During my 10 years as a Moscow-based journalist, I struggled to imagine how and when I would eventually leave Russia.
Half Russian myself, I had moved there in 2013, keen to learn more and report on a country that I felt was often misunderstood by many in the West.
In the end, the decision was made for me last month when a representative of Russia’s foreign ministry called to tell me that my visa would not be renewed and I had six days to leave.
The decision, I was told, had been taken by the “relevant authorities,” a term widely used to refer to the security services.
You may like
After POLITICO published a news story on my expulsion, I received a message from a fellow journalist wishing me luck.
“The same thing happened to me,” they wrote.
In the days since, other colleagues have shared their stories about their de facto expulsions from Russia. Most have deep ties to Russia and speak the language fluently.
Taken together, their cases illustrate a worrying trend: Journalists from Western countries are slowly being squeezed out of Russia, as the Kremlin cracks down on the last few independent voices covering the domestic impact of the war in Ukraine ahead of a presidential election next year.
“It is a way of setting the tone,” Alexander Baunov, a former Russian diplomat, now a senior fellow at the Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center, told me.
“Otherwise the Western press corps might think they are free to do as they please. The point is to have them ponder every phrase, weigh their every word.”
The home front
As Russian tanks lined up on the road to Kyiv in February 2022, back home the Kremlin was launching a second assault: on the country’s independent media.
First, government censor Roskomnadzor blocked online access to the handful of critical outlets still operating.
As Russian tanks lined up on the road to Kyiv in February 2022, back home the Kremlin was launching an assault on the country’s independent media | Chris McGrath/Getty Images
Then, new laws were passed, effectively banning the word “war” and introducing a penalty of up to 15 years in prison for the dissemination of information that called into question the official narrative on what Russia calls the “special military operation.”
Russian journalists took their cue and fled the country en masse. Concerned by rumors the authorities were about to impose martial law and close the border, many of their foreign colleagues followed suit.
As weeks and months passed, however, many of the latter gradually returned.
While Russian citizens were being prosecuted under the new censorship laws, “it seemed then that we weren’t going to be sent to jail [for our reporting],” Arja Paananen, a correspondent for the Finnish newspaper Ilta-Sanomat, told me in a phone conversation.
This fit within a long tradition of foreign journalists being spared from domestic repression.
In the years before the war, the ticket to that special status came in the form of an accreditation issued by Russia’s foreign ministry, for which journalists were required to reapply once a year in order to then secure a visa.
As relations between Russia and the West took a nosedive following the annexation of Crimea in 2014, the paperwork increased. Starting in 2022, for example, Russia introduced mandatory health checks for foreigners, involving fingerprinting, a chest X-ray and a session with a psychiatrist.
Some journalists began to be told to submit samples of their work along with their request to renew their accreditation.
But the extra red tape was largely viewed as a harmless, albeit cumbersome, formality.
It therefore came as a shock when in summer 2021, the longtime BBC correspondent Sarah Rainsford was told upon returning from a reporting trip in Belarus that she had been designated a “security threat” and was being barred from Russia for life.
Officially, her de facto expulsion was described as an answer to the two-year-old case of an employee of the Russian state news agency, TASS, who had reportedly been denied leave to stay in the U.K.
Several months later a Dutch journalist was ousted, this time over two old administrative offenses.
Wall Street Journal journalist Evan Gershkovich was arrested on espionage charges in a case unprecedented since the Cold War | Natalia Kolesnikova/AFP via Getty Images
Still, the two expulsions appeared to be anomalies rather than bellwethers of a mass purge, and the general assumption that the Kremlin paid little heed to non-Russian media coverage remained largely intact.
Only in March this year was that belief finally quashed, when Wall Street Journal journalist Evan Gershkovich was arrested on espionage charges in a case unprecedented since the Cold War. His detention was, as Paananen put it, “a warning sign to all correspondents.”
The news sparked a second exodus of Western journalists. But dozens, the majority of them citizens of European countries, stayed behind, even as they faced harsher restrictions and growing uncertainty.
‘It’s all over now’
Since the war, for citizens of what the Kremlin calls “unfriendly countries” (those which have imposed sanctions on Russia), the accreditation cycle has been shortened to three months.
The foreign ministry never formalized or explained the change. But during a press conference in February, roughly a month before Gershkovich’s arrest, ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova аnnounced the end of what she called the old “regime of maximum favorable treatment.”
“It’s all over now,” she said. Foreign journalists “are going to live their lives and get their documents in a new way: the way it’s supposed to be.”
She added that journalists would not be allowed to work in Russia if they “treat us, our country, our people boorishly and disparagingly.”
Asked for comment, the foreign ministry said its decisions to exclude foreign correspondents were a reaction to the “real terror” being waged against Russian journalists in the West.
“In the context of the harassment of the Russian media unleashed by the West, it was decided to respond by changing our policy towards journalists from unfriendly countries and introducing pinpoint restrictive measures,” the ministry said in an email to POLITICO.
In practice, the three-month review appears to have been used as a way to filter out some journalists — while keeping others on their toes.
Often, a negative decision is not made explicit or formalized, but is communicated to the journalist through an intermediary and presented as a temporary, procedural issue.
Once they have left Russia, the person is left in limbo only to conclude months later that they, in fact, have been expelled.
During a press conference in February, Maria Zakharova аnnounced the end of what she called the old “regime of maximum favorable treatment” | Alexander Nemenov/AFP via Getty Images
In my initial conversation with the foreign ministry, I was told that according to “international law,” I would not get an explanation or reason for the refusal. But after my ousting received broad media coverage, Zakharova in a statement volunteered several.
Among my transgressions were that I had been away from Russia for a large part of 2022, during which I had not published enough articles for my employer. But the main argument was geopolitical: In light of the “bullying” of Russian media and journalists by the EU, there “should not be any questions” about the visa problems of a Dutch citizen.
Caught out
Others have been given different reasons for their expulsions.
Most Moscow-based correspondents have a remit covering the entire former Soviet Union, including Ukraine. As a result, Russia’s full-scale assault on its southern neighbor caught many on the opposite side of the front line.
The Russian authorities never stated openly that they expected journalists to pick a side. But how long they stayed in Ukraine after the invasion, and whether they have continued to report from there, appears to have become an unofficial test of loyalty.
Luzia Tschirky, a correspondent with the Swiss public broadcaster SRF News, was among journalists woken by explosions in Kyiv on the first day of the war. Part of a small team, she stayed on to cover the invasion’s immediate aftermath.
In May of last year, she returned to Moscow only to face the displeasure of her handler at the foreign ministry.
“I was told that I had not come back fast enough after the ‘special military operation,’ and that others had returned sooner,” she told me in a phone conversation.
She had lost her status as a permanent correspondent and would need to reapply as a special correspondent. While that was being processed, she would have to leave Russia.
When she asked for a timeframe she was told that: “these days that is decided on an individual basis, and differs from person to person.”
Since then, Tschirky, who had been based in Moscow since late 2018 and is a fluent Russian speaker, has resubmitted her paperwork four times: never getting a clear refusal, never getting a green light. “I just got the same answer over and over again: It’s being processed,” she said.
When her name disappeared this summer from the ministry’s online list of accredited bureau chiefs she saw it as a bad sign but decided to stay quiet.
When Luzia Tschirky’s name disappeared this summer from the foreign ministry’s online list of accredited bureau chiefs she saw it as a bad sign | Dimitar Dilkoff/AFP via Getty Images
“It is the Swiss way of hoping that something would change and a miracle would happen,” she said. “Compared to other countries, normally Swiss journalists are the last ones to get into trouble.”
Agitprop lecture
Another journalist, who requested anonymity to speak freely, recalled being summoned by a Russian official for a “comradely” meeting.
“The tone was jokey, friendly, theatrical at times,” the journalist told me.
During what the journalist compared to an “agitprop lecture,” the official argued that any inconveniences faced by European journalists in Russia simply mirrored those experienced by Russians in Europe.
“The person insisted that it has nothing to do with what we write about Russia, and that the authorities would never get involved in editorial stuff.”
But then the journalist was asked why, if they regularly traveled to Ukraine, they even needed Russian accreditation. Considering their absences, one could suspect the journalist of being a spy.
“It could have been a threat, maybe not, you never know in these talks,” the journalist told me. “The person was smiling.”
Аlthough they did eventually get their documents, they are no longer in Russia. “I definitely felt unsafe,” the journalist said. “It’s not worth the risk.”
Freelance dilemma
In the case of one French journalist, their employment status became the reason for their ousting.
Formally, a journalist can only obtain accreditation on behalf of a single publication, and only staff journalists are allowed to work in Russia. But for years the Russian authorities have tacitly accepted the reality of a media industry in which freelance journalists have to work for several publications at the same time.
The French journalist, who asked not to be named, worked for several media outlets from Moscow for more than four years. A few months after the full-scale invasion, they moved away from Russia, but frequently traveled back and forth.
Five days before their accreditation was due to expire this summer their foreign ministry handler called and, in a conversation eerily similar to mine, told them that the Federal Migration Service had refused to issue a visa. No further explanation would be given, the handler said, in accordance with “international law.”
Arja Paananen accused Russian President Vladimir Putin of displaying “the doublethink of an autocratic leader in the style of George Orwell’s novel ‘1984’” | Oleksii Filippov/Sputnik/AFP via Getty Images
Later, another person from the foreign ministry, whom the journalist described as “well informed,” said it was because they had not written enough for the specific medium they had been accredited for.
“I was told I could try to reapply, but that it would be ‘very difficult,’” the French journalist said. “I understood then that the decision was final.”
No official explanation
Most of those who spoke to me suspected that a specific report acted as a trigger for their ousting.
In July 2022, Paananen, the Finnish journalist, wrote an opinion piece where she accused Russian President Vladimir Putin of displaying “the doublethink of an autocratic leader in the style of George Orwell’s novel 1984.”
The foreign ministry slammed the piece in an online riposte as “a blatant example of anti-Russian propaganda.”
Two months later, in October, for the first time since 1990 when she first started covering what was then still the Soviet Union, she was told her accreditation papers were not yet ready.
From Finland, she kept contacting her handler at the ministry who gave her the same polite answer: “She understood that it was a massive inconvenience for me, but kept telling me that she was still waiting for the right signatures from the ‘bosses’ who’d been very busy and so on.”
Leaving open the possibility it had been a mistake or delay, she waited until February this year to say openly that she’d been expelled.
“They never gave me an official explanation, but they don’t have to: They’re starting to prevent foreign journalists from working here, but are doing it in a soft way,” said Paananen.
A similar story played out in the case of another Finnish correspondent, Anna-Lena Laurén, whose ties to Russia go back to 2006. She and her 13-year-old daughter left in the immediate aftermath of the invasion, but returned to St. Petersburg several weeks later.
“I told my daughter: We can plan ahead three months at a time, but be prepared we might have to leave again,” Laurén said.
When she applied to have her accreditation renewed in May, she was told by the foreign ministry to “‘be careful with what you write,’” she told me. “It was practically a threat.”
Anna-Lena Laurén published a piece about Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov in Hufvudstadsbladet, “about how he used to be respected, but now he’s a persona non grata” | Pool photo by Alexander Zemlianichenko/AFP via Getty Images
Despite the warning, she continued traveling to, and reporting from, Ukraine, bracing for trouble in Moscow. “But nothing.”
Things changed after she published an article on Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov in April in the Swedish-language newspaper Hufvudstadsbladet, “about how he used to be respected, but now he’s a persona non grata. You know, the story everyone has written at some point.”
Shortly after, a lengthy text appeared on the foreign ministry website in a section dedicated exclusively to “fake news,” defending Lavrov point by point and launching a fierce, personal attack on Laurén.
“Maybe the editors of the publication for which Lauren is accredited should ask themselves: what is she actually doing here [in Moscow]? It is possible to write talentless, vile libel from Helsinki,” the text read.
The next day, Laurén packed her bags and left for Finland with her daughter. She didn’t tell anyone.
“Before this war, I wouldn’t have cared,” Laurén told me. But in light of Russia’s law against ‘fake news,’ she felt the statement could be a precursor to something worse.
A week before her visa was due to expire mid May, she was told by the ministry that there had been a delay with her papers.
“They were very polite and nice, but also very clear that I was to leave Russia.”
In its written answers, the foreign ministry declined to comment on specific cases or disclose the number of journalists it had expelled — but accused the West of far worse treatment of Russian journalists.
“The countermeasures of the Russian side are exclusively retaliatory in nature and are not commensurate in their scale with the mayhem caused by Washington and Brussels.”
One false move
Even those who do secure the right paperwork to remain in the country face a series of new challenges.
Some are relatively innocuous: This year for the first time journalists from “unfriendly” nations were not accredited to the St. Petersburg Economic Forum.
Even those who do secure the right paperwork to remain in the country face a series of new challenges | Harry Engels/Getty Images
Others, less so. The Wall Street Journal has reported that, prior to his arrest, Gershkovich was being followed and filmed by security service officers.
Journalists have most commonly experienced harassment while on reporting trips to Russia’s regions, often in the form of local media crews who happen to know their exact itinerary or the location of their hotel.
Interrogations by border officials, in some cases lasting hours, have become part of the process of leaving, and returning to, Russia.
Several people told me they were ordered to hand over their phones or share their IMEI number, which allows their location to be tracked.
One journalist was told by a Russian friend that they had been visited by the FSB — the main state security agency — and ordered to cut all ties with the journalist.
In the months leading up to Paananen’s expulsion, she twice came home to her St. Petersburg apartment after a trip to find her fridge leaking and the power mysteriously cut off.
“The first time could be an accident, but the second time I had been physically cut off from the main switchboard. The electricity company dismissed it as a misunderstanding.”
Such anecdotes reinforce an impression since Gershkovich’s arrest that Russia’s security services consider foreign journalists a legitimate target.
“One false move, a conversation with the wrong person or being in the wrong place at the wrong time, and you could end up facing accusations you’re a spy,” said one journalist in Moscow, who was granted anonymity for reasons of safety.
‘Logic of the prison camp’
Baunov, the former diplomat turned analyst, said Russia’s leadership is likely guided by the principle of reciprocity in deciding how far to go in limiting the size of the foreign press corps.
Even as some longtime correspondents are being pushed out, others are being given extensions and some new journalists are given accreditations.
“If Russia kicks out all foreign correspondents, the same would happen to its own correspondents in the West,” said Baunov.
That’s little assurance to those left in Moscow.
“By kicking some people out, they’re trying to scare the daylight out of the rest,” said one of the Moscow-based journalists. “And by providing different ‘reasons,’ they’re trying to make those who are left behind think that if they behave this or that way, they might get to stay. It’s the logic of the prison camp.”
Many of the journalists I spoke to expressed sadness at being ousted from a country with which they had a long history, but they said their experience in Russia had taught them to take things one day at a time.
“I covered the collapse of the Soviet Union and I remember how quickly that went,” said Paananen. “I can’t predict what will happen in Russia but I’m quite hopeful that I’ll live to see it.”
“The Russia I loved is gone,” the French journalist told me. “I already said goodbye a year ago. This time it was not as hard.”
Eva Hartog was editor-in-chief of the Moscow Times before reporting from Moscow for Dutch news magazine De Groene Amsterdammer and POLITICO Europe.
Toronto, on – Blood in the Snow Film Festival (BITS), a unique and imaginative showcase of contemporary Canadian genre films are pleased to announce the popular Festival is back for its 13th exciting year. The highly anticipated Horror Film festival presented by Super Channelruns November 18th– 23rd at Toronto’sIsabel Bader Theatre. The successful, long running festivaltakes on many different faces this year that include Scary, Action Horror, Horror Comedy, Sci-Fi and Thrillers. Festival goers will be kept on the edge of their seats with this year’s powerful line-up.
Blood in the Snow Festival begins with the return of alumni (Wolf Cop) Lowell Dean’s action horror feature Dark Match featuring wrestling veteran Chris Jericho followed by the mysterious Hunting Mathew Nichols. The unexpected thrills continue with Blood in the Snow World Premiere of Pins and Needles and the Fantasia Best First Feature Award winner, Self Driver. The festival ends this year on a fun note with the Toronto Premiere of Scared Sh*tless (featuring Kids in the Hall’s Mark McKinney). Other titles include the horror anthology series Creepy Bits and Zoom call shock of Invited by Blood in the Snow alumni Navin Ramaswaran (Poor Agnes). The festival will also include five feature length short film programs including the festivals comedy horror program Funny Frights and UnusualSights and the highly anticipated Dark Visions program, part of opening night festivities. Blood in the Snow Film Festival Director and Founder, Kelly Michael Stewart anticipates this year’s festival to be its strongest. “This was the first time in our 13 year history, all our programmers agreed on the exact same eight feature programs we have selected.”
Below is this year’s horror fest’s excitinglineup of features and shorts scheduled to screen, in-person at the Isabel Bader theatre.
**All festival features will be preceded by a short film and followed by a Q&A with filmmakers.
Super Channel is pleased to once again assume the role of Presenting Sponsor for the Blood in the Snow Film Festival. We extend our sincere appreciation to the entire BITS team for their unwavering commitment to amplifying the voices of diverse filmmakers and providing a platform for the celebration of Canadian genre content. –Don McDonald, the CEO of Super Channel
Blood in the Snow Festival 2024 Full screening schedule:
Monday November 18th 7pm – Dark Visions
Shiva (13:29) dir. Josh Saltzman
Shiva is an unnerving tale about a recently widowed woman who breaks with a long-held Jewish mourning ritual in hopes of connecting with her deceased husband.
How to Stay Awake (5:30) dir. Vanessa Magic
A woman fights to stay awake, to avoid battling the terrifying realm of sleep paralysis, but as she risks everything to break free, will she be released from the grip of her nocturnal tormentor?
Pocket Princess (9:45)dir. Olivia Loccisano
A young girl must take part in a dangerous task in order to complete her doll collection in this miniature fairytale.
