September 23, 2021


Today's News Headlines, Breaking News & Latest News from India and World, News from Politics, Sports, Business, Arts and Entertainment

‘Candyman’ Review Roundup: Critics mixed with Nia Decoster horror

4 min read

In 1992, almost 30 years after the vengeful spirit first disappointed on the big screen, Candyman is back.

Acting as the “spiritual sequel” to the original supernatural slasher of the same name, Nia Docoster’s “Candyman” – written by recent horror darling Jordan Peel – received mostly positive reviews.

Read some highlights of what the critics are saying below:

Of diversity Wayne Gleiberman:

But now director Canada has remade “Candyman” (I’m glad Tony Todd is back – making him look a little bigger, and much more respectable in his unspeakable pain), and making a horror movie about what he’s done to keep his spell on Candyman’s fairy tale is rooted in a rich meditation on social terror. The new “Candyman” refers to the original plot as an ominous haze of shadow puppets, as if to say, “It was myth. That’s the reality.” It’s less of a “slasher film” drama with a slasher in the middle.

Michael Osulivan of the Washington Post:

Like Pill’s directed effort, the film has a lot of interesting ideas: gentrification, methodological racism, metaphorical ghosts of White America’s ghostly past – some literal ghosts – and the idea of ​​mirroring, which is in the whole thread from intentionally opening credits to “Candyman” to the very end. You can tell the Chiui Nougat Center in this movie, which in many other ways complies with some interesting conventions of the slasher genre. As an example of scary story / social criticism, it’s a cut above the pill’s “us”, but its Oscar-winning debut, much less provocative than “Get Out”.

Vulture’s Angelica Jade Bastian:

“Candyman” lacks energy and innovation. Its screenplay is remarkably instructive, showing that it was neither for diehard horror fans nor for blacks. Each interesting plot point – candyMen, “Invisible Man” principle – is lost by the direction of pedestrians, simple thoughts and a desperate product of blackness. In contrast to the ’92 film to create their own work, Docosta and his collaborators have created a false fire that cannot tangle his politics – about politeness, black body (horror), racism, white will – seem relevant or provocative. . When blackness subsides, we sell such poor cultural products.

Polygon Robert Daniels:

Several rounds of Black Lives Matter protests and the proliferation of videos capturing Black Death at the hands of police have made Rose’s film crystal clear as a fantastic folkloric horror, a clear illustration of black reality, located in an abandoned corner of the city. DaCosta is the recipient of those themes, responsible for translating them into a character that fits the current ethnic environment. But his Candyman A misleading, shallowly presented concept mesh, which includes criticism of flexibility and white critical lenses and requests for black release.

Richard Lawson of Vanity Fair:

Likes to say rather than show the movie, which creates an imperfect combination of social commentary and Gothic fear. The decision to put everything in plain text is understandable: there has been an appetite for genre films, especially horror, especially after “Get Out”, which actually says something about society. And the things at hand in “Candyman” are as important as they are. What is missing in the Docoster film is a more thoughtful synthesis of messages and media.

The Associated Press’ Mark Kennedy:

Filmmakers use fictional paper dolls to tell aspects of the past, and bees and mirrors have a repetitive motif. “Candyman” becomes progressively more messy as it becomes obsolete, from granite countertops to elegantly lit and airy kitchens, to muddy abandoned and graffiti-stained projects. There are a number of startling scenes, including one in which the camera is constantly moving away from a well-appointed apartment at night, while the female occupant is having a fight with a candyman, and one in the girls’ bathroom is one that is terrifying to tear to pieces. t show.

AV Stanley from AV Club:

The script is rich in social and cultural prompt, sometimes filled with narrative, when Anthony gets drunk and surpasses an art seller as a sex worker. (The subject is not touched again). Identifying the generation of black citizens, the main issue related to the stain of racial suffering, is complex enough to start a purposeful conversation and give “Candyman” a heavy replay value. In fact, the film’s website provides curriculum resources for educators – the story is more about asking questions than tidying up. […] Where Bernard Rose spoke in 1992 about white anxiety and images of horrible black people, Dacosta expands the conversation, shifting the horror from one man to many people, creating barbarism against black people.

Aman Warman of Time Out:

It helps that Candyman is shot brilliantly. From the first frame, Docosta always does something interesting with the camera. From the clever use of mirrors, to the transformation of the scene, smart visual storytelling is almost everywhere for setting designs that begin to mirror Candyman’s look in interesting ways. The fear of the jump is rare but rarely needed: all of this contributes to the feeling of fear as the film moves on to its bold conclusion.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *