with the Bad Monkey facility. It tastes good, but I can’t give it top marks due to the high cost. I mean… it’s still popcorn, you can’t tell me it really costs them three times what it does to make their clown branded popcorn. 3 out of 5 kernels.

Smartfood – Movie Night Butter – Walmart – 150g – $4.46 ($0.030/g)

It’s not explicitly stated on the bag, but I think the “Smart” part is the reduced sodium, as it has half that of Franks, for a comparable 50g serving size. It doesn’t affect the taste though, it’s pretty good. Doesn’t taste like butter, but at least it doesn’t taste like nutritional yeast either. Still, for a middle priced popcorn, I liked it. Because it’s made by Fritto Lay, and isn’t a house or specialty brand, it’s available from a lot of retailers and easy to find. I’m going too give it a 4 out of 5 kernels.

Conclusion

Make your own. I’m not being snarky, it doesn’t take long, requires no special equipment and will be both cheaper and better tasting. I’ll see if I can rouse the motivation to put up a video on how I do it.

But for the times I’m just too lazy to do it myself, I’m picking the Compliments one, or Imperial, simply because they are cheap and inoffensive. At least until I can find one that really tastes like the movie theater, my quest continues.

Fantastic Four: First Steps (2025)

jasonmorrison Leave a comment
The Fantastic 4 First Steps (2025)

I had planned to see this in the theater, and my regular movie watching partner was on board, but life got in the way, films don’t stick around the the theater as long as they used and the second run cinemas are almost all gone, which is a shame because as gorgeous as the 4K HDR copy I watched was, some movies just benefit from seeing it on a huge screen with immersive sound. It makes the experience more Amazing, more Incredible, more… well you get the point.

I loved the movie. There have been many attempts at bringing Marvel’s first family to the big screen with varying degrees of success and I think a lot of the failures were due to the people behind the projects not understanding the characters and turning it into a generic action movie. This time, they got it. I don’t know if it’s all down to Kevin Feige, the director Matt Shakman, the writers or having the right combination of all of them, but everyone was making all the right decisions when it came to this project.

Let’s start with the overall look and feel. The retro-futuristic styling isn’t just something I personally love, but it fits these characters and their early years perfectly. Toning down the dumb blonde hothead Johnny Storm other filmmakers gravitated to and making him a real member of a scientific team was great and makes the character more interesting and useful. Setting Sue as the team leader is… the way it is the comics. It’s only misogyny and a failure to learn about the characters that put Reed at the center of previous versions. As in the comics the Mister Fantastic here is a genius, but too easily distracted by scientific puzzles.

Confession time, after watching Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness I was really looking forward to John Krasinski as Reed Richards, he seemed perfect and I could not see Pedro Pascal in the role when the official casting decisions were announced, but I was wrong. There’s a reason he keeps getting roles as a father, and he’s shown us why again here. He was great and they even managed to make his powers not look goofy. Stretchy powers are hard to translate into a live action setting without looking cartoony, and I’m sure that was the reason the people on Ms, Marvel changed her power set, but the Netflix live action version of One Piece showed it could be done and the folks at Marvel appear to have learned from that.

Ebon Moss-Bachrach was an interesting choice for Ben Grimm. I only knew him as the bombastic Richie on The Bear, but he does the quiet solid strength needed for The Thing equally as well. I have only two quibbles about the movie though and the first involves him. It’s not a complaint, really, I thought his performance was excellent, but it’s his voice, it was just… his voice and I felt it should have been deeper, stronger somehow, more gravelly, no pun intended (okay maybe a little intended). I have to compare it to the performances of Bradley Cooper and Vin Diesel in Guardians. I cannot imagine ANYONE topping Bradley’s Rocket, who, in my opinion, stole the show in all three films, but if his name hadn’t been in the credits, I wouldn’t have known it was him. There’s no mistaking Ebon’s voice for anyone but him though. Maybe he tried different versions that just didn’t work, or maybe the director just always envisioned him sounding like that from the start, I don’t know, I just feel like it didn’t project the strength of a man made of solid stone to me.

My second quibble is Natasha Lyonne, when her character of Rachel was introduced, I did a double take, because I didn’t realize it was her at first, but I loved her, it was a very different character compared to what she’s been playing recently and I was looking forward seeing what would happen between her and Ben, but nothing did happen, it felt like that part of the movie might have gotten cut. Hopefully we see more of her in the next one.

They did such a good job with this movie, they even made Galactus work, and the visuals are beautiful. Franklin had that slightly unnatural look that CGI humans often have, and I think that’s why they had him being held by The Thing so often, but aside from that, the effects people deserve a lot of praise.

I don’t want to leave out Juila Garner’s Silver Surfer. Even through the CGI, you can see the emotional changes she goes through in the film and that’s all down to the actor and the animators, and I truly hope this isn’t the last we see of her.

This is one I want to add to my collection, I think it works for comic books fans, Marvel fans and even casual sci-fi fans.

Excelsior!

Superman (2025)

jasonmorrison Leave a comment
Superman (2025)

Halloween is done for the year, and this is what this blog’s content will look like most of the time. Me talking about movies, TV shows, books and things that have been out for a while and people have mostly discussed to death already. I mean, it’s called Late to the Party for a reason.

I’m a fan of what James Gunn can do with material from comic books. I loved the Guardians of the Galaxy trilogy, I thought his version of Suicide Squad a massive improvement over the first movie and Peacemaker is fantastic, but I didn’t love his Superman.

This is a “me” problem though. The movie is very well made, it’s well acted, it’s fun, it sets up the larger DC cinematic universe, introduces cool new characters and it has that great mixture of action, comedy and character drama that Gunn does so well. My only criticisms are that Lex’s plot feels unoriginal and as much as I liked Mister Terrific and want to see more of Nathan Fillion’s Guy Gardner, the “Justice Gang” weren’t instrumental in the plot. Those aren’t the reasons why I’ll probably not add this movie to my bluray collection though, it’s Superman himself.

Back in the early ‘80s, when we got our first VCR, home videos were too expensive for most people to buy themselves, almost everyone rented them, but, my dad managed to get us a bootleg VHS cassette that had two movies on it. Star Wars: A New Hope and the Christopher Reeves Superman, and my brother and I watched those two movies over, and over and over. We never got tired of them. That portrayal of The Man of Steel made a strong impression on us, and not just us, but everyone who played the character for the next few decades. Until David Corenswet.

Christopher Reeve, Dean Cain, Brandon Routh, Henry Cavil all had their own takes on the character, but they still played the Last Son of Krypton with certain consistent traits. Even Tom Welling on Smallville and the animators of Superman: The Animated series and Justice League portrayed him in a serious, upright, almost formal manner, so this latest incarnation’s casual, laid back, Everyman portrayal isn’t what I’m used to.

To be clear, it’s not bad, it isn’t wrong and I’m not going to start saying “He’s not the way Superman’s supposed to be.” I’ve been reading comic books long enough to know that whenever a character is handed over to a new creative team, things can change, but sometimes a change just doesn’t click with me. I stopped reading Spider-Man after just the first issue when Zeb Wells took over. Not because it was bad, but because I just didn’t like what he was doing with the character.

I think this is a Superman for a new generation (my grandson absolutely loved it). I’m probably just too used to seeing the character portrayed a certain way and can’t adapt my mind to seeing it done differently. I’m still looking forward to the next film of the James Gunn era. What I’m seeing from Supergirl looks great and Krypto was absolutely fantastic. I’ll probably watch the next Superman too. I didn’t hate this one, not by a long shot, but I won’t be rewatching it over and over like it’s 1981 again, or even like I’ve done with many of the MCU movies.

The Thing (1982)

jasonmorrison Leave a comment

Night 31 of 31 Nights of Horror

John Carpenter's The thing (1982)

Every Halloween, I do the same thing. Once I’m certain no more trick-or-treaters are coming, I take down the decorations, make a three layer nacho dip, turn off the lights and watch John Carpenter’s The Thing.

There is nothing I don’t love about this movie. From the opening scene it has the viewer asking questions, and every answer leads to new questions. This movie combines terrifying monster horror and psychological thriller in the best way. Even when the killer is revealed, it may not be the only one, and you are kept guessing even after the credits roll.

The special effects are gorgeous, in the most disturbing way, and look fantastic on my new 4K HDR copy. The panoramic helicopter shots of Alaska and British Columbia (doubling for Antarctica) are stunningly beautiful, but also isolating. They establish early on how far from civilization these men are and that, when people start dying, there is no escape, nowhere to flee to.

It’s unfortunate that the last article of the series is going to be so short, my whole thing is usually nitpicking films, but I’ve lost count of the number of times I’ve watched this film and I have no notes. None. The acting is great, the editing, pacing, music, foley work, everything about the production enhances the story. It’s why I never get tired of watching it.

