He’s got legs

Posted on by thisguyatthemovies

“Longlegs”

Genres: Crime drama/horror/thriller

Country: United States

Written and directed by: Oz Perkins

Starring: Maika Monroe, Nicolas Cage, Blair Underwood, Alicia Witt, Michelle Choi-Lee, Dakota Daulby, Kiernan Shipka, Jason Day, Lisa Chandler, Ava Kelders, Carmel Amit, Peter James Bryant, Lauren Acala, Maila Hosie

Rated: R for bloody violence, disturbing images, some strong language

Run time: 1 hour, 41 minutes

Release date: In theaters July 12, 2024

Where I saw it: Studio 10 Cinemas in Shelbyville, Ind., on a Saturday afternoon, $7, 12 other people in the theater; AMC Classic Columbus 12, on Sunday afternoon, $4.89 with senior discount, about 25 other people in the theater

What it’s about: Set in the ’90s in Oregon, young FBI special agent Lee Harker (Monroe), who has exceptional intuition, is tasked with finding an occultist serial killer (Cage as Longlegs), a dollmaker who has been terrorizing the region for decades. The FBI wants to stop Longlegs but also determine why he is killing, how he is killing and if he has been getting help from an accomplice.

My take: “Longlegs” is a master class in how to establish uneasiness from the opening shot and sustain it through to the finish. I saw this twice and was just as uncomfortable, in the best of ways, the second time as the first. This is a creepy movie (especially given the standards of mainstream box-office hits, which this seems destined to be), with an unsettling predator, disturbing imagery throughout and uneasy themes, mostly that there’s a man “downstairs” (that would be you, Satan) who can manipulate the easily impressionable into doing his dirtiest of work. “Longlegs” wears its influences on its sleeves (and writer/director Perkins and star Monroe have said as much in interviews), and what a set of influences it is – Jonathan Demme’s multi-Oscar winner “The Silence of the Lambs” (1991); David Fincher’s “Seven” (1995), “Zodiac” (2007) and “The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo” (2011); Stanley Kubrick’s “The Shining” (1980); and Heath Ledger’s portrayal of the Joker in “The Dark Knight” (2008). And yet this film still feels fresh somehow. … Cage will get most of the headlines (he’s the biggest name in the movie), and you could make an argument that he deserves it. His Longlegs is strange (imagine if entertainer Tiny Tim and Ledger’s Joker had a love child and he went on to be Geppetto from “Pinocchio”), and Cage, though this is a multi-layered performance full of subtlety underneath heavy prosthetics, delivers a couple of his signature gonzo moments that will push you back in your theater seat. But “Longlegs” is Monroe’s movie, and she delivers a remarkable performance, especially given the constraints of her character. Monroe’s Lee Harker is socially awkward (she seems like she would be on the autism spectrum) and is being haunted by the past, and she rarely shows emotion (Harker smiles just once and laughs just once). Given that, Monroe must convey emotions like fear, confidence and inquisitiveness with the slightest of facial movements and lots of heavy breathing. And she does so impressively. Other standouts in the cast include Underwood as Harker’s boss, Agent Carter, a no-nonsense guy who breathes just a little levity (but not too much) into a dark, heavy film; Witt as Ruth Harker, Lee’s mom, who frequently asks her daughter if she is saying her prayers and seems a little off; and Shipka as Carrie Anne Camera, who as a young girl witnessed the brutal killing of her family members and is now hospitalized in a mental institution. Shipka is in the movie for just one scene but nails her role and fully captures the film’s disturbing tone. Cage’s is the only showy performance, but the role demanded it. And, besides, it’s Cage. … Cinematographer Andrés Arochi’s camera contributes to the unsettling nature with frequent shots from below eye level that ever so slightly skew perspective and framing that has its subject in the center-bottom, creating plenty of room for bad things to happen (or not happen) in the background. Shots also are frequently framed by doorways, creating a claustrophobic feel. Zilgi’s score is as much haunting noises as it is music, perfect for this sort of thing; the music of T. Rex is a great choice as Longleg’s go-to tunes (some of the movie flashes back to the 1970s); and the sound design is unnerving, with effective use of silence throughout. … This isn’t a perfect film (I would have taken the final shot and stuck it in the middle or at the end of the credits because it’s off-tone and steals Monroe’s thunder), and horror fans could argue all day about whether it is “the scariest movie of the decade” (a tagline used to promote the movie), but it is great at what it intends to do, and I felt that way after a second viewing. And I expect to feel the same through many more watches.

