A bee buzzes past your ear, deafening. Say it. A flick of the switch and the light bulbs surge to life, their buzzing an unsettling reminder. Say it. Your nerves steel, as you walk past your mirror, glimpsing something in its corner. Say it. A doubletake and its nothing. Say it. Suddenly it’s not your reflection in the mirror. Say it. Body off balance, staggering back to your feet and only he remains. Candyman.
Well, that was a weird way to start this review, but I feel it captures and highlights some of the visceral tones and incredible hypnotic nature featured in Candyman (2021). Not so much a remake as it is a continuation of the original film, this latest version directed my Nia DaCosta has us returning to Cabrini-Green in Chicago, but it’s much different than how we left it. Gentrification has run rampant, and the film has no problem telling us this as we follow Brianna Cartwright (Teyonah Parris), a struggling art curator and Anthony McCoy (Yahya Abdul-Mateen II), an up-and-coming artist whose work has begun to stagnate. After learning of the urban legends of Candyman from Brianna’s brother Troy (Nathan Stewart-Jarrett), Anthony in desperate need of some inspiration decides to dig a little deeper into the events of the past in this community. With this premise, events are set in motion, and this is where the film really begins to branch into its own as it blends horror with social issues of racial violence, injustice, and classism.
From the opening credit shots of an inverted skyline fading into the clouds, you can tell DaCosta is a pro in visual storytelling along with her cinematographer, John Guleserian, who are able to capture incredible shots and scenes throughout this film. There’s a certain symmetry that they encompass in their shot composition that draws the eye to the center and then all around it so you can feel the scope of the scene, like at the art gallery or Anthony standing in the street between housing complexes against a pink skyline. These focal point shots do a really great job of making the audience feel as isolated and claustrophobic as some of our characters do in these key moments. This film also utilizes a shadow puppet technique with paper cutouts to illustrate the history and lore at certain points in the film and does so to great effect to establish a fantasy-like tone to the cruel reality of the stories they portray. There was also a lot of good body horror imagery working in conjunction with bold lighting choices that really set the tone. The colors used were purposeful and eye-catching with a lot of yellows and in particular a lot of red and blue; this could allude to the film’s culminating scene or represent the clash between those contrasting colors that manifests itself amongst our characters and within themselves. On top of that, with mirrors playing such a prominent role in this franchise, the film has a lot of fun with reflective surfaces that play into the visual horror and uneasiness that it excels at. One more thing to make point of regarding the camera work are the great tracking shots that make the audience feel trapped with the character. Three of these shots specifically caught my attention: One was Anthony navigating through people in the art gallery, in an attempt to break free from the crowds and stand out. Another was the circular apartment hallway scene that seemed to have no end or beginning, representing a madness and cyclical nature to the events unfolding before us. And lastly, is the tracking shot of Anthony in a frantic state, leaving his mother’s apartment through a tube-like structure that encapsulates him, as the transformation draws near its completion. Suffice it to say I really enjoyed the visuals, cinematography, and direction of this film, but it’s in the plot and narrative that it falls off a bit for me.
The film takes on an investigative narrative mixed with a descent into madness that works well visually through Anthony’s paintings, his mental deterioration and physical transformation. Unfortunately, the mystique of the original Candyman is lost a bit; that mystery surrounding his existence is teased in the original, whereas in the latest version he blatantly exists and there is no question as to whether Anthony commits the murders himself, corrupted by the spirit of Candyman. In terms of the legend of Candyman, the film expands on this front which works in some ways for me but not in others. For example, the original story of Daniel Robitaille’s torture and murder is still there, but the Candyman legend embodies the many black faces of victims of systemic racism and police brutality over generations and is meant to represent their pain and anger. I find this inclusion to be powerful especially as represented by the tortured faces that Anthony paints. On another front, while the original sees Helen Lyle’s character exploiting black stories for her own gain, this film seeks to reclaim the Candyman mythos, recounting the character of William Burke (Colman Domingo) stating, “they love what we make but not us.” I really enjoy that aspect of the film as it takes Candyman’s presence as a terror to the black community and flips the narrative, making him a vengeful spirit born of necessity and the pain of those that were killed. Thematically that really works for me but in execution it comes off heavy-handed and on-the-nose, which was a recurring problem in the rest of the film. The use of horror and social commentary can be immensely effective as seen in films like Get Out, but they must maintain that balance and in this instance the horror element kind of takes a backseat to the less than subtly presented social issues that sometimes arise in clunky dialogue. Sometimes things need to be said blatantly and need a light casted on them, but I generally feel like weaving it into the story more organically has a stronger impact.
The cast of this film was excellent in my opinion, although I found the characters lacking a lot of depth, serving as vehicles for the plot. We do see brief instances of character motivations and aspirations, but they are mostly just pushed along. Though no one quite matches the gravitas of Tony Todd for me, I felt that the whole cast still put forth great performances that will resonate with audiences. These were just a few gripes that I had with the film but overall, in its own distinctive way I see it as a worthy continuation that pays homage to the original but reinvents the franchise for a modern audience in content and aesthetic. I recommend you see it and see where it lands for you.
