REVIEW: Buddy (2026 film) - Starring Keegan-Michael Key

Review by Jon Donnis

Buddy is one of those horror films that sounds utterly ridiculous on paper, yet somehow manages to make its strange central idea work. Directed by Casper Kelly in his feature film directorial debut, this American supernatural slasher takes the innocent, brightly coloured world of a 1990s children's television programme and turns it into something deeply unsettling. The result is funny, violent, strange and frequently surreal, with the feeling that someone has discovered an old VHS tape of a children's show that should never have existed in the first place.

The film's greatest strength is how convincingly it recreates the look and feel of children's television from the 1990s. Everything about It's Buddy! feels deliberately familiar, from the colourful sets and costumes to the songs, characters and relentlessly cheerful presentation. The production design deserves particular credit because the film understands that the horror works best when the world itself initially looks harmless. Buddy is a giant, bright orange unicorn designed to spread happiness and teach children life lessons, but that forced positivity gradually becomes sinister as his cheerful exterior begins to crack.

That contrast provides the film with much of its humour and horror. Buddy's increasingly aggressive attempts to force children to participate in his supposedly joyful world are funny precisely because they are presented with the same exaggerated enthusiasm you might expect from an actual children's programme. The satire of toxic positivity is particularly effective, taking the familiar idea that children should always be happy and turning it into something threatening. The film has a lot of fun with the conventions of children's television, while the increasingly violent consequences provide a wonderfully twisted counterpoint.

The practical effects are another major positive. When Buddy finally reveals what is hiding beneath the cheerful façade, the film does not rely entirely on suggestion. There is plenty of blood, mutilation and physical violence, and the contrast between the brightly coloured children's world and the brutality taking place within it is often striking. It gives Buddy a tangible presence and helps the film retain the feel of a traditional practical-effects horror film rather than becoming entirely dependent on digital imagery.

The performances are strong across the board. Delaney Quinn is particularly effective as Freddy, giving the character enough vulnerability and determination to make her increasingly desperate attempts to survive compelling. Cristin Milioti also brings considerable emotional weight to the real-world storyline as Grace, while Keegan-Michael Key does an excellent job vocally as Buddy. His performance is crucial because Buddy needs to remain entertaining even when he becomes frightening, and the cheerful delivery of increasingly sinister material creates much of the character's appeal.

The original songs are another highlight. They capture the artificial cheerfulness of the fictional programme while becoming increasingly uncomfortable as the story develops. It is a clever way of maintaining the children's television concept throughout the film, rather than simply using the aesthetic as a one-off joke.

There is also considerably more world-building here than the basic premise might suggest. The discovery that other children's programmes and characters have been caught up in Buddy's strange existence opens up a much larger mythology. George and his foul-mouthed marionette Willie are especially entertaining, providing another bizarre detour into the history of the world while also reinforcing the idea that Buddy has been doing this for far longer than the central characters realise. The mystery surrounding the children's missing memories and Grace's discovery of the connection between Buddy and her family gives the film an emotional dimension that gradually becomes more important.

However, Buddy does have its limitations. The central premise is stretched rather thinly across feature length. The idea of a murderous children's television character escaping into the real world is strong enough to sustain a short film or an extended horror sketch, but the longer Buddy continues, the more obvious the limitations of the concept become. There are several excellent ideas here, but they do not always feel substantial enough to support the entire running time.

The film also does not completely capitalise on its premise. There are plenty of opportunities to push the contrast between children's television innocence and supernatural horror even further, but some of the later sections feel more interested in introducing another strange idea than developing the strongest elements already established. The George and Willie material is entertaining, for example, but it also contributes to the sense that the film is moving away from its most effective central concept.

The third act is where the film becomes noticeably less controlled. The mythology expands, some narrative elements become deliberately ambiguous, and the central mystery starts competing with the more straightforward horror story. That surreal quality is part of Buddy's identity, but it can also make the story feel less focused as it approaches its conclusion.

Some of the commentary on children's media could also have been developed further. The satire of enforced happiness and the pressure to behave correctly is clear, but there are moments where the film appears to be setting up broader observations about children's entertainment without fully exploring them. As a result, some of the social commentary feels secondary to the horror and comedy rather than being fully integrated into the story.

There is also a degree of repetition. Once Buddy's basic behaviour has been established, some of the later sequences revisit ideas the audience already understands. The film can consequently feel overextended, particularly when compared with how strong and immediately effective the central concept is.

It is worth noting that Buddy is not quite as disturbing as its premise might initially suggest. It certainly contains violence and unsettling imagery, but the film's comedic and deliberately absurd approach prevents it from becoming relentlessly frightening. That will work in its favour for viewers looking for a horror film that prioritises entertainment and weirdness over sustained terror, but those expecting something genuinely nightmarish may find it less intense than anticipated.

Despite those shortcomings, there is something undeniably likeable about Buddy. It is an original idea, executed with a clear visual identity and a genuine affection for the children's television aesthetic it is subverting. The best moments are those where the film allows its bizarre premise to collide with its meticulous recreation of 1990s children's programming. When that happens, Buddy becomes exactly what it promises to be, a cheerful children's show that has somehow become cursed.

The film's biggest achievement is that it remains genuinely entertaining despite how unusual the premise is. It has a distinctive world, memorable characters, strong performances, effective practical effects and enough strange ideas to make it stand out from more conventional slashers. It may have benefited from tighter pacing and a more controlled final act, but there is plenty here to enjoy.

What a strange but well-made horror film. For anyone who grew up watching children's television in the 1980s or 1990s, everything looks and feels so familiar, but then it all goes so horribly wrong. Buddy does not always know when to stop, but its combination of nostalgia, dark comedy, violence and surreal horror makes it difficult to dismiss.

I really enjoyed Buddy. It manages to feel original and nostalgic at the same time, and despite its flaws, it is an entertaining and memorable horror film.

I score Buddy a solid 8 out of 10

You can watch the horror-comedy movie Buddy (2026) following its UK premiere at FrightFest in London on August 28 and August 31, 2026

Apple TV - https://apple.co/4y9cYz1

REVIEW: Scream 7 (2026 Film) - Starring Neve Campbell, Jasmin Savoy Brown, Mason Gooding, David Arquette, Matthew Lillard and Courteney Cox

Review by Jon Donnis

The long running slasher saga returns with Scream 7, a direct follow up to Scream VI and the seventh entry in the famous horror franchise. This time the story pulls the focus back toward Sidney Prescott, placing her once again at the centre of a new Ghostface killing spree. The result is a film that feels very familiar, sometimes almost deliberately so, but it still delivers an entertaining and suitably violent experience for fans who know exactly what they are signing up for.

The film opens with a classic style prologue set in Woodsboro. Two Stab obsessed fans decide to visit the old home of Stu Macher after hearing rumours that he might have survived the events of the original killings. It is a curiosity that ends in brutal fashion when Ghostface appears and murders the pair before setting the house on fire. The sequence feels like a clear nod to the history of the series and immediately sets the tone for the film. It is violent, tense and unapologetically tied to the past.

The story then moves to Pine Grove, Indiana, where Sidney Prescott has attempted to build a quiet life far away from the horrors that once defined her. She runs a coffeehouse, is married to police officer Mark Evans, and spends her days raising her children. Among them is her teenage daughter Tatum, named after Sidney's late best friend Tatum Riley. For a brief moment the film allows Sidney the illusion of peace, though anyone familiar with the franchise will know that it cannot last.

The return of Ghostface shatters that calm. Sidney receives a chilling call from the killer who claims to be an older and scarred Stu Macher. Whether that claim is genuine or not becomes part of the mystery, but the threat is immediate. The killer reveals that he is standing outside a theatre where Sidney's daughter and her classmates are rehearsing. Sidney races there with the police, but the attack has already begun. Two students are murdered before Ghostface disappears into the night.

From that point onward the story unfolds in the familiar rhythm of suspicion and escalating violence that the series is known for. Tatum becomes the central target of the new attacks, which creates a strong emotional hook for the story. Sidney is no longer just protecting herself. She is trying to prevent her daughter from experiencing the same trauma that shaped her own life.

The biggest strength of the film is the return of Neve Campbell as Sidney Prescott. Campbell remains the heart of the series and her presence instantly grounds the story. She plays Sidney with the calm determination of someone who has endured years of violence yet refuses to be defined by it. Even when the plot becomes chaotic, her performance keeps the emotional focus intact.

The supporting cast provides solid backup throughout the film. Isabel May takes on the role of Tatum and carries much of the tension once the attacks begin to circle around her group of friends. Jasmin Savoy Brown and Mason Gooding return as the Meeks Martin twins, survivors of previous Ghostface attacks who once again find themselves caught in the middle of the carnage. Meanwhile Courteney Cox appears once more as Gale Weathers, the determined reporter who has spent years documenting the bloody history of these murders.

The film does not hold back when it comes to violence. Several of the kill scenes are particularly intense, with Ghostface stalking characters through houses, streets and dimly lit interiors before striking with brutal efficiency. The gore is present and the tension is handled well during these moments, reminding audiences why the Ghostface killer remains such a memorable horror figure.

Where the film struggles slightly is in its lack of originality. Scream 7 clearly understands what its audience expects and it rarely attempts to move beyond that formula. The structure of the story, the suspects and even the eventual revelations follow patterns that long time fans of the series will recognise almost immediately. Nothing here feels wildly new or experimental.

That cautious approach makes the film feel safe at times. The story relies heavily on nostalgia and familiar franchise ideas rather than taking bold risks. For devoted fans that nostalgia can be enjoyable. Seeing the story circle back toward earlier events in Woodsboro gives the film a sense of continuity. At the same time it also highlights how little the formula has changed.

The running time of one hour and fifty minutes occasionally stretches the pacing as well. Some scenes linger longer than necessary while the characters attempt to figure out who might be behind the mask. The tension eventually builds towards a violent and chaotic final confrontation, but the middle portion of the film can feel slightly drawn out.

Despite those issues, Scream 7 remains an entertaining slasher film. It delivers the suspense, the gore and the returning characters that audiences expect from the series. The emotional core provided by Sidney's relationship with her daughter adds weight to the story, and Neve Campbell's performance reminds viewers why Sidney Prescott remains one of horror cinema's most enduring survivors.

In the end Scream 7 feels very much like a film made for fans of the franchise. It does not attempt to reinvent the series and it rarely pushes the story into new territory. What it does offer is a familiar and bloody return to the world of Ghostface, packed with nostalgia and anchored by a strong central performance.

It may not reach the heights of the very best entries in the saga, but it is still a solid and enjoyable addition to the series. I would score Scream 7 a respectable 7 out of 10.

Out in cinemas now

PREVIEW: The Naughty List of Mr. Scrooge (2025 Film) - A Bloody Good Christmas

Preview by Jon Donnis

It's beginning to look a lot like murder. The Naughty List of Mr. Scrooge is here to turn Christmas cheer into festive fear, bringing a sinister twist to Dickens' classic tale. The film arrives on UK digital platforms on 3 November, just in time to kick off the season with something far more chilling than tinsel and eggnog.

Written, directed and produced by Jake Helgren (Dashing in December, Bad Connection), this gruesome holiday slasher takes a group of old college friends and traps them in a snow-dusted nightmare. Their cosy reunion turns macabre when memories of a friend's death a decade earlier resurface. The mood darkens further with the arrival of an uninvited guest wearing an Ebenezer Scrooge mask and a taste for vengeance.

What follows is a wild mix of festive nostalgia and blood-soaked terror, as the killer methodically crosses each victim off his "naughty list". The film balances knowing wit with grisly creativity, leaning into its Christmas setting with twinkling lights, dark humour and enough jump scares to make even the hardiest horror fan flinch.

Early praise from genre outlets hints at a cult hit in the making. Hysteria Lives calls it "a future Christmas slasher classic", while Macabre Daily describes it as "a present you definitely want to open". Between the sharp script, stylish cinematography and committed performances, The Naughty List of Mr. Scrooge looks set to become a must-watch for horror fans who prefer their Christmas stories blood-red.

So, pour the mulled wine, lock the doors and prepare for a frightfully festive night in. The Naughty List of Mr. Scrooge is one Christmas gift that bites back.

The Naughty List of Mr. Scrooge on digital 3 November from Miracle Media

REVIEW: I Know What You Did Last Summer (2025) - Starring Madelyn Cline, Chase Sui Wonders and Jonah Hauer-King

Review by Jon Donnis

Twenty-seven years after the events in Southport first unfolded, I Know What You Did Last Summer returns with a new generation of guilt-ridden teens, a familiar hook-wielding killer, and just enough blood-soaked nostalgia to keep things afloat. Directed by Jennifer Kaytin Robinson, this fourth entry in the franchise slots itself directly after I Still Know What You Did Last Summer, brushing off the largely forgotten 2006 and 2021 entries and re-establishing continuity with a vengeance.

The setup is almost charming in its familiarity: a group of friends are involved in a late-night accident and choose to cover it up rather than face the fallout. A year later, they're picked off one by one by a killer who's very much in the know. There's no reinvention here, and the film leans into that deliberately. Robinson aims for the same glossy, lurid tone that made the '90s slashers so watchable, and to her credit, she mostly pulls it off.

Chase Sui Wonders anchors the film well as Ava Brucks, a slightly more grounded and thoughtful protagonist than some of the past franchise leads. She returns to Southport just in time to watch her closest friends unravel, starting with a cryptic note and ending with a series of brutal murders. Madelyn Cline is solid too as Danica, the bride-to-be who takes a particularly bloody journey from carefree party girl to blood-soaked survivor.

The film really earns its keep when it comes to the kills. There's an energy to the violence here that horror fans will appreciate. They're nasty, drawn out, and satisfyingly practical in a way that recalls the heyday of early 2000s horror. A scene in the now-shuttered Shiver's department store is especially strong, both for the way it taps into franchise lore and the way it builds tension before things go full carnage.

The return of Jennifer Love Hewitt and Freddie Prinze Jr. could have felt gimmicky, but actually ends up giving the story a bit more texture. Julie James is now a university professor who wants nothing to do with Southport, while Ray, now bitter and quietly disturbed, ends up playing a much larger role in the carnage than initially expected. There's a clever shift here, where nostalgia isn't just used for window dressing but actually woven into the structure of the story. Ray's arc, in particular, brings a level of personal betrayal that lands harder than expected.

Still, for everything the film gets right, there's plenty that doesn't quite land. The dialogue, especially among the younger cast, often sounds like it was filtered through a dozen TikTok scripts and rewritten for maximum cringe. Attempts at humour or sincerity regularly miss the mark, and there's a sense throughout that the film is trying far too hard to be in on the joke.

The nostalgia, too, becomes a bit of a double-edged sword. For fans of the original, there's some enjoyment in the references, the music cues, and the cameos, but it does start to weigh the film down. Rather than carving its own path, it often feels like it's tracing someone else's, hoping we won't notice the repetition.

I Know What You Did Last Summer (2025) is far from groundbreaking, but it knows what it is. It delivers grisly deaths, throws in a few fun twists, and doesn't try to overcomplicate things. It's not going to dethrone the original, and it probably won't stick in anyone's memory for long, but as a late-night slasher with a good-looking cast and plenty of blood, it mostly does the job.

7 out of 10. Not essential, but far from the worst summer trip back to Southport.

In Cinemas Now!