Horror’s found-footage sub-genre ran its course with me some time ago. But occasionally a movie will come around that reminds us of why found-footage filmmaking was once all the rave. The new independent horror film “Infirmary” starts with that kind of promise. But over the course of its lean 85 minutes, the narrative flaws begin to mount up. And no matter how encouraging it appears to be, “Infirmary” can’t see its vision through to the end.

Director Nicholas Pineda does a good job introducing his creepy setting and teasing us with what could have been a dread-drenched experience. The problem is he runs out of story well before the halfway point. After setting up its characters and establishing its location, the movie dawdles along for the bulk of its running time. It ultimately wastes a promising premise by making us endure scenes that go nowhere until the final ten minutes.

Set in 2023, Paul Syre Lee plays Edward, a recently discharged Marine who takes a job as a security guard in an old hospital set to be demolished. On his first day he meets his obnoxiously harsh boss Lester (Mark Anthony Williams) who immediately establishes his authority before sending Edward to sign some paperwork for the administrative assistant Ms. Downey (Danielle Kennedy). These are the three lone characters of consequence for the rest of the movie.

Once Edward returns, the bristly Lester gives Edward a rundown of his duties and a true or not-so-true history of the 200,000 square-foot hospital. Lester’s twisted tale include macabre experiments, dark magic, and creepy medical mannequins. It all comes off as more outlandish than unsettling which leaves us skeptical of his reliability. But to get answers we’re forced to sit through a monotonous series of scenes before finally getting to an end that leaves us with more questions than answers.

Once again, the setting isn’t the issue. The vacant hospital has all the built-in atmosphere needed for a chiller like this. And Pineda makes use of its many features including the operating room, medical records, the chapel, the cafeteria, and of course the morgue. And they’re made even creepier by being viewed exclusively through CCTV security cameras and uniform body cams. Pineda shows some real filmmaking savvy in his visual approach.

But the mood is dampened by long stretches where very little happens. We just watch Edward as he wanders down empty halls and repeatedly revisits the same rooms. The few attempts at scares grow predictable and repetitive. And then there’s the ending – a frustratingly vague ‘finish’ that leaves us to speculate about what happens while piecing together a story that the movie should have told better itself. It turns out to be the death knell for what is another found-footage flop – one that shows signs of what it could have been yet can’t escape what it actually is.

VERDICT – 2 STARS

Full Disclosure – I’m not the most informed when it comes to the Insidious movies. I’ve seen some but certainly not every installment in the long-running and financially successful horror franchise. The good thing is you don’t need to be well-versed to get the gist of these stories. They have been accessible to most everyone and thankfully that remains true for its sixth entry, “Insidious: Out of the Further”.

The film series kicked off with 2011’s “Insidious” and its last film was 2023’s “Insidious: The Red Door”, a direct sequel to 2013’s “Insidious: Chapter 2”. “Out of the Further” takes a fresh turn by centering itself around a new protagonist who has a unique connection to the purgatorial dimension known as the Further. Yet writer-director Jacob Chase maintains several firm connections to the earlier films, and his story fits nicely within the franchise’s ongoing continuity.

In Pittsburgh, Gemma (Amelia Eve) is a young mother raising her 9-year-old Maya (Island Austin) in the family home she grew up in. It’s a house with its share of painful memories. Yet despite her boyfriend Nick (Brandon Perea) repeatedly urging her to leave, Gemma is determined to build the home for Maya that she always wanted. But that proves difficult after chilling revelations from Gemma’s past threatens her and her little girl.

It begins with Gemma having dark and intense dreams, often about her late mother. Then there is the creepy elderly trio who are suddenly roaming around their neighborhood. Gemma’s encounter with one of the strangers transports her into the Further – a dark realm populated by lost and tortured souls who crave life. As Gemma is being overtaken by the demons, she is surprisingly rescued by Elise Rainier (Lin Shaye, reprising her role from the earlier films), a psychic medium who died in 2011 and now lives in the Further.