My scores: First viewing, 94 out of 100; second viewing, 94 out of 100

Clown time is over

Posted on by thisguyatthemovies

Title: “It: Chapter Two”

Release date: Sept. 6, 2019

Starring: Bill Skarsgard, James McAvoy, Jessica Chastain, Bill Hader, Isaiah Mustafa, Jay Ryan, James Ransone, Andy Bean, Jaeden Martell, Wyatt Oleff, Sophia Lillis, Finn Wolfhard, Jeremy Ray Taylor, Chosen Jacobs, Jack Dylan Glazer, Joan Gregson

Directed by: Andy Muschietti

Run time: 2 hours, 50 minutes

Rated: R

What it’s about: Evil clown Pennywise returns to Derry, Maine, to terrorize its citizens, and members of the Losers Club, now adults, must overcome their own fears if they hope to defeat him once again.

How I saw it: Unpleasantness abounds in “It: Chapter Two,” the second recent movie based on Stephen King’s 1986 novel “It.” But would you expect anything else? “It: Chapter Two” doesn’t waste any time getting right to its disturbing tone, and it does not let up throughout its too-long running time. But it mostly makes up for the uncomfortable nature of the material and its tendency to bog down in the middle with a standout cast and intense visuals that often border on hallucinogenic. It’s a creepy movie all around, more so than frightful, but one you might not be able to look away from.

Its predecessor, “It,” was set in the 1980s, with seven young Derry, Maine residents – dubbed the Losers Club — banding together to defeat Pennywise, an evil clown who can change forms to lure his victims. “It: Chapter Two” is set 27 years later, and guess who’s back in town? Pennywise is, and he’s up to his old tricks. When the body count starts to mount, Mike (Isaiah Mustafa), the only member of the Losers Club to stay in Derry this entire time, summons the old gang, now middle-aged adults, to return and defeat Pennywise once and for all. The Losers Club – Mustafa, James McAvoy as Bill, Jessica Chastain as Beverly, Bill Hader as Richie, Jay Ryan as Ben, James Ransone as Eddie and Andy Bean as Stanley – must confront their own fears if they are to carry out a ritual that Mike says will bring lasting peace to Derry. One of the Losers Club doesn’t make it back to Derry, choosing to take his own life instead of facing the clown again.

The opening of “It: Chapter Two” arguably is its most troubling scene, though there are many candidates for that title. Two young adult males at a carnival kiss, and soon a group of homophobic young men is beating them, throwing one into a river, where Pennywise fishes him out of the water before doing what Pennywise does. The scene is in the book (and is based on a real-life hate crime in Maine), and at first it seems exploitive, ill-placed and ill-advised. But screenwriter Gary Dauberman and director Andy Muschietti came up with a way to tie the scene to the rest of the movie, and it is the most significant way in which the movie strays from the original source material.

More ugliness follows, including an incestuous father and a scene that includes domestic violence and attempted rape inside a marriage. Both scenes and the opening seem almost tone deaf by 2019 standards but also help set up the message of the movie (and book) – that the marginalized and victimized can unite to stand up to their oppressors. Pennywise, who creates imaginary situations based on each Losers Club member’s fears, is the ultimate oppressor.

Muschietti’s approach seems to be more of everything is better, but the more here is too much, especially given the movie’s length. “It: Chapter Two” tries to cover too much ground, and since the intensity does not let up, the horror starts to feel like emotional white noise. Each character is given their turn in the middle of the movie, and its here that it starts to show its length.

But the visuals are at times stunning. Pennywise in the climactic scene is truly odd and disturbing. Muschietti bounces the story back and forth between time periods (the young Losers and the middle-aged Losers) often, but a plot device that could have gotten in the way is done so seamlessly that it improves the movie. James McAvoy stands out in the ensemble cast, and Hader gets a lot of laughs but also is troubled by a secret he has been hiding. Joan Gregson as Mrs. Kersh (an older lady who lives where a young Beverly lived) is every bit as creepy as Pennywise in her one scene, and that’s before she morphs into a monster.

“It: Chapter Two” is a bit of a mess, and a long mess at that. And while it is not as strong as its predecessor, it has enough of what Stephen King fans have come to expect to make it worthwhile.

My score: 70 out of 100

Should you see it? Yes, if you have a high tolerance for unpleasantness and are patient enough to sit through a three-hour film.

Better than advertised

Posted on by thisguyatthemovies

Title: “The Curse of La Llorona”

Release date: In theaters April 19, 2019; on disc/streaming July 16, 2019

Starring: Linda Cardellini, Raymond Cruz, Patricia Velasquez, Marisol Ramirez, Sean Patrick Thomas, Jaynee-Lynne Kinchen, Roman Christou, Tony Amendola, Irene King

Directed by: Michael Chavez

Run time: 1 hour, 33 minutes

Rated: R

What it’s about: The supernatural La Llorona haunts two women and their young children in 1970s Los Angeles before a disillusioned priest is brought in to drive the evil spirit away.

How I saw it: It would be easy to pan “The Curse of La Llorona,” a movie that topped the box-office charts this spring and earned more than $125 million on a reported $9 million budget. And critics have had little trouble panning it. A loosely connected entry in “The Conjuring” franchise, “The Curse of La Llorona” has a Rotten Tomatoes critics score of 30 percent, and it does not far much better with audiences (42 percent).

Its sins? It’s not terribly original. The script is not much to write home about. Many of the scares are telegraphed. And about that “Conjuring” connection: It seems tacked on as if to cash in on the franchise’s popularity despite the uneven quality of the series’ movies. The connection here is Father Perez (Tony Amendola), who made an appearance in “Annabelle,” the entry about a creepy doll that makes a brief appearance here. That’s not much of a connection.

But, like Maximus (Russell Crowe) in “Gladiator,” you should be asking, “Are you not entertained?” And that’s what “The Curse of La Llorona” does. It entertains. When it comes to low-budget supernatural horror thrillers, that alone should be enough.

“The Curse of La Llorona” is about a Latin America folk tale. As legend goes, La Llorona (The Weeping Woman) was abandoned by her husband and left to raise their two young sons in 17th century Mexico. But out of grief and anger, she drowns her sons. She is condemned to wander for all eternity until she finds the bodies of her children.

In “The Curse of La Llorona,” she shows up in 1970s Los Angeles to haunt two women and their children. One is an unstable woman, Patricia (Patricia Velasquez), who has been accused of not being able to care for her two young sons. A case worker assigned to investigate her, Anna Garcia (Linda Cardellini), unwittingly exposes Patricia’s boys to La Llorona. And then the spirit comes after Anna’s children, a daughter and son. When Anna’s children sustain injuries they can’t explain (injuries caused by La Llorona), Anna, who is struggling to overcome the grief of her police officer husband having been killed in the line of duty, is in danger of losing her children.

Out of desperation, Anna seeks the aid of Rafael (Raymond Cruz), a man of faith (but not religion, as he notes) who has become disillusioned with a church that has distanced itself from him because of his unusual practices. It’s at this point that “The Curse of La Llorona” hits its stride. The pace picks up as soon as Rafael enters the story, and Cruz’s wonderfully dry sense of humor is perfect for a movie that had been building slowly toward the halfway mark. Cruz uses whatever he has at his disposal (though it is not clear to Anna and her children he knows what he is doing) to chase away La Llorona, and the action and scares are relentless as the movie builds toward its climax.

