Bone Keeper (2026) | Bone Keeper feels to me like a lost drive-in creature feature where every bad decision is basically a gift for us horror fans. #jackmeatsflix

My quick rating - 5.2/10. In true old-school monster movie fashion, the story of Bone Keeper begins right from the get-go. There's an unknown flying object, crashing down on Earth, and straightaway making sure that whoever sees it won't have a pleasant evening. Forget little green men. What crawls out of this meteor is something far slimier, nastier, and far more interested in turning a cave system into its personal all-you-can-eat buffet. The unlucky cavemen who happen to be nearby are basically the film’s opening appetizers, and from there, Bone Keeper wastes no time embracing its B-movie monster roots.

The film then jumps to 1976, where James Wheeler heads into the cave looking for answers and, unsurprisingly, ends up becoming another local legend. All that remains is some grainy Super 8 film showing the silhouette of the creature, which is exactly the kind of creepy setup that us horror fans can get behind. In the present day, his granddaughter Olivia, played by Sarah Alexandra Marks, returns with a group of explorers and friends to finally uncover the truth. Naturally, because this is a horror movie and common sense is apparently illegal, the group meets up for a road trip. And why not head straight for the cursed cave, and somehow still seem shocked when things go sideways.

It is precisely this nostalgia factor that makes Bone Keeper such an entertaining film. The writer/director Howard J. Ford obviously has a passion for these old monster films in which the monster is king and humans are just the walking meals, making one mistake after another. From the very first moment when they pick up this social media addicted "bitchhiker" (Sarah T. Cohen), you can almost smell the Bone Keeper drooling. More food for the monster? Why not.

The appearance of John Rhys-Davies as the older professor adds a nice bit of clout and some fun charm to the setup. His connection to Olivia’s grandfather and the eerie private film screening before the expedition gives the story a bit more bite before everyone inevitably decides that splitting up inside the cave is somehow a fantastic idea. Horror movie logic remains undefeated.

The gore effects are genuinely solid, and the creature itself is a really satisfying mix of practical effects and monster-movie slime. There’s something refreshing about seeing a creature that feels tactile and physical rather than drowning in overly polished CGI. Yeah, the CGI and/or AI that was used, especially on monster movement, was obvious, but almost purposely. And time to face it. Generative AI is here to stay. We need to get used to it, unfortunately. The cave setting is also convincingly claustrophobic, creating that nice “absolutely not” feeling every time someone wanders deeper into the darkness.

Now, I do have to laugh at some of the decision-making here. After witnessing the monster, the group somehow thinks pitching a tent basically within throwing distance of the cave entrance is a perfectly acceptable survival plan. It’s the kind of gloriously dumb horror logic that almost becomes part of the charm. The stupidity definitely does not stop there, but honestly, that’s part of the fun.

Bone Keeper (2026)

There’s also a particularly strong dream sequence that lands well, plus the obligatory final scare sequel tease that feels ripped straight from the golden age of creature features. Bone Keeper pleasantly surprised me. It’s messy, a little ridiculous, and exactly the kind of monster flick that would’ve played beautifully in a late-night drive-in double feature. Sometimes all you really need is a creepy cave, questionable choices, and a hungry monster waiting in the dark.

https://jackmeat.com/bone-keeper-2026/

Ballistic (2026) | The most ballistic thing in this movie isn’t the bullets, it’s a grieving mother’s spiral into blame and obsession. #jackmeatsflix

My quick rating - 5.1/10. Ballistic opens with the kind of standoff that screamed to me, “You know we’ll circle back to this in 90 minutes.” Two people, guns raised, enough unresolved frustration to power the whole film. It’s a solid hook, and I genuinely thought I was in for a lean revenge thriller with some sharp twists and maybe a body count to keep track of.

Instead, this one takes a very different route.

The film follows Nance Redfield, played by Lena Headey, a grieving mother whose son was killed in Afghanistan. In what might be one of the most grimly committed opening acts I’ve seen in a while, she literally digs into her son’s body at the funeral home to retrieve the bullet from his corpse. Nothing says “coping” quite like a funeral-home autopsy side quest. It’s a brutal scene, unsettling by design, and it immediately sets the tone for the kind of grief-fueled obsession the film wants to explore.