Elise directs Gemma to her assistant in the living world, Claire (Maisie Richardson-Sellers) who is able to communicate with her mentor in the Further. Through Claire, Elise informs Gemma that she possesses the rare ability to transport demons back into the living world. For that reason she has been targeted by an especially malevolent entity named Cyrus (Sam Spruell) who deviously plans to use Gemma to escape from the Further by any means necessary.

Chase has a lot of fun tinkering with the established Insidious mythology while also expanding it in some wildly imaginative ways. To be honest, the rules of the world don’t always make sense, and it can get a little bogged down in all the talk of travelers, couriers, acolytes, etc. But there is a wickedly fresh idea at the film’s core and Chase draws inspiration from both “Poltergeist” and “A Nightmare on Elm Street” to bring it to life. And it opens the door for some interesting possibilities for the future.

To its credit, “Out of the Further” isn’t the kind of rehash that often comes when we’re six movies into a series. Instead it’s a surprisingly effective soft reboot with enough of its own distinct DNA to prove the Insidious franchise still has legs. It’s rich with nightmarish atmosphere, introduces devilish new demons, and has some delightfully disgusting moments (those who fear the dentist chair, beware). It will certainly satisfy longtime fans and I wouldn’t be surprised if it earns a few new ones as well.

VERDICT – 3.5 STARS

[“In Spite of Ourselves” screened at Filmland 2026 and was followed by Q&A with writer-director Jeff Loeb, cinematographer Gabe Mayhan, and composer Jim Fairchild.]

Josh Loeb writes and directs “In Spite of Ourselves”, a romantic drama that (sadly) almost feels like the remnant of a bygone era. It’s the kind of adult-centered movie that simply doesn’t get made these days. Instead studios have migrated towards flighty and formulaic melodramas aimed at younger audiences. Thankfully independent cinema has left the doors open for filmmakers who still remember the work of the Rob Reiners and Nora Ephrons.

“In Spite of Ourselves” surprises in a variety of ways. Tops on the list is how it continually bucks the predictable formulas that have come to define these types of stories. Every time we think it’s going a more conventional route, Loeb brings things back to earth. And that grounded sensibility extends to everything from the characters to the dialogue to the story arc itself. It’s such a refreshing reminder that stories like this can be told without following some worn-out blueprint.

From the outset, “In Spite of Ourselves” feels as if it’s drawn from real life. And for good reason. Loeb pulls from all kinds of life experiences, from his successes as an accomplished restauranteur to more personal family circumstances. It all factors into his story about two thirtysomethings, who by all conventional modern movie wisdom appear destined to be together. But as we learn, they’ll need to come to grips with their own messy lives if they are to have any chance together.

Archie (Brett Dier) is an up-and-coming comic out of Los Angeles who can’t seem to get out of his own way when it comes to commitment. His only semblance of a social life is hanging out with his two friends and fellow comics, Ben (Mo Mandel) and Sam (Alyssa Limperis). When not touring comedy clubs along the west coast, Archie is trying to cope with the failing health of his father Frank (Glenn Morshower), who is living in a senior care facility battling dementia.

Meanwhile in Portland, Hannah (Conor Leslie) is a talented baker with big dreams of opening her own restaurant. For the time being she’s stuck working for a narcissistic chef named Jake (Ethan Ingle) who believes he can treat her however he wants due to one night of drunken indiscretion. But Hannah has more on her proverbial plate. She has slowly been losing hearing in her right ear. And the only means to potentially stop it is a major surgery that comes with some frightening risks.

While doing a show in Portland, Archie pops into Jake’s place for a cinnamon roll which is where he meets Hannah. The moment plays like your prototypical meet-cute with its slightly awkward dialogue, sheepish grins, and a glaringly obvious mutual attraction. But well before the movie veers into standard-issue rom-dram territory, Loeb pulls his story back to reality with a slightly comical yet emotionally grounded moment that sets the tone for the rest of the film in its own unique way.

While Archie and Hannah have an easygoing and organic connection, their individual struggles begin pulling them in opposite directions. It’s here that the movie features the same maddening lack of communication that often plagues these stories. It’s a case where one open and honest conversation could avoid the majority of the conflict. But in the movie’s defense, overly internalizing their feelings fits naturally with these characters. And it builds towards an ending that honestly conveys the messiness of real life.

Loeb’s script communicates its themes through the lens of the writer’s own experiences which infuses it with an authenticity rarely found in the genre today. It also helps to have two solid anchors in Leslie and Dier, whose indelible charm and natural chemistry bled over into a real-life engagement. Then you have some solid supporting characters, such as Hannah’s best friends Becca (Britian Seibert), a raging cynic, and Shalice (Zora Casebere), a hopeless romantic. They mostly dodge the archetypal bullet which allows them to have some genuinely meaningful moments.

Other factors play into the movie’s success, from its distinct visual language to its shrewdly composed score. But the impact is felt most through Loeb’s refreshing vision and two superb lead performances. The bulk of the humor seems aimed at stand-up comedy fans, but there are plenty of amusing moments for the rest of us. And the schmaltz-free storytelling is a nice reminder that stories like this can be told without the crutches of excessive sentimentality and tired formula. For me, that’s what makes “In Spite of Ourselves” stand out most.

VERDICT – 4 STARS

Creepy kids are the main dish in Eli Roth’s “Ice Cream Man”, the director’s intentionally goofy and gleefully gory spin on the age-old Pied Piper legend. The film is Roth’s first feature since the seismic box office disaster that was “Borderlands”. His latest sees him back in his splatter film wheelhouse with a movie that is a horror comedy in its fullest sense. And I can an assure you, “Ice Cream Man” is quite different than his previous horror offerings.

There are no grand illusions here. Roth knows the kind of movie he’s making and never pretends otherwise. “Ice Cream Man” is a gorefest that pushes the blood and guts to absurd levels. But it’s also openly self-aware which ends up fueling much of the film’s warped and twisted humor. And considering how much “Ice Cream Man” relies on children, the humor is crucial in making the blood-drenched movie digestible. More on that in a second.

The story kicks off as an old-fashioned ice cream truck rolls into Bayleen Bay. It’s a regular day in this cozy coastal town, which basks in the idyllic glow of the warm summer sun while the enthusiastic sounds of children plays like background music. And their enthusiasm only grows once they hear the high-pitched jingle of the ice cream truck. As kids surround his frozen ecstasy on wheels, the eerily silent ice cream man (slyly yet devilishly played by Ari Millen) hands out free ice cream to every child there.

The day ends as normal, outside of a few brain freezes, sugar rushes, and upset tummies. It isn’t until later that the movie’s sinister twist is revealed. In the middle of the night, the Ice Cream Man begins driving his truck through every neighborhood with his jingle ringing out in the darkness. It triggers something within the children, who suddenly begin rising out of their bed in a catatonic haze, their faces stained with dried ice cream and sprinkles. Much worse, the kids begin gruesomely murdering their parents with a gleeful indifference.

The next morning, Jared (Charlie Zeltzer), who fortunately is lactose intolerant, wakes up and heads to school where he encounters a campus full of zombified classmates. Suddenly the Ice Cream Man pulls up, which sends the students into a murderous frenzy. They begin hacking, impaling, and dismembering their teachers, and those are the tamer kills! Meanwhile Jared is joined by fellow ice cream abstainers Mia (Kiori Mirza Waldman) and Tommy (Shiloh O’Reilly) in a desperate effort to escape.

The rest of the movie follows these three kids from vastly different social groups as they navigate the copious carnage and comical chaos that Roth throws their way. And he throws A LOT their way. Enough that we can’t help but feel a little queasy, not at the extreme gore itself, but at the child actors and actresses tasked with capturing it for the camera. From all indications, it was made a playful shoot for the young cast. Still it’s a quagmire that the film never fully escapes from.

