Connect with us

Movie Reviews

‘Shelby Oaks’ Review: Neon’s Hodgepodge Horror Lets Chris Stuckmann Take His First Stab at Haunting

Published

on

‘Shelby Oaks’ Review: Neon’s Hodgepodge Horror Lets Chris Stuckmann Take His First Stab at Haunting

Whether you want a job done right, or just done right now, do it yourself. That’s the fearless edict uniting first-time feature filmmaker Chris Stuckmann and his headstrong final girl Mia (Camille Sullivan) in the winding mystery of “Shelby Oaks.” 

An ambitious horror exploration born of the found footage format, which honors genre but rarely attempts to subvert it, this spooky procedural unearths a new kind of cold case for Neon — this one, fittingly acquired on the heels of the viral “Longlegs,” still running away with the box office now in its second week. When four internet ghosthunters known as the Paranormal Paranoids find trouble in an abandoned town, three turn up dead and the last (Sarah Durn) is never discovered. 

'TWISTERS,' from left: Glen Powell, Daisy Edgar-Jones, 2024. ph: Melinda Sue Gordon /© Universal Pictures /Courtesy Everett Collection

Who took Riley Brennan?” graffiti across the surrounding Ohio area wants to know 12 years later. It’s very Derry and just one of many warm details that make Stuckmann’s universe, smartly but subtly shaped by EP Mike Flanagan, feel closer to a Stephen King joint than a “Paranormal Activity” successor. 

The police and public might be useless here, but Mia won’t give up. She doesn’t know if she believes in ghosts; what she does know is that her sister isn’t a liar. A true crime documentary picks up where the grainy footage recovered from the victims’ camera leaves off — examining the dead investigation through the eyes of a dogged loved one operating outside of a broken system. Something similar could be said of Stuckmann who, as a history-making champion of the Kickstarter campaign (his scrappy feature raised more than $1.3 million online), pulled off a small miracle getting his movie made this way. He’s a YouTube talent himself, known for complex video criticism and a deep love of genre. Using a story by him and his wife Samantha Elizabeth, Stuckmann makes his impressive but imperfect debut backed by a built-in fanbase already appreciative of his film philosophy.

Killers aren’t always afforded the opportunity to explain themselves, and after a movie review goes live, directors even less so. Stuckmann has made a poetic career out of appreciating the magic of production, graciously and methodically considering how a totality of factors impact what ends up on screen. Through his impassioned YouTube channel, which was founded in the very internet hey-day the “Shelby Oaks” opening recalls, Stuckmann has spent years bravely beating back cinematic shit-posting. Instead, he’s repeatedly emphasized his love of all things The Movies — rarely if ever lobbing “bad” criticism at anyone — and his mosaic-like feature reflects that affection back ten-fold. To critique his film then, it seems important and fair to say upfront that its existence is a good thing. As plainly put as a review this early can be (most audiences won’t see “Shelby Oaks” until sometime next year): Chris Stuckmann can indeed make a movie and, all things created equal, he should probably make more movies. That’s even truer if he’s able to keep his admirably pure production pipeline protected from business-minded studios.

Now, the hard part. 

Advertisement

As aggravating in its logic gaps as it is frustrating with its stop-and-go propulsion, this confused debut effort knows what it wants to be (a dryer, more cynical “Lake Mungo” maybe?) — but it isn’t that. There’s tremendous promise in the first twenty minutes, which in a bit of meta commentary has Stuckmann writing dialogue for news anchors who quietly mock viral creators and question whether Riley’s disappearance was somehow still just a hoax. (Shout out, lonelygirl15, long may she vlog!) And yet, much like a first-time marathon runner, the writer/director gets off to a stronger start than he can maintain. After a jaw-dropping opening, a collapse in the tension arrives mid-way through the second act — somewhere between Mia and her husband’s (Brendan Sexton III) second or third fight about vigilante justice and the baby they’re not having — and the suspense never recovers. 

