Forbidden Worlds Film Festival Review: The Big Scream – Six Feet Down Under
Summary
Forbidden Worlds Film Festival is Bristol’s leading genre film festival, launched in 2022 and set in the old IMAX (now Bristol Megascreen), with a penchant for showing cult fantasy, action, sci-fi and horror films.
Rating: ★★★★★
Running Dates: Friday 24th October 2025 - Saturday 25th October 2025
Where to see it: Bristol Mega Screen
Duration: 2 day film festival, 3 films a day
Review
Act One: What’s It All About?
We were welcomed back as ‘press’ by the amazing team behind Forbidden Worlds Film Festival to review this year’s spooky-season version of the festival, “The Big Scream: Six Feet Down Under”, a two-day exploration of Australian grindhouse and Ozploitation cinema. Because it’s not just the spiders, snakes and crocs you have to fear in Australia, it’s the twisted minds of filmmakers!
The eighth installment of the film festival (two a year since 2022, one standard festival and one spooky festival around Halloween) was as good as ever. Not only are there great movies to watch, but they always have an array of stalls in the lobby as well to keep you entertained during the break between films. This year, Bristol Brewery were back with their great selection of beers and ales, all with their own special designs on the cans for the festival, and there were some amazing food stalls as well in case you needed an energy boost! The festival has its own merchandise with themed pins and t-shirts and I loved seeing the XXXX Castlemaine beer mats which took me right back to my 1990’s childhood of seeing those bonkers beer adverts on TV! Personally, I spent my time having a look around the book and DVD stalls that were there and ended up picking up a couple of horror-themed pins for my bag.
The theme for this year’s “Big Scream” was more specific than usual with all 6 films coming from the land down under and I wasn’t sure what to expect. The tone of Australian cinema has always been a bit perplexing to me, the humour is off-kilter and not something I have always warmed to, and the aesthetic is often grimey and dusty which I find hard to watch. But Forbidden Worlds kind of demands that you put your biases aside and you go in with an open mind, because this is a film festival of the weird, the wonderful and the downright wacky, and you need to really immerse yourself…so that’s exactly what I did! So let’s take a look at the films shall we?!...
Act Two: The Films We Saw
Edit: We saw four out of the six films at the festival, “Long Weekend” (1978, Dir. Colin Eggleston) was skipped due to a phobia of snakes and “Fair Game” (1986, Dir. Mario Andreacchio) we sadly missed but have watched since and enjoyed but have not reviewed as we didn’t see it at the festival.
NEXT OF KIN (1982, Dir. Tony Williams)
Linda Stevens (Jackie Kerin) inherits a large old house from her Mother which doubles as a nursing home. When she moves in, she begins to have visions and experience strange happenings. The question is, is she losing her mind or does something evil lurk within the house?
This was a really great film. Think “The Shining” meets “The Texas Chainsaw Massacre” (mostly visually) meets “What Lies Beneath” with a slightly hammier overtone! It’s a true gothic horror, the setting of the large house, called Montclare, is stunning, with dark wood furniture and dim lighting to really deepen the atmosphere, and the grounds are vast and isolated. The plot develops well and all of the scenes in the house are very suspenseful, there are so many typical but well crafted horror film moments such as the use of shower curtains, figures appearing in windows and water running red to mimic blood.
I really enjoyed the central performances, Jackie Kerin as the main character Linda was remarkable, a vulnerable, smart and intense performance which only suffered in places from a ropey script and some outdated 70’s-style editing. But she drove the film and her descent into madness (and later, clarity) was very watchable. And then we have Barney, played by John Jarrett (Wolf Creek), who is Linda’s love interest and who (quite rarely in horror films) is a man who actually believes her and tries to help her rather than trying to convince her she needs to be put into an asylum. He’s goofy and charming and Jarrett plays him so well, a great accompaniment to a brilliant central performance from Jackie Kerin. The rest of the cast are great too, small but mighty and incredibly creepy, and they deliver naturally comedic moments amongst all the spooks and scares.
I’ve touched on the script being a bit iffy and it is, there’s a lot of Linda saying “Barney” in various tones and inflections which feels lazy and annoying, but there isn’t much dialogue in the film so it doesn’t affect things too much. This is because Next of Kin is all about the atmosphere, it’s about what isn’t being said, the tone, the mystery, and the score! The score is a fantastic, 80’s synth dream that builds an effective atmosphere throughout and shifts at all the right moments.
Simply put, I really liked this film. It’s dated in places but overall it’s a very successful and tense horror. The ending is brilliant, the part that is most reminiscent of The Texas Chainsaw Massacre, and they really ramp up the gore in some of the final bathroom scenes as well - I will never look at a comb handle in the same way again.
BODY MELT (1993, Dir. Philip Brophy)
The director himself introduced this film, as is the tradition with many of the films at Forbidden Worlds, via a pre-recorded message. He hilariously spoke about hating Australian landscape and the idea of filming in it, so his film is about “dumb suburbia and the d***heads who live there”, which is likely why it’s set in a cul-de-sac!
Body Melt is absolutely bananas! Local health spa and experimental drug company Vimuville are using the residents of Pebbles Court cul-de-sac to try out their vitamin supplements which have some gruesome and slimy side effects. And when I say slimy, I mean it! This film is pure body horror, think “The Substance” meets “The Thing” or “The Fly” with a sub-plot that is reminiscent of “The Hills Have Eyes”. It’s gross, it’s sticky, it’s snotty, it is not for the faint hearted. I have seen a lot of insane horror so it didn’t bother me too much, and practical effects are more fascinating to me than disturbing, but the reactions of people around me were comically large, people were shaking in their seats, gasping loudly and covering their eyes… I think Director Brophy would have been proud!
I personally wasn’t a fan of this one. It is refreshing to go back and watch films that did special effects the old fashioned way before CGI and AI took over and I have a fascination with the practicality of movies which I think many audience members do. It’s why people still love going to see a Tom Cruise film as we know he is going to be doing all of his own stunts. And Body Melt is packed full of practical effects so if that’s something you like to see, it’ll at least entertain you. But for me, that’s where it stopped.
The premise is simple and yet somehow it became so convoluted to the point of annoyance. We were presented with a number of sub-plots and side characters whose importance was either explained too late or was completely irrelevant as it became clear they were just cannon fodder for the practical effects department. There’s the sub-plot of two residents of Pebbles Court heading towards the Health Spa and having to stop at a windshield repair place along the way, only to find themselves among a family of mutated people who are linked to the melty-melty vitamin company and who try to kill them. Then there’s the police department trying to work out what is going on, the competition between the doctors creating the vitamins, the stories of the other residents in the cul-de-sac…it’s all just a bit much.
It’s worth a watch if you like gore and practical effects and you can see how this has had an influence on films like “The Substance” for sure. It also has Harold Bishop in it from Neighbours so there’s that. But overall, I was disappointed by how this was very much a style-over-substance film and if the plot had been refined, it could have really been something great.
THIRST (1979, Dir. Rod Hardy)
It’s rare to see a vampire film that doesn’t follow all the stereotypical tropes, bats flying around, retractable fangs, an affliction to garlic, and “Thirst” isn’t strictly a vampire film but it’s in that genre. I was really impressed with the concept, a woman named Kate (Chantel Contouri) is kidnapped by a sinister cult who believe her to be the descendant of alleged Hungarian serial killer, Elizabeth Batheroy, who was said to have bathed in the blood of her victims to ensure ever-lasting youth. Kate soon discovers that this cult is farming humans for their blood in the hopes of maintaining their youth as well, and she is faced with a dilemma: leave or stay and fulfill her destiny.
The first 30 - 40 minutes of this film are really good. The cast are recognisable (it took me forever to realise where I knew David Hemmings from who plays Dr Fraser - he was the Governor in the 2001 Vinnie Jones film “Mean Machine” ha!) and their performances are solid. The opening sequence is great and I also like the establishing scenes in the cult’s compound where we see all the “volunteers” being farmed for their blood and everyone walking around aimlessly in matching hospital-type gowns. However, I very quickly became annoyed with the lead actress (Contouri), who simply was not very good. Her line delivery was wooden and her facial expressions were comedically over exaggerated. There were moments of brilliance, where I truly believed she was frightened, but there was a lot of aimless wandering and bad line delivery which just took me out of it.
The pace of the film also just lost momentum after about the 40 minute mark. There were a couple of climactic scenes that should have been these pace driven crescendos but they fell victim to slow 1970’s editing and just went on far too long. The film also reveals too much too soon, it’s in those first 40 minutes that Linda is told who she is by the cult leaders and gets walked around the compound and shown all the secrets, there’s nothing left for the second half of the film.
There are moments in Thirst that are great though, there’s a shower scene where Linda is drenched in blood which is very visually effective and I also really liked that the cult members put their vampire teeth in on a sort-of denture plate as they aren’t supernatural vampires. But it needs another edit or dare I say, a remake?!
RAZORBACK (1984, Dir. Russell Malcahy)
This film was introduced as “Jaws on land but with a giant pig” which right off the bat had me intrigued and laughing. I’m not sure I would put it in the same conversation as the absolute masterpiece that is “Jaws”, but it has some of the same charm and practical effects that Jaws has.
“Razorback” is the directorial debut of Russell Malcahy who went on to direct Highlander and the cinematographer for the film is Dean Semler who was the cinematographer on “Mad Max 2”, “Mad Max Beyond the Thunderdome”, “Waterworld”, “Dances with Wolves” and “Apocalypto”, so it has a very specific aesthetic. There’s a lot of dust, dirt and grime, a steam-punk-meets-Burning-Man-meets-the-outback clothing design, and a Terry Gillam-esque set design (Gilliam did all of the artwork on Monty Python and directed “12 Monkeys” and “Brazil”). Everything is exaggerated, buildings have jagged edges and diagonal lines, and there’s a harshness to the setting that is its own character in the film.
There are parts of this type of aesthetic that I like, and when the film enters into a brief dream-state where the central character is hallucinating, everything just makes sense. The sets are bold and artistic, and the lighting is colourful and mesmerising, but outside of the dream-state, it feels too theatrical and not very grounded. You’ll be watching a scene of the main character running around in the deep, dark desert, and yet behind every sandbank and every tree you will see a big beam of light coming from what is obviously a spotlight, and it just doesn’t make sense to me. It feels more like a lighting choice you would make for theatre but not for film and in terms of continuity you have certain shots that are very dark and then wide-shots with all these beams of light…make it make sense!
The film isn’t bad though, I think it’s just not my cup of tea aesthetically and I’m a visual person so I found it hard to connect to the film. The plot was fun, a giant razorback takes the grandchild of Jake Cullen (Bill Kerr) when it smashes through his house in the middle of the night. The town doesn't believe him, but years later he is proven right when the razorback returns and attacks and kills an American animal welfare reporter Beth Winters (Judy Morris). Her husband Carl Winters (Gregory Harrison) then comes to the outback to find out what happened to her and teams up with Cullen and Sarah Cameron (Arkie Whiteley) to take down the pig!
I think if the film was made again now, you would really hone in and focus on that basic plot, but there’s sub-plots and side characters for days here. There’s some “bad guys” who literally made my skin crawl, there’s a meat factory location which was vile to watch in every scene, there’s a local hotel and bar which was rowdy and maybe not utilised enough, there’s a sort-of romantic connection between Carl and Sarah which is bizarre given the very recent passing of his wife, and the razorback itself with its thirst for murder. It’s just messy.
I think if you watched this film as a child, you would love it. It has the nostalgia factor for sure, like watching The Dark Crystal or Jumanji, and then when you revisit them with an adult brain, you have to let go of a bit of that magic they made you feel and admit that they are a bit rubbish! It’s okay to still love them because they gave you great memories and maybe you wore the VHS tape out from watching it so much, but I think if I owned Razorback on VHS now, the tape would be in no danger at all.
Act Three: In Conclusion
You might think based on my reviews of the films I saw that I had just an okay time, but that is far from the truth. I love film, I love it so much and even if I don’t quite connect with a film, I’m still having a good time watching it and at Forbidden Worlds Film Festival especially. There is nothing better than sitting in a dark room, in front of a giant IMAX screen with hundreds of people you don’t know, all connecting and laughing and gasping at the same things. It’s such a community experience, where it’s okay to think, “What the **** did I just watch?!” and know that everyone else in the room is thinking the same thing as you, but that’s what makes it so fun!
Forbidden Worlds simply know how to put on a great show, to get you out of your comfort zone and to showcase films that need a bit of love; ones that might have been forgotten but are begging to be watched and appreciated. They have picked their lane and are driving steadfastly and successfully down it with such ease and charm and their film knowledge is astounding. I will be back year on year, whether it be as press or not, and I strongly encourage you to do the same. The next Forbidden Worlds is 23rd - 26th April 2026 so hopefully see you there – it’ll be a ripper that’s for sure!
Standout Moment: Video messages from the directors and actors being played before the films start. These are always very heartwarming and funny moments and in the past we have seen video messages from people such as Samuel L Jackson, James Cameron and Jamie Lee Curtis, so I always look forward to these parts!
Go if you like: Films, cult cinema, community, culture and questioning everything you have ever known!
Last Impression: A fantastic film festival that will continue to grow and charm its audiences.
Written by Amy Evans
We were kindly gifted these tickets in exchange for a review.