That said, there is a lot for splatter film fans to appreciate in “Ice Cream Man”. The creativity and artistry from the makeup and effects teams is routinely on display as they mostly practically capture every bonkers idea Roth tosses at them. And they visually manage to walk the line between grisly and goofy. Together with Roth and DP Simon Shohet, they also help to pull off some mind-boggling extended sequences that require as much intense coordination as corn syrup.

“Ice Cream Man” succeeds in being the gratuitously gory and absurdly funny horror-comedy concoction that Eli Roth envisioned. It has all the ingredients to entertain those who know what they’re getting into and repulse those who don’t. On one hand, it’s unhinged go-for-the jugular fun that is just as interested in making you laugh as squirm. On the other hand, it’s a movie that uses children in ways that can easily be considered suspect. It ultimately poses a question that reaches beyond this one movie. But the answer to that question may be enough to shape how you feel about it.

VERDICT – 3 STARS

Three very pretty people team up to get back a fortune owed by a ruthless despot in Guy Ritchie’s “In the Grey”. It’s a sleek and straightforward action-thriller laced with big set pieces, snappy dialogue, and a nonsense approach to storytelling. And did I mention three very pretty people? Henry Cavill, Jake Gyllenhaal, and Eiza González form the film’s central trio and clearly have a ball with Ritchie’s signature energy and swagger.

Despite hardly any promotion, “In the Grey” is a consistently fun throwback action film that deserves an audience. Ritchie never hides his intentions. His latest is a kinetically-paced heist movie that slow-builds to a big action payoff. And it openly leans on the charms, good looks, and sharp chemistry of its three leads. It’s a pretty simply formula that Ritchie knows well, and here he mostly gets it right.

The storytelling unfolds with a near procedural precision, directly moving us from point to point with hardly any downtime for such things as character development or relationship building. The movie is nearly as all-business as its characters, finding room for the occasional dry banter until it’s time for its trio to go to work. The simplicity is almost endearing even if it does approach formulaic. As for me, I enjoyed Ritchie’s unapologetic matter-of-fact approach.

The world of “In the Grey” is full of attorneys, bankers, investors, mercenaries, and tyrants. It’s where we meet the cunning and commanding Rachel Wild (a fabulous González), a lawyer who aggressively recovers money from shady borrowers and returns it to the equally shady financial firms who loaned it. Rachel is hired by Bobby Sheen (Rosamund Pike), a reluctant but desperate banking executive trying to avoid her boss’s wrath by retrieving $1 billion owed by a powerful crime boss named Manny Salazar (Carlos Bardem). The problem is Salazar has already killed one of Bobby’s lawyers who dared to try and collect.

Rachel is good at her job because she works within that small grey area between legal and illegal. And it helps that she has two loyal and capable extraction experts by her side, Sid (Cavill) and Bronco (Gyllenhaal). Individually they have unique specialties; together they are a highly efficient and lethal duo aided by their small team of operatives. As for Salazar, he lives lavishly on an island he owns, protected by a private army and a corrupt police department who are on his payroll.

Rachel gets Salazar’s attention by slickly, meticulously, and covertly seizing his assets, freezing his accounts, and ultimately costing him millions of dollars. It earns her an invite to Salazar’s island to hammer out a deal. Sid and Bronco accompany her as protection and are more than capable of keeping her safe. But they’re more concerned about the extraction if things heat up. And as you can guess, things definitely heat up leading to an action-packed second half marked by one unexpected swerve that really raises the stakes.

The film’s three stars have all worked with Ritchie before and they effortlessly slide into the skins of the characters he has created. We can only speculate about the depths of Rachel, Sid, and Bronco’s relationships. That’s because they are consummate professionals with a near robotic focus on the job at hand. They occasionally break their intensity with a bit of humor or a concerned word that may point to closer bonds. But their affections mainly lie with their work, as seen in their extensive planning, detailed coordination, obsessive preparation, and pinpoint execution.

