Directed By Sophia Takal

Starring – Imogen Poots, Cary Elwes, Lily Donoghue

The Plot – Hawthorne College is quieting down for the holidays. One by one, sorority girls on campus are being killed by an unknown stalker. But the killer is about to discover that this generation’s young women aren’t willing to become hapless victims as they mount a fight to the finish.

Rated PG-13 for violence, terror, thematic content involving sexual assault, adult language, sexual material and drinking

POSITIVES

– Fluid Pacing. This film is an anomaly of contemporary cinema, considering it has very little in entertainment value, yet never slugs or dulls its way to a skiddish finish. At 87 brisk minutes of storytelling, “Black Christmas” constantly keeps the story moving, trading in traces of a conventional second act conflict for two third’s that cuts out much of the repetition in struggle that can be expected in horror films. When the film reaches its final conflict, it feels like there’s still around a half hour left in screen time with where we should be in familiar story beats. In reality, the present number is actually half of that, and brings forth a pleasant surprise, whether you enjoyed the film or not, that makes this film nowhere near as harmless as it really could’ve been.

– 70’s production value. As to where this version of “Black Christmas” traded in its 70’s origins for a modern day rendering, the visual flare of stylish imagery and swift camera movements prove that Takal as a director has certainly done her homework for history. The neon lighting of what feels like endless Christmas lights, as well as a grainy cinematography style by “Master of None’s” Mark Schwartzbard, better illuminates a dreary atmosphere that replicates what is emitting in screenplay themes throughout. In addition, the sharp pans in reverse of scenes that feature our masked killer are a series of meaningful callbacks to the days when visual storytelling served as an effective tool for articulate jump scares before they became cliche’d. The inclusion here doesn’t make anything terrifying or remotely chilling, but does transcend the modern production towards a timeless effort in the same way that 2017’s “Suspiria” perfected.

– Durable leads. The supporting cast give us very little shades of depth through a series of characters who easily rub together in contrast to distinguishing their differences. Thankfully, the leading ladies and a familiar film veteran do more than enough to pick up the slack. This brings us another emotional turn for Poots, who balances enough fragility in her past, and toughness in her femininity to make her blossom as a complex character. In addition to Imogen, Aleyse Shannon’s breakthrough turn as Kris brings us a vibrancy in humorous personality, which will inevitably make her a familiar staple of cinema moving forward. The chemistry between Poots and Shannon feeds into the sisterhood bond that so much of the script hinges on, all the while preserving a brawn for female leads that is still a rarity, even in 2019. Rounding out the reputable performances is a turn from Elwes, who is having the time of his life as a seedy sociology teacher, with enough nervous ticks in demeanor to make him seedy.

NEGATIVES

– Predictable. This hurt the film before it ever began, as the use of some extremely revealing trailers not only gave away the who, but also gave away the why. It leaves very little meat on the bone of suspense for the film, which in turn puts us the audience one step ahead of our characters throughout the whole movie, for all of the wrong reasons. What’s even worse is that the film still treats every reveal like it’s some ground-shaking revelation meant to twist audience perspectives into investing further into the mystery. Said mystery simply is never present for a single second anywhere in the movie, and as to where trailers done poorly are still ruining cinema in 2019, the flat complexity of a screenplay so one-dimensional does very little to shake itself free of the pivotal tidbits of information that it intentionally or unintentionally meant to relay.

– Tonally inept. If this film were more self-aware of the lunacy that is enveloped in its fantastical screenplay, then the entire feature could give way to at least making this an entertaining sit for avid horror fans seeking the splendor of B-movie cheese. Instead, everything portrayed is presented in a light that is far too serious and riveting to ever feel cohesive with the nature of depiction and direction that is being presented. It proves the air of pretentiousness for deep sociological themes that resonate in the film, yet constantly feel melodramatic for the way they are articulated in such a ridiculous fashion. This film wants so badly to be “Get Out” for victimized women during the rape culture, but its lack of subtlety and profound sting in the way its themes are illustrated on camera skewers the importance of its touchy subject matter.

– Spoon-feeding. “Black Christmas” is a film that deals with the rape culture at a college level, and does so with a force in direction that is virtually inescapable for all audiences. This would be good if the material was presented in a way that worked cohesively with the horror narrative, but the pounding over the head of reminder that resonates so unapologetically in this film made each scene evolve into poisonous territory. For my money, it’s in grouping all men together where Takal’s film treads dangerous waters, proving that its female heroines are no better than the very masogynstic males who treat women as nothing more than sexual conquests. Nearly every man in this movie is evil or disappointing in some way, with the exception of one black male who annoyingly serves as a P.S.A for how to treat women at all times. Is this material important? Absolutely, but not at the cost that its incorporation halts the progress of what made the narrative special in the first place. It takes social commentary to annoying levels, and doesn’t raise anymore awareness because of the deranged nature for how it’s depicted.

– As a remake. We got a “Black Christmas” remake in 2006, which was OK at best, but at least remained true to the movements of the 1974 original movie. Here, we veer off of the path of familiarity so brutally that nothing except the movie’s title and the college setting resonate with what we expect from the narrative. Originality is good in some respects, particularly with remakes that don’t require clinging so tightly to the memorable original installment to sell its movie decades later. However, when the differences come at the expense of genre classification, it can be detrimental to what made it memorable in the first place. In fact, this remake is such a shell of its former self that it feels like a social justice film, which was splashed with a familiar title to fool people into paying attention to its intentions. It’s the worst kind of remake; one that doesn’t remain true to itself while seeking the boldness of bigger intentions.

– Dreaded rating. Blumhouse loves PG-13 horror movies because they have the ability to cater to a bigger age of audience to invest money into their pockets. Unfortunately, such a designation negatively impacts the movements and believability of this particular film. For dialogue, it’s the abrasiveness of college kids who don’t curse during some truly testing times with their lives being on the line. In addition to this, the violence and brutality of the movie is virtually non-existent, thanks to a series of cut-scenes that constantly ask the audience to fill in the blanks for the movie they rightfully paid for. There’s one death that we see up-close, but the killer’s back to the camera obscures anything important or permanent to the scene that would make definitive in what we are watching. Other than this, the scenes always cut-out right when confrontation between sides rears its ugly head, diminishing the essence of the scene during the moment when definition is needed the most. It reminds us of everything that is wrong with PG-13 classification in movies too daring to ever come across as compelling because of such.

– Mindless dialogue. Once in a while, we are treated to a line that is either so obvious that you can’t help but cringe, or a line so inconsequential that will have you shrugging your shoulders for why it received so much emphasis within the heat of the scene. For the former, legendary lines of cliche like “What’s the worst that could happen?” are mumbled, and then quickly after presented with the answer to that question being the absolute worst thing that could happen. Likewise, a line from a character we’re supposed to empathize with, saying “No wonder my Dad left my Mom”, is presented with the kind of focus and attention to delivery within the frame of the shot that makes it feel like something bigger is at play, when in reality nothing ever materializes. It not only disrupts the intended investment into the character, but illustrates everything wrong with these characters, in that none of them have anything even remotely interesting to convey.

– Sloppy editing. This is especially prominent during the third act of the movie, where a series of sequences and scenes are so abruptly sliced that they often lack connective tissue between cuts. It’s not as bad as an action movie like “Jason Bourne”, which uses frequent cuts of jagged editing to over-complicate what should be a single frame, but this is annoying for its own reasons, mainly omitting what we don’t see in detection between characters in conflict that helps tie details together. It often gives a feeling that scenes are missing from the sequence, and leads to visual direction that is very difficult to follow, and easily stands as Takal’s biggest adversity as a feature length orchestrator.

My Grade: 3/10 or F