For Rent (10:33) dir. Michèle Kaye
In her new home, Donna unravels a sinister truth—her landlord is a demon with a dark appetite. As her family mysteriously vanishes, Donna confronts the demonic landlord, only to plunge into a shadowy game where the house hungers for more than just occupants. An ominous cycle begins, shrouded in mystery.
Lucy’s Birthday (9:29) dir. Peter Sreckovic
A father struggles to enjoy his young daughter’s birthday despite a series of strange and disturbing disruptions.
Parasitic (10:00) dir. Ryan M Andrews
Last call at a dive bar, a writer struggling to find his voice gets more than he bargains for.
Naualli (6:00) dir. Adrian Gonzalez de la Pena
A grieving man seeks revenge, unwittingly awakening a mystical creature known as the Nagual.
The Saint and The Bear (6:34) dir. Dallas R Soonias
Two strangers cross paths on an ominous park bench.
The Sorrow (13:00) dir. Thomas Affolter
A retired army general and his live-in nurse find they are not alone in a house filled with dark secrets.
Cadabra (6:00) dir. Tiffany Wice
An amateur magician receives more than he anticipated when he purchases a cursed hat from the estate of his deceased hero.
9:30 – Dark Matchdir. Lowell Dean Horror / Action
A small time WRESTLING COMPANY accepts a well-paying but too good to be true gig.
Tuesday November 19th 7pm – Mournful Mediums
Night Lab (15:00) dir. Andrew Ellinas
When a mysterious package arrives from one of the lab’s field research stations, a promising young researcher uncovers a conspiracy against her masterminded by her jealous boss. She soon finds herself having to grapple with her conscience before making a life-or-death decision.
Dirty Bad Wrong (14:40) dir. Erica Orofino
Desperate to keep her promise to host the best superhero party for her 6-year-old, young mother Sid, a sex worker, takes extreme measures and books a last-minute client with a dark fetish.
Midnight at the lonely river (17:00) dir. Abraham Cote
When the lights go out at a seedy little motel bar, at the crossroads of a seedy little town, nefarious happenings are taking place, and three predators are enacting their evil deeds. Enter Vicky, a drifter who quickly realizes what’s happening right under everyone’s nose. After midnight, In the shadows of this dim establishment, evil begets evil, and the predator becomes the prey.
Mean Ends (14:58) dir. Émile Lavoie
A buried body, a missing sister and an inquisitive neighbour makes for a hell of an evening. And the sun isn’t close to settling on Eric’s sh*tty day.
Stuffy (18:26) dir. Dan Nicholls
A young couple sets off in the middle of the night to bury their kid’s stuffed bunny, as one of them is convinced that the stuffy might be cursed.
Dungeon of Death (18:33) dir. Brian P. Rowe
Torturer Raullin loves a work challenge, especially if that challenge involves hurting people to extract information from them.
9:30 – Hunting Matthew Nichols(96 mins) dir. Markian Tarasiuk
Twenty-three years after her brother mysteriously disappeared, a documentary filmmaker sets out to solve his missing person’s case. But when a disturbing piece of evidence is revealed, she comes to believe that her brother might still be alive.
w/ short: Josephine (6:15) dir. John Francis Bregar
A man haunted by his past seeks forgiveness from his deceased wife, but a session with two spirit mediums leads to an unsettling encounter.
Wednesday November 20th 7pm – BITS and BYTES
Ezra (10:57) dirs. Luke Hutchie, Mike Mildon, Marianna Phung
After fleeing the dark and demonic chains of his shadowy old home, Ezra, a killer gay vampire, takes a leap of faith and enters the modern world.
Head Shop (18:14 episode 1-3) dir. Namaï Kham Po
In a post-apocalyptic world, Anna’s life and work are dominated by her father Sylvestre, a short-tempered mechanic with a terrible reputation for tearing the head off anyone who dares cross him. He decides that she’s old enough to follow in his footsteps, much to her dismay. To prove herself, she must now decapitate her first victim. Can she find a way to defy fate?
D dot H (18 :15 episodes 1-2) dirs. Meegwun Fairbrother, Mary Galloway
Struggling artist Doug is visited by the beautiful and enigmatic H, who claims he holds the power to visiting “inconceivable places.” Still half-asleep, Doug is shocked when H vanishes suddenly and her doppelganger, Hannah, strides past.
Creepy Bits: “Last Sonata” (21:08) dir.
Adrian Bobb, Ashlea Wessel, David J. Fernandes, Sid Zanforlin and Kelly Paoli.