What follows is less action-thriller and far more slow-burn drama. If you go in expecting Headey to morph into some unstoppable one-woman vengeance machine, mowing down everyone from corrupt executives to military officials, Ballistic is going to throw cold water on those expectations fast. There’s no John Wick here. Instead, the film leans hard into emotional collapse, blame, and the desperate human need to make tragedy make sense.

Nance’s search for someone, anyone, to hold responsible becomes the real engine of the story. Her boss at the ammunition plant, the military, and even Kahlil, played with real nuance by Hamza Haq, all become targets for her unraveling mind. This is where the movie works best. Both Headey and Haq deliver strong performances that elevate material which, at times, threatens to become repetitive. Headey in particular carries the film with a believable mix of rage, grief, and exhaustion.

To be honest, I was hoping that at some point, there would have been something else going on – like some kind of mystery or even conspiracy that could have been revealed. Wasn’t there anything more to the death of her son than just the obvious part? Well, it doesn’t give in to such a temptation, and instead focuses on a much darker message. Sometimes, there simply is no hidden enemy pulling the strings.

That said, the ending pushes realism in a few different ways that would never happen. And it ends on a note that feels more dramatically convenient than believable. For a film that sticks us with this quote after the finale: "It is estimated that at least 30 percent of the ammunition that comes back in American soldiers' bodies... is American-made." That final stretch is painfully unbelievable.

Ballistic (2026)

Once I adjusted my expectations and accepted that this wasn’t an action film in disguise, Ballistic settled into being your average drama. It’s not thrilling, and it’s certainly not explosive the way the marketing and title suggest, but the acting makes the journey worthwhile. Sometimes the most ballistic thing in the room is just unresolved grief.

https://jackmeat.com/ballistic-2026/

The Whistler (2026) | A violent little spirit and great flamenco music can’t quite save a horror movie built on unbelievably dumb choices. #jackmeatsflix

My quick rating - 4.4/10. I did think that The Whistler looked creepy when I added it to my slider a while back. It opens with text exposition laid over a scenic Venezuelan landscape, explaining that the Maria Lionza cult has been thriving for over 400 years. Ancient spirits, ritual practices, and a deeply rooted supernatural belief system? It’s a good way to begin a horror movie and certainly sufficient to attract any viewer who desires a horror movie centered on folklore possession.

The ritual scene at the beginning of the movie strengthens this hope, with a lady being kidnapped and utilized in a ritual to conjure The Whistler’s soul and then thrown away when she’s no longer useful. Someone gets attacked, blood is spilled, and the title card makes its dramatic entrance. At least the movie is kind enough to immediately answer the question of where the title came from.

Once the main story gets rolling, though, The Whistler starts tripping over its own characters, and Nicole is easily the biggest culprit. Diane Guerrero does what she can with the material, but Nicole is written as the kind of horror movie parent who seems completely immune to common sense. She’s grieving the loss of her daughter, which gives the film an emotional anchor, but the way she barrels through every warning is enough to make you want to yell at the screen.

When she’s told it’s too dangerous to perform a ceremony to speak with her dead child, her response is essentially, “I’ll pay whatever it costs.” Because apparently, in horror movies, ancient spirit rituals work like premium streaming subscriptions. If you’re going to dive headfirst into supernatural territory, maybe respecting the people who actually understand it would be a good place to start. Of course, someone from the cult immediately agrees to do it for the money, because bad decisions are clearly contagious here.

The Whistler itself is a pretty violent little menace when it actually gets going. There are some satisfyingly brutal moments, including a nasty disembowelment that leaves behind plenty of blood. The issue is that there just isn’t enough of that energy spread throughout the film. Director Diego Velasco clearly knows how to make a movie look good, and there are genuinely creepy moments sprinkled in, but the story never finds enough of an identity to separate itself from the pile of other possession flicks out there.

