Best and Worst of March 2015

We seem to have avoided the dumping month of 2015 up to this point. But with March we have very few thrills or anything to get excited about. I won’t lie, it’s been a slightly disappointing month, especially with a certain film transforming the opinion over an Alien 5 from a brilliant idea to a worrying concept. But still there were some good parts, and here are the three standouts from this month.

3: It Follows

An homage to the video nasty era of horror but there’s enough intelligence and wit woven throughout to make It Follows a very interesting and enjoyable scary film. In a year that’s sure to contain the odd number of lazy low budget horror flicks its promising to see the first one be this well made and entertaining. There’s also little doubt that many of these lazy filmmakers will try to imitate the success and refreshing nature of it, as well as this we can add the Follower to one of the great 20^th century monsters.

2: Still Alice

Julianna Moore gives what is arguably the performance of her highly distinguished career. The heartfelt, raw and achingly true story of Alzheimer’s disease claiming a young intellectual and the crushing effect it has on her as well as the rest of her family. There are credible performances all round but the dramatic depth is only extended by the underlying themes of identity and academia. Nearly every scene matters and has an impact, with no misstep and no Hollywood melodrama.

1: The Tale of the Princess Kaguya

Studio Ghibli and Takahata go it alone with the retirement of Hayao Miyazaki and fear not fans of Totoro, the team is most certainly not lost without its biggest player. The animation takes a slightly different tone to previous work from the company, but it could be there most beautiful yet. The story is wonderfully inventive and unique, the imagination soars, it relishes life itself as we witness birth, growth, coming of age, fate, grief, joy, departure and about a dozen other emotions. It is truly a work of art.

And the worst…..

CHAPPiE

It pains me to give this to one of the most anticipated films of the year, from Neil Blomkamp who has gone from visionary to a guy with a good idea executed poorly in around two hours of bad dialogue, ridiculous plot points, misplaced motives unlikable characters and awful acting. It is certainly visually impressive, and I can certainly learn to love the character of Chappie himself but the surrounding humans and relationships stem from the wrong end of the spectrum. As I explained in my Relatables segment if you want a touching human/robot story watch the Iron Giant, avoid this.  

Cinderella

"You shall not go to the ball."

This recent Disney trend of doing live action reboots of their animated classics could be frowned upon by many, especially with the recent news of a Tim Burton Dumbo remake, but of course one could argue that it is a damn side better than making terrible sequels such as Cinderella 2: Dreams come true, one of those rare films to score a critics consensus of just 0% on Rotten Tomatoes, so surely a remake can’t be worse than that can it?

You know this story, but assuming you don’t somehow, a young girl called Cinderella is abused and oppressed by her stepsisters and stepmother (Kate Blanchet) until she gets the chance of a lifetime from her fairy godmother (Helena Bonham Carter)

I can say immediately that though there are faults, the answer to my earlier question is in fact no. If you look at Rotten Tomatoes you can confirm that. Considering that I couldn’t understand why this film even had to exist, it’s pretty good. Last year we saw Maleificent criticised for being too flexible with the source material, so this adaptation appears to be sticking to it as closely as possible.

Make no mistake this is more or less the same Cinderella that you grew up with. Of course more recently that animated film appears to be devoid of most emotion that the company has started to include you would hope that this remake could include some depth to the story. Sadly it doesn’t have enough emotion beyond the superior acting of its cast to demonstrate any pushing of boundaries at all.

Kenneth Branagh is a director that knows visual magnificence in the smallest detail. Thor was impressive, as was the 1996 Hamlet adaptation. The same goes here with some brisk pace throughout in order to prevent the story that is extended by just short of 40 minutes from dragging. The style of Cinderella is refreshing but also serving as a small tribute to the original. The sense of humour also shows through absurdity rather than any specific moment, but it works well to create its own magical atmosphere.H  

As you might expect the shining star of this entire ensemble is Kate Blanchet. She’s given big entrances and gigantic scenes. She really does dominate every moment that she is on the screen and never allows the melodramatic nature of the story overcome her own acting ability. She treats the dialogue with the right amount of respect and severity in order to make it convincing, but not so much as to turn the idea of oppressing your step daughter and locking her in the attic as well as preventing her from socialising with anyone as depressing as it would be in reality.