Set among forests, lakes, and small towns, Creepy Bits is a horror anthology series helmed by five innovative filmmakers exploring themes of human vs. nature, the invasion and destruction of the natural world by outsiders, and isolation within a vast, eerie landscape that is not afraid to fight back.
Tales from the Void: “Whistle in the Woods” (24:36) dir. Francesco Loschiavo
Horror anthology TV series based on stories from r/NoSleep. Each tale blends genre thrills & social commentary exploring the dark side of the human psyche.
9:30 – Self Driverdir. Michael Pierro Thriller
Facing mounting expenses and the unrelenting pressure of modern living, a down-on-his-luck cab driver is lured on to a mysterious new app that promises fast, easy money. As his first night on the job unfolds, he is pulled ever deeper into the dark underbelly of society, embarking on a journey that will test his moral code and shake his understanding of what it means to have freewill. The question becomes not how much money he can make, but what he’ll be compelled to do to make it.
A couple on a cottage getaway tries to work on their relationship but ends up getting more than they bargained for when they discover something sinister lurking beneath the surface.
Thursday November 21st 7pm – Funny Frights
Midnight Snack (1:41) dir. Sandra Foisy
Hunger always strikes in the dead of night.
Hell is a Teenage Girl (15:00) dir. Stephen Sawchuk
Every Halloween, the small town of Springboro is terrorized by its resident SLASHER – a masked serial killer who targets sinful teenagers that break ‘The Rules of Horror’ – don’t drink, don’t do drugs, and don’t have sex!
Gaslit (10:36) dir. Anna MacLean
A woman goes to dangerous lengths to prove she wasn’t responsible for a fart.
Bath Bomb (9:55) dir. Colin G Cooper
A possessive doctor prepares an ostensibly romantic bath for his narcissistic boyfriend, but after an accusation of infidelity, things take a deeply disturbing turn.
Any Last Words (14:22) dir. Isaac Rathé
A crook trying to flee town is paid an untimely visit by some of his former colleagues. What would you say to save your life if you were staring down the barrel of a gun?
Papier mâché (4:30) dir. Simon Madore
A whimsical depiction of the hard and tumultuous life of a piñata.
The Living Room (9:59) dir. Joslyn Rogers
After an unexpected call from Lady Luck, Ms. Valentine must choose between her sanity and her winnings – all before the jungle consumes her.
A Divine Comedy: What the Hell (8:55) dir. Valerie Lee Barnhart Dante’s classic Hell is falling into oblivion. Charlotte,
sharp-witted Harpy, navigates the chaos and sets out despite the odds for a new life and destiny.
Mr Fuzz (2:30) dir. Christopher Walsh
A long-limbed, fuzzy-haired creature will do whatever it takes to keep you watching his show.
Out of the Hands of the Wicked (5:00)dirs. Luke Sargent, Benjamin Hackman
After a harrowing journey home from hell, old Pa boasts of his triumph over evil, and how he came to lock the devil in his heart.
The Shitty Ride (9:13) dir. Cole Doran
Hoping to impress the girl of his dreams, Cole buys a used car but gets more than he bargained for with his shitty ride.
9:30 – Inviteddir. Navin Ramaswaran Horror
When a reluctant mother attends her daughter’s Zoom elopement, she and the rest of the family in attendance quickly realize the groom is part of a Russian cult with deadly intentions.
w/ shorts: Defile dir. Brian Sepanzyk
A couple’s secluded getaway is suddenly interrupted by a strange family who exposes them to the horrors that lie beyond the tree line.
+ A Mother’s Love dir. Lisa Ovies
A young girl deals with the consequences of trusting someone online.
Friday November 22nd 7:00 pm – Creepy Bits(anthology horror series)
Creepy Bits is a short horror anthology series that explores pandemic age themes of isolation, paranoia and distrust of authority, serving them up in bite-sized chunks. Directed by Adrian Bobb, Ashlea Wessel, David J. Fernandes, Sid Zanforlin and Kelly Paoli.
9:30 – Pins and Needles (81 min) dir. James Villeneuve Horror / Thriller
Follows Max, a diabetic, biology grad student who is entrapped in a devilish new-age wellness experiment and must escape a lethal game of cat and mouse to avoid becoming the next test subject to extend the lives of the rich and privileged.
w/ short: Adjoining (11:42) dirs. Harrison Houde, Dakota Daulby
A couple’s motel stay takes a chilling turn when they discover they’re being observed, leading to unexpected consequences.
Saturday November 23rd 4pm – EmergingScreams (94 mins)
Apnea (14:58) dir. David Matheson
A single, working mother finds her career and her offbeat son’s safety in jeopardy when she discovers that her late mother is possessing her in her sleep.