If you’ve never watched The Thing, I highly encourage you to. Turn off the lights and grab yourself some tortilla chips. I’ve got a dip recipe I can share with you.

Oh and if you’re not ready for bed when the movie finishes, put on The Rocky Horror Picture Show. Happy Halloween!

Night of the Living Dead (1968)

jasonmorrison Leave a comment

Night 30 of 31 Nights of Horror

Night of the Living Dead (1968)

We are on the second to last night of the marathon, and it occurred to me that I had not yet watched a zombie movie. So I’ll correct that oversight with what will turn out to be the oldest, lowest budget, yet highest rated movie so far. It has an average rating of 95% on 82 reviews and an audience score of 87 on Rotten Tomatoes and I agree with them.

In the intro I wrote 30 days ago, I said I wanted to see if older movies still held up. Some did, some didn’t, but this one, the oldest of them all, sure does. Okay, it’s in black and white, but so was Clerks, the film stock is cheaper than colour and when you’re on a tight budget, you save money where you can. The look also helps hide the weakness in the makeup, it’s nowhere near as detailed or polished as a modern B movie, especially the eyes. Without the cloudy contact lenses that are affordable and common today, the zombie’s eyes are too intelligent looking and don’t make them look dead. That’s about it for the negatives though, the rest of the film is great.

The cinematography is well done, the editing, the music, even the acting is surprisingly good for a cast comprised almost entirely of first timers. The pacing and tight script keeps you interested and engaged the whole time. Like most good zombie films, a lot of the drama comes from the humans. I loved that you are made to dislike Harry right from the beginning, but that he turns out to have been right in the end. Speaking of endings, that was a surprising, but sadly all too realistic way to close out the story.

It’s interesting to me to go back and watch the grandfather of modern zombie movies and see how it differs to the lore of today. First, they never call them zombies, the news people refer to them as ghouls, but technically a ghoul is a creature that is still living. Second, these zombies use tools, so they aren’t completely mindless. They’re also afraid of fire, which we don’t really see these days.

I liked it, I liked it a lot more than I thought I would and I encourage any budding filmmaker to watch it themselves and see that you don’t need a huge budget or well known actors to tell a good story. You just need talent.

Candyman (1992)

jasonmorrison Leave a comment

Night 29 of 31 Nights of Horror

Candyman (1992)

Clive Barker neither wrote, nor directed this film, but it is based on one of his short stories from the Books of Blood collection (Volume 5, “The Forbidden” if you want to read it yourself). Bernard Rose is both writer and director, and the movie stars Tony Todd and Virginia Madsen.

So the story starts out amazing. It is moody, atmospheric, lots of benign jump scares to get your heart going. They set up the characters and their relationships, It’s a cool premise, with two PhD candidates working on their theses about urban legends, when they hear the tale of “Candyman” and begin investigating it. Not believing it to be real, they naturally perform the ritual to summon him. Well, Virgina Madsen’s Helen does. Her colleague Bernadette (played by Kasi Lemmons) only says his name four of the required five times, while standing in front of the mirror and of course, nothing happens… or does it.

*SPOILER ZONE*

So this for me is where the movie takes a turn and wastes potential for a really amazing story. Helen is later walking through a parking garage and hears a voice calling her name. She turns around and sees the silhouette of someone who looks like Candyman, then she passes out. When she wakes up, she’s in a bathroom that’s not hers, she’s covered in blood and there’s a woman screaming on the other side of the door. So of course, Helen gets arrested for murdering a dog and child abduction (because the baby from the apartment is missing). This sets up a fantastic premise, they could have made this a much better horror mystery. Was Helen framed by the gang member she identified to the police earlier? Did the spirit of Candyman do it? Was it really Helen, who did it while she had blacked out? Was she possessed? That’s a great story, but it doesn’t last long.

Bernadette is killed in Helen’s apartment and Helen is taken to a psychiatric hospital. So at this point, the criminal framing her theory is out the window, but it might still be Helen who’s the real killer. Nope, we are quickly disabused of that notion when her psychiatrist is killed, while she’s strapped to a chair in front of him. It’s impossible for her to have done the deed. So they took what could have been a fantastically told mystery and turned it into a standard supernatural killer movie.

Now, I will say, Tony Todd is amazing. The man has a presence and charisma that carry this movie. I firmly believe it would not have been as successful a franchise without him, because the “lore” of Candyman makes no sense.

