The Invisible Man: What Happens To The Dog? | Screen Rant

The Invisible Man 2020 briefly featured an adorable dog named Zeus, owned by Cecilia and Adrian, but did the little pooch survive the film? One of the most memorable parts of The Invisible Man‘s 2020 reinvention is the opening sequence, in which Cecilia (Elisabeth Moss) escapes from her abusive boyfriend Adrian’s (Oliver Jackson-Cohen) high-tech home in the dead of night. Without saying a line of dialogue, the film effectively conveys how terrified Cecilia is of Adrian, and that makes every little moment in which she almost wakes him excruciatingly tense.

This includes one time when Cecilia inadvertently kicks the bowl of her and Adrian’s dog Zeus, making a loud clattering noise and causing an incredibly suspenseful moment where the viewer wonders how Adrian could’ve possibly slept through that. Cecilia then runs into Zeus after she’s out of the house, and although she can’t take him with her, she can’t bring herself to leave without removing the inhumane shock collar Adrian has put on the poor creature.

Related: Invisible Man Theory: What Happens To Cecilia After The Ending

From then on, Zeus mostly disappears from the story, outside of a few short scenes. Understandably, many animal lovers have a hard time watching a dog die in a film, and may be asking if Zeus lives. Here’s what happens.

While it’s somewhat easy to miss during The Invisible Man‘s shocking, satisfying conclusion, Zeus does survive the film. This is despite the fact that earlier Zeus attacked an invisible Adrian to protect Cecilia, when Cecilia infiltrated Adrian’s home to try and figure out how he was pulling off his scheme against her. Interestingly, that means that despite Adrian behaving like a monster toward Cecilia, he still didn’t choose to kill Zeus for interfering in his plans. Even evil people like their pets it seems.

Anyway, after Cecilia succeeds in killing Adrian in a way that makes it look like a suicide, she leaves the house with Zeus in tow, suggesting he’ll go on to a new life in a happier home. No more shock collars for this good boy, not even one. If a sequel to The Invisible Man 2020 ever happens – and with the box office take, it’s not hard to imagine – one assumes that Zeus will return along with Cecilia, hopefully to attack some more evil people. Zeus will not tolerate such despicable behavior, especially toward his human mama, and won’t hesitate to take another bite out of crime in the future.

More: The Invisible Man 2020’s Every Reference To The Original Monster & Movie

2020-03-22 22:00:32

Michael Kennedy

Child’s Play’s Chucky: Who Played the Role Better, Dourif or Hamill

Child’s Play‘s notorious killer doll Chucky has now been voiced by two great actors, Brad Dourif and Mark Hamill, but who played the role better? Sometimes a character becomes so closely identified with a particular actor, it’s almost impossible to imagine anyone else ever taking over the part. That’s more often associated with live-action roles, but in the case of Chucky, it’s also true. It’s a bit odd that Dourif’s career trajectory took him from an Oscar-nomination for One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest to voicing a foul-mouthed doll, but either way, he’s terrific at it.

Of course, successful franchises tend to last forever nowadays, and individual people don’t. People die, people retire, people get sick of playing the same role, it happens. What makes the fact that Hamill played Chucky in 2019’s Child’s Play remake especially odd is that Dourif has done none of those three things. He most recently voiced Chucky in 2017’s Cult of Chucky, and is set to return for Syfy’s upcoming Chucky TV series. Yet, due to a quirk in the franchise’s rights situation, MGM was able to move ahead with a remake anyway, complete with a new actor playing Chucky.

Related: Chucky Killed His Own Mother (But Not In The Child’s Play Movies)

Still, that shouldn’t be held against Hamill, as Dourif wasn’t interested in being part of the remake, since creator Don Mancini’s original franchise is continuing. Hamill was offered a cool role, took it, and even expressed nervousness publicly about taking over such an iconic horror villain after Dourif made the character his own. That all said, did Hamill manage to best his predecessor?

