A film with a teddy bear at the center of the movie may make the audience think that the bear is going to come to life. Surprisingly, the bear in remains calm and silent in Imaginary, a thriller where the terror can be hard to find. Directed by Jeff Wadlow, Imaginary is one of the most authentic thriller films I have seen. Not exactly excellent, but high quality and, again, authentic.

Imaginary begins with Jessica (played by DeWanda Wise), a woman who grew up with a harsh life of abuse and hardship. She is married to Max (played by Tom Payne), and she is a stepmom to Tom’s daughters, Taylor (played by Taegen Burns) and Alice (played by Pyper Braun). When Jessica moves with her family into her childhood home, Alice’s mood start to shift. Alice has an imaginary friend named Chauncey. At first Jessica believes it’s a phase—until more evil begins to emerge in the most unexpected realms throughout the childhood home.

There is a background of conflict that mingles throughout Imaginary—a mother with a harsh childhood, a father who is divorced, a daughter who is a typical teenager and another daughter with a detrimental imaginary friend. The audience will at first believe that the film is a typical horror film where a spirit makes a child evil, but the terror in Imaginary backfires in unpredictable ways, and it tends to pop up like an old-fashioned wolf man monster. The film is more of a puzzle than anything else, and there seems to be a lot of over-thinking in the writing and execution. The film is just not written to leave the audience feeling scared after. Rather, it leaves them curious. What in Jessica’s past is related so much to the teddy bear? What are those weird moving parts in Jessica childhood home?

I found Imaginary to be not extremely well written, but it has a niche in the horror genre. It has a spiritual type of terror that is hidden in a teddy bear. It also seemed to create a maze of sorts that grows with tainted memories. Karma and misdirection find itself combined in this film, and that is what sold me the most with Imaginary. But instead of a revenge teddy bear, which we expect after the teddy bear is introduced, it heads down the track of almost a terror Tetris. The questions and theories keep evolving. And instead of scary terror, it’s more about experimenting and investigating the spirits that are flowing. The film begs the question of who will find the answers to the terror? Find out in Imaginary. Three out of four stars.

What is appropriate when it comes to teachers and students? What behaviors cross a line? How awkward or uncomfortable can situations get? In Miller’s Girl boundaries are crossed when there is an inappropriate relationship between a teacher and student. When things take a turn for the worst in the story, things become misconstrued as the characterizations and dynamics are an utter mess. Overall, the film’s presentation falls flat. While Miller’s Girl is rich in context and dialogue, the continuity is lacking. There is limited background to explain why the scenarios end up being so dreadful and miscalculated. As someone who respects boundaries, Miller’s Girl was a-disappointment.

The film takes place in a rural Tennessee. Jonathan Miller (played by Martin Freeman) is an English teacher. He is lucky to have his job because the school he works at has difficulties with funding. His friend Boris (played by Bashir Salahuddin) is a science teacher and they both end up in a strange dynamic with two female students. Cairo Sweet (played by Jenny Ortega) and Winnie Black (played by Gideon Aldeon) both have uniquepersonalities with Cairo being stranger. Jonathan assigns Cairo to write a paper about an author that speaks to her. The author she chooses is Henry Miller which is a red flag. This choice is questioned by Jonathan because of the context of the novels written by Miller. There is a level of closeness that Cairo learns about from Winnie. Both girls figure out ways to be seductive for their own benefit. Cairo’s goal is to have her piece grasp a lot of attention to help her have a bright future. This is where the real trouble in the film sets in. The seductive relationship between Jonathan and Cairo crosses boundaries. From this point on, Miller’s Crossing turns into an unbearable mess with poor writing and limited continuity.

The film is poorly displayed, and the connections happen too quickly. The seductive scenes are just thrown in. Even the teachers have poor judgment. The story includes one poor choice after another. Miller’s Girl just keeps repeating the same bad mistakes. To add to the mess, weird personalities overtake the film’s writing. The sole purpose seems to be to expose the stupidity among its characters, including the sexualized brains of the students.

There is a scene where Cairo adapts her essay about Henry Miller and correlates it to the seductive (and inappropriate) experience she had with Jonathan. This is an example of how this movie displays mediocrity at its finest. Comparing a famous author and linking it to a teacher with poor morals seems wrong. Although the basic idea behind this movie had promise, it is the approach it took to become enticing or haunting that failed. Miller’s Girl is not only poorly written but also poorly executed.

The film finds no resolution to any of the foolish conflicts. Although there is some seductive chemistry, it seems rushed. When boundaries are crossed, there are irreparable consequences. The story goes around in circles. In the end, this film was a poor experience because it was disgusting and confused. One out of four stars for Miller’s Girl.