La Llorona (Marisol Ramirez) is a genuinely scary spirit, and first-time feature director Michael Chavez seems to know just when to bring her on screen. And it helps that Chavez leads us to believe La Llorona is going to show up a couple of times when she doesn’t. Chavez borrows heavily from horror genre staples, but what sets the film apart from lesser supernatural movies is some outstanding camera work with unusual perspectives. There’s a certain beauty in the movie’s dark settings that’s noticeable.

“The Curse of La Llorona” doesn’t advance the horror genre, and it does not make a statement about the current state of politics or society. But it is fun and provides a few tension-relieving laughs and plenty of screams, even when it’s obvious they are coming. Is that not entertainment?

My score: 82 out of 100

Should you see it? If you can forgive its shortcomings and not put too much thought into it, “The Curse of La Llorona” would make for a fun popcorn-and-a-movie night at home.

We’re not in IKEA anymore

Posted on by thisguyatthemovies

Title: “Midsommar”

Release date: July 3, 2019

Starring: Florence Pugh, Jack Reynor, William Jackson Harper, Vilhelm Blomgran, Will Poulter, Isabelle Grill, Ellora Torchia, Archie Madekwe, Liv Mjones, Anna Astrom

Directed by: Ari Aster

Run time: 2 hours, 20 minutes

Rated: R

What it’s about: A group of young people travels to rural Sweden for a summer festival and finds themselves among a pagan cult.

How I saw it: Watch “Midsommar,” the sophomore effort by “Hereditary” writer/director Ari Aster, and you’ll likely leave the theater confused by everything you’ve witnessed. There’s much to like here, and a lot to not like so much. It’s a film that will have you rehashing it for days in your mind, and it’s fodder for great conversation. And it would seem capable of holding up to multiple viewings, but only if you have the stomach for it. It’s a horror movie, though not solely a horror movie, with a bit of complexity and symbolism and a slew of “WTF?” moments. It’s one of those films that seems to want to draw a line between “love it” and “hate it.” But you’ll have an opinion one way or the other.

“Midsommar,” perhaps even more than an in-broad-daylight horror story, is about a dysfunctional romance between a young, emotionally needy woman, Dani (Florence Pugh), and Christian (Jack Reynor), a heartless dude bro who is being urged by his college buddies (Williams Jackson Harper, Vilhelm Blomgran, Will Poulter) to ditch Dani. But then unspeakable horror happens to Dani’s family, and she needs Christian even more than ever, even if he isn’t capable of being emotionally available. Unbeknownst to Dani, the guys are planning a summer retreat to rural Sweden, where they will attend a festival that happens only once every 90 years. Dani ends up tagging along, and her relationship with Christian deteriorates even more once the group finds itself in the midst of a pagan cult.

The wise thing for Dani and the boys to do would be to run at the first sign of trouble, but this being a horror movie, we know that’s not going to happen. Also, if you travel to a foreign land and are driven out to the middle of nowhere and don’t know what you’re getting into, at a time when you are emotionally unstable, maybe don’t indulge in hallucinogenic drugs. It can’t help. And it doesn’t as Dani, Christian and friends are sucked into the weird Swedish rituals and it becomes clear that the “Midsommar” festival is a lot like the Hotel California – you can check out any time you like, but you can never leave.