While it may not seem fair to judge Brad Dourif’s entire run as Chucky against Mark Hamill’s one film, one kind of has to do that, as Dourif doesn’t get a ton of lines in the original movie. For most of Child’s Play 1988’s running time, Chucky actually isn’t shown coming to life, as an attempt to leave it a bit unclear if what Andy is saying is real. With that caveat out of the way, it’s time to get down to business.

Hamill’s Chucky voice is a lot less sinister and human-sounding than Dourif’s, but that’s by design, as the new Chucky is a doll controlled by a malevolent AI, while the classic version is a doll possessed by a serial killer. Dourif’s Chucky voice is also much more high-pitched and squeaky, while Hamill’s is softer and kinder, even when doing evil things. Hamill’s Chucky is probably creepier for that reason, as most of the time, it sounds deceptively friendly, while Dourif’s Chucky doesn’t usually attempt to hide his murderous intentions.

On the other hand, the fact that Chucky’s voice is human makes him far more capable of expressing extreme emotions like rage and pain, leading to a much more dynamic delivery. He’s also more sadistic, as while Hamill’s Chucky will kill people, Dourif’s might torture them first. Chucky seems more like his own character when played by Dourif, while Hamill’s can sometimes feel more like a plot device, but again, that’s partly the result of the Child’s Play remake’s writing. At the end of the day, both actors excel at the particular version of Chucky they’re given to play, but Dourif’s version is simply more memorable, funny, and menacing. Therefore, Dourif gets the victory.

More: Child’s Play: Chucky’s Human Name Was Inspired By Three Real Murderers

2020-03-22 21:00:57

Michael Kennedy

1408’s Original Ending Was Much Darker – Why It Was Changed

2007’s acclaimed Stephen King adaptation 1408 didn’t necessarily end on an upbeat note, but its original conclusion was much darker still. When it comes to haunted hotels, King likely crafted the definitive story of that very specific sub-genre with his classic novel The Shining, which was of course adapted into an iconic 1980 film by director Stanley Kubrick. However, it’s not King’s only successful attempt at turning a hotel into a source of abject terror, as he also wrote the short story 1408.

1408 was first published in King’s 1999 short story collection Everything’s Eventual, which as usual for the author, was received exceptionally well. The story focuses on Mike Enslin, an author and paranormal investigator who, oddly enough, doesn’t actually believe in the paranormal. Research for a new book leads Enslin to the supposedly haunted room 1408 at New York City’s high-end Dolphin Hotel. Against the desperate urging of hotel manager Gerald Olin, Enslin books the room after threatening Olin with legal action. Unsurprisingly, he soon learns Olin was right.

Related: 1408: The Creepy True Story That Inspired The Movie

Many King fans pointed to 1408 as the standout story of Everything’s Eventual, and in 2007, a film adaptation of 1408 was released. Starring John Cusack as Enslin and Samuel L. Jackson as Olin, 1408 was a critical and commercial hit, and is generally considered one of the best King-based movies to date. Yet, the ending audiences saw in theaters was the end result of big changes to the original conclusion.

The beginning of 1408‘s end is the same in both the theatrically released cut and the director’s cut, which contains the originally planned conclusion. The room tries to get Mike Enslin to commit suicide, but he refuses, turning the tables by managing to light the cursed location on fire and burn it down, much to Olin’s delight. In the theatrical cut, an epilogue scene sees Mike back at home with his wife Lily, who doubts his story of what happened until she hears their dead daughter’s voice on Mike’s tape recorder. It’s certainly not a happy ending, but at least Mike survived.

In the director’s cut, original ending, Mike succeeds in destroying the room but dies in the process. Lily is left emotionally shattered, and Olin sees a terrifying vision of Mike’s burnt corpse, as well as Mike’s daughter Katie. It’s a bit ambiguous what happens after, but it would appear that Mike and Katie go on to the afterlife together. According to director Mikael Hafstrom, this ending wasn’t used because test audiences didn’t like it, believing it to be too depressing to see Mike not survive.

Interestingly, the original director’s cut ending is the default on most home video releases of 1408, and is now considered by most fans to be the definitive conclusion. As is so often the case, test audiences seem to have gotten this one wrong. There are also two additional ending variants available on 1408‘s Blu-Ray release, one in which Mike dies and his publisher Sam somehow gets mailed the manuscript Mike wrote about the room during a false ending earlier in the film, and another where Mike lives that’s just a slight change to the theatrical ending.

