Skip to main content

Sting - Hurt Less Than Expected

Anyone that knows me, knows I'm pretty arachnophobic. Even tiny spiders freak me out. But, in movies, I'm generally intrigued. Arachnophobia is an amazing movie, IMO. I still can't believe they had spider wranglers on set that kinda' told the spiders where to go and what to do to some extent. Crazy! But I digress. When I saw the poster for Sting, in my head I thought "Oh great. Another Itsy Bitsy 'masterpiece'". In case you can't read between the lines, I didn't think too highly of Itsy Bitsy. However, when we watched Sting, I was pleasantly surprised that it was not a throw-away spider movie. There was actual thought and some craftsmanship put into this. No, it's not going to win Oscars, but it was easily better than expected. So here we go, let's talk about Sting.

Image by Horror Movie Blog

As soon as the movie started, I thought "Oh wow. That's sooooo original. An alien spider..." and I think the creators knew their trope had been used many times before. Almost immediately, it was presented differently though. Sting is a story about an alien spider that lands in an old woman's apartment that then is cared for by a young girl, as sort of a pet. But, it's alien, and she doesn't know that. It begins to grow and show abnormal spider behaviors. This takes us down an interesting and somewhat unique storyline that I don't know that I've seen before. A lot of the movie is actually based along the relationship Charlotte, the young girl, has with the spider. To the point where she actually tries to protect it from her family. The movie also tells a decent story about a blended family overcoming the initial tears in the seams. It wasn't a movie just about killing people, which to some horror fans may be a let down. I don't know, I like that there was a bit more substance here. I loved the old horror flicks that gave you backstory and motivations for the killers. Sting also goes out of its way to build up tension and suspense which is something severely lagging in today's modern cinema in general.

Image by Variety

One thing I think stands out about Sting versus many of today's movies was the lack of CGI. Not that there wasn't any CGI, but most of the special effects were practical, and because of that, they feel more real. Which for someone like me, can be really terrifying when the spider is as big as a grown man. There were many film shots in the movie that reminded me of the older horror movies; less straight on and more uncanny-valleyish like when you see shots from the spider's perspective or from the to corner of a room when the action is about to happen. I felt like the movie took some small chances and they paid off for a bit of uniqueness. The humor was well placed as well. This is so important in horror flicks. It's fine to have jokes in horror movies; recommended actually, to help break the tension sometimes. But remember you're making a horror movie, not a comedy. Sting walks that line pretty well. Jokes will happen and then the story takes you right back to the action.

Image by Collider

The opening of the movie drags a bit longer than necessary, and there were many times that my suspension of disbelief waned for sure. There are only so many times you can accept that a character makes the same mistake before you just believe their an idiot. And, you can only use the same methods of portraying scenes so often before they look stale and boring. An example of this here is the movies usage of the vent system in the apartment building. I couldn't tell you how many times we're presented with the vents as the atmosphere for the movie. There's a lot of vent crawling for sure.

Image by Collider

Overall, its a throw back to the creature-feature days of the past. A nice, fresh look at a tired trope. It doesn't reinvent the wheel, but it knows that, and leans into what it does well. Like most movies of today, they don't push the envelope of what is accepted, even though they hint that they will at times. I remember when you never knew what new line a horror movie would try to cross. Now, they're likely too afraid to be "cancelled" if they walk off the path too much. It was a good entry into the creature-feature subgenre of horror and easily worth a watch.


Overall score: 6.5 out of 10 stars

Pros:
- Traditional creature-featuresque film with some flare and story.
- Practical effects are very well done.
- Did not rely on only jump-scares. 

Cons:
- The genre is very tired at this point.
- Some of the casting seemed out of place.
- Suspension of disbelieve only goes so far, and this movie easily crosses that line at times.
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Bagman (2024): A Surprising Slow Burn That Defies Expectations

Going into The Bagman , I was fully prepared to sit through a low-budget gorefest, packed with cheap jump scares and predictable plotlines. But to my surprise, what I got was something much more refined—a slow-burn suspense thriller that outshines many bigger-budget projects. The film uses its time wisely, building tension and setting up a compelling atmosphere, while steering clear of the typical pitfalls that drag many horror flicks down. Image by IMDb Slow and Steady Wins the Race This movie doesn’t rush. It takes its time to develop the story, but does so in a way that keeps you mildly hooked. It’s one of those rare films where the slower pacing actually benefits the narrative, allowing each element to breathe and come into focus. You won’t find rapid-fire scares here, but rather a creeping sense of unease that makes you wonder what’s lurking in the shadows. The way The Bagman sets up its "rules"—through a twisted fairy tale—was pure brilliance. By tapping into something
Post a Comment
Read more

IF: A Great Concept Drowned in Missed Opportunities

Alright, let’s dive into IF , the latest flick that had all the potential to be a heartwarming tale but ended up stumbling over its own premise. Before we get too far in, I must say, I had hopes. Not high hopes, but hopes. With a unique concept and a cast that included Ryan Reynolds, you’d think this film would be a surefire hit. Spoiler alert: it wasn’t. IF introduces us to the world of imaginary friends (IFs) and the impact they have on the people who create them. Sounds intriguing, right? Sadly, what starts as a promising setup quickly turns into a muddled mess. The concept is great, but the execution leaves a lot to be desired. Image by FirstShowing.net The Good Let’s start on a positive note: Cailey Fleming , who plays Bea, did a remarkable job with what she was given. Her portrayal of a girl caught between childhood and adulthood was nuanced and believable. She brought a sense of maturity to her role while still managing to capture the innocence of being a kid. It's a shame
Post a Comment
Read more

Inside Out 2: Out of My Mind for Watching or Worth the Emotions?

Alright folks, I recently had the pleasure of seeing “Inside Out 2”. Let’s get this out of the way: I was super pumped for this sequel, but hesitantly optimistic given Disney’s recent track record. How did it fare out? Let’s dive in. Almost There, But Not Quite Mind-Blowing “Inside Out 2” brings back our beloved emotional crew – Joy, Sadness, Anger, Disgust, and Fear – along with some new faces that shake up Riley’s teenage mind. The gang’s all here, and their banter is just as entertaining as ever. But while the first “Inside Out” was a masterclass in making us feel all the feels, this one doesn’t quite hit the same high notes. Don’t get me wrong, it’s still a good time. Imagine going to your favorite ice cream shop, ordering the double fudge sundae, but they give you the single scoop instead. It’s still delicious, but you’re left thinking, “This could have been epic.” That’s “Inside Out 2” in a nutshell – satisfying, but you know it had the potential to be something more. Image by St
Post a Comment
Read more