Cops are rarely the answer to, well, anything, but it would do wonders to have absolutely anyone helping Mia get her investigation under control. Alone for most of the movie, Sullivan isn’t given nearly enough scene partners (blink and you’ll miss Keith David) and Mia wastes tons of screentime silently spinning her wheels. “Shelby Oaks” is the kind of movie that will show you montage after montage of old photographs, dream journals, and library documents — allegedly poured over by Mia for more than a decade — and then seriously ask you to join in her surprise when she inexplicably starts to piece together the facts she already had in evidence. 

The scares face diminishing returns too as Mia’s decision-making betrays her as an inconsistent, if not outright dimwitted, hero. Running through nightmarish scenes ranging in genre reference from hixploitaiton to gothic romance, the stunning surroundings photographed by cinematographer Andrew Scott Baird almost cover up for Mia’s baffling lack of intellectual direction. But what real person, pray tell, has their sister go missing for more than a complete Chinese zodiac cycle, only to spur of the moment visit a derelict prison… with an almost dead flashlight… in the middle of the night? The scene is pretty, but she seems like a moron.

It’s those obvious loose ends that allow “Shelby Oaks” to devolve into an unmotivated pursuit of an unremarkable character. The fault doesn’t lie with Sullivan (she does what she can!), but as Mia’s behavior makes less and less sense, her sister’s story grows equally confused. Pops of comedy suggest a self-awareness to some of the script (yes, at least one character will acknowledge that saying the name “Paranormal Paranoids” is orally atrocious) and yet there aren’t enough jokes throughout to classify it as a horror comedy. Toss in some well-intentioned but ill-conceived “Hereditary” inspiration that’s nothing if not gravely serious and for-the-love-of-funniness stops working as a believable excuse.  

That said, it bears repeating, Stuckmann should make movies. “Shelby Oaks” was obviously written by a critic, one with a near-legendary knowledge of the pop culture archives, and it’s directed with a palpable confidence that could lead to better things. Doubling-back to that marathon metaphor, Stuckmann finishes his race only somewhat worse for wear. He manages a beautiful final shot that, no matter what comes before it, is fun as hell and hints at what we’ll no doubt someday learn this freshman filmmaker does best. Easily the smartest journalist-turned-producer working in horror today, Stuckmann is going to be even better when he leaves “Shelby Oaks.”  

Advertisement

Grade: B-

A Neon release, “Shelby Oaks” debuted at Fantasia Fest 2024. It’s expected in theaters next year.

Movie Reviews

Review: Curry Barker’s ‘Obsession’

Published

on

Review: Curry Barker’s ‘Obsession’

Vague Visages’ Obsession review contains minor spoilers. Curry Barker’s 2025 movie features Michael Johnston, Inde Navarrette and Cooper Tomlinson. Check out the VV home page for more film criticism, movie reviews and film essays.

For the past decade, it seems like every buzzy horror movie has cared more about heavy-handed allegories for grief and unprocessed trauma than actual scares. You could blame the paradigm-shifting success of Jennifer Kent’s The Babadook (2014), but her film is effectively creepy at face value. It’s harder to view many of the horror directorial debuts which arrived in its wake, bearing an obvious influence, as anything more than belabored metaphors. Obsession, the feature directorial debut of YouTube sketch comedian Curry Barker, feels like a breath of fresh air in this regard, as the filmmaker doesn’t attempt to make an explicit thesis statement on a weighty topic. In a time where a horror movie needs to be about overcoming trauma to be taken seriously, a low-budget shocker like Obsession can be nasty and nihilistic on its own terms.

Obsession isn’t all guts and no brains, however, as Barker’s screenplay incorporates subtle satires of two dusty character tropes: the unwittingly toxic Nice Guy and the Manic Pixie Dream Girl of his fantasies. In Obsession, Michael Johnson portrays Bear, a music store employee pining after his co-worker Nikki (Inde Navarrette), who seemingly views her admiring colleague as a little brother, rather than a potential beau. One day,  Bear purchases a “One Wish Willow,” a discontinued novelty product from the 1980s which grants a single wish to anybody who breaks it in half. That same night, he fails to ask Nikki out when driving her home, and then wishes that she would love him more than anyone in the world. Immediately, Navarrette’s character becomes co-dependent, often unable to leave her house due to an overwhelming need to please Bear. It’s a classic Twilight Zone-style premise about being careful what you wish for.