Let’s look at the bad and then finish strong with the good:

THE BAD

  • “Midsommar” is long (2 hours, 20 minutes) and it’s slow, and that makes it seem even longer than it is. Perhaps this is done to replicate the feel of a multi-day festival that takes place during a time of year in Sweden when there is little darkness and thus not much sense of time. Or maybe it’s just slow because that’s what artsy movies are supposed to do.
  • Outside of Dani, the characters aren’t flushed out. Christian and Josh (William Jackson Harper) have a bit of a dispute and rivalry about a thesis paper, but that just leads to one plot point (and a ritualistic death). Will Poulter is clearly playing it over the top as the horned-up Mark, but his main purpose in the movie is to rattle off one-liners that are hit-and-miss funny (he makes a reference to Waco, Texas, that few under the age of 45 will get, and the main audience for this is well south of 45). Christian, Josh, Mark and Pelle (Vilhelm Blomgren) are almost comically male and privileged. They are annoying, as is Dani, who, when she isn’t on the verge of an emotional breakdown, just gives Christian this weird glare when he is being inattentive and unsympathetic. Seemingly dozens of Swedish people dance around in robes and flowers, and they start to all seem alike, which might just be the point.
  • The ending. Without giving all of it away, Christian meets a terrible fate (as do his buddies), one that is perhaps deserved or, depending on your view, perhaps excessive. Christian is by all accounts a terrible person and the worst boyfriend imaginable, but Dani could have left his awfulness behind long before getting on a plane to Sweden. It begs the question: What makes for a stronger woman – breaking free and going on with your life independently and then finding someone who really cares for you, or getting revenge in horrific fashion?

THE GOOD

  • The “WTF?” moments. They are intense. And it’s not just the gore, which is brutal by mainstream movie release standards. When someone leaps off a cliff headfirst into rocks below, the results are not going to be pleasant. Nor are they when someone leaps off the same cliff feet-first into the rocks and then must be put out of their misery. Aster doesn’t shy away from showing the mangled bodies up-close. Just as unsettling are a dance marathon to determine the festival’s May Queen, with the participants drugged for good measure; and an orgy in which a drugged Christian has been brought in to impregnate a young village woman as several other women of various ages and body types stand and watch and even give Christian a hand, so to speak. Warning: “Midsommar” shows male full-frontal nudity in a couple of places.
  • The cinematography (by Pawel Pogorzelski) is, if at times a bit showy, dazzling. A prologue that tells Dani’s story is so mesmerizing that you could forget how disturbing the content is. Part of the cliff scene is shot from above, giving us a sense of how high the cliff is and how isolated those on top of it are as they await their fate below. When the story shifts to Sweden, everything is awash in sunlit whites and yellows, and while that might not be the stuff of traditional horror stories, it adds to the unsettling feeling. Also, the festival is full of wide-open spaces, and if Alfred Hitchcock taught us anything in the famous airplane sequence in “North by Northwest,” open spaces leave little place for us to hide from the bad stuff.
  • The score by the British artist known as The Haxan Cloak (Bobby Krlic). He mixes electronica with acoustic strings and other folksy sounds that perfectly complement the disturbing and yet often beautiful visuals.

My score: 77 out of 100

Should you see it? “Midsommar” is so spectacularly and interestingly shot that it deserves to be seen on a big screen. Whether or not you can stomach some of the content and can be patient enough to wait out a long, slow film is a matter of preference.

Don’t go in the basement

Posted on by thisguyatthemovies

Title: “Ma”

Release date: May 31, 2019

Starring: Octavia Spencer, Juliette Lewis, Diana Silvers, McKaley Miller, Corey Fogelmanis, Luke Evans, Missi Pyle, Dante Brown, Gianni Paolo, Tanyell Waivers, Dominic Burgess, Allison Janney

Directed by: Tate Taylor

Run time: 1 hour, 40 minutes

Rated: R

What it’s about: A 40-something woman befriends a group of local high school students, but the situation soon takes a dark turn.

How I saw it: Let’s start with a couple of questions about “Ma”:

  • What is an Academy Award-winning actress like Octavia Spencer doing in a mid-level teen psychological horror film?
  • And since she apparently signed up for the starring role of her own free will, why couldn’t Spencer have been on screen during the entire film?