Nereid (7:48) dir. Lori Zozzolotto
A mysterious woman escapes from an abusive relationship with earth shattering results.
BedLamer (15:00) dir. Alexa Jane Jerrett
On the shores of a small fishing village lives a lonely settlement of men – capturing and domesticating otherworldly creatures that were never meant to be tamed.
Blocked (6:30) dir. Aisha Alfa
A new mom is literally consumed with the futility of cleaning up after her kid.
Dance of the Faery (10:23) dir. Kaela Brianna Egert
A young woman cleans up her estranged, great aunt’s home after her death. Upon inspection, she soon realizes that her eccentric obsession with fairies was not born out of love, but of fear.
Deep End (7:36) dir. Juan Pablo Saenz
A gay couple’s heated argument during a hike spiral into a nightmare when one of them vanishes, leading the other to a mysterious cave that could reveal the chilling truth.
Ojichaag – Spirit Within (11:21) dir. Rachel Beaulieu
An emotionally devastated woman seeks comfort in her choice to end her life. As she faces death in the form of a spirit, she must decide to let herself go to fight to stay alive.
Lure (9.56) dir. Jacob Phair
A tormented father awaits the return of the man who saved his son’s life.
Let Me In (10:00) dirs. Joel Buxton, Charles Smith
A reluctant man interviews an unusual immigration candidate: himself from a doomed dimension
7:00 pm –The Silent Planet (95 mins) dir. Jeffrey St. Jules Sci-fi
An aging convict serving out a life sentence alone on a distant planet is forced to confront his past when a new prisoner shows up and pushes him to remember his life on earth
w/ short: Ascension (3:57) dir. Kenzie Yango
Deep in a remote forest, two friends, Mia and Riley, embark on a leisurely hike. As tensions run high between the two, a strange humming noise appears that seems to be coming from somewhere in the woods.
A plumber and his germophobic son are forced to get their hands dirty to save the residents of an apartment building, when a genetically engineered, blood-thirsty creature escapes into the plumbing system.
w/ short: Oh…Canada (6:20) dir. Vincenzo Nappi
Oh, Canada. Such a wonderful place to live – WHETHER YOU LIKE IT OR NOT. A musical look into the artifice surrounding Canadian identity.
Sometimes, you just have to return to the classics.
That’s especially true as Halloween approaches. While you queue up your spooky movie marathon, here are 10 iconic horror movies from the past 70 years for inspiration, and what AP writers had to say about them when they were first released.
We resurrected excerpts from these reviews, edited for clarity, from the dead — did they stand the test of time?
“Rear Window” (1954)
“Rear Window” is a wonderful trick pulled off by Alfred Hitchcock. He breaks his hero’s leg, sets him up at an apartment window where he can observe, among other things, a murder across the court. The panorama of other people’s lives is laid out before you, as seen through the eyes of a Peeping Tom.
James Stewart, Grace Kelly, Thelma Ritter and others make it good fun.
— Bob Thomas
“Halloween” (1978)
At 19, Jamie Lee Curtis is starring in a creepy little thriller film called “Halloween.”
Until now, Jamie’s main achievement has been as a regular on the “Operation Petticoat” TV series. Jamie is much prouder of “Halloween,” though it is obviously an exploitation picture aimed at the thrill market.
The idea for “Halloween” sprang from independent producer-distributor Irwin Yablans, who wanted a terror-tale involving a babysitter. John Carpenter and Debra Hill fashioned a script about a madman who kills his sister, escapes from an asylum and returns to his hometown intending to murder his sister’s friends.
— Bob Thomas
“The Silence of the Lambs” (1991)
“The Silence of the Lambs” moves from one nail-biting sequence to another. Jonathan Demme spares the audience nothing, including closeups of skinned corpses. The squeamish had best stay home and watch “The Cosby Show.”
Ted Tally adapted the Thomas Harris novel with great skill, and Demme twists the suspense almost to the breaking point. The climactic confrontation between Clarice Starling and Buffalo Bill (Ted Levine) is carried a tad too far, though it is undeniably exciting with well-edited sequences.
Such a tale as “The Silence of the Lambs” requires accomplished actors to pull it off. Jodie Foster and Anthony Hopkins are highly qualified. She provides steely intelligence, with enough vulnerability to sustain the suspense. He delivers a classic portrayal of pure, brilliant evil.
— Bob Thomas
“Scream” (1996)
In this smart, witty homage to the genre, students at a suburban California high school are being killed in the same gruesome fashion as the victims in the slasher films they know by heart.
If it sounds like the script of every other horror movie to come and go at the local movie theater, it’s not.
By turns terrifying and funny, “Scream” — written by newcomer David Williamson — is as taut as a thriller, intelligent without being self-congratulatory, and generous in its references to Wes Craven’s competitors in gore.
— Ned Kilkelly
“The Blair Witch Project” (1999)
Imaginative, intense and stunning are a few words that come to mind with “The Blair Witch Project.”
“Blair Witch” is the supposed footage found after three student filmmakers disappear in the woods of western Maryland while shooting a documentary about a legendary witch.
The filmmakers want us to believe the footage is real, the story is real, that three young people died and we are witnessing the final days of their lives. It isn’t. It’s all fiction.
But Eduardo Sanchez and Dan Myrick, who co-wrote and co-directed the film, take us to the edge of belief, squirming in our seats the whole way. It’s an ambitious and well-executed concept.
— Christy Lemire
“Saw” (2004)
The fright flick “Saw” is consistent, if nothing else.
This serial-killer tale is inanely plotted, badly written, poorly acted, coarsely directed, hideously photographed and clumsily edited, all these ingredients leading to a yawner of a surprise ending. To top it off, the music’s bad, too.
You could forgive all (well, not all, or even, fractionally, much) of the movie’s flaws if there were any chills or scares to this sordid little horror affair.
But “Saw” director James Wan and screenwriter Leigh Whannell, who developed the story together, have come up with nothing more than an exercise in unpleasantry and ugliness.
— David Germain
Germain gave “Saw” one star out of four.
“Paranormal Activity” (2009)
The no-budget ghost story “Paranormal Activity” arrives 10 years after “The Blair Witch Project,” and the two horror movies share more than a clever construct and shaky, handheld camerawork.
The entire film takes place at the couple’s cookie-cutter dwelling, its layout and furnishings indistinguishable from just about any other readymade home constructed in the past 20 years. Its ordinariness makes the eerie, nocturnal activities all the more terrifying, as does the anonymity of the actors adequately playing the leads.
The thinness of the premise is laid bare toward the end, but not enough to erase the horror of those silent, nighttime images seen through Micah’s bedroom camera. “Paranormal Activity” owns a raw, primal potency, proving again that, to the mind, suggestion has as much power as a sledgehammer to the skull.
— Glenn Whipp
Whipp gave “Paranormal Activity” three stars out of four.
“The Conjuring” (2013)
As sympathetic, methodical ghostbusters Lorraine and Ed Warren, Vera Farmiga and Patrick Wilson make the old-fashioned haunted-house horror film “The Conjuring” something more than your average fright fest.
“The Conjuring,” which boasts incredulously of being their most fearsome, previously unknown case, is built very in the ’70s-style mold of “Amityville” and, if one is kind, “The Exorcist.” The film opens with a majestic, foreboding title card that announces its aspirations to such a lineage.
But as effectively crafted as “The Conjuring” is, it’s lacking the raw, haunting power of the models it falls shy of. “The Exorcist” is a high standard, though; “The Conjuring” is an unusually sturdy piece of haunted-house genre filmmaking.
— Jake Coyle
Coyle gave “The Conjuring” two and half stars out of four.
Fifty years after Sidney Poitier upended the latent racial prejudices of his white date’s liberal family in “Guess Who’s Coming to Dinner,” writer-director Jordan Peele has crafted a similar confrontation with altogether more combustible results in “Get Out.”
In Peele’s directorial debut, the former “Key and Peele” star has — as he often did on that satirical sketch series — turned inside out even supposedly progressive assumptions about race. But Peele has largely left comedy behind in a more chilling portrait of the racism that lurks beneath smiling white faces and defensive, paper-thin protestations like, “But I voted for Obama!” and “Isn’t Tiger Woods amazing?”
It’s long been a lamentable joke that in horror films — never the most inclusive of genres — the Black dude is always the first to go. In this way, “Get Out” is radical and refreshing in its perspective.
In Ari Aster’s intensely nightmarish feature-film debut “Hereditary,” when Annie (Toni Collette), an artist and mother of two teenagers, sneaks out to a grief-support group following the death of her mother, she lies to her husband Steve (Gabriel Byrne) that she’s “going to the movies.”
A night out with “Hereditary” is many things, but you won’t confuse it for an evening of healing and therapy. It’s more like the opposite.
Aster’s film, relentlessly unsettling and pitilessly gripping, has carried with it an ominous air of danger and dread: a movie so horrifying and good that you have to see it, even if you shouldn’t want to, even if you might never sleep peacefully again.