Lily James as the titular character is impressive, but she never steals the scene on her own. More than once she just feels like a plot device being passed around between more important characters like her stepmother, fairy godmother and prince. Most of the time she demonstrates excellent charisma and attitude to make the character more three dimensional but against veteran actors she’s out of her depth slightly. As well as this Helena Bonham Carter seems to have spent too much time with Johnny Depp as his eccentricity appears to have rubbed off on her, the scenes where she is involved causes it to drift into melodrama, but then again she is the magical centre of the film so you could probably excuse that, not me of course because I demand realism from my Disney fairy tales damn it.

To Cinderella’s credit it does try to spice up the final act with a few twists that I won’t spoil, but they took a few risks and it mostly worked. Sometimes it doesn’t feel as if it played correctly to the rest of the story as the twist was slightly too sudden and unexpected. As if they had finished the script but then said ‘we need to make this longer, add this bit at the end’.

If you were disappointed by Alice in Wonderland (2010) and love the original animation then you will love this adaptation, probably.

Result: 7/10

The Tale of the Princess Kaguya

"Only now do I finally remember why I came here."

Though they were frequent collaborators and Studio Ghibli cofounders Hayao Miyazaki and Isao Takahata were at completely different ends of the anime scale. Miyazaki enjoyed the fantastical genre full of bright colours and a bold presentation such as Spirited Away and My Neighbour Totoro while Takahata told stories of a more serious and tragic nature, if you only need one example, Grave of the Fireflies (see what I mean). But with one half of the duo gone, does Takahata have to fill in for both sides now?

An ageing woodsman stumbles across a tiny princess in a glowing bamboo stalk and upon taking her home to his wife finds that it grows very quickly, soon becoming an infant, then a child. Over the next few years she grows to become a creature of astonishing beauty and courted by the wealthiest and most powerful men in Japan.

Studio Ghibli is no stranger to crafting beautiful animated creations, but this could be their best yet in terms of style. It’s certainly not the same look as Totoro or Spirited Away, but there’s a  more whimsical look with outlines that aren’t as clearly defined that allow the colours to blend and interact in a stunning way, as if a watercolour painting suddenly sprung to life on screen. I try not to use the term beautiful too much when describing films from Ghibli because it is an overused term when it comes to the look of them. But I have to say it because the film is so striking and unique, yet somehow natural, that it really is one of the most beautiful creations of animation this century, possibly of all time.

But like I said, is Takahata trying to cover both ends of the spectrum here? Well it certainly has that fantasy element that Miyazaki treasured so much. The colours and contrast make it look… yeah, it’s difficult not to use that word. Let’s just say that the  imagination behind the entire film is inspired, full of wonderful characters and amazing aspects that make it a magnificent visual and mental spectacle.

What about the substance behind the style though? There’s a lot of that as well, being Takahata is might be more mature, but only if you’re not familiar with Ghibli’s work then it is certainly unusually deep in terms of drama. But of course if you are familiar then it’s about the level you would expect from their work. It’s on par with Spirited Away and My Neighbour Totoro, and they’re both a walk in the park compared to Grave of the Fireflies.

Not to say that Princess Kaguya is short of dramatic depth. There are plenty of mature elements that crop up particularly as our title character must abandon her simple, but enjoyable life and take up the role as a princess. This is where the drama really starts and if anything (here’s where the true genius of the film lies), even though we are introduced to a magical realm, it is at this point where it feels like we lose a bit of the wonder and whimsy deliberately. It’s like the exact opposite of the Princess Diaries.

At times the supporting characters can feel slightly simplified, but there was enough drama focussed on the princess for me to forget that very minor flaw. It knows that she is the centre of the story and as long as the main emotional empathy is targeted to her, I could remain attached to the story as a whole. The plot feels a bit stretched to take it to the two hour runtime that it was clearly aiming for long before a script was ever produced. Some scenes run a bit thin and others drag slightly, but these are minor problems.

Make no mistake, there is some real, raw emotional power displayed frequently in Princess Kaguya, but there’s also enough magic to entertain, fascinate and amaze us throughout.