Spencer, who earned a Best Supporting Actress Oscar for her role in “The Help” and has been nominated for the same honor twice since then, plays Sue Ann, aka Ma. Sue Ann seems to lead a lonely existence in a non-descript Ohio town. It’s the kind of place where locals rarely leave, and if they do, they find themselves returning. Everyone knows everyone else’s business. Sue Ann grew up in the town. She works for the local veterinarian (Allison Janney, who also seems to be playing below her level), who is verbally abusive to her. She doesn’t have any friends.

One day a group of local alcoholic high school students camps outside a liquor store hoping someone of age will buy them booze. Sue Ann happens by and, after some pleading from the new girl in town, Maggie (Diana Silvers), agrees to break the law for them. But something (and this is the case even if you didn’t see the trailer) is off about Sue Ann. She gets too friendly with the teens too quickly. Soon, she is inviting them to party in her basement, where they can drink (their only hobby) if they don’t take the Lord’s name in vain, have a sober driver and never go upstairs. Sue Ann also parties with them.

Perhaps because they are so elated to have a private place to party, or maybe because they are stereotypical horror movie dumb teens, the group of five doesn’t notice that Sue Ann has run off the rails. And, oddly, it does not phase them when, during one of their drinking sessions in the basement, Sue Ann pulls a gun on a teenage boy and makes him take off all his clothes. Maybe no one in a movie set in present-day Ohio has heard of #MeToo. When Sue Ann starts stalking the teens, do they tell anyone that could help? No.

As is the norm in these types of movies, Sue Ann’s behavior deteriorates. Turns out she was psychologically scarred by an incident 30-some years ago and has never forgotten. Conveniently, it turns out the parents of some of the teens partying in her basement were involved in her traumatization, and now Sue Ann has her opportunity for revenge – never mind that none of the teens was personally responsible for what happened to her before they were born.

Spencer is as outstanding as you would expect, and she clearly is having fun being in a starring role and playing a psychopath. Her acting seems effortless. It matters little that she is so charming that it is difficult to fully buy into her being a ruthless killer. She is the best aspect of “Ma,” and the movie drops down a couple of levels each time she is not on screen.

Part of the problem with “Ma,” directed by Tate Taylor (who also directed Spencer and Janney in “The Help”), is with pacing. It checks in at 1 hour, 40 minutes, and it didn’t seem that long, perhaps because the final act seems rushed. All the horror movie action seems to take place in the final 20 minutes. Few 100-minute movies would benefit from more time, but this one would have, unless the action could have been better spread throughout. The final act feels especially frantic compared to the first two-thirds of the film, which builds slowly, emphasizing the characters’ small-town existence in the first third, then (in the best part of the movie) letting Sue Ann’s psychosis simmer in the second act before exploding into violence.

“Ma” also has a couple of noticeable plot holes and a few too many conveniences — like Sue Ann’s easy access to animal tranquilizers, which she utilizes on humans; or how the people who rush to Sue Ann’s house in the climatic scene have little idea where she lives but somehow find a place that is described as being “in the boondocks.” A side story about Sue Ann having a daughter that she drugs but plays off as ill seems to exist just for an easy jump-scare. A brief reference to race and how it might have figured into Sue Ann’s traumatization is made in the climatic scene when she paints a black teen’s face white and says it’s because the group can have only one black friend; she apparently was the only black student back in her high school days.

Other inferences about race can be made from “Ma,” which is rare in that it features a black woman doing the killing. But it doesn’t seem as interested in such weighty matters — not in the way Jordan Peele’s clever “Get Out” was — as it does being a mid-level summertime teen horror movie. As great as Spencer is, she couldn’t turn it into something more special than that.

My score: 55 out of 100

Should you see it? This easily could wait until release on disc/streaming.

What about ‘Us’?

Posted on by thisguyatthemovies

Title: “Us”

Release date: March 22, 2019

Starring: Lupita Nyong’o, Winston Duke, Elisabeth Moss, Tim Heidecker, Shahadi Wright Joseph, Evan Alex

Directed by: Jordan Peele

Run time: 2 hours, 1 minute

Rated: R

What it’s about: A family’s vacation home is invaded by doppelgangers of themselves.