It is with the pacing that the film truly fails. It is a slow burn, one that sadly does not pay off its efforts until the last twenty minutes. And even then, all that happens is that the film has discovered how to pump life into itself. Nicole’s late-game leap into becoming some sort of instant occult expert is unintentionally hilarious, especially when she starts performing parts of a ritual she never even saw. Grief now comes with a crash course in Spanish and advanced demonology.

The flamenco music throughout was a nice touch, adding atmosphere and flavor to an otherwise familiar horror package. But then the movie tops it all off with a tidy Hollywood ending and the classic sequel tease, just in case this spirit wasn’t done whistling yet.

The Whistler (2026)

https://jackmeat.com/the-whistler-2026/

undertone (2026) | Starts with a creepy lullaby and somehow ends with me being more sleepy than scared. #jackmeatsflix

My quick rating - 4.7/10. Undertone opens with a creepy lullaby, and for a moment, I genuinely thought, okay, here we go, this might actually get under my skin. Creepy lullabies are basically horror’s version of a cheat code. Unfortunately, after that strong opening note, the film settles into a much slower rhythm that never quite builds into the nightmare I had hoped for.

The setup is solid on paper. Evy (Nina Kiri), host of an all-things-creepy podcast, moves into her dying mother’s house to become her primary caregiver. Already, that’s a loaded, emotionally rich horror premise. Add in ten mysterious audio recordings from a pregnant couple dealing with paranormal noises, and you’ve got something that should be absolutely dripping with dread. Instead, Undertone feels like it keeps circling the runway without ever landing.

The film relies quite heavily on Evy, and Nina Kiri gives it her best effort. She features in nearly every scene where something important happens, as she listens to unusual noises and unravels the mystery around her. The problem is that the script gives her a lot of moments that are unintentionally funny for the wrong reasons. There’s only so many times you can watch someone pause mid-listening session, slowly stare into the middle distance like they just heard the ghost whisper “boo,” and expect it to still register as scary. After a while, it starts feeling less like psychological horror and more like your earbuds glitching out.

The podcast framing also had me chuckling, and not always in the intended way. Hearing Evy and her unseen co-host Justin (Adam DiMarco) do the whole “blah blah, let’s get back into character” routine, only to continue sounding exactly the same, had me wondering if the real horror was the production meeting. It undercuts the immersion almost every time the film uses the audio format as a source of tension.

That said, the sound design is easily the film’s MVP. If anything in Undertone works, it’s the audio atmosphere. The persistent creaks, distant noises, and layered recordings do a lot of the work. They try desperately to scare us when not much is actually happening. The cinematography also deserves credit, making strong use of the confined setting. The house feels appropriately boxed in, and director Ian Tuason clearly understands how to use space and restraint. There’s genuine filmmaking talent here, even if the script keeps putting it in a headlock.

My biggest issue is that the film mistakes slow pacing for suspense. Half the tension-building scenes rely on the classic horror trope of someone inching toward a flickering light like they’ve never paid an electricity bill before. I’m sorry, but if a light is flickering in my house, I’m not slow-walking toward it like it’s the final boss. I’m marching straight over to jiggle the bulb and mutter about the wiring.

undertone (2026)

I really wanted to like Undertone, especially with such a clever “scariest movie ever heard” concept playing off its podcast angle. But in the end, it left me feeling more bored rather than creeped out. The actors are perfectly fine, the direction shows promise, but the story and script needed far more bite. Instead of dread, I mostly felt like I was waiting for something, ANYTHING, to finally happen.

https://jackmeat.com/undertone-2026/

Spider-Man: Across The Spider-Verse (2023) | A visual masterpiece with enough Easter eggs to make comic fans pause every frame like they’re studying game tape. #jackmeatsflix

My quick rating - 7.9/10. Spider-Man: Across the Spider-Verse somehow takes everything the first movie did brilliantly and says, “Cool, but what if we turned the dial so hard it snapped off?” The animation here is flat-out insane. Already, I was impressed by the first movie, but what this sequel does is somehow take it up a notch, making the first one seem like nothing compared to it. Every shot would seem like it belongs in an art gallery if there were any that display comics having a midlife crisis.

The sheer visual creativity on display is ridiculous in the best way possible. Every universe has its own style, texture, and personality, making the multiverse actually feel different instead of just being the same city with a different filter slapped over it. This movie doesn’t just push the boundaries of animation. It politely waves at the boundaries and then launches itself through them headfirst.

The action sequences aren’t much tamer either. Here again is Miles Morales, showing off his ability to swing through places that nobody has any business getting into and doing so in style. The action sequences are frenetic, inventive, and exciting to watch, each Spider-Man bringing his or her own sense of flair and personality to the action.

I don’t usually give enough credit to voice performances. That’s 100% on me and not the movie, but Shameik Moore and Hailee Steinfeld genuinely deserve it here. Miles and Gwen’s chemistry feels so natural that their scenes often hit harder than the action itself. There’s a believable touch to their conversations that keeps the movie grounded even while it’s throwing six hundred Spider-People at the screen.

And speaking of Spider-People, this film absolutely has fun with that concept. The endless parade of alternate versions is not only hilarious but also a goldmine for fan service. The Lego Spider-Man bit got a genuine laugh out of me. How unexpected and so perfectly absurd was that? The Easter eggs are everywhere, too. Daring us, comic fans, to pause every frame and start pointing at the screen like conspiracy theorists.

That said, for a movie sitting at 140 minutes, I definitely felt the runtime. For something I’d call an exceptional action movie, you know, the kind that earns an 8 or higher, those two-plus hours should disappear. Here, they didn’t. The pacing occasionally drifts into music-video territory, which looks amazing but sometimes slows the actual story momentum. And then there’s that ending. Yes, it’s an effective cliffhanger, but it also felt like the movie hit the brakes right as it was flooring it.

Spider-Man: Across the Spider-Verse (2023)

Still, Spider-Man: Across The Spider-Verse is wildly entertaining, visually groundbreaking, and more than worthy of the hype - even if IMDb’s “greatest movie ever made” crowd might need to relax a little. Either way, I’ll absolutely be first in line for part three of this animated trilogy.

https://jackmeat.com/spider-man-across-the-spider-verse-2023/

Tarot Curse (2025) | The kills were fun, but the story had less depth than a fortune cookie and about the same level of explanation. #jackmeatsflix

My quick rating - 3.7/10. I have no problem with horror films that ask me to set aside my skepticism. Tarot Curse seems to invite me to leave mine parked beside the tour bus even before the title sequence finishes.

The film kicks off on a surprisingly fun note, with some poor guy being stalked by an unseen presence before meeting a quick and nasty end. There’s a stab, some solid tension, and then a wonderfully grim practical effect involving a bowling ball that immediately lets you know what kind of movie this wants to be. It’s bloody, creative, and just campy enough to get a smile out of horror fans. If nothing else, the opening promises a goofy good time.

Then we hit the classic horror road trip setup: a group of students heading to New Orleans for Tara’s (Lauren Chanel) birthday. Naturally, they all seem to barely tolerate one another, which is always the cinematic signal that half the cast exists solely to be fed into the meat grinder. Apparently, they’re high school kids, though they seem to think they are well into their 20s. In true genre fashion, they follow some random skull-faced stranger because that apparently screams “safe and fun adventure.” Horror characters continue to prove that basic survival instincts are optional, and that is why we love it.

Once the group ends up at the old blind tarot card reader’s place, you can already hear the death clock start ticking. She performs some mysterious ritual, blows dust in their faces like she’s seasoning a roast, and sends them home with conveniently fuzzy memories of the weekend. Not that they seem to care.

Back at school, things quickly get hairy. And yes, that pun is absolutely deserved considering the first major kill. Two of them die almost immediately, and the remaining survivors somehow still refuse to connect the dots. At a certain point, when your friends are being gruesomely picked off in ways that match cursed tarot readings, maybe it’s time to stop being the “I don’t believe in this stuff” character and start being the “let’s leave town immediately” character.