Obsession Review: Related — Review: Chandler Levack’s ‘Mile End Kicks’

Advertisement

Barker has admitted that The Simpsons’ “Treehouse of Horror” series directly inspired Obsession, specifically a season 3 segment in which Homer gets a monkey paw. However, Bear’s poor wish-making decision isn’t positioned as a cautionary tale, and the character is never let off the hook for wanting to exert control over a woman’s emotions. This is a depiction of a man who lacks the self-awareness to comprehend his domineering, misogynistic impulses, but it’s not an overbearing commentary on toxic masculinity, as Barker keeps any social views firmly in the background so the protagonist can gradually become aware of the havoc he’s created on his own terms. Bear isn’t given the chance to atone for his sins, and everybody in his orbit suffers a fallout from the emotional torture he unleashes. With a protagonist like that, Barker more than earns the right to succumb to his most mean-spirited impulses.

Obsession Review: Related — Review: Joachim Trier’s ‘Sentimental Value’

There’s an admirable simplicity to Obsession’s high concept. The wish can’t easily be reversed — you only get one wish, even if you buy more — and the director even makes fun of the idea that there would be further lore behind the device, with a phone number on the back of each pack leading to an ominous dead end. During a first watch, my mind went back to Richard Kelly’s The Box (2009), another modern riff on The Twilight Zone, where a married couple learns they’ll be given $1 million if they press a button in a mysterious box, even it will kill two strangers. The director lapses into full conspiracy thriller territory by revealing that the protagonists could eventually be the next victims, thus building out lore that connects their fates to various shadowy government agencies. A weaker iteration of Obsession would have followed those same impulses, refusing to accept the characters’ fates as granted and bending over backwards to develop convenient plot loopholes to save them. Barker’s screenplay is effective because it stays true to established rules, never deviating from Bear’s self-imposed path.

Obsession Review: Related — Review: Cole Webley’s ‘Omaha’

Advertisement

Johnston and Navarrette are both excellent in the lead roles, with the latter performer standing out for sustaining an intense caricature of the Manic Pixie Dream Girl archetype, highlighting how an Annie Wilkes-style sociopath (see the 1990 film Misery) lurks just below the surface of a romantically idealized trope. This is also aided by a plot which never lets viewers forget that Nikki acts against her will, as she momentarily snaps back to reality before being dragged back to her sunken place of servitude. Navarrette’s character is drawn far richer than any trope, simplified to aid a man’s power fantasy. The cruelest, most mean-spirited action emerges when Nikki’s agency is robbed, ensuring she still receives punishment alongside the man who wished for it. But every toxic, coercive relationship has collateral damage, and Barker paints this in stark extremes without pausing the horror to reflect and make his commentary overt and overbearing.

Obsession Review: Related — Review: Chloé Zhao’s ‘Hamnet’

Obsession refuses to underestimate the emotional intelligence of the audience and refrains from spoon-feeding viewers monologues about abuse and trauma. These themes have always been inherent within the horror genre, but the past decade of over-explaining them has proved a hindrance to anything which could be positively shocking. Obsession reminds moviegoers that the most effective way to approach dark topics is to experience them on your own terms.

Alistair Ryder (@YesitsAlistair) is a film and TV critic based in Manchester, England. By day, he interviews the great and the good of the film world for Zavvi, and by night, he criticizes their work as a regular reviewer at outlets including The Film Stage and Looper. Thank you for reading film criticism, movie reviews and film reviews at Vague Visages.

Advertisement

Obsession Review: Related — Building the New Queer Canon #10: Elliot Tuttle’s ‘Blue Film’ and Tackling Society’s Ultimate Taboo

Categories: 2020s, 2026 Film Reviews, Featured, Film, Folk Horror, Horror, Monster Horror, Movies, Psychological Horror, Psychological Thriller, Supernatural Horror, Thriller

Tagged as: 2025, 2025 Film, 2025 Movie, Alistair Ryder, Curry Barker, Film Actors, Film Actresses, Film Critic, Film Criticism, Film Director, Film Explained, Film Journalism, Film Publication, Film Review, Film Summary, Horror Movie, Journalism, Movie Actors, Movie Actresses, Movie Critic, Movie Director, Movie Explained, Movie Journalism, Movie Plot, Movie Publication, Movie Review, Movie Summary, Rotten Tomatoes, Streaming, Streaming on Amazon, Streaming on Peacock, Thriller Movie

Advertisement

Continue Reading

Movie Reviews

Film Review: ‘The Wizard of the Kremlin’ Finds Paul Dano and Jude Law in a Compelling Throwback Political Drama – Awards Radar

Published

on

Film Review: ‘The Wizard of the Kremlin’ Finds Paul Dano and Jude Law in a Compelling Throwback Political Drama – Awards Radar
Vertical Entertainment

Russia in the early 1990s is a fascinating and mysterious place. The entire country essentially was transformed overnight with the fall of the Soviet Union, followed by several years of trying to figure out what kind of a nation they’d become. We now know the direction Russia ultimately took, of course, but the behind the scenes machinations are ready made for cinematic treatment. So, a film like The Wizard of the Kremlin, while decidedly a throwback sort of work, very much scratches that itch. The movie has elements that hit and elements that miss, but a couple of strong performances ultimately rule the day.

The Wizard of the Kremlin arguably could have been made into a compelling miniseries, but going about it as a film does keep things from sprawling out too widely. Now, the pacing is lax and the running time is a bit bloated, but the core of what makes this flick interesting is consistently in evidence. It’s a work that now seems like a throwback, though the issues it’s tackling are very much still on our minds today.

Vertical Entertainment

After we set up the framing device of a writer (Jeffrey Wright) speaking to our protagonist, we officially meet Vadim Baranov (Paul Dano), a former avant-garde theater director and reality television producer that will grow to be a shadowy figure in government. In the early 90s, Russia had Boris Yeltsin in charge, so ineffective and drunk that he’s literally propped up for speeches. When oligarch Boris Berezovsky (Will Keen) assembles the Unity party, a group of the wealthy elite hoping to find a figurehead to replace Yeltsin. Berezovsky recruits Baranov to help, and they settle on Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin (Jude Law), the director of the Federal Security Service. He seems happy as a spy and skeptical of politics, but with only a time bit of convincing, he’s set to become Prime Minister.

Soon, Prime Minister becomes President when Yeltsin resigns. With Putin now elevated to power, the changes come hot and heavy. In short order, any hope of Russia becoming like the west goes away, reduced to a fearful gangster state. As Barnov becomes the right hand man of Putin, he’s conflicted about what he’s seeing, all the more so when he rekindles a relationship with Ksenia (Alicia Vikander), a woman from his younger days who gives him a potential way out.

Vertical Entertainment

Paul Dano and Jude Law are both quite good, with the former getting a rare leading role, while the latter gives layers to what could have been a caricature. Dano also takes his fictionalized character and adds the complexity that never makes him feel out of place. It would be easy to have Baranov seem like a writer’s creation, though Dano allows him to fit in. You see the moments where he has doubts about you believe Dano, too. Law doesn’t show up until almost halfway through, and once he’s on screen, he’s effectively unsettling. He doesn’t play him as a monster, even as he does awful things, but he plays him so convinced of his own authority that it’s deeply creepy. Alicia Vikander is solid, though a bit wasted, while Jeffrey Wright has almost nothing to do. In addition to Will Keen, supporting players include Tom Sturridge, amongst others.

Advertisement

Filmmaker Olivier Assayas directs while co-writing with Emmanuel Carrère, and it’s an effort that should get him more consistent English language work if he wants it. While not on the level of a Clouds of Sils Maria or a Personal Shopper, his European sensibilities pair well with this look at Russian dealings. Now, Assayas does let things run long, as this goes far past the two hour mark, while some elements of the story are more interesting than others. Assayas and Carrère never figure out what to do with Wright’s character, either, so he feels superfluous. However, as a fly on the wall, watching as Dano’s character puppeteers it all, it’s never less than compelling.