More: Every Stephen King Movie Ranked, From Worst To Best

2020-03-22 20:00:04

Michael Kennedy

The Shining: Danny’s Imaginary Friend Tony Is [SPOILER]

Danny’s imaginary friend Tony in The Shining is actually someone surprising, as revealed not in the film, but in Stephen King’s original book. In Stanley Kubrick’s iconic film adaptation, Danny Torrance refers to Tony as “a little boy that lives in my mouth,” and Tony shows visions to Danny of things that have happened and things that will happen. Tony is sort of presented as Danny’s way of guiding himself through the various information he receives via his powerful psychic abilities.

Late in the film, Tony seems to take over for Danny after the little boy is traumatized by his encounter with the woman in Room 237, telling Wendy Torrance that her son is no longer present, and speaking in the weird croaky voice Danny used previously when talking as Tony. He eventually snaps out of it, but for all intents and purposes, it appears that Tony was indeed imaginary, and just an invention of Danny’s psyche to help him cope.

Related: The Shining: Why Stanley Kubrick Changed Stephen King’s Story

However, as with many aspects of The Shining movie, Tony’s characterization is quite different than it was in King’s classic novel. King’s prose makes Tony’s true nature quite clear, and it adds an all new layer to an already very complex story.

Near the end of Stephen King’s The Shining book, it’s revealed that Tony is actually Danny Torrance’s future adult self. It’s also revealed that Danny’s middle name is Anthony, explaining why exactly Tony is called that. The reveal makes a lot of sense, as it’s established that Danny’s “shining” powers allow him to see past and future events, and if that’s the case, that would mean that his future self might in fact be sending him visions of those future events back, in a sort of stable time loop. The future Danny knows what needs to happen for him to survive the Overlook, and facilitates that.

Notably, this reveal isn’t reflected at all in the recent Doctor Sleep movie, which stays in line with the Stanley Kubrick version of The Shining. The plot point was adapted into the 1997 miniseries remake of The Shining though, which was written and produced by King himself. Danny sees Tony as a person, and in the final scene showing Danny’s high school graduation, Danny is played by the actor who’d previously been seen as Tony. Notably, this epilogue scene wasn’t found in King’s book, and actually sees the ghost of Jack Torrance appear to Danny as he graduates, seemingly now at peace.

More: Every Stephen King Miniseries, Ranked Worst to Best

2020-03-22 14:00:16

Michael Kennedy

The Hunt: Was Betty Gilpin The Real Crystal May? | Screen Rant

Warning! Major spoilers for The Hunt below.

The Hunt left its audiences with a burning question — was Betty Gilpin’s Crystal May the right Crystal? From previews dating back to its original 2019 release, the film seemed to be a straight forward adaptation of The Most Dangerous Game. So, it was quite the surprise when the film revealed a final act twist — she was never supposed to be one of the hunted.

The movie sees a group of wealthy corporate elites rounding up and kidnapping a group of “deplorables.” They drop this group in an abandoned field before they begin to hunt them for sport. As her comrades are quickly killed off, Crystal May fights back and begins to pick off her tormentors one-by-one. This leads to a pretty epic showdown with Hilary Swank’s Athena, who is the leader of the hunters. In the middle of monologuing during the film’s final act, Athena informs Crystal that she was selected because of everything she said online under the screen name “Justice4Yall.”

Related: Why The Hunt’s Reviews Are Surprisingly Negative

However, it turns out that Athena’s group nabbed the wrong Crystal. Gilpin’s Crystal May says they were actually looking for Crystal Mae, another Crystal in her hometown. With her dying breath, Athena asks Crystal if she was lying — if she is actually Justice4Yall. While Athena does not believe Crystal told her the truth, it’s pretty clear that they got the wrong girl.