How I saw it: Jordan Peele had a hard act to follow — his own. His feature film debut, “Get Out,” was a huge hit at the box office in 2017 and almost universally lauded by critics. The horror story with bits of comedy and a lot of commentary on race relations in the U.S. was nominated for Best Picture and earned Peele an Oscar for Best Original Screenplay.

Peele had set the bar high. Maybe a bit too high. It might be much to ask of his sophomore effort, “Us,” to hit the heights of its predecessor, and it doesn’t. But it does not miss by much. A horror story that amps up the blood and tones down (or at least makes less obvious) its take on society, “Us” is nonetheless an outstanding, meticulously made and fun film that can be enjoyed on many levels.

“Us” is the story of the Wilsons, a middle-class family who set out to enjoy a beach vacation in Santa Cruz, Calif. But something is amiss, and we know why. The mother, Adelaide (Lupita Nyong’o, in a tour de force performance), had a traumatic experience on the same beach back in 1986. She got separated from her family, wandered into a funhouse during a thunderstorm and encountered what appeared to be her doppelganger. Fast-forward to current day, and Adelaide, now with a husband (Winston Duke) and two children (Shahadi Wright Joseph and Evan Alex), still is bothered by what happened. She is suffering from, as we are told in flashbacks, post-traumatic stress disorder.

Though uncomfortable, she seems to be soldiering through the vacation until a family arrives at their vacation home and stands unresponsive at the end of the driveway. They don’t stay unresponsive for long, and the Wilsons soon realize the family is made up of doppelgangers of themselves. But they aren’t exact replicas. The doppelgangers speak in grunts, except for Adelaide’s doppelganger, Red, whose voice is as terrifying as it can be hard to understand. They carry gold scissors, and they aren’t visiting the Wilsons for a social call. Soon the Wilsons are faced with the unenviable task of killing people who look like them or being killed by them.

Without giving everything away (which might not be possible given the film’s many layers), the doppelgangers are part of a group of underground beings called the Tethered. Their lives, right down to their movements, are tied to their duplicates living the good life above ground. The Tethered aren’t happy with their existence, and one of them, Red, has organized an uprising that looks not unlike a zombie apocalypse. Will the Tethered overtake the world? Will the Wilsons survive? Will they want to?

Who are the Tethered? Peele gives us bits and pieces of an explanation and a bit of a back story, but not much. They could represent the marginalized among us. Or a reflection of our inner selves.  If we each were faced with our doppelganger, how uncomfortable would that be?  Here’s guessing plenty uncomfortable.

Peele is a fan and student of the horror genre, and it shows. “Us” plays homage to such films as “The Shining,” “The Goonies,” “The Birds” and “It Follows.” Even “Home Alone” gets its moment. “Us” is littered with 1980s pop culture references. And it has a M. Night Shyamalan-like twist at the end. Think “The Sixth Sense.” Like in that movie, the twist in “Us” will have you rewinding the movie in your brain and kicking yourself for not having recognized all the clues. And there are plenty of clues.

Peele leaves much unanswered in “Us,” and that can make it a tad frustrating and perhaps not totally satisfying (at least at first), but it also will leave audiences thinking. It’s one of those movies that can be picked apart and discussed in depth, if you choose, and should only get better upon multiple viewings. It can be taken as a deep philosophical statement about the duality of human beings and society, and the current state of haves and have-nots in the U.S. But it also can be enjoyed for what it is on the surface, a slasher movie that spills enough blood to be disturbing (you might not be able to look at a rabbit the same way ever again) and has enough laughs to lighten the tension and keep it fun. Ultimately, what we make of “Us” is up to us.

My score: 85 out of 100

Should you see it? Yes, if you can stomach quite a bit of blood, tension and unsettling images and themes.