Film Jury

On this episode of Film Jury, we're diving into the 2023 supernatural horror film The Offering. Set within an Orthodox Jewish community, the film blends demonic folklore, family trauma, and possession horror into a chilling story centered around an ancient evil unleashed during funeral preparations. The verdicts are split on this one. Kat and Kristina both deliver Guilty verdicts, finding the film weighed down by familiar horror tropes, predictable scares, and missed opportunities despite its unique cultural backdrop. James lands on a light Not Guilty, appreciating the film's atmosphere, creature design, and willingness to explore lesser-seen religious traditions within the horror genre, even if the execution doesn't fully live up to its potential. Does The Offering bring something fresh to possession horror, or is it another case of style over substance? Join the jury as we debate the scares, symbolism, performances, and whether this supernatural thriller deserves a place on your watchlist.

In this episode of Film Jury, the jury heads into the underground halls of The Possession of Hannah Grace (2018), a horror film that somehow feels like CSI, a CW supernatural pilot, and Cabin in the Woods all stitched together under flickering fluorescent lights. James Patrick, Kat Stratford, and Kristina Patrick break down the film's rushed editing, bizarre worldbuilding, over-the-top exorcism sequences, and an underground morgue that looks suspiciously like a secret Vatican demon lab. Along the way, the panel debates whether the movie had genuine potential buried beneath the surface, or if it was doomed by production chaos from the start. From upside-down crucifix lighting and "Vecna" telekinesis to motion-sensor jump scares and one very confused EMT named Randy, nothing escapes the scrutiny of the Film Jury. Court is now in session.

On this episode of Film Jury, we dive into the upcoming adaptation of and why Kat, James, and Kristina absolutely loathed it. From the baffling creative decisions to the wasted potential of adapting one of the most genuinely unsettling indie horror games in recent years, the jury tears into what went wrong and why this adaptation completely missed the psychological dread that made the original game so effective. Was it bad casting? Weak writing? A total misunderstanding of the source material? Or did Hollywood once again prove that adapting horror games is far harder than studios think? Nothing is spared in this brutally honest breakdown as the Film Jury delivers its verdict.

In this episode of Film Jury, we put The Autopsy of Jane Doe on trial. What starts as a routine examination of an unidentified body quickly becomes something far more disturbing as layers of mystery, science, and the unexplained begin to collide inside the morgue. But the real question isn't just what happened to Jane Doe… it's whether the film itself holds up under scrutiny. We break down the storytelling, tension, pacing, and horror mechanics that drive the film, and challenge whether its reputation matches its execution. Is it truly a standout modern horror entry, or does it lean too heavily on atmosphere over substance? After deliberation, the jury returns with a unanimous decision: 3 Not Guilty verdicts. But not for the reasons you might expect.

We close out our month-long theme of movies we hated so much we had to dedicate an entire series to them… with a surprising twist. This week on Film Jury, new juror Shannon Scott steps in and selects The Grudge (2004), a film infamous for its eerie atmosphere, fragmented storytelling, and that unforgettable croaking curse. But what was meant to be another unanimous takedown didn't quite go as planned. While Shannon holds firm with a guilty verdict, both Kat and James break ranks and deliver a shocking not guilty, defending the film's mood, structure, and lasting impact on early 2000s horror. Is The Grudge a confusing mess or an underrated horror experiment that still gets under your skin? Tune in as we debate: Whether the nonlinear narrative works or falls apart The effectiveness of its atmosphere versus its storytelling If this remake holds up or belongs in the "so bad it's bad" category Three jurors. One divisive horror film. A split verdict you won't see coming.

This week on Film Jury, we're stepping aboard the infamous Ghost Ship… and it doesn't take long before things go very, very wrong. Kristina, Kat, and James break down one of the early 2000s' most memorable horror openings, then dig into everything that follows, for better and mostly worse. From its slick style and wasted potential to the narrative choices that leave you questioning what could have been, the crew examines whether Ghost Ship is a misunderstood cult favorite or just another drifting relic of its era. The verdict? Kristina: Guilty Kat: Guilty James: Guilty A unanimous decision. Sentence: lost at sea. Tune in as we discuss why this film still sticks in people's minds… even if it doesn't fully hold together.

This April, we're deep into our "movies so bad we had to build a theme around them" series… and this week might be the breaking point. Kat brought us Subservience, starring Megan Fox… and the jury is not okay. What should have been a sharp, thought-provoking sci-fi thriller instead spirals into a hollow, confused, bargain-bin imitation of better AI films. Flat performances, nonsensical character decisions, and a script that feels like it was generated and never edited… this one tested everyone's patience. James, Kristina, and Kat all came in ready to evaluate. They left united in frustration. Verdict: Guilty. Of wasting our time, insulting the genre, and making us question our life choices… and our friendship with Kat. If you've ever hate-watched a movie and needed validation, this episode is for you.

The month of April is upon us and the Film Jury will be deliberating on four films that they hate so much they just had to devote an entire month to the movies. The first entry will be Freddy vs. Jason from 2003 which finally puts the Springwood Slasher up against the king of Crystal Lake in this mash-up flick that was decades in the making. Jurors James, Kat and Kristina dive into the full plot of the film, cinematography, directing, acting, special effects (or lack thereof) and more! The film gets a round of guilty verdicts from the jurors - the first film in the two dozen plus movies reviewed to be sent to film jail.

In this episode of Film Jury, we put the cult classic April Fool's Day on trial. What starts as a seemingly straightforward slasher quickly twists into something far more unexpected, forcing us to question whether clever storytelling can redeem a film that plays with audience expectations this aggressively. Does the payoff justify the ride, or does it leave viewers feeling cheated? James and Kristina deliver a guilty verdict, arguing that the film's structure undercuts its own tension and fails to deliver on the promise it builds. Kat, however, stands firmly in the not guilty camp, defending the film's bold narrative choice and its lasting impact on the genre. Was this an innovative subversion ahead of its time, or a misfire that sacrifices satisfaction for shock value? We break it all down in this episode of Film Jury.

In this episode of Film Jury, we're diving into the cult horror gem Behind the Mask: The Rise of Leslie Vernon, a sharp, self-aware slasher that pulls back the curtain on what it really takes to become a legendary killer. Told through a documentary-style lens, the film follows Leslie Vernon, an aspiring slasher icon, as he openly walks a film crew through his process, from cardio training to victim selection to the psychology of fear. What unfolds is equal parts horror, satire, and surprisingly smart commentary on the tropes that defined the genre. James, Kat, and Kristina break down the film's layered storytelling, its deep-cut references to classic slashers, and how it manages to both honor and deconstruct the rules established by icons like Michael, Jason, and Freddy. They also debate whether the film's tonal shift in the final act elevates it or holds it back. Verdicts are in and it's a unanimous decision: not guilty. If you love horror that's as clever as it is bloody, this is one worth revisiting… or discovering for the first time.