When I heard that Jordan Peele was going to write and produce a reboot of 1992's "Candyman" I had mixed feelings. I like Jordan Peele as a filmmaker, but I wondered why he would bother remaking an existing property, as opposed to just continuing to write, produce and direct original material. But, I figured that with him attached, it would probably be pretty good. I finally went to see it and well, it turned out to be a "I liked it but I didn't love it" situation.
The 2021 version of "Candyman" is NOT a remake. It's a direct sequel to the original film, ignoring the the two mediocre sequels that were released in 1995 and 1999 respectively. I don't like to give away too many plot points, so I will just provide a brief summary.
The 2021 version of "Candyman" is NOT a remake. It's a direct sequel to the original film, ignoring the the two mediocre sequels that were released in 1995 and 1999 respectively. I don't like to give away too many plot points, so I will just provide a brief summary.
Yahya Abdul-Mateen stars as Anthony McCoy, a visual artist living in Chicago with his girlfriend, gallery director Brianna Cartwright (Teyonah Parris). McCoy has been struggling creatively, and then he hears about the legend of Candyman from Brianna's brother Troy (Nathan Stewart-Jarrett). He goes exploring around the site of the old Cabrini Green housing projects, where he meets Billy Burke (Colman Domingo) who owns a local laundromat. Burke tells him the details of the Candyman story and how to summon the spirit by saying his name five times while looking in a mirror. Inspired by the legend, Anthony creates an art exhibit based on the horrific tale, along with some social commentary, and the piece is exhibited at Brianna's art gallery, where it is not exactly well received.
Of course, on of Brianna's co-workers and his girlfriend decide to test the Candyman legend by saying his name three times in the mirror that forms the basis of the exhibit and, well, let's just say that it turns out to be a bad idea, and mayhem ensues.
As the film progresses, McCoy finds himself increasingly drawn into the world of Candyman, and as art and reality begin to blur, he finds that he has a connection to the story that he never could have imagined.
Of course, on of Brianna's co-workers and his girlfriend decide to test the Candyman legend by saying his name three times in the mirror that forms the basis of the exhibit and, well, let's just say that it turns out to be a bad idea, and mayhem ensues.
As the film progresses, McCoy finds himself increasingly drawn into the world of Candyman, and as art and reality begin to blur, he finds that he has a connection to the story that he never could have imagined.
So, what did I think of the film? Overall, I liked it. The acting is very good, as are the gore effects and I liked the 'cutout' type effects that they use to tell parts of the story. I thought that was a pretty cool storytelling tool and adding an interesting visual element to the film.
Let me address one thing right away. Some of the reviews I've read and some of the opinions expressed on social media seemed to focus too much on the "message" of the film. Yes, the film does address the experiences of Black people in America, but I never felt that it was too heavy-handed. It's simply a part of the story and it reflects the characters, and the circumstances in which some of them lived. It also deals with class and how it is woven into the art world. Again, I never felt that I was being beaten over the head with "the message". Yes, it's noticeable but again, it's just a part of the story. After all, this is a horror film, and we see plenty of people meeting horrific ends. Much as also been made of the fact that only white people are slaughtered in the film. Umm, so fucking what? How many times have we dealt with the cliche' of the "Black Dude" dying first in the film? No one seems to complain about that? I get a little tired of people looking for problems where there are none.
I think my biggest problem with the film is that, like many sequels are remakes, it just wasn't necessary. I am not nearly as militant about this as some people though, and I really didn't mind that Peele decided to revisit "Candyman".
Another problem that I had is that none of the people who end up getting slaughtered by Candyman are particularly likeable, so there's no real emotional response to their killings. There is one character in particular that is so irritating I was thinking that if Candyman didn't get him, someone else would eventually take in out just for being a colossal dick.
I found it to be an enjoyable slasher film that had some social commentary thrown in. I really did like the way the writers connected this film with the 1992 film. The way they brought back Tony Todd and Virginia Madsen was very clever and well done in the sense that they did NOT make it a Tony Todd or Virginia Madsen film. They are just two threads that connect the films, and it was cool.
Let me address one thing right away. Some of the reviews I've read and some of the opinions expressed on social media seemed to focus too much on the "message" of the film. Yes, the film does address the experiences of Black people in America, but I never felt that it was too heavy-handed. It's simply a part of the story and it reflects the characters, and the circumstances in which some of them lived. It also deals with class and how it is woven into the art world. Again, I never felt that I was being beaten over the head with "the message". Yes, it's noticeable but again, it's just a part of the story. After all, this is a horror film, and we see plenty of people meeting horrific ends. Much as also been made of the fact that only white people are slaughtered in the film. Umm, so fucking what? How many times have we dealt with the cliche' of the "Black Dude" dying first in the film? No one seems to complain about that? I get a little tired of people looking for problems where there are none.
I think my biggest problem with the film is that, like many sequels are remakes, it just wasn't necessary. I am not nearly as militant about this as some people though, and I really didn't mind that Peele decided to revisit "Candyman".
Another problem that I had is that none of the people who end up getting slaughtered by Candyman are particularly likeable, so there's no real emotional response to their killings. There is one character in particular that is so irritating I was thinking that if Candyman didn't get him, someone else would eventually take in out just for being a colossal dick.
I found it to be an enjoyable slasher film that had some social commentary thrown in. I really did like the way the writers connected this film with the 1992 film. The way they brought back Tony Todd and Virginia Madsen was very clever and well done in the sense that they did NOT make it a Tony Todd or Virginia Madsen film. They are just two threads that connect the films, and it was cool.
My final thoughts are these. I think too many people assume that Jordan Peele directed this film. He did NOT. It was directed by Nia DaCosta, who co-wrote the screenplay with Peele and Win Rosenfeld. It irks me that so many people make this assumption. I do admit that I was not familiar with her, but I was aware that she, and not Jordan Peele, directed this film. Personally, I think the studio didn't push this fact because she is a relative unknown, and Peele has made his mark with two successful horror films under his belt, and it's a shame. DaCosta is directing "The Marvels" for Marvel/Disney which is due in 2022, so it's nice to see her get to direct a higher profile film.
Speaking of Jordan Peele, I really do like him as a filmmaker. I think he is incredibly talented and I was such a fan of his brilliant comedy that I never saw it coming when he emerged as a horror director. I enjoyed both "Get Out" and "Us" and I can't wait to see what he does next.
Having said that, I hope he doesn't drift into Eli Roth territory, where he gets anointed as this modern master, only to get eclipsed by his own hype. It made me crazy when Fangoria magazine gave Roth an lifetime achievement award after only three films. That's not his fault, and I hope the same thing doesn't happen to Peele.
Speaking of Jordan Peele, I really do like him as a filmmaker. I think he is incredibly talented and I was such a fan of his brilliant comedy that I never saw it coming when he emerged as a horror director. I enjoyed both "Get Out" and "Us" and I can't wait to see what he does next.
Having said that, I hope he doesn't drift into Eli Roth territory, where he gets anointed as this modern master, only to get eclipsed by his own hype. It made me crazy when Fangoria magazine gave Roth an lifetime achievement award after only three films. That's not his fault, and I hope the same thing doesn't happen to Peele.
Overall I thought "Candyman" was a good film, and I encourage you to see it and judge for yourself. It might not have been "necessary", but it's far better than most of the endless stream of sequels, prequels and remakes we've been fed for the last two decades.
RSS Feed