First, why is he called Candyman? The legend is about a black artist who is murdered for falling in love with and getting pregnant a wealthy white woman, and is then mutilated and murdered by hired thugs. Where’s the candy? And why would the murderers cut off his hand and attach a hook to it, only to then kill him with bees (random) and burn the body? The whole thing SOUNDS made up, like a tale that is exaggerated and built upon by different tellers over generations, which many urban legends are, and that’s an idea worth exploring. It could have been about how legends are exploited by people to control others (like the gang leader) or how the stories can inspire people consciously or unconsciously to mimic them (Helen is the killer all along), instead we have a ghost who can do almost anything, has a hook for a hand and is covered in bees because it looks cool.

I may be overly harsh with this, but I think it’s because they took what could have been a psychological horror masterpiece and turned it into a standard supernatural slasher flick that is saved from obscurity only by Virginia Madsen and the aura of Tony Todd. I don’t know anything about the films production, but the feeling I get, and it is just a feeling, is that the studio saw the first half of the film and said, “Naw, we need more blood and more Candyman. Oh, and add in a lot of bees. Bees are scary.”

Videodrome (1983)

jasonmorrison Leave a comment

Night 28 of 31 Nights of Horror

Videodrome (1983)

I thought I had seen this movie already, but after watching last night, I realize I must only have seen the trailer, or maybe caught snippets of it on TV, because I didn’t remember any of it and believe me, the one thing I think everyone can agree on about Videodrome is that it is memorable.

This film is unlike most of the others I’ve watched this month, in that it belongs to a category of horror I’m not a fan of. Body Horror. I don’t enjoy movies like Hostel, Saw, The Human Centipede or others of that genre, but Videodrome is different.

*SPOILERS BELOW*

The premise of Videodrome is this. Max Renn (played by James Woods) owns a small TV station in Toronto, and he’s always looking for something he can air that will push the boundaries of what’s acceptable to broadcast, in an effort to draw viewers. His technical specialist shows him snippets he was able to de-scramble of an encrypted satellite broadcast of people being tortured. He tells him it’s called Videodrome and Max starts to become obsessed with it. Then Max starts hallucinating, and the movie really takes off.

It’s not the bizarre imagery and special effects that make Videodrome interesting to me, it’s the incomprehensibility of it. I complained a lot about Possession being weird and not making sense, so it may seem contradictory that I liked those qualities of Videodrome, but the difference is that here, it all fits in the context of the story. See, the thing is, we don’t know what’s real and what isn’t. The film is shot solely around James Woods’ character. We are never given anyone else’s perspective or point of view and once we know that not everything he sees or experiences is real, how can we trust ANY of the things we see?

In literature, he would be called an unreliable narrator. He isn’t lying, it’s just that he can’t distinguish what between what is real and what isn’t, so we the viewers can no longer trust what we see. I don’t mind weird, I like weird, and even when things don’t really make sense, I okay with it, if the not making sense is an organic part of the story and characters. In those cases, it’s actually great, because it leads to discussion among the audience. Is Nicki really dead? We don’t know for sure, just because we don’t see her again doesn’t mean she is. Especially since it turns out the videos weren’t really being broadcast from Pittsburg at all… or were they? Was the conversation with Peter real? At what point did Max break from reality? Is the Videodrome signal even a real thing, or did Max suffer a psychotic break?

The movie has probably been discussed to death in film classes around the world where smarter people than me can break down it’s commentary on popular culture and our addiction to screens or something, but I just think it was a wild journey about a mans fading grip on sanity.

You can watch Videodrome on Amazon Prime if you have a subscription, I think I’m going to find a bluray copy with director’s commentary to watch it again. This is a film I’d really love to hear “making of” stories about.

The Unseen (1980)

jasonmorrison Leave a comment

Night 27 of 31 Nights of Horror

The Unseen (1980)

I had never heard of this movie before reading an article on a blog called Longbox of Darkness. The premise sounded interesting. A trio of female reporters find themselves staying overnight in a house occupied by a hostile being lurking in the basement. I really liked that The Howling had reporters as the main characters, and this movie stays Barbara Bach, who I only knew from her role in The Spy Who Loved me. Also in this film are Sydney Lassick, a terrific character actor who’s face is instantly recognizable, even if you don’t remember his name, and Stephen Furst, that most will know as Flounder from Animal House, but as a lifelong Babylon 5 fan, he’ll always be Vir to me.