Of course the savvy Ritchie is no stranger to big action. It takes some time getting to it with the surprisingly dense exposition-filled stage-setting. But once it comes, it doesn’t disappoint. It’s a veritable buffet of tense shootouts and thrilling vehicle chases, marked by big explosions and an even bigger body count. Meanwhile the costume design is as eye-popping as the set pieces. As I said, these are very pretty people and Ritchie looks to his favorite designer, Loulou Bontemps to ensure they’re well dressed for the every occasion.

“In the Grey” is a wildly entertaining action caper that mixes a Soderberghian style of storytelling with Guy Ritchie’s visual panache. It hearkens back to older action films yet has an exhilarating verve all its own. With such a laser focus, the film does leave you wishing for more between the three main characters themselves. But Ritchie knows what he’s after, and he locks in and delivers. Gyllenhaal and Cavill are rock-solid fits, but it’s an especially great role for González who ends up stealing the show. And what a fun show it is.

VERDICT – 3.5 STARS

With a title as straightforward as they come, the horror thriller “Itch!” gives you some idea of what you’re in for. Yet to his credit, writer-director Bari Kang has more on his mind than gripping tension and queasy body horror. He throws in a number of potentially meaningful themes. And while they do provide “Itch!” with some added weight, they don’t all work as intended. That leaves the movie to rely on good old-fashioned scares and suspense.

“Itch!” isn’t much into backstory or world-building. I’m guessing it’s partly due to the film’s limited budget. But it’s also something Kang isn’t especially interested in. Instead he crafts a more character-driven survival horror experience, set (mostly) within a tense single-location setting, and with a mysterious deadly threat that grows more terrifying as more is revealed about it. That’s the backbone of “Itch!”, and the movie works when it stays focused on its genre beats.

Kang also stars as Jay, a widowed single father whose young daughter Olivia (Olivia Kang), hasn’t spoken a word since her mother died. Jay helps run his father’s retail store in downtown New York City which is where the majority of the movie takes place. While his dad (Steven Alonte) stays home caring for his ailing wife, Jay mans the place with their long-time cashier Lisa (Mia Ventura Lucas).

But the tension sets in once we learn about a highly contagious outbreak that is spreading across the city at an alarming rate. Those infected fight an unbearable itch stemming from painful rashes that make their skin feel like it’s burning. We never learn the cause – is it medical, chemical, supernatural? But the setup creates as a harrowing scenario, especially once newscasts report hospitals are overwhelmed by self-inflicted injuries, airports are grounding all flights, and the more seriously infected are turning erratic and violent.

This comes fully into focus after a lady comes to Jay’s store covered in sores and screaming about an unbearable itch. Jay seals his store as more aggressive infected gather outside. With him is Olivia, Lisa, a panicking customer, Henry (Douglas Stirling), and a disgruntled former employee named Miguel (Patrick Michael Valley), along with his pregnant niece Gabriella (Ximena Uribe). Together the six attempt to survive the threats that lie both outside and within. Clashing personalities, fear, and paranoia become as dangerous as the deadly infection that threatens them all.

Unfortunately some of the characters do veer into archetype territory which slightly derails some of the drama. But the bigger hindrances are the various attempts at social commentary that rarely land as intended. The film has a pretty cynical point of view which manifests itself in several glaringly obvious ways. Whether it’s on-the-nose statements about the homeless and refugee communities, or a strangely out-of-the-blue reflection from Henry. There’s certainly nothing wrong with having something to say. But here the ham-fisted attempts mostly ring hollow.

Those few distractions aside, Kang does a terrific job keeping his audience fully engaged. And he impressively shows that you don’t need a big studio budget to do it. The tightening psychological tension itself is enough to keep us locked in. But Kang never forsakes the horror elements, using a cool variety of practical effects in creating some effectively bloody scares. And while not all of its messaging works, the blistering itch is a compelling and unsettling metaphor which gives this solid indie chiller an added jolt. “Itch!” is now available on VOD.

VERDICT – 3 STARS