Result: 9/10

The Relatables: The Iron Giant vs CHAPPiE

So as promised I am going to look at some films that share themes, ideas and stories. Neil Blomkamp’s Chappie is certainly not being well received by critics right now, and many people have started to accuse its robot designs of plagiarising designs seen in Robocop, Japanese Anime, and Big Hero 6. But I think it could have been drastically improved if it had looked at Brad Bird’s 1999 box office bomb, but still truly wonderful, animated science fiction tale. (Spoilers ahead for both films)

The robots from each film had a very similar background, both built for war, but now forced to discover the world from a child-like perspective, while being hunted by the people who misunderstand him. Chappie did get its robot right, just like the Iron Giant. The problem came from the human interaction as the character that we thought would teach it, its young inventor, was abandoned in favour of those criminals. The human/robot relationship should have been the anchor of that film. Bird made sure that both characters learned from each other and developed interestingly, none of that happened with Chappie and the criminals, instead we disliked the humans so much that we just wanted Chappie to leave them.

With The Iron Giant we grew to care just as much about the human as we did about the awesome robot. They grew together and each had qualities that the other missed. Ultimately we understand at the end why the Giant’s death is necessary as we care enough about the boy to want him to survive, and if that means we have to let go of Vin Diesel’s giant robot then we have to accept. Chappie should have been even better at this because an older human means we can have a more intelligent level of discussion between the two and because the machine is only six foot tall it can literally be on a more personal level. But the Iron Giant does this well with the machine storeys higher than our hero.

As well as this the trailer gave us the image of Chappie raising his arm, imitating He-Man having seen him on TV. This got me excited as something similar was seen in Iron Giant. We saw the Giant learn his morals from reading Superman comics, he got his sense of right and wrong from kids stories of superheroes, just like we did. So that makes him so relatable and so likable to the audience even though he isn’t human. Chappie looked at this for about one scene, then dropped. Brad Bird brings it up again and again, at poignant moments. As the Giant sacrifices himself, his last words and the answer to the question ‘what do you choose to be’ are; Superman.

The villain also needs to be looked at. Hugh Jackman is good but there’s no motivation, no reasoning, nothing to make us sympathise with him. In the Iron Giant the military commander who wants to destroy the Giant starts out as a man who wants to be a hero, he wants to serve and protect his country while earning respect for himself as well. That means that when he sees something that anyone else would perceive as a threat, he acts. Even when he is given proof that he is wrong and the Giant is not a threat, he can’t accept it because every instinct and moral he has is telling him the proof is wrong, so he goes further, and it’s set in the cold war so his paranoia makes sense. A good motivation would have really enhanced the antagonists attack against Chappie.

The Iron Giant also knows what its themes and messages are. It deals with identity, militarism, paranoia, mortality and friendship. It ties them together in a clever, powerful and original way. Chappie starts off like a warning against A.I. Then it delves into human/robot relationships, then poverty, then crime, then redemption, then cowardice and courage, then something about what it means to be human, followed by some generic action sequences all tied up with the ending of Lucy. It’s disconnected and unfocussed. There’s no reason to admire the story because it doesn’t resonate on any level at all, from obvious to subversive.

So there you are, Bird’s animated film succeeded on all the levels that Chappie didn’t. If it had looked at why this film worked and then applied some methods to its own story, it might have worked.

What do you think is the best robot movie of all time, or of you want to leave a comment about the article, leave one below to let me know. Also feel free to leave suggestions for any other Relatable articles you want me to write. Thanks for reading.

An Introduction to The Relatables

Sometimes a certain film comes out and you can’t help but think ‘I’ve seen that before’ and it can be true. More than ever, especially in recent years, with reboots, remakes and reimagining’s you get films that share several qualities with some that come before it and rather than borrow the things that work, they try to distance themselves from the original.

A sad example of this is what happened to the Amazing Spider Man. They were so desperate to separate themselves from the Sam Raimi trilogy that they went as far as to cut out Uncle Ben’s most important line. But at the same time they had to follow the same plot points and had no way of reimagining them, therefore it just felt like a cheap copy of the original that didn’t want to be noticed by fans of Toby Maguire and called out because of it, like a Youtube video that tries not to get to many views rather than risk copyright infringement.   

So sometimes it can be a good idea to copy the original version in some respects. But of course it can prove disastrous as seen with Psycho, completely failing to grasp artistic beauty of the original and the nerve shredding suspense. The reason was firstly the lack of substance, and the lack of originality. The film was only twenty years old at the time of the remake, it’s like someone remaking Pulp Fiction today, but at the same time we knew that story, we knew what would happen, Psycho wasn’t like a foreign language film and not accessible to the masses of western audiences, the box office numbers of the original proved that. If the writers had somehow found a way to retell that story then t might have succeeded in gripping audiences.