Even though they share many similarities, this movie fixes a lot of what I didn’t like about The People Under the Stairs. It’s hard to discuss what I really enjoyed without spoiling some things so continue reading only if that doesn’t bother you, or you have a short memory.

*SPOILERS BELOW*

The pacing and structure is great and the movie subverts your expectations at almost every turn. You start off thinking it may be about a stalker ex boyfriend, then maybe about the creepy owner of a museum, then maybe a ghost, or something else. It keeps you guessing, so it keeps you interested.

I also loved that the killer, didn’t turn out to be the actual monster, but another victim of the true villain of the story. The more I sit here thinking about it, the more things I find I liked. The violence isn’t overdone. There are no over the top killings with fountains of blood, everything is realistic and believable, especially once we find that the killer is more of a developmentally stunted man than a monster intentionally setting out to hurt people.

I’m surprised this movie isn’t better known, or better rated. It may be the lack of a high body count or extreme gore factor that prevents it from penetrating the consciousness of fans of this genre, but I find all of that works in it’s favour, in the context of the story.

The Hills Have Eyes (1977)

jasonmorrison Leave a comment

Night 26 of 31 Nights of Horror

The Hills Have Eyes (1977)

Despite how the poster looks, this is not p[art of the Mad Max franchise, it is the second movie written and directed by Wes Craven, and it is much better than some of his later works *cough*peopleunderthestairs*cough*. To set your expectations though, this is a low budget grindhouse film. It doesn’t have the polish of A Nightmare on Elm Street, but it still works.

There’s probably a name for this category of film where people are preyed upon by a family of cannibals. It’s not unique and there’s probably a name for it on TV tropes, I’m just too lazy to go look it up. I don’t want to go into too many details, the story is pretty thin, and we aren’t given much in the way of backstory for most of the characters, so almost anything I write would be a spoiler. I’ll just say, I liked the fact that more than one person survives the ordeal, the action is well paced and surprising and once the stranded family figures out what’s happening to them, they get smarter and don’t all fall apart.

It’s not award winning by any stretch, but it’s a fun popcorn movie. It’s surprisingly less graphic than I would have expected for a movie like this, but maybe they cut it down to avoid an X rating. This is one case where I would be interested in seeing the re-make. Maybe that can be the theme for next year.

The People Under the Stairs (1991)

jasonmorrison Leave a comment

Night 25 of 31 Nights of Horror

The People Under the Stairs (1991)

My wife watched the first thirty minutes of the film with me, then she stood up and declared “This is a bad movie” and went to bed. I’m not going to go that far. People have different likes and dislikes and it’s unfair to make statements like that based on your own personal tastes. I’m not going to disagree with her though, simply because of who made the film and that I have seen much, much better from Wes Craven.

I’ve gotta check IMDB, but this may have been his first stab at a horror/comedy and the comedy side of it is kind of weak, I didn’t laugh much and the villains were more cartoonish than menacing. The dog was the scariest antagonist and the biggest threat the hero faces. You know what the movie is like? It’s like Home Alone, but they make the kid the burglar and then they mashed it with the X-Files episode “Home”. I’m also not a fan of stories where the villains only motivation is ‘They’re crazy because they’re inbred’. That’s lazy writing in my opinion.

So far this month I have watched 25 horror movies, and without even realizing it, 99.9% of the cast in these movies have been white people. The only people of colour I can remember are the Native Americans in Prophecy and a single black man in The Ninth Gate, who had I think had only one line. When people talk about unconscious biases, this is an example, so it’s awesome that Brandon Quintin Adams was cast as the hero in the movie, but less awesome that the script leans so strong into bad stereotypes. His sister is a prostitute, Ving Rhames’ character is a burgler, they are so poor that this brilliant child sees no way of helping his family except to turn to crime… like seriously, none of the other movies I’ve watched this month have the hero start out by committing crimes and THIS is the one with the black star?

It’s ranked well on Rotten Tomatoes, and I’ve seen many comments about it being an underrated classic. I’m not one of them. I had never watched it before last night and will most likely never watch it again, unless my memory fails as I get older and forget I watched it, but hopefully I remember my blog entry exists and I can re-read this. If I’m in the mood for a Wes Craven film, I’ll stick with Nightmare, or New Nightmare or Scream. I have never watched The Hills Have Eyes, so maybe…