The Wizard of the Kremlin would have been an Oscar hopeful two decades ago, when this type of flick was awards bait. Now, it stands as a bit of an odd duck, though even with that, it’s a compelling film with some strong acting contained within. Could it have been better? Sure. Could it have been a lot worse? Absolutely.

SCORE: ★★★

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Movie Reviews

‘Given Names’ is a Fascinating Exploration of Who We Are (Berlinale 2026 Film Review)

Published

on

‘Given Names’ is a Fascinating Exploration of Who We Are (Berlinale 2026 Film Review)

The concept behind Given Names (Prénoms) is so simple that it’s hard to believe no one has ever done it before. Filmmaker Nurith Aviv showed up at the apartment of various friends of her with a bunch of flowers, and then listened to the friend talk about their first, or given, name. That’s it! It’s the kind of discussion that happens often in real life – just listen to any group of new mothers justify their choices, or any teenager sulk about what this label for their identity means to them – but it’s not often such a chat is captured on film.

It doesn’t work flawlessly, of course: at the Berlinale Ms. Aviv made it clear the movie was originally designed as a kind of art installation, and more reviews than were included were filmed. The opening of the film is also more of a tribute to the late French filmmaker Agnès Varda, who Ms. Aviv had worked with. (Mr. Varda’s original given name was actually Arlette, changed by her when she was a teenager.) But once we are into the direct interviews this hiccup is immediately forgotten as we get a window on some really interesting cultures and how their given names have shaped these very interesting lives.

You learn so much about someone while knowing so little of them, just from the simple story of their name. One of the interviewees was born in secrecy during the Holocaust, left on the doorstep of a Polish family by his Jewish parents where he spent the first years of his life under the name of a dead child of the Polish family. Once he was reclaimed by his parents they did not really change his name, but moving to France and beginning a new life in a new language changed it for him. Other interviewees had parents from different cultures and gave their child a name that with different connotations in each culture. It’s fascinating to hear these considerations be discussed but also how the owner of this name felt about it. One woman has a stutter, so mentions how pleased she is to have a name she can pronounce. She also has a very ordinary name from her birth culture (the Turkish name Zeynep), because her mother had a embarrassing first name that her own parents made up, and was therefore adamant her own children would not have the same problem. Some people have had different names through different stages of their lives, while others have had names for different purposes. Some have had the same name the whole way through and never liked it, others like their name so much they write poems about it. There’s a whole spectrum of humanity and history on display here through just one simple question.

The interviews were clearly rehearsed but they were not a dialogue. Instead Ms. Aviv filmed them talking directly to the camera, sharing these intimate details about this gift they were given and how that’s affected them like we’re chatting over a coffee. All the interviews were conducted in Paris and in the French language, but even amongst that there’s a global reach among the people here that is both very ordinary and highly unusual. Some people have received prejudicial treatment based on their names while others have had no problem at all. In France names are taken seriously for an additional reason: the spelling of names is legally standardised. Some people are pleased by the simplicity, while other people (or their parents) rebel. A cultural side effect is that it’s therefore not unusual for the name on your birth certificate to be used only in government contexts, while your true name is used everywhere else.

American audiences find such interference laughable, of course, but in other ways American discourse around baby names has shaped the way people around the world think about their choices. Just think how ordinary names like Luna or Lea, Liam or Luca are in preschools around the world right now. These short, easy-to-spell names travel across different cultures in ways which names like that of this movie’s editors, Nurith and Hippolyte, might not. Given Names is a fascination exploration of a cultural issue we more normally take for granted, and I am not just saying that because one of the interviewees is also named Sarah. Our given names are who we are but also who our parents thought we might be, and that’s not necessarily who we become. Hearing people discuss their feelings about this is entrancing indeed.

Advertisement

Given Names (Prénoms) recently played at the Berlin International Film Festival.

Learn more about the film at the IMDB site for the title.

You might also like…

 

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending