TheRetroCritic

Bette Davis playing a killer with an evil twin sister? Sounds amazing, right? Especially when you've seen her in Whatever Happened To Baby Jane? and Hush Hush Sweet Charlotte , Dead Ringer just sounds like it could just be the best thing out there. And yet director Paul Henreid somehow succeeds in making this one of the least impressive evil Bette movies. So what went wrong? Well, for one thing the twin "effect" works about as well as the green screen in Hitchcock's Family Plot (obscure reference: it doesn't). Bette Davis also seems thrown throughout especially when she has to act alongside herself. There's delays in the conversations and she just doesn't sound natural or convincing. The film also suffers from a slow rhythm with very little actual suspense making this a somewhat dull experience. Visually at least Dead Ringer does well and there are a few Hitchcock-style sequences, most notably the first murder, which are admittedly a treat. One

Up until this moment, the Leprechaun films were just a bunch of stupid but oddly enjoyable, trashy horror comedies. With Leprechaun 4: In Space, I'm pleased to announce, we're entering Ed Wood territory. Going in, I just wanted to know how in hell they were going to explain the Leprechaun's space presence. They don't. Not even a bit. I'm not even sure the word "leprechaun" is even uttered at any point throughout the film! We're told a group of human space marines are going on some planet to kill some alien...which turns out to be Warwick Davis' critter. Leprechaun 3 was no masterpiece but it did have quite a few redeeming qualities about it, but In Space is just...chaos. It's like a weird mix of a Starship Troopers -style action B movie, a Leprechaun horror film, a Mel Brooks, Spaceballs -type Dr Who spoof and a cheesy Star Trek The Original Series episode. Yeah... This is one of those rare films where nothing works. Story? Nope. Visuals

It's Leprechaun time again as we get dangerously close to the much talked-about "space" one. Here though, the setting is most definitely Earth, Las Vegas to be precise, and our favourite evil green bastard is once again after his beloved shilling. You can probably guess the entire film from the first couple of scenes with the usual combination of bad puns, limericks, boobs, blood and OTT gore thrown in. Nothing is really added to the franchise with this third instalment except perhaps even more silliness. Yes. That's possible. Unfortunately, out of the 5 million jokes we're given about 5 work and there are quite a few tumbleweeds whenever one of them fails. That said, Leprechaun 3 still manages to be entertaining enough and the jokes that do work, although they don't make any rational sense anywhere in this solar system, are actually pretty brilliant. One sequence involves the leprechaun giving someone a dysfunctional sex robot which of course malfuncti

In many ways, Leprechaun 2 is a superior sequel. Then again, it is a sequel to  Leprechaun  so how good could it possibly be? Kinda like how  Evil Dead 2 is a sequel to Evil Dead , this Leprechaun is really more of a remake or a reimagining of the first film with only Warwick Davis' evil fantastical critter in common: the plot doesn't continue from the first instalment and it seems like this time there is some kind of budget involved despite the (unsurprising) absence of Jennifer Aniston. Whereas the first film took place in and around some old house, this time we actually have a story with characters you actually sort-of care about (not Shevonne Durkin, she's rubbish) and *gasp* numerous locations! Now the Leprechaun is looking for a bride to... cover in gold and impregnate (as you do) but he can only do that with a descendant of the daughter of a past slave of his and that'll only work if she sneezes three times and no-one says "God bless you".