This is where Tarot Curse really struggles. The premise actually has potential, but the script never does enough with it. The mythology behind the tarot woman, the curse, and the “why” behind any of this is left so thin it feels unfinished rather than mysterious. Sometimes ambiguity works in horror. Here, it just comes off as lazy writing.

The acting doesn’t help much either. It's not quite enough to be laughably bad, but it's utterly predictable and one-dimensional, and the characters are lacking any real personality. The one character who may be worth pulling for would have to be Quinn (Evelyn Kim), simply because she's the only one who appears to be trying to stay alive.

That said, there is still plenty of good direction from Jason Winn, and the practical gore effects are clearly why we are here. Unfortunately, there must be more to a movie than just splatter effects. Well, not a hell of a lot more, but give us something. Mix in an absolutely abysmal ending that fizzles out, and Tarot Curse ends up as a forgettable horror flick that had the cards stacked against it from the start.

Tarot Curse (2025)

https://jackmeat.com/tarot-curse-2025/

Portal in the Pines (2025) | Imagine Stranger Things crashed into a satanic B-movie and forgot how to end itself. That's my take on this mess. #jackmeatsflix

My quick rating - 4.1/10. I am not entirely sure if they were being serious or not with this indie flick. Portal in the Pines is that kind of film where you just know it started with a whiteboard, several coffees, and some person shouting, “How about we just add a little bit more?” C'mon, guys, pick a lane.

The film opens in 1985 at a military base where some top-secret testing goes spectacularly wrong. Not the cool, calculated “this was part of the plan” kind of wrong either. More of the “whoops, we may have just ripped a hole in reality” kind. It’s a fun setup, helped by the local shock jock intro that gives the whole thing a slightly campy, late-night paranormal radio vibe. Right away, Portal in the Pines promises aliens, government secrets, satanic rituals, and possibly hell itself. Ambitious? Absolutely. Focused? Not even a little.

Once we jump to the present, the story follows rural fireman Jessie, played by Garrett Kruithof, who stumbles into the kind of situation most firefighters probably aren’t trained for - a secret particle collider opening a portal to hell in the woods. Somewhere between Stranger Things, a late-night Syfy Channel entry, and a supernatural conspiracy podcast, the movie keeps tossing new ideas at the wall to see what sticks. Aliens? Sure. Other dimensions? Why not. Spiritual warfare? Toss it in. At times, it genuinely feels like writer-director Eric Gibson had five different movie pitches and decided the best solution was to combine all of them into one blender.

All things considered, Portal in the Pines stands out as an impressive work for its budget. There are good performances throughout the film, and even when the story becomes a bit confusing in terms of “what movie are we watching,” it remains engaging enough to keep watching. Kruithof does a decent job juggling the madness, which is no small task when the film keeps changing lanes every ten minutes.

Ashton Leigh’s Ashley, Jessie’s ex-wife, is written to be aggressively frustrating, and mission accomplished there. She’s the kind of character who makes you want to yell at the screen, so credit where it’s due. On the brighter side, Jamie Kennedy as Herby brings some much-needed comic relief and actually fits surprisingly well into all the alien encounter nonsense. His scenes are easily among the most entertaining in the film. Sierra DeRose’s Evelyn also leaves a good impression, especially given her connection to the opening disaster, though it definitely feels like the movie could have used more of her.

The effects are fair for the budget and do enough to sell the more bizarre moments. But where Portal in the Pines really stumbles is the finale. After spending so much time building toward stopping the satanists from opening the gates of hell, the final confrontation is so silly it borders on parody. Then, just when you expect some kind of payoff, the ending takes the cheapest and laziest possible exit route.

Portal in the Pines (2025)

Still, despite being all over the place, Portal in the Pines is semi-watchable in that oddly entertaining “I can’t believe they went there” kind of way. It’s messy and overloaded with ridiculous tropes, but at least it never dies of boredom.

https://jackmeat.com/portal-in-the-pines-2025/