Film review: “Sting” lacks bite

Director: Kiah Roache Turner
Writer: Kiah Roache Turner
Stars: Alyla Browne, Ryan Corr, Jermaine Fowler

Summary: After secretly raising a disturbingly talented spider, 12-year-old Charlotte must confront the facts about her pet and fight for her family's survival when the once adorable creature quickly transforms into a giant, flesh-eating monster.

Kiah Roache-Turners Sting had all the makings of a great spider horror film, especially considering there hasn't been a memorable film since Ellory Elkayem's release Eight-legged freaks. By Frank Marshall, of course Arachnophobia was the pioneer of the subgenre with its deft mix of spine-tingling terror and heart-stopping laughter Sting seems to be heavily inspired by the character of exterminator Frank (Jermaine Fowler).

Frank receives a call from Helga (Noni Hazlehurst), who complains about a strange noise in her apartment, which the exterminator investigates with a rather frightening look. Roache-Turner does an excellent job of identifying the nature of the threat, with quick camera movements that heighten the tension as Helga cannot understand what is happening behind the walls of her apartment. It's also the only truly frightening scene in the film, as it perfectly shows how big the spider will eventually grow and attack everyone in the apartment complex while a massive snowstorm forces it to stay there.

The film then flashes back to four days earlier, when a small meteorite (you'll have to suspend your disbelief for a while) crashes into the apartment complex, where an alien egg hatches and a spider appears. As Charlotte (Alyla Browne) explores the apartment through the ventilation shaft, she sees a rather strange but fascinating spider and decides to catch (and raise) it without her mother (Penelope Mitchell) and stepfather (Ryan Corr) knowing . Of course, those who have seen Joe Dantes Gremlins Do you know what will happen when the spider (named Sting, although anyone expecting the police will be disappointed) asks Charlotte to feed her through a special whistle.

Sting eventually gets bigger, confusing the apartment's anthropologist (Danny Kim), and what's obviously going to happen, happens: it starts killing people, and it's now up to Charlotte to stop what she started. However, this is Roache-Turner's cardinal mistake, because despite the film's R rating, none of the kills are shown on screen. What's the point of an R rating if you don't give the people what they want (bloody murders to go along with the jaw-dropping practical effects)?

No, the R rating only exists because some characters say the F-word more often than the PG-13 rating allows; Otherwise, it would probably be a film that most families could enjoy. The presentation appears to be similar to that of Roch Demers. Stories for everyonea series of family-friendly films (apparently I will never define them as such) in Quebec that began in the mid-80s and often included otherworldly aspects that traumatized a generation of children as they suffered emotionally (Cléo's death). In The dog that stopped the war is the best known example of this) or physiological stress (all copies of The peanut butter solution should be burned to ensure that future generations do not develop post-traumatic stress disorder by the age of 5).

You have a child protagonist caught up in a larger-than-life situation where his own problems cause the people around him to end up in danger, again similar to Stories of everything Films. In this regard, Sting It definitely has elements of family-friendly fare to offer, but its R rating feels completely unwarranted, almost as if it's afraid of showing children physical violence if that Stories for everyone Series (and their derivatives) were far more violent and unafraid to send children audiences into endless nightmares (no, really, Quebec's family film industry needs to be investigated).

So there is no excuse for it Sting to achieve a full R rating, even if Roache-Turner's approach can be considered family-friendly. As a result, none of the kills feel effective, despite the fun, practical effects, and dynamic cinematography on display. You can only go so far when a decision completely derails the film's pacing and action, and Roache-Turner seems to forget that most (if not all) viewers are here for the spiders and want to see people become like them be murdered for no reason. The rest is completely irrelevant, but would be welcome if the character relationships were handled with care and emotional investment.

Unfortunately, none of the family dynamics work here. They're all written haphazardly, checking a box full of clichés without a single thought given to elevating their relationships above clichés. The performances aren't entirely terrible, but there isn't a single moment where the audience wants to latch onto the characters and sympathize with them as Sting (predictably) starts killing the people in the apartment. And when none of the kills or action scenes are in any way memorable, it's a double whammy of tedium as you wonder when exactly this ordeal will end.
The end of the film leaves the door open Stitch 2, which I wouldn't be entirely against, as the problems in this film are easy to fix, and it starts with fully committing to its R rating beyond swear words. Once that's fixed, it might be easier to get used to the characters as their story complements the gore on screen. See you then, Sting will remain one of the most disappointing films of the year, its potential immediately squandered when it's clear that the film will be nothing more than a slightly more edgy PG-13 horror flick in which one-note protagonists are paper-thin and predictable in the story.

Degree: D