The question of Crystal May’s true identity is meant to leave the ending of this massively controversial film a little open-ended. But the fact that Athena and her friends kidnapped the wrong Crystal because they went on unverified truths is totally in keeping with theme of this movie. The Hunt opens with a text chain between Athena and her friends in which they discuss how excited they are for their upcoming hunt of human “deplorables.” At the end of the film, it’s revealed that text chain took place a year prior to the events of the movie. The contents of their texts were leaked, and they were all fired from their high-ranking jobs.

Athena claimed that the hunt was simply a joke. Everyone who posted about it online went too far by spreading gossip without verifying the facts first. So Athena and her friends decided to teach the “deplorables” involved with the leak a lesson. They wanted this hunt to be true. In the year leading up to the events of The Hunt, the elites decided to grant them that wish, and spent time and money planning their perfect hunt. Beyond that, the hunters painstakingly selected the people they wanted to hunt, based on the things they said online.

For some reason, Athena is fixated on the woman behind the screen name Justice4Yall. As Athena tells her in The Hunt‘s packed ending, Crystal is the group’s “Snowball,” referring to a character from Animal Farm. Athena’s so excited to take this woman down that she does a shoddy job verifying her identity. When she comes face-to-face with the wrong woman in a wildly violent showdown, Athena so badly wants to believe she caught the right Crystal. Despite getting the truth straight from the source, Athena dies believing what she wants to believe. It’s a grim, but clever full-circle ending for The Hunt.

More: The Hunt’s Donald Trump Controversy & Delay Explained

2020-03-21 19:00:30

Brynne Ramella

Robert Englund’s Unproduced A Nightmare on Elm Street Sequel Sounds Wild

A Nightmare on Elm Street is one of the most popular and crazy franchises for the horror genre, but even though the film has a number of ridiculous sequels, it sounds like producers should have listened to Freddy Krueger himself for ideas, as Robert Englund wrote a sequel script back in the ’90s.

Ever since acclaimed horror auteur Wes Craven introduced Freddy Krueger and the Nightmare on Elm Street universe to unsuspecting movie audiences, they’ve become staples of the genre. There are plenty of horror series that have survived over the decades, but there are few that go in as weird directions as the Nightmare on Elm Street series. The films take some interesting risks, not all of which pay off, but it leads to some growing pains as Freddy continues his rampage on clueless teens.

Related: Who Could Direct A Nightmare On Elm Street’s Reboot

There are seven A Nightmare on Elm Street films, one remake of the original movie, and a crossover showdown with Jason Voorhees. The films all attempt to follow the same chronology and, as a result of this, the later films in the series suffer from this baggage and can crumble under their own weight. The horror sequels continually feature strong performances from Robert Englund, entertaining special effects, and creative kills, but they struggle to find the right direction for the series. However, Robert Englund has recently spoken out about an idea he had for a sequel, which sounds like it could have completely reinvigorated the franchise.

A Nightmare on Elm Street 3: Dream Warriors was a major turning point for the series and it was during a time where the studio was considering many different approaches for where to go with the series. Robert Englund himself was one of the several people to submit a script, with his sequel titled “Freddy’s Funhouse”, which followed Tina’s older sister from the first film. Tina’s sister would be back, now much older, and on a mission to figure out what happened to her deceased sister. In essence, she would effectively become a paranormal Nancy Drew of sorts as Englund’s script incorporated more of a hard-boiled detective quality to the horror series. Englund was also adamant that the main character in the franchise always be a female that’s in distress, as that dynamic is baked into the series. However, he wanted to empower his heroine a little more than usual.

Englund’s script is a very novel and satisfying continuation of the films’ lore, but he admits that since it was written back in the ‘90s, it faces a number of hurdles due to the many advancements that have taken place since then. Englund specifically cites that the detective methods used in the script were inventive back in that decade, but wouldn’t work anymore because of how far technology has come. The script would definitely need updates to address these issues. However, if those areas are improved upon, there’s really no reason that this premise still couldn’t work, only with Tina’s sister now even older than she’d be in the ‘90s.

Englund isn’t exactly optimistic that his script idea will be a viable option, but A Nightmare on Elm Street has really struggled to come back to life as of late. With all of the successful legacy sequels that have been happening, especially within the horror genre, perhaps “Freddy’s Funhouse” could still be the best angle for the Nightmare on Elm Street films, since it was designed to be work as a direct sequel to the original film.