But as I said, sometimes films are just similar, without being a remake and rather than call them out for it, we should encourage them to do it but in their own new way. At the same time of course they could learn a lot from the original inspiration.

So this series covers everything that separates one good film from a terrible one. I’ll highlight what it should have used and what it did on its own to its advantage as well as why one succeeded and one didn’t. So get ready for the Relatables. 

Still Alice

"I can see the words hanging in front of me and I can't reach them and I don't know who I am and I don't know what I'm gonna loose next."

It’s safe to say that Julianne Moore has been massively successful on nearly every level of her career. Just to give one example, she’s arguably the standout of PT Anderson’s Magnolia, a film that features Tom Cruise, Phillip Seymour Hoffman, William H Macy and John C Reilly. And that was just a supporting role. Here she takes up the lead role to give one of the most beautiful and haunting performances of recent memory.

A linguistics professor Alice Howland (Moore) who has recently turns fifty and is happily married as well as being a mother of three suddenly has her life turned upside down when she begins to suffer from memory lapses. These symptoms are diagnosed as early signs of Alzheimer’s disease and now she has to try and retain her own identity and memories.

There’s also no denying that this film was always going to raise delicate subjects. Moore’s performance has to cover many things here, as well as the various stages of the disease she gives us a picture of a proud and intelligent woman. These early impressions that she expertly exudes only make it more heart-breaking as her mind itself is compromised. It’s also a very subdued portrayal of the character, diving straight into the role but not to the extent of being flashy and over the top. It’s quiet for a majority of the film, and that’s what makes it so spectacular in its own way.

While it’s rare for this disease to affect someone this young it’s not unheard of. Here we see a bleak version of events and the repercussions from almost every angle. Not only is there the issue of her own mind decaying, but there’s a 50/50 chance that her children will inherit the disease from her as well. The tragedy of it is highlighted as Alice could not have seen this coming, as her own mother dies when she was young.

The family that surrounds her are also portrayed expertly and combined with the excellent writing they do feel genuine. Alec Baldwin as Alice’s husband John is a prime example. Too many films with a similar premise involve the spouse leaving their partner as they encounter difficulties. Here Baldwin stays with her throughout and is supportive, like a genuine person who cares and will do what someone who loves a person would do. This is also the best performance I’ve ever seen from Kristen Stewart.

There’s a great precision and sensitivity to this screenplay as well. There are very few false steps and because the majority is so good one could almost forgive it for those few times that it does. But it does occasionally, for a start there are some repetitive moments in the film, and I understand that it does need to create that effect to hammer the message across, but sometimes it feels as if they’re using a sledgehammer to do it. There’s also one oddly redundant scene in which Stewart’s character performs a Chekov play).

But I am nit-picking here. It would be easy to forget, amid the amazing performances, that there are also some impressive directorial techniques on display here from Wash Westmoreland and Richard Glatzer. The use of spinning cameras and blurred images make the deterioration of Alice’s brain a cinematographically impressive spectacle. As the film, and the condition, progresses these effects also progress in a similar fashion, just in case you had any doubts over the severity of this situation.

The end of this film is also emotionally ambiguous, not to give anything away. I do love a film that has the confidence to not manipulate the viewer over what to feel at the end, instead you can decide what emotional level the end result of Alice’s journey reaches.

So not only is this the performance of Julianne Moore’s career but it also proves to be emotionally resounding and deeply thoughtful thanks to an incredible screenplay and interesting direction.

Result: 9/10

Focus

"Congratulations, you're a criminal."

A lot of critics claim that Will Smith hit his commercial peak in the 1990s with Independence Day and Men in Black. Then he hit a dramatic peak in the early 2000s with Ali and The Pursuit of Happiness. Recently though, few will deny that he has taken a slight downturn, not around nearly as much as we’ve previously seen him and not in any successful films critically or commercially. With DC’s Suicide Squad only a year away (compared to a lot of the films scheduled that’s very recent) it might be a good time to make a return to the top billing, has he done it here?

A veteran conman (Smith) takes rookie thief (Margot Robbie) under his wing to teach her the ways of his trade. However, when they individually become involved in a major racing heist one wrong turn from just one of them could spell disaster for both of them.