Next: The X-Files: Freddy Krueger’s Cameo Role Explained

2020-03-20 20:00:26

Daniel Kurland

Ratched Updates: Release Date & Story Info | Screen Rant

Ryan Murphy is bringing Ratched, a TV series about the origin of One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest‘s infamous nurse, to Netflix, and here’s what we know. One of TV’s most prolific producers in recent memory, Murphy boasts a track record of success most would love to have. Murphy’s resume includes, but is by no means limited to, American Horror Story, Glee, Nip/Tuck, American Crime Story, and Scream Queens. After years working with Fox and its various networks, Murphy is now in bed with Netflix, starting with the recent series The Politician.

Murphy currently has multiple other film and TV projects in the works with Netflix, as the streaming giant attempts to maintain its place as the top dog in at-home entertainment. One of these projects is Ratched, which serves as an origin story for the titular Nurse Mildred Ratched, one of fiction’s most reviled villains. Ratched is best known to most for her Oscar-winning portrayal by Louise Fletcher in director Milos Forman’s 1975 film adaptation of One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest, which started as novel by Ken Kesey, and had also been a Broadway play.

Related: Every Ryan Murphy Movie & TV Show Coming In 2020

Playing Nurse Ratched in the Netflix series is Murphy’s frequent muse Sarah Paulson, who has earned raves repeatedly on American Horror Story and American Crime Story. The lead character is certainly in good hands, but here’s the rest of the info we know about Ratched.

Ratched was first ordered straight to series by Netflix in September 2017, making it a long time coming at this point. So eager was Netflix to land the project that they committed to two seasons up front. By early 2019, Ratched was confirmed as having begun filming, although it’s not clear at the moment how much has been filmed to date, as no wrap announcement was ever made. That said, Netflix still has yet to book any kind of specific premiere date for Ratched, but considering the Coronavirus pandemic keeping viewers inside, 2020 may be a great time to launch the show, assuming at least season 1 is done.

Outside of Sarah Paulson’s arguably perfect casting as a young Nurse Ratched, frequent Murphy series guest star Jon Jon Briones will play the head of the mental institution where Ratched works, while American Horror Story mainstay Finn Wittrock will play a criminal with a connection to Ratched. Daredevil‘s Vincent D’Onofrio is also onboard as misogynistic governor George Wilburn. Besides those four, Murphy has filled out Ratched‘s cast with lots of other heavy-hitters, including Charlie Carver, Judy Davis, Harriet Sansom Harris, Cynthia Nixon, Hunter Parrish, Amanda Plummer, Corey Stoll, Sharon Stone, Rosanna Arquette, and Don Cheadle, all in undisclosed roles.

Few details have surfaced about Ratched‘s story, which is set in 1947, and chronicles Ratched’s journey from fairly normal nurse to full-on sociopath. Ryan Murphy has at least revealed that he has a four-season plan for Ratched, and that the final season would see Paulson’s character go one on one with R.P. McMurphy, Jack Nicholson’s iconic character from One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest. Who will play the character is unknown.

More: Jack Nicholson’s 10 Best Movies, According To Rotten Tomatoes

2020-03-20 17:00:07

Michael Kennedy

The Hunt Is A Future Cult Classic: What The Reviews Got Wrong

Blumhouse and Universal’s The Hunt is one of those movies that is destined for cult classic status despite flopping at the box office and being ushered in by surprisingly negative reviews from critics that missed the mark and got it wrong.

While certainly marked by adversity from the start, The Hunt was met with low audience attendance and became a box office flop due to theater closures in the wake of COVID-19 spreading into a global pandemic. Though delays and cancellations of this magnitude are unprecedented, it almost seems like the film is cursed in some way. First, it was pulled by Universal after controversy with President Donald Trump and his supporters following two mass shootings in El Paso, Texas and Dayton, Ohio. Trump condemned violent media right around the time The Hunt got publicity about its trailer, which focused on a group of “elites” hunting “deplorables”, which was a term used by Hillary Clinton during the 2016 United States Presidential Election to describe those with a conservative political lean and Trump’s supporters.

Related: Why The Hunt’s Controversy Couldn’t Override Coronavirus

The Hunt did seem political through its various marketing in 2019, but Universal stated that it was being pulled from their release schedule due to the mass shootings that took place, not the controversy surrounding the President’s tweets. It was released on March 13, 2020, and was surprisingly not focused on politics. Instead, The Hunt took a look at social media, the pitfalls of believing what people read on the Internet, and how perceived truths can be dangerous when there’s no factual evidence to support one’s beliefs.

Many critics have said that The Hunt is “lazy satire” or have criticized it for seeming too on-the-nose rather than being more thematic and subtle like other social horror films. Jordan Peele’s Get Out and Us, which introduced mainstream media to how political horror can be without being explicit about it, has been compared to the movie numerous times. Of course, The Hunt isn’t trying to be either of those movies; it’s very secure in its own identity, and packs copious amounts of gore into a sleek, 90-minute run-time. It’s fast-paced by nature, but ticks by faster through decisions made by director Craig Zobel as well as writers Nick Cuse and Damon Lindelof to kill off major characters in the early action sequences without missing a beat. The audience never has time to really get attached to characters, and most don’t even have names until the credits roll – when they do, the revealed names are hilarious.

In The Hunt, the concept introduced by the film’s inspiration – The Most Dangerous Game by Richard Connell – is ridiculous, but only as ridiculous as the real pitfalls of social media. It set in the modern world where people are quick to make enemies on Twitter the moment they don’t agree with someone’s opinion and where the outcry of “fake news” punctuates discussion on a daily basis. The satire is present, but it’s careful not to overstay its welcome. Instead, this is a movie that focuses on making its audience question their own beliefs: there are no clear winners or losers, no clear protagonists or antagonists; everyone is thrown into a field together, given weapons, and the chips fall where they may.

The Hunt‘s real meaning involves the concept of perception and a societal lean toward reactionary measures instead of rational thought. Other horror movies that are revered today, such as John Carpenter’s The Thing, were discarded in the past. Perhaps The Hunt was released during a time where its themes are too fresh and too sensitive, which is precisely why it’s bound for cult classic status in the future.

Next: The Hunt’s Donald Trump Controversy & Delay Explained

2020-03-20 01:00:57

Jack Wilhelmi

How James Wan Is Changing Up Frankenstein | Screen Rant

After the successful execution of the first movie associated with Universal’s new Dark Universe, announcements of other projects have been surfacing, including a James Wan produced monster movie that many suspect to be Frankenstein. Like the rest of Universal’s classic monsters, Frankenstein has been tackled in many different angles – both good and bad – however the details surrounding Wan’s take sounds like it could be precisely the type of refreshing take that could bring the monster back to life the right way.

Leigh Whannell’s The Invisible Man was a standout success that ended up being not only critically acclaimed, but highly profitable for Blumhouse and Universal, raking in approximately $65 million as of this writing on only a $9 million budget. Blumhouse is known for turning low-budget horror projects into big profits, and Universal’s dedication to developing standalone stories involving their classic monster franchises instead of focusing on interconnectivity and universe building like they attempted in the past with 2017’s The Mummy, which was an abject failure. Since The Invisible Man released in theaters in February 2020, two more announcements have been made about future movies: Karyn Kusama’s Dracula and a James Wan produced monster movie that hasn’t yet been confirmed to be Frankenstein.

Related: Every Dark Universe Movie Releasing After The Invisible Man

Information in late 2019 surrounding James Wan taking the helm of a Frankenstein movie circulated, but went cold; some information even disappeared, though nothing was officially denied. Plot details point to Frankenstein for a few reasons, but regardless, Universal’s property is bound to be shaken up by the talented director of horror franchises like Saw and The Conjuring.

Information released from THR said that the plot involves “a group of teens who discover that a neighbor is building a monster in his basement. Spoiler: The monster gets loose.” It has also been said that the film, just like Whannell did with The Invisible Man will provide an updated look at the classic tale. Based on that snippet alone, the upcoming project, which certainly seems like it could be Frankenstein has shades of movies like DisturbiaFright Night, and even Stranger Things, which could bring a completely different narrative into play.

Most often, Frankenstein stories revolve around Dr. Frankenstein and his monster, but don’t always consider the effects of those on the outside, or the moral considerations of bringing something back from the dead for one’s own, selfish gain in the name of scientific discovery. This element is often explored in horror, with sci-fi/horror genre blends in particular. Movies like Splice have seen scientists facing off with their own creature, and while Frankenstein’s monster is often depicted as a tragic creature, or even a commentary on the cruelty of humanity as was done in Penny Dreadful, it would be fun to see the monster let loose and allowed to be monstrous from an outsider’s perspective.

Whatever James Wan and Universal have planned for the next monster movie, even if it’s not Frankenstein in a traditional sense, it’s good to see strong creators in the horror space dusting off the classics and updating them for modern horror fans who still hold the original material in high regard.

Next: Every 21st Century Universal Monster Movie Ranked, Worst To Best

2020-03-19 20:00:16

Jack Wilhelmi

Corona Zombies: The First Coronavirus Movie Explained

Full Moon Features is set to release the first movie to capitalize off the coronavirus pandemic with their horror film Corona Zombies. Since the emergence of the first-known coronavirus cases in December 2019, the entire world has changed drastically. Due to the worldwide spread of COVID-19, the entire country of Italy is under lockdown, airlines across the globe are on the verge of shutdown, and in the United States, social distancing has become the norm; restaurants, bars, and movie theaters are shutting their doors for at least two weeks. But that hasn’t stopped Full Moon Features from finding a way to make the most out of the mass panic.

Full Moon Features is a production and distribution company that specializes in sensationalist direct-to-video horror and sci-fi films. Established in 1988 by noted cult filmmaker Charles Band, the company is well-known for churning out films like Puppet Master, Evil Bong, and their countless sequels for very little money and on a tight schedule. Being in business for so long, Full Moon has always tried to find ways to keep their finger on the pulse and compete with larger companies in the film industry. They even got into the streaming craze in 2019 with the launch of their own channel and app, also called Full Moon Features.

Related: How Coronavirus Has Impacted The Horror Movie Genre

Announced earlier this week in an exclusive from Horror Society, the Corona Zombies logline reads: “A government asleep at the wheel! The wealthy shrugging it off! And a virus that causes its victims to get up and kill! The people they kill… get up and kill.” Full Moon has already begun promoting Corona Zombies on Twitter, and the film is set to be released digitally on April 10th. With the film courting controversy due to the sensitivity of this global crisis, why might Full Moon Features make what could be a risky move?

Exploitation cinema has a long and storied history capitalizing off of immediate fears and concerns of the public at large, almost solely for the purpose of financial gain. Whether people are enraged or entertained, exploitation films function off the adage that any press is good press. This is not lost on Full Moon’s founder, a filmmaker who has operated out of the traditions of exploitation cinema for his entire career. Coronavirus has the unique position of being the one thing almost everyone in the world is thinking about right now. This makes it perfect fodder for exploitation cinema, and what better way to take advantage of that than by producing a horror movie called Corona Zombies?

Full Moon Features is already diving in head first, regardless of potential criticism for capitalizing off a global pandemic. Their Twitter account has been releasing promotional images playing off of hand sanitizer and toilet paper shortages. On top of that, they have also been posting photoshopped images from newscasts of President Donald Trump and other officials holding the Corona Zombies poster.

It remains to be seen whether Corona Zombies will be a success. Just because the entire world is dealing with the coronavirus doesn’t mean everybody will flock to a low-budget, quickie horror film even if it is the first movie to deal directly with the pandemic. For some, this may just be an exercise in bad taste. Regardless, it’s hard to blame Full Moon Features for staying true to their exploitation genre roots. With movie theaters closed and most major productions shut down, some will surely consider streaming Corona Zombies from the safety of home to lighten the mood.

Next: Underrated Horror Movies To Stream At Home While Avoiding Coronavirus

2020-03-19 14:17:41

Garrett Spake