For those of you hoping to see Will Smith in a role that allows him to display some charisma with the necessary dramatic depth to make him stand out in that usual way that he does, then you will not be disappointed. He does have some great on screen chemistry with Robbie in which they complement each other whilst also establishing an interesting character within. The dialogue is well written and performed brilliantly by the two leads, if you want some idea of what they will be like in Suicide Squad then the chances are that it will be like this as it seems to be a good formula and suits their style.

Speaking of style in general, Focus has a lot of it. There’s a lot of glitz and glamour on display to add to the film. It certainly looks like a good con film based on aesthetics at least. Assisted by some brilliant cinematography and lighting the film succeeds in avoiding that flavourless and dreary vibe that Smith fell into otherwise known as After Earth.

I do take issue with the structure of the film though. While singularly the segments are all entertaining and enthralling, the film feels like it’s been split into two sections rather lazily. It features Smith training his newest asset and then of course they enter a new heist, but the training segment takes up half of the film that really isn’t needed, or at least should not be presented in that structure. If they had started off in the big heist then use flashbacks to show the training or abandon the small heist and instead break up the training with some smaller cons in a more episodic fashion then I would be much happier with the overall story.

The reason why Focus would suit a flashback scenario is because I was actually interested in both parts, usually in films with flashbacks I’m much more interested in one aspect than in another, but here I would have loved both parts equally and wanted to explore them both at the same time and to give the movie a pleasing structure.

As well as this the emotional centre of the film is off slightly. Since she is the novice one would think that Robbie is the emotional attachment for the audience, and since he is the wise and all-knowing master Smith should be a supporting character, but instead Focus’ core darts in between them throughout, as if it’s unaware of who to actually concentrate on.

As well as this, as too many heist films eventually do, Focus jumps the shark a bit with its final twist. I can’t really spoil it and I doubt you’ll see it coming because it is rather farfetched in that respect. And as well as this, I can’t help but think to myself that Focus is much more of a quick time killer of a movie rather than something you’d remember for more than a year.

Perhaps too light hearted to be the heavy hitting drama it was advertised as and not quite comedic enough to be classed as a humorous take on the genre Focus feels a bit unfocussed (ironically) but rest assured it is very entertaining.

Result: 6/10 

CHAPPiE

"I am consciousness, I am alive, I am Chappie."

Director Neil Blomkamp has been praised as the latest addition to a string of legendary science fiction visionaries. His first big success District 9 was a success in every word, even being nominated for Best Picture at the Oscars, his next film Elysium was slightly more divisive, looked upon favourably by most and as mediocre by others (myself included). But both boasted interesting stories and amazing visual effects. Chappie restores the universal balance by being disliked by nearly everyone (myself included).

In the near future police droids known as scouts are used on a mass scale by the government to maintain order. But, not content with his success their creator decides to work on a machine that can think and make decisions independently in the same way that a human can. However the company does not take kindly to his actions such as rival inventor (Hugh Jackman) who decide to take action against his creation, or as he has called it, Chappie.

One thing that must be immediately praised about Chappie is, well, Chappie. The titular character is wonderfully innovative and essential to the story as it progresses. From the machine we see development, comedy and all the backstory to make it a compelling character.

However this is ruined by the fact that the child like Chappie is taken in by criminal and becomes one, not as the trailer made us believe a robot that gets most of his morals from Saturday morning cartoons (like we did, am I right… no… just me then). Executed in the right way the criminal story could still emotional. But it isn’t so you almost loose sympathy for the most likable and well developed character in the film.

Though Chappie is aesthetically pleasing, with some truly spectacular special effects work and great interaction between the physical and the CGI aspects of the story, it has many, many flaws. The first of which is the characters and the way they are written. Hugh Hackman brings no distinctive or unique feel to the story’s main villain. Though he talks briefly about the ethics of robotics aside from that all of his actions are made without any justification or explanation. If he’s just in it the money then why doesn’t he just say that instead of –arsed monologue about robotic laws? If there’s something else behind it why is there no explanation.

The creator of the robot is your usual young man with a dream cliché and has no real opinion other than to create something and then protect it, why, what’s his personal connection with the concept to risk his life in order to find it. The acting on display from some of the supporting cast is abysmal to say the least. As the cheerful robot is on the run he hangs out with a group of criminals and their contribution needed to be reduced here a lot. It is just bad full stop, not bad as in not caring or over enthusiastic, it’s just painful to watch them on screen.

The plot also feels sharply and roughly drawn towards a final shootout that, though it is fun and well directed, is inevitable. The rush and need to steer the film towards this throughout means that Chappie cannot answer the questions it promised it would raise. The grasp of the writing cannot cope with the big questions the concept raised. But in an effort to steer clear of Elysium Blomkamp has taken a more talkative story here, which would be fine if the acting and characters were actually good, but they aren’t. Elysium was criticised for choosing action over examination, Chappie actually has less excitement than District 9, but with characters that are not as interesting or examine a large concept from an intimate point of view.

Just thinking about it now it hit me, Chappie is could have been the mainstream and successful Brad Bird’s Iron Giant. If you were disappointed by the direction Chappie took then you should check out that and find a better story about AI reacting to humans.

If the trailer promised you a grown up ET, all Chappie gives you is an elitist Transformers.

Result: 3/10

It Follows

"Wherever you are it's somewhere walking straight for you. All you can do is pass it along to someone else."

Horror films are on a decline, there is no denying it. Even when audiences do get a genuine horror masterpiece like Oculus of the Babadook they end up disliking it because they’ve become so used to the generic , lazily written, cheap jump scares, money making, stupid characters, cliché ridden, unfrightening pieces of crap (god I hate those kind of horror movies) where was I? Oh yeah… that they give it a bad score, complaining about the monsters not appearing. It Follows may be the one that can do both, it could break that mould by tapping into the mainstream horror, only very slightly, and then putting a unique spin on it to be all things to all people.

Following teenager Jay’s (Makia Monroe) recent romantic evening that culminates in sleeping with her boyfriend, he reveals that he has passed a curse onto her. Something will follow her and torment her until she finds a way to pass the curse on to another unfortunate soul. Abandoned by the boy but assisted by her friends she must find a way to escape the supernatural stalker.

It Follows certainly harkens back to what many will refer to as the golden age of horror, the late 70s/early 80s era. Here you had everything from exploitation, slasher, psychological and demonic, your Elm Street’s, Exorcist’s, Shining’s and Halloween’s, all there for a fright night you’d never forget. And elements of them all are clearly visible in this film. It Follows takes them as inspiration, applies them to its own simple premise and plays with them a bit as well.

This can create problems, primarily the fact that if you know these films well enough you can see them being used and though it is great fun to watch them, it can be distracting and reduce the actual horror. For gullible teenagers this will undoubtedly be horrifying but be prepared to be disturbed rather than terrified if you a horror fanatic.

But in another way that can be beautiful because there’s more of a sense of dread rather than sheer terror. There’s a real sense that you’re stuck on a roller coaster with Jay that you can’t get off  and even though you desperately want to there’s still enough intrigue and mystery to make you stay on. This is only highlighted by the fact that the Follower only gives chase at walking speed, but it will never stop. This gradual chase is used to great effect, something just at the corner of the screen could be the final threat and the sense of paranoia it generates is brilliant. It Follows also clearly relishes these clichés as much as it examines them, similarly to Cabin in The Woods a few years ago.

Actually speaking of which there are a number of similarities as Cabin in the Woods is probably not the scariest of horror films, but it’s clever enough to be admired as something else and the masterful execution and no nonsense acting style from everyone involved really makes it stand out. The same goes for It Follows. Especially Monroe as she takes just the right approach to make me and everyone else sympathise and connect with Jay as she struggles through teenage life before becoming the possessor of an STD (but in this case D stands for demon) actually, you could look at this film as a subversive comment on STD’s just as people have done so with Cronberg’s The Fly. They act like real teenagers, they have complicated relationships but they don’t hate each other, and at the worst of times they can come together to help one another.

Having a character that you connect with cannot be understated in a horror film as it causes the instinctive reaction of ‘what would I do in that situation?’ That is the fear inducer right there. You try to look over the practicalities and morals of the whole series of events and in that way It Follows begins to disturb in more ways than one.

It Follows is one of the strongest and most intelligent horror films in recent memory. Just as Cabin in the Woods dealt with creature features, this one deals with demons and ghouls in a similar way. It’s scary and fun and wonderfully.

Result: 8/10