Cinemaic

The Last Exorcism (2010; Daniel Stamm)

2010-08-09T20:19:00.003-05:00

How could I have passed up a screening of this? Knowing my tendency towards all things Eli Roth and mockumentary, the idea of combining the two was just too sweet for me to pass up. I needed a few days to reflect on my exact reactions, but now I think I got them reined up.

Raised to be a minister, Cotton Marcus has been deeply seated in the church community for almost his entire life. Events have unfolded over the years that make him question whether or not being a pastor is his true calling, but he sticks with it for the time being to help people with his natural gift to entertain. He decides to let a small documentary crew accompany him on his final exorcism before he announces his retirement to reveal to the public just how fake it all is.

People can take this movie a lot of ways. It could easily be seen as a heavy handed swing against religion, or even a final revelation that maybe there are truths to be had in the supernatural. Peoples bias on the subject (including mine) will sway their opinion one way or the other, but I really don't think that was the intentions of the film. I think, like other projects attached to Roth, this is a film for enjoyment.

Let me explain. I was so torn on some aspects of the film as they felt as sort of a betrayal to the mockumentary movement. I have fully explained my opinion on what they should and should not consist of (here, here, here, here, etc...), but this experience showed me a little bit of a different light (similar to that of Cloverfield). The Last Exorcism contains both CGI and a musical score. Now normally I found those things so distracting in mockumentaries that I never really felt they had a place in what was supposed to be a reflection of the real world. Something to me really clicked in this one, though. The score highlighted the events properly without taking over and the CGI, while a stretch, really can't be held against the film for realism if I allow the score.

So what is this? This was a piece constructed to be entertainment. They wanted to make a movie that utilized the strengths of mockumentaries and the strengths of more standard fiction movies. It may still seem sort of incompatible, but watch it and see if it really is that much of a problem.

On other notes, the light-hearted tone through large portions of the film help lean your opinion towards the entertainment part of the realism vs. entertainment argument and it has been a long time since such a solid lead has been seen in a mockumentary. Seems like I haven't really found a lead so compelling to follow in a mockumentary since the Blair Witch Project itself, and that is something special. The only part I have to dock heavily for is the CGI-laden ending, because despite leniency for the CGI, the ending will definitely leave most people a little stunned.

Score: 4/5

Notes: Eli Roth.

8 1/2 (1963; Federico Fellini)

2010-06-30T21:04:00.004-05:00

I have been struggling to find the inspiration to put more work into this site. In a sort of strange coincidence, I managed to find my inspiration in Fellini's 8 1/2. This is a film so strongly built on incoherency of inspiration that it fit perfectly with my conundrum.

To try and define 8 1/2 in simple descriptions such as mine seems like it would do more harm than good. In the most concrete form, it is a character study about a famous director who wishes to create a film that acts as his autobiography, but at the same time seems to be his last grasps with confronting the life he has lived. As he tries to unveil the scope of his film, he seems to struggle more and more with justifying the events that to most others seem like a surrealistic take on the state of loneliness.

8 1/2 is a film that very much speaks for itself, so my review will be short and sweet. Films such as this are so hard to pigeon hole into categories as they feel so layered and lovingly composed that to skip over any of the content feels like as much as an injustice as trying to tear the film apart. It is a piece that seamlessly blends reality with dreams and than mixes them both into cinema. It makes you question the state of the characters, the state of Fellini, and the state of yourself. The score is phenomenal and it isn't very often you see a film so gorgeously shot that still manages to keep your attention with it's full, gripping content. Despite the hefty length, 8 1/2 flutters by in an instant and will rattle your world.

I really did mean short and sweet, however I hope that the impact of films like this continue to inspire me to write and will hopefully have more up soon.

Score: 5/5

Notes: After rewatching Santa Sangre again recently as well, clowns are more and more becoming everyday occurrences of life.

The Last House on the Left (2009; Dennis Iliadis)

2010-06-04T16:37:00.003-05:00

Let me set something straight. I hate remakes, but I also hate Craven. As far as I am concerned, almost (stress almost) every single Craven film could be improved with a remake so my expectations for this were a little higher than other remakes (i.e. higher than no expectations at all). Just needed to make sure I got that out in the open before I started talking anything in detail.

Two dumb girls get kidnapped by psychos who are on the run. Pretty sure we all know the rest.

The first thing I noticed about the remake is that the two girls are drenched in American culture and my feelings are they deserved a portion of what they got. I choose to look at certain events in a different light and it makes watching this film, and even Craven's original, very tedious. It isn't that I choose to have it out for Craven, but when you make characters like these (which seems to be more and more common) I find it insulting to my intelligence. Not every single American goes out all over looking for drugs and partying with strangers. It brings it to an even lower level knowing that the creators have a full range of control over how they want to craft these girls, but intentionally choose to make them lawbreaking scum bags.

It isn't that they weren't completely aware. They tried to form touching moments for one of the girls by giving her a brief back story about a dead brother who always told her to try her best, but that just doesn't cover it. I find it hard to not spoil things when writing negative reviews as I feel compelled to just pick it all apart, so you might want to stop at this point and know I don't like this movie.

Now for the spoiler moments. That back story is what drove her to give up drugs temporarily and try her hardest to be a great swimmer. However, when it becomes essential for her to swim for her life, she gets shot down and dies. So what does that tell us? Are we supposed to interpret these events as she was a failure? It most certainly seems this way, and in that case, how am I supposed to bond with her? Are they trying to call me a failure too?

The entire film is built around what happens to these girls and the affect it has on the other characters. However, having the entire first segment be a mound of insults to my person and an absolute frustration in general makes enjoying the second segment a stretch. I will give it credit for being relatively solid in the portion dealing with the parents, but it isn't perfect and even if it was it couldn't save the whole from being a mess.

Score: 2/5

Notes: Was it needed to remake an insulting movie into an even more insulting movie?

Man on Wire (2008; James Marsh)

2010-03-26T23:42:00.004-05:00

I have finally decided to take a step back from my never ending mountain of work to write another review. I have had a lot of films mulling in my head, but I just haven't had the time to make anything concrete. So here you go.

A documentary that explores the life and achievement of one man's dream.

Like most of you, I have never given a second thought to tightrope walking. I went to a circus once when I was little, but I never really ever gave the concept a chance. So coming into a film about a man whose dream was to tightrope really worried me that I wouldn't be able to connect to his dream. To miss the connection in a documentary such as this would be catastrophic to its message, but I was determined to try.

As I watched the images flutter across my screen, I realized I wasn't watching a documentary about tightrope walking. I was watching a documentary on dreams and the people who would give it all for a shot at them. Philippe Petit, the focus of this piece, was so struck and captivated by a single moment in his teenage years that it proceeded to craft the rest of his life to the achievement of this one, miraculous goal. To be able to witness a person so determined and motivated that they never seem to falter. A person so willing to embrace a goal so far from reach that they will do anything to get only a step closer.

“What a beautiful death to die in the arms of your passion.”

To amplify the power of the event, it is retold by Philippe and his comrades with such an intensity that it is like they are being thrown right back into the days where it all unfolded. The score put behind the events is subtle and upbeat to the point where it feels like it is pushing you along with Philippe to go conquer your own dreams. It makes you reflect on yourself and how far you would go with a friend so driven by an object of their desire. This documentary, despite how far off his dream may be from your own, has the power to connect to anyone and may even inspire people to change their lives. This is the impact great films should have.

Score: 5/5

Notes: Watch this documentary.

Pandorum (2009; Christian Alvart)

2010-01-15T15:57:00.003-06:00

My life is once again filled with classes and stress, so the intervals between reviews will increase. On the bright side, however, a few friends and myself decided to sit down and make a pact between us. During the year 2010, we will all watch three hundred films we've never seen and no less. This also gives us motive enough to do the other thing we wanted which is to try and be a little more fair. We've always neglected certain areas of cinema and skipped releases we "knew" were going to be awful, so this is our chance to turn that around. So while watching all these films will give me even less free time, what time I have I should be able to squeeze out a review or two because lord knows I'll have enough material to write about.

The earth is suffering extreme overcrowding, resources are low, and all that boring stuff. The solution? A shuttle sent out into space found a planet almost identical to ours and so a plan is set in action to have people shipped over there to make more room. Shit breaks, stuff goes wrong, and everything is dark and metallic.

To be absolutely counter intuitive, this isn't a film I was actually planning on skipping. When it first released I had no idea what it was and more or less just let it sail past me, but recent talks around me got me interested and so I thought I would check it out for myself.

First thing that caught my metaphorical eye was the soundtrack. While somewhat modern, it also felt like it had a tinge from the horror of old. While by no means fantastic or inspiring, it was a step above just throwing tense ambient sounds into the mix.

Second thing, the lighting. I understand a lot of the criticism of sci-fi horror, because visually many of them do look alike. The fact of that matter is, though, that how else would you design a tense atmosphere in a spaceship? The structure is reasonable considering the direction technology is going, and having the dank, dark steel corridor sort of triggers your reaction by itself now.

The most important part of this film to me, though, was the structure of it all. This film could have derailed itself in all sorts of ways, but it managed to keep itself tight throughout most of its playtime. I think the perfect comparison would be Neil Marshall's The Descent. Much like Marshall's work, Pandorum relies heavily on the mystery and darkness to propel fear, but after everything begins to clear up little by little, the film picks up the pace into more of an action setting. It all goes back to my belief that the less you see, the more you are afraid. The over exposure usually kills the tension in a horror film, but if you shift the whole film with the exposure, it all flows much easier with much more effect.

As far as the weaknesses go, while the characterization of each of the survivors was clear, they felt a little cliche. I don't want to delve too much into the story so you are able to go in as blind as I did, but one character in particular had an action sequence which, while it could have been effective in another film, just felt out of place in the reasonable reality that was already constructed so carefully. However, that being said, I would not be lying if I said that had someone wanted to shoot Alien now instead of so long ago, knowing the conventions of popular cinema today, it probably would have come out something like this.

Score: 4/5

Notes: Think The Descent with an Alien twist to it all.

The Lovely Bones (2009; Peter Jackson)

2010-01-04T02:36:00.007-06:00

My feelings behind the announcement of this title were very strong. The idea that Peter Jackson might start honoring his humble beginnings by giving us another Heavenly Creatures was just blowing my mind. I just kept thinking to myself how nothing could go wrong, because obviously Peter Jackson is immune to the trends of the spotlight...

A very young teenage girl gets murdered. However she refuses to leave the land between the living and dead so she can observe what is happening to the people who were around her.

If the very ominous "..." didn't give it away, that was sarcasm up in the first part of this review. Being under the spotlight with high financing seems to have finally killed Jackson's chances of handing us another Heavenly Creatures (let alone another Bad Taste). The wonderful soul behind the somewhat twisted message is completely absent for this recent attempt.

First off, if you are trying to decide whether or not a certain scene requires CGI, it doesn't. This film felt like a gigantic test of my tolerance for computer animation. Half of the effects were completely unnecessary. They were supposed to express the wonderful creativity that was the land between Heaven and Earth, but one can find beautiful locations on Earth that fit just as well and don't kill the atmosphere nearly as bad. Look at Lord of the Rings for example, which was also shot by Jackson and the environments looked absolutely breathtaking in some scenes. While on that topic, I'm no expert on the book, but half of the imagery and symbolism just felt absolutely needless. Throwing in imagery and CGI for the sake of having them simply doesn't cut it, sorry (just look at Halloween II).

Now to just to throw the rest out there and meet my minimum requirements, the soundtrack was interesting at a few points, but ultimately just distracting, poorly timed, and kinda loud. The acting was mostly solid (Stanley Tucci did wonderful) but the characters weren't given much to work with within the story arch. The entire message of the film sort of gets jumbled between all the abstract, useless sequences and it really just falls apart.

Before ending, I will give it a few positive spins. A small handful of scenes actually were well executed and enjoyable, and even though I had a perfect example lined up it got buried under the garbage pile in my mind, so that is all I got.

Score: 1/5

Notes: I know it doesn't release until 2010, but IMDb insists on 2009 and who am I to argue? Also, they didn't have faces on the back of milk cartons. What the hell was up with the cheap looking digital film?

Eli Roth

2010-01-02T18:57:00.004-06:00

It has been an obnoxiously long time since I did a director column so I figured now is as good a time as any (I'm right between two films. Also no, I doubt I'll have time to review them both).

Fell in love with film after watching Alien. Went through film school winning an award or two and than was stuck in limbo for a while before finally getting financing for his first piece, Cabin Fever. The rest is history.

I figured I was more in the mood for praising someone instead of ripping their careers apart, so here you go. Eli Roth is one of the most outstanding young horror directors of our time. He, like most good actors and directors, started as an extremely geeky film nerd. This background and intimate knowledge of film helps lay the groundwork for all of his own pieces, each showing a fantastic connection to the works that came before him.

To paraphrase Quentin Tarantino, Eli Roth is the future of horror. All of his films have shown us he is fully capable of taking us places we don't want to be and we love him for it. Here is for hoping he brings us Thanksgiving sooner rather then later.

Other Notes:

Huge fan of the Olsen twins.

Is a Bear Jew.

Has always made profit on all his films. In order, 15 times budget cost, 20 times budget cost, and 3 times budget cost.

Most Well Known Films Include: Cabin Fever, Hostel, Hostel II

Important Horror Films of the Decade

2009-12-31T22:01:00.008-06:00

I was asked by several people if I was ever going to work on a "Top 10 of the Decade" list or what have you since it is so popular. To be honest I was never considering the idea because I have a terrible memory and deciding an order would be extremely difficult. However, I finally decided I could just craft a general "Important" list that just spits out my favorites of the decade in no special order.

Grindhouse (2007; Quentin Tarantino & Robert Rodriguez)

While not fully horror, it was indeed a tremendously profound release bringing the trashy styles of old back into the mainstream fold. Endlessly entertaining (more so Tarantino's) and inspiring, these must not go unwatched (as well as the trailers).

The Descent (2005; Neil Marshall)

Marshall's important follow up to is surprisingly popular Dog Soldiers. It implemented both a fantastic visual style (only the natural lights they carried on them) and atmosphere that pretty much could creep anybody out.

A Tale of Two Sisters (2003; Kim Ji-woon)

It has been stated before how much I admire this piece as well as Kim Ji-woon, so not much more needs to be said. This film is structured perfectly down to the last detail. Every shot has both a purpose and a meaning. It doesn't come much better.

Battle Royale (2000; Kinji Fukasaku)

While I'm not 100% convinced this is actually a horror (more of a drama) I didn't want anybody getting the idea I was neglecting it. A reflection of some of the finest political satire there is. Watch it.

The House of the Devil (2009; Ti West)

This nod goes both to the film itself, as it is a wonderful reimagining of what Roman Polanski would have done if he was West's age and to Glass Eye Pix who have really come into their own this decade. I look forward to watching many of their upcoming releases and hope they continue to polish their retro style.

Mockumentaries (Various)

I could go on to list a paragraph for several of the great mockumentaries of the decade, but I want to emphasize that this is the decade that followed Blair Witch Projects fantastic release. That led the way for this decade to explore the boundries of the idea and craft some of the most wonderful stories with them. Ex. Cloverfield, Quarantine, [REC], Paranormal Activity, etc.

Hostel (2005; Eli Roth)

Eli Roth's second huge venture into horror and what a venture it was. I would love to put all of Roth's films onto the list, but I feel Hostel is the most structurely tight and polished of them so I'll let it speak for all three.

Session 9 (2001; Brad Anderson)

Session 9 came as a bit of a surprise as it sort of snuck up on me and signified an important time in psychological horror in the United States. Thoroughly atmospheric and powerful, it is definitely one that has seen many plays on my television.

American Psycho (2000; Mary Harron)

Wonderful opus into the world of the high class yuppie. Specifically one who has completely snapped and uses the materialistic shell as his only cover. Absolutely wonderful.

Trick 'R Treat (2008; Michael Dougherty)

Fantastically structured horror anthology celebrating everyones favorite horror holiday. This film should become a staple for everyone's Halloween nights for now on. Also, can't forget our new mascot as well ;) .

Gozu (2003; Takashi Miike)

This selection is once again for a broader idea. Takashi Miike. He played an important role in both this decade and the last, and this pick was merely a reflection of one of his shining moments. Critics say he churns out too many films not to have great ones, but I don't think anyone can deny that when he has great ones, they truely are great.

Suicide Club (2001; Shion Sono)

Again, this is merely a symbol for the start of a very important career in the director that is Shion Sono. While not his first piece, it can be heavily agreed upon that this was his most important. Both creepy and compelling, Suicide Club was the underdog film of the decade. Not to mention a nod to the mindfuckery that are Sono's works.

Uzumaki (2000; Higuchinsky)

Another gem that has faded away from memories recently. This film showed that given the eye for it, mangas can be adapted onto the big screen with great success.

Shaun of the Dead (2004; Edgar Wright)

This piece proved the inspiration for a huge mishmash of other splatter comedies. The beauty of it all is that it is still the strongest one of the decade. Not that I won't give a nod to Slither.

Let the Right One In/Thirst (Various)

These two important pieces proved that vampire films can involve romance and not also be scraps off of a 12 year old girls journal. Solidly structured and nodding to the vampire films before them, these two prove that the moral ambiguity of vampires has never been explored and it really should have been.

Behind the Mask: The Rise of Leslie Vernon (2006; Scott Glosserman)

No need, there is already a review up ;).

Bubba Ho-tep (2002; Don Coscarelli)

One of my favorite horror comedies in existence. Shows off what Bruce Campbell can do with a "serious" role to play. Wonderfully creative and hilarious to top it off.

I'm sure I forgot several and any input would be helpful. If I think of more I'll make edits and tack them on in the end. Hope everyone has a wonderful 2010.

The Horribly Slow Murderer with the Extremely Inefficient Weapon (2008; Richard Gale)

2009-12-26T19:51:00.004-06:00

I figured it was about time for another ludicrous short to be posted up on this site, so here you go. The Horribly Slow Murderer with the Extremely Inefficient Weapon is probably one of the silliest shorts in recent history. Check it out sometime as it is definitely worth the ten minutes of your time.

Spoorloos (1988; George Sluizer)

2009-12-26T19:07:00.004-06:00

I've said before that I always use the titles I first heard whenever naming a review for this site, but this title is Spoorloos for another reason on top of that. I don't want anyone thinking I'm talking about Sluizer's American remake under the same English title, The Vanishing.

A man goes on a road trip through France with his girlfriend/wife/what-have-you. While stopped at a gas station, she decides to stop in and get them both drinks and never returns. Completely destroyed by this, the man spends the next several years of his life searching for her kidnapper. His persistence pays off eventually, as his fliers finally catch the attention of the kidnapper himself.

It may seem like I'm giving something away even though I normally never do (with the exception of The Uninvited as I was completely determined to tear that remake apart). However, none of that description is a spoiler as most of that is given to the viewers right away. The focus of Spoorloos is very much the conflict and thoughts of the two men involved. It is for all intents and purposes one of the greatest character studies ever filmed. While one of the major points has popped up repeatedly in both film culture and music (how long would you search for the one you love?) there are a myriad of other important aspects to pick up along the way. Maybe the most important part, though, is how closely the film hits home. You have no choice but to immediately root for the man as he desperately clings to memories of her, knowing full well you would do the same.

I won't waste your time with many of the more technical aspects as you should be spending your time hunting down a copy of this piece for yourself, but some things need to be said for those who are interested. The camera is served to us in a mostly minimalistic style, rarely focusing on backdrops or rapid motion, chosing instead to give us intense, focused shots on the people involved. The camera never falters, challenging us to bare witness, and even mentally take part in, the events that unfold.

Score: 5/5

Notes: Never Take Bike Trips to France

Attack the Gas Station (1999; Kim Sang-jin)

2009-12-23T16:37:00.006-06:00

What comes to mind when you read a title like Attack the Gas Station? Frankly, I had absolutely no idea what to think about it at all. The concept itself is odd, but not the annoying forced odd in films like Tokyo Gore Police that just irritate you. No, it sounded like some form of odd that could almost be compelling if crafted by the right hands.

Four Korean youth decide to attack a gas station.

No matter how I tried to wrap my head around it all, there always just seemed to be something missing. The idea of four trouble makers attacking a gas station hardly seemed like enough material to warrant an entire full length film. How much action could one possibly churn out of a limited cast doing what is essentially only robbing a single store.

Apparently you can derive endless action out of it, as that is exactly what Sang-jin accomplished. While I am not an expert in his works, I must say that after watching this piece a few weeks back that every other film he has done is now on my list of "must watch". Whatever it is that drives him to these ideas is like nothing I have ever seen in any other director before. To be able to craft such a stylized action comedy out of a simple title is just mastery of his craft at work.

I am going to make my analysis brief for this one, as most of the film is spoken for in just the title itself. Don't get me wrong, however, this is not some childish Apatow piece trying to soak up some cash from drug addled teenagers. The comedy in AtGS is both simple and at the same time very much more matured and thought through than what passes as comedy in the US today.

The colors tended to be sharp, adding more of an edge to the action sequences, of which there were many. The music was very much on key with the tone of the rest of the film and the camera never made itself unwelcome. It all shaped up into a breath of fresh air for me, as I no longer felt I had to wait for only the Coen Brothers to craft the comedies I enjoy.

Score: 4.5/5

Score: Attack the Gas Station, otherwise known as A New Way of Applying for Jobs

Paradise Murdered (2007; Kim Han-min)

2009-12-21T23:46:00.005-06:00

With my winter break in motion and most of my friends visited, I finally have some time to sit down and enjoy a few moments of peace.

A small island community numbering only seventeen citizens finds itself in quite a situation. The situation being that all seventeen of them disappear and no one knows why. The film proceeds to go back in time to give us a first hand experience of what really happened.

First off let me say that despite how much I hate most thrillers that come out of the US, I've noticed foreign pieces tend to feel a lot more fresh and appear to know that they actually have room to move around and explore (see Memories of Murder for an example of this). This is most likely caused by the unbelievable amount of red tape and butchering scripts have to go through in the US to get the green light (aka, turn everything into Se7en). The whole point of all this is mostly that just because things get described as thrillers, don't get too distraught until you find out what country it is from.

Right off the bat you notice that Han-min isn't planning on taking the entire film too seriously as we are introduced to the film by over-acting fisherman screaming about like little girls finding a spider. This is a trend that continues through the earlier parts of the film, and one can't help but feel a little uncomfortable with that. As I see it there are two sides to this, either you could see it as just some jabs at light-hearted humor, or you could see it as more of an inadequacy on Han-min's part. This film being his debut, (and strangely enough not on IMDb) odds are his confidence might have been a little on the lesser side of the spectrum. As far as I am concerned the jabs at humor were unnecessary as the film was actually interesting enough and had enough compelling atmosphere to stand on its own. This, in return, produces a negative effect as everytime one of the nonsense scenes pops up, it reminds you of just how much of a movie it really is.

As you should notice by the plot, this piece focuses on a very large group of individuals, which makes it hard for the director to make them appear as individuals and not just background noise. This might be the strongest asset this film has. While not as evenly spread and thorough as pieces like 9 Souls and The Thing, most of the cast on the island have enough time to develop past the 2D place holder mark. That accomplishment alone is fantastic considering there are seventeen of them and the film clocks at just under two hours long.

Overall the film has enough strength to hold on its own. While some of the absurditys can grind on your patience near the beginning, the whole thing comes together well enough as the tale progresses. The pacing and structure are solid, keeping your interest and not bogging the story down while trying to conceal what was really happening. It all wraps up into a nice mystery that while flawed, is still enjoyable enough to sit down to on a nice night before bed (if you can't tell, that is what I did ;) ).

Score: 3/5

Notes: Whodunit? Whodunwhat?

Quick Shots II

2009-11-07T22:57:00.003-06:00

I am hoping to have some time in the next few days to review a handful of movies, but just in case I thought I'd throw up a few more scores for those interested.

House of the Devil (2009; Ti West)
Horror
5/5

Black Dynamite (2009; Scott Sanders)
Comedy
4.5/5

Prince of Darkness (1987; John Carpenter)
Horror
4.5/5

Jungle Holocaust (1977; Ruggero Deodato)
Horror/Drama
4/5

Eden Log (2007; Franck Vestiel)
Horror/Drama
4/5

Quick Shots

2009-10-19T20:19:00.006-05:00

I have been spending my time writing lesson plans for student teaching, so I haven't had much time to sit down and write reviews but I thought I should at least throw something up so here are a few movies I've seen over the past week or so (and a score to wet your appetite). In no particular order...

Wind Chill (2007; Gregory Jacobs)
Horror
Score: 4/5

I Sell the Dead (2008; Glenn McQuaid)
Horror/Comedy
Score: 4/5

Antichrist (2009; Lars Von Trier)
Drama/Horror
Score: 4.5/5

Take Care of My Cat (2001; Jeong Jae-eun)
Drama
Score: 3/5

Let the Right One In (2008; Tomas Alfredson)
Horror/Drama
Score: 4/5

Trick 'R Treat (2008; Michael Dougherty)
Horror
Score: 4.5/5

EDIT: I have decided to make this an actual column for me to post films I have been watching but haven't had time to review, so expect a lot more of these from time to time.

They Live (1988; John Carpenter)

2009-09-25T22:06:00.006-05:00

When I am asked to sum up my opinion of cinema from the 1980's I always use the same two word answer. While it is a very biased answer, many people still agree with me that it seems to fit the mood of the genres it touched. Those words?

John Carpenter

A drifter finds his way into work and a temporary home while, well, drifting. While there he notices some mysterious activity that leads him into a whole new world of truth.

They Live continues a tradition that many other horror directors started years before. The political commentary in it is so obvious, yet unlike Romero, it never feels too forced or pushed down our throats. It very much feels natural with the flow of the rest of the film and our attention never waivers from the action at hand.

They Live also marks the end of Carpenter's fantastic eighties career and in a way feels like an appropriate summary of his previous works before falling into his downhill slide in the nineties (with the exception of In the Mouth of Madness). However, after all of this introduction, where does it leave the film itself?

The character Carpenter places before us are absurd. We focus around a drifter whom we know nothing about who is thrust into a terrifying situation and instead of panicking he pulls out some guns and some cheesy one-liners. He meets friends by beating them or holding guns to them. The point I am trying to make here is that this film is awesome. This movie continues the enjoyment we all had when we first watched Escape From New York years earlier.

If you have never seen Escape From New York, then there really is no way to convince you that the description above is more than just ridiculous garbage. I am not a proponent of saying that trash cinema is actually high quality in disguise, but with Carpenter's works it really is. Everything was sculpted to their degrees on purpose. It is obvious with pieces such as The Thing and Halloween that Carpenter is no stranger to serious cinema and this idea helps solidify that he wanted these movies to look this way for a reason.

They reflect the absurdity of the political ideas that the films are commenting on. The genius behind such a tool is that not only does it further drive the commentary home, it also gives what would have been a more "normal" piece a life of its own.

I suppose I should briefly touch on the more concrete elements. The camera is well instrumented here and the black & white actually adds to the feeling that we are trying to be controlled as if our artistic minds are being suppressed by the lack of color. The score is typical of eighties Carpenter with very simple melodies being effectively used. The drawbacks are that while it is an undeniably strong film, you can't help but feel some of his spark fade on all aspects of the piece. It is like asking a landscape artist to do a portrait. The portrait will look good, yes, but it will still lack some of the genius that pushes his landscapes past the point of good.

Score: 4.5/5

Notes: Obey this review. Consume Carpenter's products.

Paranormal Activity (2007; Oren Peli)

2009-09-25T14:28:00.006-05:00

I learned one thing from my years as a movie fanatic, and that is that crowds are terrible. I usually skip out on most theatre screenings simply because the crowds can completely break the atmosphere of a movie if they are bad enough. So when I go to see the screening of this film in a packed theatre of 750 people and it still manages to scare me... well... we must have something going for us.

Young couple X and Y (easier than typing in names) move into a house and Y (the woman, clever huh?) starts hearing noises during the night. She then goes on to tell X she has had previous experiences with hauntings and they should get help from experts.

We all know here how much I love mockumentaries, so when I caught wind of this a few months back I couldn't resist getting sucked in. As more and more reviews popped up saying that this is the scariest film they've seen in years my interest had no where to go but up. Lucky for me, one of the screenings just so happened to be close by so my friends and I packed up and shipped off (not that we really packed anything, it was only an hour drive, but whatever).

The problem with many modern day horror films is they try too hard to focus on flat out thrills and jumps and lose out on atmosphere. That or they are just terrible at all of it, but just roll with me for this. The situation is that more often than not, it is easier to craft some cheap thrills that can win over most common movie goers than it is to craft an atmosphere so dense that the ceiling might as well be two feet off the ground. This is where I find the greatest strength of mockumentary film making. When you design your piece into a form of first person perspective and amateur film making, you no longer have to carefully craft tense scores to match your inspired landscapes. The power of the first person perspective is its ability to push atmosphere through its own momentum.

This is of course assuming you can keep us wrapped into the films reality which can be the toughest part. Mockumentary film making is so barren of components relative to traditional film making that a lot more stress is put on what is there. The acting has to be top grade or else their characters fail to reflect what most of us would do. The lighting has to be perfect, neither showing us too much nor too little. The use of extravagancies such as CGI has to be justified to such an intense degree as its presence can abruptly rip you right out of an otherwise perfectly constructed piece.

After all of that, where does it leave our main topic, Paranormal Activity? If there was ever another mockumentary to continue Blair Witch Project 's thrown (and to a lesser degree, Noroi's thrown) it would be this one. Many of the strengths that made Blair Witch so successful are what push Paranormal Activity forward. The day/night sequences that appeared in Blair Witch show up much stronger in Paranormal Activity. They train your body to react to the time of day without having to really lift a finger. It came to the point where the audience I was with started screaming as soon as realized a night sequence was beginning.

To make even more connections, the use of CGI in Paranormal Activity was almost non-existent. The concept was to use simple tricks to propel what would otherwise be a normal ghost story to scarily realistic proportions. The characters, while not perfect, still thrust the story forward with enough charisma to keep us interested.

While films like Cloverfield have shown us once again the unlimited possibilities we have access to using the mockumentary style, it is films like Paranormal Activity with their seemingly average subject matter that truly frighten us. This portrayal of events could have easily been anyone. It could have been you. That, my friends, is scary.

Score: 4.5/5

Notes: I know the still I used wasn't in the screening, which is exactly why I used it. It doesn't spoil anything and makes a clear statement at what you can expect.

The Uninvited (2009; Charles & Thomas Guard)

2009-08-23T12:52:00.003-05:00

This is a touchy subject for me. Like so many others, I am sick of this remake trend. The idea that foreign films are not enough to stand on their own and need "translation" into our culture is quite sickening to me. However, I simply decided to ignore the bulk of this trend and try to ride it out. Needless to say, the J-horror remake fad is dying slowly but surely (making way for slasher remakes...) and then this monstrosity pops up. As seen on the front of this blog, one of the films in my top ten is the deeply profound "A Tale of Two Sisters". Kim Ji-woon is an unstoppable force in the world of cinema today, and his works should not be touched. The labyrinthine structure of "A Tale of Two Sisters" mandates the viewer to watch its intricicies over and over to fully establish its beauty and awe-inspiring construction. So when it comes to the remake, well, comparisons must be made to establish the complete lack of necessity of it all. This will, in turn, lead to many aspects of the films being exposed, and while I will never divulge anything gigantic, I will be forced to dissect and compare specific scenes. So if you have never laid your eyes upon Ji-woon's masterpiece, I recommend you stop here and just know this; Never fuck with the Kim.

Some girl (now named American) is traumatized by her mothers death and is temporarily sent to an institution to recover. After some time, American is sent home to reunite with her father and sister (now named Bullshit) only to discover that her father's girlfriend has moved in. There is something off and neither American nor Bullshit like her. The veins go much deeper, but that is enough for now. Now to compare!

The first thing shoved into our face is how Americanized this film has become. We start out watching American make out with some guy at a party. Why? In the original folktale and Ji-woon's interpretation, there was never a need for such acts. I guess this is the US way of establashing innocence because she denies the advance to fornicate. That is how we interepret morals in our youth? Disgusting and unwarranted. The strengths of the character should lie within the character herself as this film is very much an understanding of her mind, not how much or how little she loves dick.

This paragraph is simply another example of Americanizing the film and contains spoilers, so skip this if you haven't seen the first one (it is the only one that matters). The development of the "other" sister in this film is quite a dramatic difference. In the original the sister was developed, just like everything else, as a way to cope with the guilt and resentment. The sister represented that which needed protection from the materialized evil that needed to be fended off. All forms of deep symbolism are discarded in the remake, choosing to adapt the more surfaced twist that is seen in umpteen dozen other films that have come out in the past decade.

The visual style of the remake craves desperately to be identical to its parent, but fails in all forms. As seen in the image above, the solemn beauty of the house in the first film is tried at, but simply comes off as background noise. The soundtrack is dull and does nothing but carry us from scene to scene as if they only included it because they knew they had to. The focus on water is present like in the original, and just like the original, it is simply there as an allusion to the original folktale. In that regard, I suppose, it can be considered even.

One thing that bothered me greatly was the change of title. "The Uninvited" seemed like a ridiculous title to me given the original content of the first film. I guess it is supposed to be a reference to the girlfriend who was never wanted in the home. However, most people would assume it to be about the apparations that occur, as if they were unwanted ghosts haunting the innocent people inside. That, of course, wouldn't make any sense, as in the original the apparations are not only wanted, but are needed in order for the center of our film to exist.

As I kept pondering the title, I suppose I came to understand it a little better. As I said before, the remake stripped all forms of depth and tradgedy that were essential to the original's success and beauty and threw them into a hole. I kept wanting to analyze the copied imagery for what it was in the original and tried to apply it to the remake. That was a poor mistake. All the copied scenes were thrown in without second thought by idiots who apparently didn't understand their existence in the first place. The example I will use here is the blood trail.

The blood trail was the essential escalation of her coping after her illusions were threatened when her father confronted her. The trials she was putting her sister through had to become more rigorous as her guilt grew heavier on her conscience. The trail was then later shown to represent the fragments of her different realities colliding as she finally lost herself with the confrontation with the girlfriend at the end. So what does any of this have to do with the remakes blatant copying? Nothing at all, they simply threw it in to create "tension".

The significance of "A Tale of Two Sisters" was built upon the significance of all of its little pieces. Everything that was shown was placed in front of us delibrately. What we get with "The Uninvited", however, is simply another collage of the dozens of other remakes, scare scenes slopped together by a story devoid of soul and meaning. Not only can the film not stand up to it's predecessor, it can't even stand up as its own film. The importance of this review really comes in expressing many of my ideas on "A Tale of Two Sisters" so that my eventual review of it doesn't have to be a book like this review is.

Score: 1/5

Notes: Bells, Pearls, and Insignificance

Grotesque (2009; Koji Shiraishi)

2009-08-20T14:01:00.006-05:00

Way back when I reviewed a movie called Noroi, which was themed similarly to the Blair Witch Project. In said review I also said the director had made other films themed off of the long-black-haired-girl craze in the form of "Ju-rei" and "Kuchisake-onna". Sprinkled onto the end was a little note containing the title and genre of his newest work, Grotesque. It seems it is time to leave the hair behind and go for a modern day torture porn flick. Awesome.

What to put into the summary... well, two people who just started dating get tortured.

You see the thing is, much in the vein of what Eli Roth wanted to do (but US censors didn't want him to do) Shiraishi brings back the certain flavor that torture porn films need. "Grotesque" comes straight to its point at the very beginning and doesn't stay longer than it wants to. The whole genius of this piece comes with the fact that Shiraishi got to make exactly what he had in mind; a brutal and explorative adventure into torture and rape that doesn't bother with the modern nonsense it doesn't require such as character development.

That isn't to say that this movie has no inner themes to it. You might be able to pull out some ideas about love (strangely enough) or something silly like that, but then why are you watching this film of all things? On that note, why was it necessary to include those things at all? I know I said Shiraishi's genius was his ability to do away with unneeded garbage, but that wasn't exactly true. It was just about 95% true, which is a lot closer than most people come.

The problem with Grotesque, however, begins a little past the half way mark. We are shown a very surreal series of scenes that didn't quite fit the relentless butchery that had been thrown into our faces up until that point. While I have mixed emotions about that segment of the film, it is not the only piece that will yank you back into reality. Near the ending the film takes a sudden, unwarrented change in tone that kills some of the final impact of it all. It felt sort of like a cop out when Shiraishi had already taken it so far.

Do these segments ruin the film? Hardly. I give kudos to Shiraishi for his attempt at updating the torture genre. The torture itself, being the main focus in the first place, is very vivid and can easily succeed in making any normal person look away in disgust. It is just a shame that the atmosphere had to be broken in a way that it could not be repaired.

Score: 4/5

Notes: Would you die for someone you love?

Make Over

2009-08-10T20:33:00.003-05:00

After some consideration, I decided I would revamp my scoring system over the next few days. I wanted a system that could better reflect my opinions in a more precise manner. Plus, when using a scale of ten, it becomes hard to score films between the areas of one and five as once a film because trash, measuring the exact amount of shit it is becomes redundant. However, I always felt that the five scale was just a little too restrictive and it tended to clump my almost tens with my tens.

After giving it some thought, I decided that a minor change to the five scale would solve the issues I have been having. So let me now demonstrate the scale I have in mind.

1: Rubbish; Offal; Garbage. This will, and always has, been the lowest a film could acquire (unless you count zero, but that just feels like you are saying the film doesn't exist).

2: Mostly Rubbish; Bad. These are the films that are bad, but they may have some signs of life in them somewhere.

3: Average; Mediocre; Watchable. These are films that are on the border. They have enough material within them that might warrant a watch depending on your tastes.

4: Good; Worth Time. These are the films you should definitely look into if you have the time. While they struggle with minor points, they are still well constructed and demand your attention.

4.5: Almost Great. These are the films that are so close to being 5's that they deserve their own category separate from the 4's. This category keeps the 4's and 5's from growing to unruly and large. These films, like the 5's, are ones you need to see, but just with a little less urgency.

5: Great; Perfection. Enough said about these. These are the greatest films around. Buy them now.

Also, this list puts a cap on the recommended list, restricting it to only 4.5 and 5. This isn't to say you shouldn't still watch the 4's, but it shrinks the list to those films that need the most attention. Hopefully the transformation will be done within a day or two. Maybe even with a new review... but let's not get too ambitious.

The Master is Back

2009-07-16T17:21:00.004-05:00

After four years in exile, my favorite director Toshiaki Toyoda is back. Not only is he back, he is back in a big way announcing that his newest piece is following the trend of Kuchu Keien by pushing his previous trademarks and story arches out the window. Included with the news was this sneak peek...

This film will be a tremendous moment in cinema history for people who have been lucky enough to watch Toyoda's body of work. There is no doubt in my mind that Toyoda will drive home another perfect score with this one, but until then I will copy the plot from Twitch where I first found out about this piece of news. I'll keep this blog updated if any more news is released.

The time is the Middle Ages, when gods and demons reigned over a larger dominion than humans, before humans came to rule over the entire world. Oguri, a renowned masseur, is summoned to the fortress of the ruler of the dark world, a man known simply as the Lord and ailing from a venereal disease. After encouraging Terute—a captive princess from another land—to escape, Oguri is poisoned to death by the Lord before he can make his own getaway.

At a fork in the road between heaven and hell, Oguri is sent back to the land of the living in the form of a Hungry Ghost, in a state of apparent death. Saved by a monk who happened to pass by, he learns of a “spring of rebirth.” Meanwhile, Terute manages to flee from the Lord’s fortress and reunites with the undead Oguri. But the Lord is hot on their heels, hell bent on finding and punishing Terute.

Kichiku Dai Enkai (1997; Kazuyoshi Kumakiri)

2009-06-25T22:40:00.005-05:00

Kichiku Dai Enkai comes off as sort of an inspirational film, as strange as that may sound. Not to the degree that I find their vague rebellionism inspiring or that I find their clothing so hip to the jive. It is more that this film plays like a gore film should. It has some good effects, some half decent acting, and even some good camera work. What is so inspirational about that? This was Kumakiri's senior thesis in college and is really just his college buddies messing around on tape.

As the story goes, some political college group gets in trouble and their beloved leader goes to jail. He decided to put his girlfriend in charge of the group which begins to sew discontent, etc.

I'm going to keep this review on the short side as I already wrote another review recently and I really should be writing papers instead. As stated before, this is a college level piece, but don't let that give you any wrong ideas. The only thing that gives away that this is a college work is the fact that the stars are all college aged.

The camera is what really sold me. While it has an amateur feel to it, it also portrays a very serious and skilled knowledge of the do's and do not's. The first Evil Dead film comes to mind as a comparison, however, I feel that Kumakiri does it a little better than young Raimi.

The score is sparse (whether it be from lack of budget or actual choice I'm not sure) but is effective enough when used. The real problem here lies with the pacing. To succeed at making a slowly paced, character driven piece (which believe it or not is what this film is) you really need to have actors that shine and can carry a lot of weight with their dialogue. While this shows ambition, it really isn't an area that tends to excel in college works. While I doubt it was naivity on Kumakiri's part, it still is a wound that the film never really can rebound from.

Score: 3/5

Notes: Slow Pacing? Character Development? In a gore film?

Sling Blade (1996; Billy Bob Thorton)

2009-06-25T12:13:00.006-05:00

A film highly overlooked by most people due mostly to the monolithic success that was Forrest Gump, Sling Blade is... wait a minute. I never review anything up here...

Much better. Well, I might as well do the plot first too... Karl, a mildly handicapped individual, is put into a mental hospital after killing his mother and her lover at a very young age. Fast forward a few years and now it is time for Karl to be released as an adult to create a life of his own. With great unease the hospital releases him, and we get front row seats to just how adapted Karl is.

Alright, now to backtrack, Sling Blade was regrettably ignored by most people (myself included... but I was 6, give me a break) during the colossal reign of Forrest Gump. I'm not saying Forrest Gump didn't deserve the attention, but we need to learn to spread the love a little more.

The first moments of the film where we witness Karl's interview with a young girl writing for her school newspaper and then his eventual release set an unforgettable tone of unease. This is our first introduction to Karl, and we are thrown right in with the rest of the characters as we try to figure out whether Karl has really recovered. This part of the film seals the deal as to why Forrest Gump won out. The light-hearted sides of film tend to sell better.

That isn't to say that the entire film has a serious tone about it, that is. In actuality, the film does have quite the mixture of emotions thrown into it with great success. Add on top of that a great timely soundtrack to fit the southern atmosphere and baby, you got a stew going.

The only thing I can dock this film for is the lack of replay action it will get (which is another contrast to Forrest Gump). This film is a beast (two and a half hours or something like that) and it just didn't feel like the material was enough to warrant frequent repeats (it was damn close, though).

Score: 4/5

Notes: Hades (Some people call it Hell, but I call it Hades)

Busy Busy

2009-06-07T15:12:00.002-05:00

As summer has come, I have found myself in a surprisingly time consuming list of summer courses and what time is left over has been with family or other hobbies that are tying up my funds (PS3 & WH: 40k). My time should free up a little more around the second summer semester allowing me to watch a few movies and write my opinions on them. So until then, enjoy some posters and stills from some of the games I've been playing.

The Good, the Bad, the Weird (2008; Kim Ji-woon)

2009-05-01T19:26:00.012-05:00

This film is a lot of "seconds" for me. It is my second Kim Ji-woon film (the first being A Tale of Two Sisters which I obviously loved). It is my second venture into Asian westerns. While not a second, I will also say this is one of my many ventures into films starring Song Kang-ho (Memories of Murder, Sympathy for Mr. Vengeance, etc.) Now, with this film having connections with so many of my top ten, can it live up to the standards I have set for it?

The three main characters are of course the Good Guy, the Bad Guy, and the Weird Guy. They all end up on a hunt for the same map that may or may not be worth anything at all. As their struggle continues, more and more parties are brought into the mix, all trying to get ahold of the map for themselves.

This movie was a surprise on all accounts. Not only did I get everything I wanted from it, I got it in such an enjoyable package of comedy and inspirational action sequences that this is truly a film for the books. Enough of this love affair...

Starting off with the camera, I must say that Kim Ji-woon pulled out all the stops. His eye for color was well documented in A Tale of Two Sisters, but this particular title shows off some of his other skills. He manages to create some wonderful panoramic shots of the desert as well as a handful of wonderfully constructed set pieces for the action sequences. There is no flaw here.

The soundtrack is as equally stunning as the camera work. The music brings you back to the days of Westerns, but maintains a very modern feel to it to give itself its own identity. While a lot of aspects of this film are very obviously based on another film with a very similar title, that doesn't mean that this piece does not have enough to stand on its own. No flaw here either.

What's left? The acting? Please, this film stars three of South Korea's most prominent actors (as well as my favorite, Song Kang-ho whom I mentioned above). The only thing to drive people away from this movie is its lack of depth. I normally never bring this up, because usually the plot is enough to give that part away, but I thought I should address it at least once.

I was once told that you have directors who either are good at telling stories or are good at making you think and that the perfect directors are the ones who can bring those two together. I was never truly sold on that idea (it was an argument for David Lynch, who I am not a fan of). I feel you don't need to encapsulate both of those aspects into every film you make. I think all you need to do is find the balance of the two you are most comfortable in and make the best of it. You don't need to stump your audience or give them life changing realizations to make them enjoy your films. Let this be one of those that proves my point.

Score: 5/5

Notes: Kim Ji-woon's films are expensive, which is what is making it take so long for me to acquire them.

Martyrs (2008; Pascal Laugier)

2009-04-28T21:19:00.007-05:00

Martyrs is a film stemming from a new found obsession with gore and violence not seen much before in France. In the vein of Irreversible and Inside (among others I haven't reviewed yet), Martyrs picks up where the others left off and excels.

A young girl who is tortured and beaten when younger manages to escape. Grows up, makes one true friend, and together they decide to take matters into their own hands. Pretty straight forward, right?

The only summaries I was ever given before seeing this film were very brief such as the one I just gave, so despite being told how amazing it was, I was still a little bit nervous. That sort of plot just sounds weak... like some sad attempt to hold scenes of violence together. I was gladly proven wrong so if that summary had you concerned, you can relax.

The camera and acting are what really shine through in this piece. The shots are very well constructed and balanced. They also take great care in never showing you more than they need to during each moment. Some of their earlier moments (first half hour) have tremendous build ups until the film takes a drastic change of pace. However, the camera stays right with it as once the pacing and mood change. The cutting immediately becomes erratic and uneasy.

Touching briefly on the acting... it is superb. The two main actresses pull their characters off in stride, never once letting us doubt their roles. Nearing the end, one of them plays off desperation spotlessly (with the little help of camera sweeps and a minor score).

The only thing that goes against this film is that, like with most ultra violent films, they lose replay impact after each viewing. So once again...

Score: 4.5/5

Notes: Long haired girl... in a French film?

Kourei (2000; Kiyoshi Kurosawa)

2009-04-13T20:27:00.005-05:00

Kiyoshi Kurosawa is a big name in the J-horror circle, however he is a man I have more or less ignored for mostly monetary reasons. The only other work I have seen of his before this one was his very popular Kairo. There is one thing that becomes apparent from watching either of the previously stated pieces, and that is that Kurosawa has quite an eye for camera.

A psychic is out to prove herself as real with the help of a college student. She is given the opportunity to when a young girl gets kidnapped off of a playground, but things go wrong, shit goes down, etc...

I have a problem with movies dealing with psychics. It's not so much that they are bad plot devices, it's just that I get so sick of them because I know "psychics" in the real world are just people robbing others of their money. I can't help myself from getting annoyed whenever I see one on film, even if they are "real" in terms of the story. It would be unfair for me to dock this film for that however, but I just had to get it out there.

As I stated earlier in the introduction, Kurosawa's mastery of the camera is very much apparent. He uses everything from slow crawls, first person perspectives, and room sweeps all to their fullest potential. He tries his hardest to get everything he can from his chilling sequences. Speaking of which...

Kurosawa also presents his chills and scares very effectively. He is not shy in showing you what the characters see, and he tries his hardest with the use of a limited score and effective camera to make every second of it count. He also doesn't use cheap shots to try and scare you; he uses an effectively built up atmosphere to slowly build up a lingering sense of paranoia.

So is there anything wrong with it? While Kurosawa does build the atmosphere he wants, the films slow pace sometimes works against it instead of for it. There is also a reference to Dopplegangers that is played with but sort of just becomes neglected. While this may look like your average J-horror film on the outside, it plays very much different from your Ju-on's and your One Missed Calls. This is very much a low key, brooding piece meant to haunt you long after it is over. So while it's pacing halters it slightly, Kurosawa achieves what he set out for in the end, giving this film a score of...

Score: 4/5

Notes: Long. Black. Hair. Again.

Noroi (2005; Koji Shiraishi)

2009-04-03T21:18:00.006-05:00

I can now officially say that Koji Shiraishi is a director whose body of works completely confounds me. He is the director of Kuchisake-Onna (Carved) which was an awfully mediocre underachievement of generic asian cinema. Also, while never having seen it, Ju-Rei was a film that was torn apart by critics (not that they matter too much) for being exactly what I described Carved as.

Out of the blue, Noroi. A film so scary I actually looked away. As embarrasing as that may sound, true horror/gore hounds such as myself live for events such as this. The thrill of being scared, even if only for a few moments, makes it all worth while. However, when a movie such as Noroi comes around, dealing those thrills out in spades, it can bring most people to their knees (or just have them look away like I had to). Our main man is a paranormal investigator who is currently looking into a curse and the connections between the people it is having an effect upon.

(Don't worry, I went back and watched the scene again so I didn't miss anything.)

So do you see my confusion with Shiraishi now? On one hand he is scraping the bottom of the J-horror bucket looking for any long haired actresses that might be left over, and then on the other he is making possibly the scariest mockumentary that exists to this day. It has also come to my attention that his newest work might actually be yet another peak in his career so I will be waiting impatiently with both eyes wide open (mostly because Noroi has made me too scared to close them).

Right, onto the movie... Well, as usual with mockumentaries, there is only so much that can be said. So much of the success relies upon powerful acting and storytelling, which this film is drowning in, and once they obtain those aspects they are well on their way to being a diamond in the rough. All the performances in this film are top of the line (with a special nod to Mitsuo Hori with a mind blowing performance as an eccentric "super psychic").

As far as storytelling, Shiraishi took great care to craft an intricate backstory to go along with the "current" events to tie it all together. This leads to a world that feels very much real, which in return only draws us, the viewers, into the curse that much deeper. The development of the backstory reminds me very much of another high class mockumentary film (Blair Witch) that uses it as a method to make the material that much more real. We suddenly question whether or not these films are actually mockumentaries.

There is a score used here, but it is very scarce. It is simply sprinkled in to make the experience that much more horrifying.

To quote a critic who is much more popular than I...

"So in summary: if you don't crap yourself by the end of Noroi, then chances are that you're dead inside and no amount of horror movies will ever scare you."

Score: 4.5/5

Notes: Score is subject to change. I felt such an urgency to get the word out about this film that I haven't given myself time to watch it a second time yet.

P.S. The quote can be found here... mandiapple.com/snowblood/noroi.htm

P.P.S. Shiraishi's newest film is named Grotesque, and is a very intriguing looking torture porn.

Rant II

2009-03-30T21:34:00.002-05:00

I have a feeling that rants might become their own column, so I have named it appropriately...

This time on rant, I wanted to take a more humorous approach and talk about some of the stupid things I have heard and seen (relatively) recently regarding cinema. To start off...

1. http://www.wanderinggoblin.com/2009/03/29/twilight-not-just-a-film-its-now-a-religion/

That's right, as if the horde of obnoxious little girls in chain pants wasn't enough to drive us insane, they are now creating their own religion to remind us just how dumb they are in case we forgot sometime between Queen of the Damned and now. The best part is that they require you to acknowledge that all the characters are indeed real people and truly exist. Yeah... right.

2. This is a story my friend told me. He was hanging around our campus, I believe, and he overheard someone say, and I paraphrase, "Yeah, Hostel? That terrible Saw rip off."

I really don't believe that story needs any explaining. There are so many points that are just so wrong it hurts.

3. This last one is something I once read. I was browsing the IMDb forums and happened upon a Black Christmas hate thread (the original, not any of this new bullshit) and they brought up how it was terrible (SPOILER LOOK AWAY NOW IF YOU HAVEN'T SEEN BLAIR WITCH OR BLACK CHRISTMAS) because it, like Blair Witch, never showed the "bad guy". They called it lazy writing and directing.

Are you joking me? Really? They are the lazy ones... what about you with your lame ass excuse because you have no imagination?

This ranting feels like a nice break between movie reviews and reminds me I need a new director post soon. I will have to get on that sometime...

Memories of Murder (2003; Bong Joon-ho)

2009-03-24T20:50:00.008-05:00

It is about time for me to cover another of my current top ten, Memories of Murder. This review is going to contain many more stills than I normally use because this is one of the most beautifully shot films ever, and it just so happens that a lot of the scenes I was going to talk about happen to have images I could find.

At a time when South Korea was desperately trying to claw it's way up to match the modern, leading first world countries, a killer arose to take advantage of the confusion and chaos that was enveloping the criminal justice system. As young women start to wind up murdered across a small province, local "detectives" Park and Cho are forced to team up with a professionally trained detective straight from Seoul, Seo. As the crimes continue, the three men desperately dig for any sort of connections between the murders that might help them get one step ahead.

The thriller tones sound obvious, but I assure you that this is nothing like the garbage you see coming out of the US. Several important aspects are at play during the film, all of which play a major role in the development of the case and of the characters, themselves. Park and Cho are from the small province they watch over, and thus have not yet become part of the rapid development that Seoul has been put through. This leads to complete differences in styles that make Park and Cho come off as idiots and almost neandrotholic. However, as the film progresses and the characters evolve, you see that the truth is completely different. You begin to understand the motives of the three men and why they act the way they do.

Right from the start you are shown the lack of organization that Park, Cho, and Seo have to try and work with. They are not taken seriously by the citizens around them, which leads to a lack of containment at the crime scenes and results in the destruction of valuable evidence. As the film develops, you start to witness the full extent of Bong Joon-ho's eye for the camera. The still above represents one of my favorite scenes in which a reinactment of a crime goes wrong. The shot and the one that takes place after it are truly awe-inspiring. As far as the score goes, it melds perfectly with the mood of every scene, further dragging us into their desperation and hopes.

The true extent of the desperation, and a major turning point for one of the detectives is the still above. We witness a truly heart-wrenching scene that connects to a part earlier in the film that makes you want to break down and cry with them. However, not all of the movie is as emotionally draining, as interspersed throughout the piece we find some truly fabulous humor, but never enough to ruin the overall tone that lurches over the film. The performances are spectacular, some of the greatest I have ever seen. As discussed earlier, the detectives transitions and our opinions of them were only possible by the spotless performances of all involved.

The point I am trying to get at? That this movie is damn near perfection. I could continue to go on and on, but I rather not give anymore away than I already have. The only thing I could see bothering people is the pacing. I have witnessed this first hand, that when people go into a thriller they expect slick, fast paced action. However, I think that those people are fools and should go back to their Fincher films and leave the real masterpieces to people like us.

Score: 5/5

Notes: I wish I could score it higher, The film with the same title being released this year is NOT a remake (I was so happy to find that out).

The Baby's Room (2006; Álex de la Iglesia)

2009-03-23T22:35:00.007-05:00

When I reviewed my first Film to Keep You Awake, I said horror films made for television tend to feature too much lighting. It is becoming quite obvious to me that this television series has done away with that problem and has begun dealing with another recent problem plaguing film in general. Digital. Need I say more?

A young couple moves into a nice house that was mysteriously cheap. As soon as they move in they begin to hear voices through their baby monitor and start to get worried. It is obvious where I am going with this now, so I'll just leave it at that.

While The Baby's Room retreads ground that has been so retreaded that I doubt there is even ground to be treaded on there anymore, it does it well enough that it deserves some credit. While the ghost tale is not the only horror cliche at work here (the ending comes to mind) it still has enough chills to make it a worthy experience.

The soundtrack is sort of bland and uninspired, which matches perfectly with the script, I suppose. The pacing is adequate; keeping you interested enough to keep you going. The acting is a lot better than one would expect, which happens to be one of the only aspects where this film reaches beyond average.

The camera is of the same bland quality, but with one major exception. During the course of the film, the couple acquires a baby monitor with a video feed. This leads to some very interesting, almost mockumentary type scenes where we are bound to only the limited sight of the monitor. This leads to some actually effective chills until the film dials it down and goes for a more straight forward approach that drags it back into the realm of normality.

So to wrap this brief entry up, while the film reeks of cliche, it's use of an effective medium for certain scenes gives it's score a little bit of an edge to a final of...

Score: 3/5

Notes: Potatoes are red.

Jacob's Ladder (1990; Adrian Lyne)

2009-03-16T19:52:00.006-05:00

It has taken me a long time to thing of something to write as an introduction to this review. I had all these wonderfully constructed things to say in my mind about the movie, but nothing as an introduction. Then I finally gave up and put this.

Jacob is a Vietnam veteran who has returned home to New York (I think it was New York... whatever, just Big City X). He had gotten a doctorate degree, been divorced, and is now dating a woman who works at the post office with him (despite his doctorate, yes). His life starts to go off has he begins to flashback to a certain day in Vietnam where his platoon was attacked and he, himself, was injured. His flashbacks begin to manifest themselves into reality, having an effect on his health and daily life. As to prevent giving away much else, the rest of the film is him combating his flashbacks and memories of his past.

I find it hard to limit myself to such a summary of this film. To really get a grasp on what I am going to try and explain to you, you really just have to watch it for yourself. This film is so heavily event driven that reviewing it will be hard without being able to directly reference certain events. I will try and express what I can anyway, however, as I feel this is a neglected film that needs to be heard.

Jacob's Ladder is for all extents and purposes, a film about a man's struggle within himself. While that is pretty generic sounding, you have to realize that it really is a man's struggle within himself. The genius of Lyne's work is that he makes all the events, no matter how disturbing, completely grounded into reality on some sort of level. This is very important in the impact of the film as it drives you so strongly convinced of reality until the last scene of the film.

The whole film is built off of dual meaning. While you are watching the film, every event is both significant in the life of Jacob as he perceives it, and as a symbol in the struggle he is having. I am trying to drive home to you that this film is a lot deeper than just gore and drama on screen.

I know the previous segment will be hard to follow without having actually seen the film, and I apologize that I really can't simplify it anymore. I needed to stress the importance of the symbolism so that people don't walk away feeling the ending as some sort of cop-out. That could completely ruin the whole film for them, and they don't even realize they are missing out on what they really just saw. Now I will discuss some of the more technical aspects I usually cover so that there is at least one part in this review people who have yet to watch this movie can grasp.

At first I was weary as the camera felt sort of dull and unmotivated to really capture any scene with any real form of emotion. However, I quickly found out how wrong I was as the film threw me into some of the most wonderful visuals I can remember seeing in recent history. The soundtrack is unmemorable (there might not even be one... that is how forgettable it is) and is the only truly real disappoint in my mind at the moment. That rounds off this review with a...

Score: 4/5

Notes: Hippy Scientists, No Post-Production Special Effects

Behind the Mask: The Rise of Leslie Vernon (2006; Scott Glosserman)

2009-03-07T21:12:00.007-06:00

In a world where slashers are not movies, but in fact reality, a young man by the name of Leslie Vernon is about to become the next great killer. To mark the occasion, he has given special access to three young wannabe journalists to record him as he prepares for the night that he hopes will launch him into slasher history.

Oh and how he succeeds. This film is everything a slasher should be and everything a satire wants to be. I say wants to be because as we all know, slasher satires have been done before. Don't let that scare you off, though, this is no Scream. With self references that put Scream's to shame and acting that is truly inspiring (more on that later) Behind the Mask is worth ten times it's own weight in gold. If someone would be so kind as to calculate what that actually comes out to that would be very helpful. I am simply assuming that it comes out to a decent amount, but wouldn't I look like a fool if it wasn't?

Anyway, on to the acting. While acting is an aspect I tend to skip over unless it is appalling, I felt that with this movie, it is very much needed. Nathan Baesel as Leslie Vernon is captivating to say the least. He appears in front of the screen like a child celebrating Christmas. His energy and vigor are palpable as we watch him jump and tremble with excitement at the very idea of his special night.

The cinematography is everything you could want in a slasher and more. Throughout the film we switch from mockumentary style camera as we watch the journalist's footage and pretty standard yet crisp slasher filming. The transitions flow smoothly, despite how it may sound, and work beautifully in a certain sequence where we are walked through the night as Vernon wants it to unfold.

The weak points? Well, there really aren't any. While maintaining a resemblance to the slasher formula, the mockumentary filming and the depth to the satire give it a life and a feel of it's own. However, with that comes a certain understanding that the audience must have a previous grip on basic slasher standards. I want to give it two separate scores to resemble this, but I wouldn't know how, so for now...

Edit: I have decided not to punish this film at all for expecting some previous knowledge. So a perfect score it is.

Score: 5/5

Notes: Ahab, Virgin, and Robert Englund

Kill, Baby... Kill (1966; Mario Bava)

2009-02-21T20:35:00.006-06:00

I shall once again delve into the classics of cinema with one of Italy's finest, Mario Bava. While never achieving the same fan base in the United States as his son, Lamberto, later would, many would argue Mario Bava is well deserving of the same, if not more, attention that his son would later recieve.

In a small, nearly abandoned town a curse looms over all who still live there. When one of the younger women in the town mysteriously dies, a "big town" inspector and doctor are called in to find out what really happened. They remain troubled, however, as no one in the town is willing to give them any sort of answer. It quickly becomes apparent to them that the people living within the small town are incredibly superstitious, and if they want to try and figure out what happened to the woman they must try and find out the past of the cursed town.

While Kill, Baby... Kill treads a very familiar ground in ghost tales, it is driven so wonderfully by Bava's eye with the camera, the unsettling score, and the entire cast's performances that no new ground needs be broken to make it a perfectly competent piece of art. Through watching Bava's work, you can very clearly see where another, more modern master got his inspiration. The colors, score, and general atmosphere of the film show a clear relation to the finer works of Dario Argento.

Some of the imagery is absolutely wonderful. Certain sequences, such as a collage of images in a nightmare sequence, can be truly frightening at times. We have all seen the parade of long haired Japanese preteens popping out at us recently (with mixed results) but the ghost Melissa in this movie easily tops the list as one of the most genuinely terrifying.

Bava's use of the camera is inspiring to say the least. While certain scenes show off true potential, he carefully skirts around coming off as too over confident in his skills. When you put on top of that his truely awe inspiring use of colors you create a visually stunning piece. The only real problem was that the script could not keep up with the excellence of everything else that was treating our senses.

It's like having to eat the greatest bowl of ice cream you've ever had but running out of sprinkles half way through.

Score: 4/5

Notes: Cobwebs, Spiderwebs, and a Scary Little Boy

*IMDb the last note if you can't figure it out yourself*

The Midnight Meat Train (2008; Ryuhei Kitamura)

2009-02-18T23:28:00.005-06:00

Ryuhei Kitamura is a director many people have been keeping their eyes on. His eye with the camera is quite remarkable and most people would have trouble denying that (his action cutting is another story). When his popularity had grown so much that he was asked to direct an American horror film, I will admit I was very intrigued. It also brought to mind the time when he was asked to direct another film outside of his expertise, Godzilla. While never witnessing this film, the word on the street is that even his most dedicated fans had to turn away in disgust.

A small time photographer finally gets his shot at a larger scale show. The only problem is that the head of the show says his work is a little too shallow and he needs to dig just a little deeper into the city's underbelly to achieve real masterpieces. He tumbles upon a mysterious man who only boards the trains at night and he decides to try and figure out the reason why.

It turns out that Kitamura actually does have more than just one (action) trick up his sleeve. While his style is still very much present in the film via slow motion and heavily stylized kill scenes, the film definately has the feel of something very new to him.

First off, while his characters are not poorly constructed or poorly acted, they still feel a bit... bland. They just come off as any other American couple in any other American film (The Grudge's character come to mind as another example of this). While stereotypes can be helpful in films, this is not one of them.

I want to touch back for a minute upon the idea of Kitamura's camera. Word on the street is that some people feel that this film is a bit over directed. Meaning, he went way too far out of his way to try and make this film look so good it just looks like shit. I disagree. If you understand Kitamura's background, his touches feel very much normal for him and are not that far of a stretch with the material used in this specific film.

Now to speed up the rest of this so I have time to rest and try and get healthy. The colors used fit wonderfully with the rest of the film. The blue tones used in the subway car fit perfectly (and are also quite natural). The soundtrack isn't very memorable, but is at least competent. What is the point I am trying to get at? This film is a combination of the expertise of a very competent director and the average-ness of someone who obviously doesn't work in this genre mixture very often.

Score: 4/5

Notes: Ted Raimi, Conspiricies, and Mushroom? Chest

Rope (1948; Alfred Hitchcock)

2009-02-16T22:53:00.004-06:00

Most of my movies that I review tend to be relatively new. Can you blame me? These movies are from my generation, are easier to research, and are easier to obtain. However, as a self proclaimed "film addict" I must always take some time to go back and obtain the classics. While most of them have been put on Criterion, and are therefore ludicrously expensive, some maintain normal (cheap) releases. Those are the ones for me.

Two intellectual socialites have embraced an idea that certain individuals at such a sophisticated level such as themselves have the right and responsibility to kill lesser individuals. To prove to themselves just how cunning they are, they decide to not only kill one of these lesser humans, they decide to hide the body in a chest in the middle of their living room. It also just so happens they are hosting a party for the man they murdered in that very room.

I have always maintained that Rope is Hitchcock's strongest film (followed closely by other well knowns such as Rear Window and Vertigo). The actors in this film pull off their respective roles perfectly, my favorite performance being Brandon (John Dall) who is a charismatic and manipulative som' bitch (and who is also a murderer).

I will be honest, some of my enjoyment of this film comes from the knowledge of how it was made. Hitchcock wanted to try and shoot a film in as few shots as possible. He was, however, limited to the length of the modern film reels, which led to the film ending at around ten rolls, with some of the cuts hidden by zooming into objects and zooming out at the start of the next roll.

That being said, this led to the camera being mostly restrained to sweeps and zooms, but it worked almost perfectly within the small confines of the film (a single room and a hall).

Which brings me to another thing I have noticed. There is something about confined films that makes me feel that it can show so much more about the director's skills when they can craft an interesting and gripping film only utilizing one or two set pieces (see 12 Angry Men). I also enjoy when directors can successfully juggle a large cast of major characters, but that is for later reviews (see my top two favorite films).

Where does this film go wrong? I felt the continual use of dialogue that was suppose to be cleverly playing around with the murder (stories of strangling chickens, the use of the word dead) was a bit over used and became so obvious at points it distracted you from the atmosphere of the film and pulled you back into reality for just a split second. While small, it still has an impact on the final vision of the film that prevents it from achieving the coveted perfect score.

Score: 4.5/5

Notes: James Stewart is a Sexy Man

The Last Broadcast (1998; Stefan Avalos & Lance Weiler)

2009-01-30T20:39:00.004-06:00

As stated many times before, I love mockumentaries.

That is all I have.

Two men (pictured above) run a small time television show that is quickly losing it's crowd. In order to get some attention back, they decide to do a live broadcast of them hunting down the Jersey Devil. They hire two other men to accompany them into the woods and then everything falls apart. Three of the men are murdered and the fourth is determined to be the guilty one. What we watch is a documentary about the case and how the host feels that the fourth man is very much innocent.

My reviews on mockumentaries always have to be short due to the fact that not much can be said about the cinematography or score. This leads me to a very blunt point... if you enjoy this style of cinema, you will very much enjoy this film. If you however have no fondness for this ilk of film, then you should just walk away, because apart from the ending, no "new" ground is struck with this one.

Any of you who cared enough to reach this point.. this is for you. I feel this film lovingly crafts a murder mystery in with a spice of horror all wrapped up in my favorite bow of mockumentary reality. From the get go we are bombarded with facts from the case that seemingly pointed to the fourth man as the guilty party, but as the digging becomes more intense, more evidence comes to light that makes us not as sure as we were before.

The reason I am going to knock points off of the final score is for the ending. While it was a gutsy move to pull, I felt that a more... Blair Witch ending would have fit better. If you see the film you will understand what I mean.

Score: 4/5

Notes: Mockumentary on a Documentary

Sukiyaki Western Django (2007; Takashi Miike)

2009-01-30T16:34:00.007-06:00

Two things need to be stated here in this little introduction. Firstly, I have always loved Takashi Miike. Secondly, I have always hated westerns.

(Quite the cliff hanger, eh?)

In a small desert (until the end) town, two rival gangs fight over the ownership of the land to prospect for gold. We are treated to a mysterious hero coming in to try and end the battle between the White's (pictured above) and the Red's (pictured below) before it reaches even more ridiculous proportions.

When I first heard about this project a while back, I thought the idea of Miike, one of the masters of shock cinema, creating a spaghetti western seemed a bit of a stretch. However, I have learned over the years never to judge Miike's works until you actually watch them. I was going to put off purchasing and reviewing this film until it's price dropped, but the lure of Tarantino in a Miike film was too much for me to handle so I caved.

From the very forced English dialogue coming from Japanese actors to the stereotyped western setting, every piece of this movie feels perfect. By every piece I mean almost every piece, I just thought the sentence would flow better if I used every instead of almost every. Anyway.

The colors vary from bright whites to muddy browns. The camera goes from corny (on purpose) western shoot-outs to beautiful "landscape" shots as I like to call them (couldn't think of a better word for set pieces that would get my point across). Every inch of this film is filled to the brim with the heart and spirit of a man (Miike) who loves his work (or in this case, someone elses terrible genre). His understanding of how to make the film was almost perfect (once again, stressing the almost as I will get to the negative in a bit).

Now when dealing with a film filled with stereotypes up the ass, it is hard to craft each concept without it feeling boring or forced. Miike almost pulled it all off, except for some of the love story parts. Some of them (one "romantic" scene near the end dealing with two people crawling comes to mind) just felt unneccesary to the completion of the story.

Score: 4.5/5

Notes: Tarantino, Forced English Dialogue

Tremors (1990; Ron Underwood)

2009-01-11T19:52:00.007-06:00

I don't care what anybody says about this movie, I just can not take it seriously. I feel that as much as it may try to be an exercise in claustrophobic suspense, I see it more as a silly 90's take on a monster film.

That being said, it in no way makes the film bad, you just have to know what to expect. A group of southern hicks get trapped in their valley when four giant.. worm things attack and start dragging people under the dirt.

While keeping my reviews undeniably fresh, the cinematography in this film is keeping the vision of the filmmaker undeniably bland. By bland I mean if you took the textbook on the basics of working a camera and made a movie on it, this is what you would have. The sheer blandness is making my vocabulary so bland that I have used bland too many times in this review already.

I want to keep this review on a high note however, as not everything about this movie is (you know the word by now). The acting was good enough to hold the story together, and by that I mean the acting was obviously made over the top to balance out the fact that the entire movie is based down below.

I could sit here and try and chalk away at why this film is not exceptional, or I could tell you that you should approach this movie differently. If you walk up to this movie with the idea that you just want to sit down to a good ol' monster flick, then that is exactly what you will get. Much like slasher flicks, monster movies have almost their own set of rules. All they really need to work are the monsters to terrorize and the people to be terrorized. Throw in some explosions and some death and it should sell.

What was the point of me going on about the cinematography then? Just to simply show you that while monster movies have some of their own rules, they aren't allowed to be lazy and/or uncreative and still expect a top score.

Score: 2/5

Notes: Chick Without Pants, Elephant Guns

Fall Guy (1982; Kinji Fukasaku)

2009-01-03T12:07:00.004-06:00

Ah, Kinji Fukasaku, the man that brought us the almost painfully mainstream success here in the US, Battle Royale. There is nothing wrong with being mainstream or being Battle Royale, it is just more of that Dark Knight syndrome following it around. I shall leave the rest of my comments for my Battle Royale I & II review sometime in the future...

First off I don't know much about the history of this film, so I have no idea if it really was shot in black and white the first time around, however, the R1 copy of the film is in color, so those of you who flip out about not having color can calm down.

My summary for this piece will be a little longer than normal as I feel to better understand this film, you need a fuller history to it. Our lead (Yasu or something like that) is a bit player, meaning he is just one of those faceless guys in the movies (mostly samurai movies in this case) who gets thrown around. In this case, he is being thrown around by his idol, Ginshiro or something (I am bad with names). Part of the culture during this generation was that lead actors were like super stars, and their fans would pretty much do anything for them. Well, Ginshiro is losing his fans to another, younger lead actor (name is unimportant and forgotten by me) and ontop of this, the record setting stunt shot he was supposed to shoot (flipping a man down a 30 foot tall staircase) had been cut because no bit player or stuntman was brave enough to take the fall.

Then more tradegy strikes Ginshiro when he finds out his girlfriend has gotten pregnant. I shouldn't have to tell you, but just incase, that was a big no-no in Japan (as well as the US if it counts for anything). To help save his crumbling face, he asks (forces) Yasu to pretend to be the father of the child and to marry the girl. Yasu's love for Ginshiro (and his secret love for Ginshiro's girlfriend) lead him to say yes, which in return leads to him taking more dangerous rolls in films to pay for the extra mouths.

I don't know about you, but I find the story behind this film to be quite genius. Yasu is an optimistically pathetic character who his pushed around due to his nice demeanor. Ginshiro is a once powerful man who is becoming pushier as his downfall approaches. Whats-her-face is a woman torn between the father of her child (whom she also loves) and the man who is obviously willing to do anything to make her happy. Once you add into the mix the fact that every single character in this film is delibrately overacted (to the point where most lines are actually being screamed and not spoken) to mirror how extreme (and ludicrous) their devotions are, it quickly becomes a recipe for success.

Now I will briefly cover my other usual sections. The music is very catchy, especially the main song that opens up the film, which is never a bad thing. The camera is actually the only thing that remains "normal" among the absurdity of the film, which brings a wonderful sense that we (the camera representing us) are not as crazy as what we are seeing. The only reason I am not handing this film a perfect score is because I have only seen it once, and I never hand out 10's after only one viewing. Whenever I watch this film again, I might come back and edit the score as I see fit, but for now...

Score: 4.5/5

Notes: Movie about a Movie about a Movie.

From Beyond (1986; Stuart Gordon)

2009-01-01T23:30:00.006-06:00

I must say, this review is going to be ridiculously biased. Not for the sake of Jeffrey Combs. Not for the sake of Stuart Gordon. Simply for it being inspired by Lovecraft. I have been a avid fan of Lovecraft for quite a few years, so I always welcome anything that is tied to his works.

I am glad that (while other people may disagree) there is a semi-competent director (in the form of Gordon) who is frequently giving us his visions of what he thinks is truly going on in Lovecraft's worlds. The beauty of it is that another director can come along, create another film on the same short story, and come up with completely different creatures that dwell in the other dimensions and worlds.

(Keeping it fresh again) two scientists set up a device that activates a certain resonance, causing a gland in our brain to grow, allowing us to see into another dimension, and in return, seeing that dimensions inhabitants see us. To bring the idea to another level of realism (at least to a degree) the film makes a connection between schizophrenia and the size of that certain gland. I thought it was a clever idea, at least.

I am not quite sure as most of the surprisingly few Gordon films I have seen are fuzzy in my memory, but it appears he has a very intimate fondness with still camera angles. While that can make films come off as stale (due to moving cameras representing progression, movement, etc) it worked surprisingly well as we felt our characters trapped in a certain space. The camera was further complemented with a wonderful color palette in many of the shots.

As for the score, it is adequate but altogether not too exciting or memorable. Jeffrey Combs puts on a wonderfully enjoyable performance (again). All in all this film has the feel of a Lovecraft title, but it lacks the depth required to truly delve into his beautifully constructed world. While that obviously can not be held against any single film, maybe it is something Gordon might want to work upon. A series of Lovecraft films that fit together besides the small hints to locations that reoccur.

Score: 3/5

Notes: Tentacle Rape (Fuck Yes)

Welcome to the Jungle (2007; John Hensleigh)

2008-12-28T00:02:00.007-06:00

Excuse me if I find it a bit hard to swallow that the same man who helped write Armageddon and Jumanji decided his best career move would be to make a horror mockumentary about cannibals. One last thing, yes, this movie really is a mix of two classic mockumentarys you should be thinking of. If you really can't name both of them, shame on you. I will give you a little bit longer to get some guesses before I give it away...

(Pause)

Two young couples (yeah, that's right, can you guess it yet?) head into the jungle to try and find proof of Michael Rockefeller's survival so they can make it rich. Bad happens.

Alright, the break is over. At first, this film comes off as only an updated, milder form of Cannibal Holocaust (Dubbed Mockumentary #1 for you guessing folk). However, once you crack it open and start watching it, you will quickly learn that it uses a very Blair Witch formula for developing the characters and the tension. (Yes, Blair Witch is Mockumentary #2. You can leave your score in the comment section).

However, it feels that Hensleigh got too caught up in trying to develop each part that he forgot to tie them all together. This leads to a very choppy experience where the pacing and atmosphere drastically change from one piece to another. We start with the Blair Witch feel of watching our main kids be silly so we can bond with them and what have you. We then are brought into our kill zone (the wilderness for all three). Tension dwells in the group and fighting occurs, which is supposed to help add to the helplessness of the situation. After the tension and fighting, bad happens.

You see, where the Blair Witch Project set all of these steps up and blended them into one cohesive, believable web, Welcome to the Jungle just leaves out the bridges between. We go from parties directly to walking through the forest. We are then treated to ten or so minutes of nonstop fighting. The traveling and fighting really aren't mixed together at all. After we watch nothing but fighting we are immediately thrown into the bad happening and then the film is over.

I will say, however, that not all in this is bad. All of the characters come off as credible and are acted very well. Also, the #1 part of this film is actually executed almost perfectly. The cannibals are portrayed brilliantly and some of the kills, while very #1, are still very effective. So even despite the film's poor attempt at reaching for #2, the fact that it nailed #1 so perfectly near the end made the questionable beginning surprisingly tolerable and rescued the film from being a failure.

Score: 3/5

Notes: Is that Mikey screaming for help? Or is it Josh...

Incident at Loch Ness (2004; Zak Penn)

2008-12-27T22:47:00.006-06:00

I am a total sucker for mockumentarys, I am very aware of it. I just love the potential of it all and the almost endless new doors that it can open. So on that note...

Two men with a digital camera choose to start a documentary filming the life and ideas of Werner Herzog at the same time he was planning on filming a documentry of his own about how fake the Loch Ness monster is. They all head out to Scotland for Herzog's film and things start to fall apart within the crew and Herzog's reality.

First off, this movie gets points for centering around Werner Herzog. I personally like to believe that when Zak Penn decided to try to make this mockumentary, he knew that people would never approve of having to watch him on film for that long. In order to compensate, he chose to switch the main director in the movie to Herzog. As an extra insurance policy, he also chose to make sure he came off as a complete idiot compared to Herzog. Whether or not he knows how close his fake personality represents his competence as a writer is a different story, however. Maybe even the story for his next screenplay ;).

Anyway, what mocumentarys come down to are the immersion. Do you feel like this is a real documentary? With this film the answer is a resounding "sometimes". When certain parts of the film hit, it can be very obvious that they took thought in setting the shots. That in return kills the feeling of spontaneity that these sort of films are supposed to possess. However, that is only some of the time, leaving the majority of the experience in the green. So to leave this review brief so I can write my next one, I will lend this film a...

Score: 3/5

Notes: Jeff Goldblum, Bikini Model

The Prestige (2006; Christopher Nolan)

2008-12-23T21:11:00.005-06:00

"Now you're looking for the secret. But you won’t find it because of course, you're not really looking. You don't really want to work it out. You want to be fooled."

The Prestige, the film I believe to be Nolan's greatest achievement to date (despite the several million people who would disagree with me) is finally being reviewed on my site. How exciting.

Two up start magicians have a bumpy beginning and spend the rest of their lives trying to one up each other. The sheer determination of both of them brings their competition to life threatening proportions as both of the men refuse to back down. To put it briefly, it is a story of unparalleled determination.

Nolan's expertise in story telling and presentation are at their peak as he transforms a very entertaining book into the perfect screen adaptation. He makes exactly the right changes to make the book's tale fit.

As for his presentation; it is spot on. His camera feels perfectly balanced with it's colors and zooms. The music is constructed perfectly for the era we are being shown, yet still feels so wonderful on our ears.

The original tale told on paper is filled with twists and turns that are almost completely unexpected, however the film kicks it up a notch, burying you with hints and clues without you being the slightest bit aware. That toppled upon one of the most gripping realities once you finally grasp it all makes this film worthy of a...

Score: 4.5/5

Notes: Better Than The Dark Knight

Hype in Cinema

2008-12-06T01:36:00.004-06:00

This will be a very brief entry, at least for now, as it is late and I want to go to bed. I wanted to pay a little attention to hype's roll in the success of certain films. Specifically "God's gift to cinema" The Dark Knight.

We are all well aware of the hype put around this film. Firstly, for people like me, Christopher Nolan has always come off as a very competent and powerful film director, even though his first entry into Gotham was less than stellar. Secondly, it is a film about Batman, which will always play well with the crowds (at least draw them in for some profits). Thirdly, and most important to this entry, the death of Heath Ledger. At the time, only the crew and his friends had any idea what his performance was like, and obviously they were going to say it was the most amazing thing to ever grace our vision since the Sistine Chapel.

This played perfectly into Nolan's hands as it gave his perfectly fine film the edge and publicity it needed to become truly huge. Obviously it could be argued that it would simply have been just as popular as Nolan's first entry if it hadn't been for the unfortunate death. That is the route I am going to take, but as I said, it is late so I am not going to do the arguing now.

The media obsession fueled by all of this helped shoot The Dark Knight into what VERY many people believe to be the single greatest film ever made. I hate to tell you people, but cinema does not start and stop with The Dark Knight. What drove me to point this out was I never got over the IMDb rush surrounding that movie. Fans, even before the movie came out, started voting The Dark Knight perfect 10 scores, and then to give it a little boost, they began voting the films that already had the top few spots scores of 1. This debacle actually worked, as The Dark Knight became the #1 movie of all time on IMDb's list for quite a while before other people caught on and balanced it back out (sort of).

The whole point of this really wasn't to say that The Dark Knight was a bad movie (I rather enjoyed it and would easily give it a score somewhere around 8). The point was to give that IMDb example to help show that people can be sort of... dumb, for lack of a better word. That movie was propelled into stardom by some form of mob mentality, but it will soon be replaced in most people's minds (most likely with the The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus, which will be the last movie featuring Heath Ledger). If you still believe that The Dark Knight deserves to be called the greatest movie ever made, then you should just wait a little longer and watch as it becomes forgotten in the waves of releases, where only the true pieces of art remain afloat.

Errata: I was on amazon the day after I made this entry, and pretty much any item is now linked to The Dark Knight. I found a box set containing the entire series of the Flintstones... and it was linked to The Dark Knight. This is getting out of hand.

My Bloody Valentine (1981; George Mihalka)

2008-12-03T20:02:00.006-06:00

Ah, yes, My Bloody Valentine. A classic slasher-esque film that has spawned everything from a group of pre-teen sounding boys moaning into microphones like little girls to a sequel that is rumored to come out sometime next year.

This film is one in well... six thousand or so slasher films that has a faceless weapon wielding killer who takes out obnoxious teenagers for the good of us all...

Anyways...

The regular rules to slashers apply here, such as the completely dull camera and the overacting (or just plain bad acting) teenagers that you want to get killed a little faster. However, simply because it is a slasher, we can completely overlook that because you know all of that, and in fact, want all of that to happen in your slashers.

However, we must examine the film on other grounds. The sound effects are decent enough, and the kill scenes try too hard to be actually tense. The blood is in it's fair share of scenes, but not quite as heavy as I would have wanted. The adults are in their usual know-too-much-yet-do-too-little fashion. All in all, the movie just rounds up to be the safest, plainest, most generic slasher one could ask for. Is that bad? Not at all, but at the same time, it isn't great either. Spend your time watching the more well known and better crafted slasher films if that is really what you are after.

Score: 3/5
for slasher fans
Score: 4/5

Notes: Valentines, Pick Axe, Heart-Shaped Box

No Country for Old Men (2007; Joel & Ethan Coen)

2008-12-02T21:33:00.007-06:00

Ed Tom Bell: Now that's aggravatin'.
Wendell: Sheriff?
Ed Tom Bell: *points to a bottle of milk* Still sweatin'.
Wendell: Whoa, Sheriff! We just missed him! We gotta circulate this!
Ed Tom Bell: Well, okay. What do we circulate? Lookin' for a man who recently drunk milk?

In this Coen masterpiece, we are introduced to a well constructed, almost new age western (to use those terms lightly), where we follow Llewelyn Moss, a nobody, as he finds a satchel full of money from a drug deal gone bad. He tries his hardest to hold on to it all, even after a psychopath (carrying a mightily fun weapon) starts to close in on him to get the money for himself.

To make up for my absence, I thought I would add an extra long summary to better serve my reading audience. Except not really, it just seems long because most other movies I review can be summed up with a few words. Anyway, on to the actual reviewing.

To commemorate this review, I will start with... the soundtrack. Actually, as far as my memory can hold up, most of the movie was played through without any music at all. However, one thing that always struck me about this film that I can always love the Coen's for is their expertise with dialogue. It really feels like they captured the region's accents perfectly, and used it to help capture the mood from scene to scene.

Another aspect that was captured perfectly in this film was the intensity of everything happening on screen. Now this film is no horror of any sorts, but some of the events that unfold will leave you at the edge of your seat waiting to find out what is happening on the other side of the door. Most of the credit for that goes to Javier Bardem who plays the psychopath. Almost all of the scenes where he is forced to have conversations with other characters, you are never quite sure what is going through his head or how he is going to react.

One last performance to note would be that of the sheriff. By far the wisest character of them all, it almost seems he is reluctant to grasp on to the enormous chain of events that is unfolding around him. His deductive reasoning is amazing, and he tries to convince himself it is not sometimes simply just to give himself some sort of solace from the brutal truth. To prevent this review from growing to large, I will just touch on the camera by saying it is in solid form and fully competent.

After all of that, nothing negative really rings in my memory, so that would leave this piece of art at the comfortable score of...

Score: 5/5

Notes: Mother-in-Law, Chicken Crates, Mexico Border

My Absence

2008-11-25T22:32:00.002-06:00

To explain my absence as of late, I blame my classes, and one specifically more than others. However, on that note, this semester ends next week, so I will have pleeeenty of time to catch back up and hopefully meet a 10-review-a-month goal.

The Last Shark (1981; Enzo Castellari)

2008-10-17T18:17:00.005-05:00

This movie is such a blatant rip off of Jaws, that in Spain it is titled "Jaws III".

The reason I chose that specific cover is because I think it is amazing. Just look at how scary that is. I don't care how uninspired it is, sharks are scary. Needless to say for this movie, think Jaws. A shark attacks.

I just want to say that this movie even as a rough sailor with an accent and a mustache. Oh, and he is being hired by a clean shaven man who is cool headed. Oh, did I mention a skinny dipping girl? And the town doesn't want to close the beach to save money? And a buoy getting stuck on the shark. Sorry, where was I?

Oh yes, the camera. I like to think of that camera as simply... nope, don't have an analogy for it, it was just bad. Not bad in the sense that it was shakily unbearable, but simply as inspired and creative as the movie itself.

Okay, I just need to throw one last joke into this then I am done. I had this idea for a movie I want to make. It is about a guy named Michael Buyers. He goes around on Halloween and kills people in a white mask.

Anyway, no matter how hard I try to bury this film for being my Michael Buyers film, the subject matter is simply so rich (seeing as sharks are always scary) that you can't help but get sucked in anyway. No matter how bad the shark looks, or how silly the movie seems, you just have to love it for one reason or another. Does this mean I forgive the movie? No, not even close.

One part I want to mention about this film before I finish, simply to have something positive to throw out, is that the score is truly enjoyable. The potential for the music and "noises" as I like to call them is absolutely amazing, if only it had a proper script and flow of ideas to back it up.

Score: 2/5

Notes: Another film from my friends at wtfdvds.com

The Last Shark at wtfdvds.com/all-dvds-1/the-last-shark-1981-dvd-215.html

Camping del Terrore (1987; Ruggero Deodato)

2008-10-15T17:03:00.006-05:00

"You know what I think about Democracy... let alone campers".

Yeah, that's right. That is a quote from this movie.

This is a slasher film, so what do you honestly want me to say? There are kids who go camping and get knifed.

Going into this, the first thoughts I had were as follows.

1. It is a Ruggero Deodato film, so I can expect some original kills, a decent to wonderful soundtrack, and some well executed camera work.

2. It is an 80's slasher, so some terrible acting, poor script work, and teenage nudity.

Can you guess how much of that was accurate? Yeah, all of it. We are treated to a delightful soundtrack that is truly leagues above the rest of the film. I mean seriously, I find a lot of his music to be absolutely amazing.

The kill scenes and the killer himself look fine, which helps lend a little credit to the awkward performances by the killee's. I can't really move around this review very much because it is almost like slashers have their own set of rules so nitpicking isn't going to get me very far. So instead of me trying anymore, I will just leave it as this.

This movie blends Deodato's style of film making with the genericism (that isn't even a word, I bet) of 80's slashers. In even shorter terms, this is the perfect film for any slasher fan or any Deodato fan.

Score: 3/5
or for Deodato/Slasher fans
Score: 4/5

Notes: This film represents my first review of a group of films I received from the wonderful chaps at wtfdvd's. Check them out at wtfdvds.com

To find this specific film go to wtfdvds.com/all-dvds-1/body-count-aka-camping-del-terrore-dvd-1545.html

TV Shows Pt. III

2008-10-09T23:27:00.006-05:00

I have become extremely lazy and not reviewed anything for a long while as most of my time has been spent watching Six Feet Under through again. Another reason, as if the first wasn't enough, is that I have been waiting for some movies to come from my good friends at wtfdvds. So, just to show that I am not just neglecting this site on purpose, I will throw some more television shows out there.

1. Arrested Development (2003; Mitchell Hurwitz): This show came across as a fresh breath of air for awkward comedy. The genius behind a lot of the coincidences is just outstanding.

2. Monk (2002; Andy Breckman): This wonderfully enjoyable show, sort of like Shark, is a wonderful spin on a worn out piece of subject matter. This show began as a nod to Sherlock Holmes, but has grown so much in popularity that it has become it's own legend.

3. Psych (2006; Steve Franks): On the note of fresh spins on worn out subject matter, I bring you Psych. Like Monk, it began as new version of Sherlock Holmes. Differing from Monk however, it brings forth a younger cast with a whole different direction in it's comedy. It also brings forth a psychic element which only adds to the humor.

And that concludes this new post. My next one will (hopefully) be soon when I get my hands on my new DVD's.

Dellamorte, Dellamore (1994; Michele Soavi)

2008-09-29T18:23:00.004-05:00

Wow, as a way to piss on my own parade, I am reviewing a horror movie. I didn't really mean to play it out that way, but I think of it as a way to express my power over this site. I am the all powerful one here, and I can break any rules I set for myself.

Francesco Dellamorte runs the cemetery in a town. He is such a private person, that when the dead start to rise, he chooses to keep it between him and his mentally ill companion, then to tell the world and get help.

This just so happens to be one of my favorite zombie films ever created. While still a zombie film, it has it's own branch of originality in it's story telling. This is not a zombie outbreak, but a zombie containment scenario. As a horror-comedy, it has the feel of a classic zombie film, with the environment beautifully constructed and plenty of gratuitous violence and nudity, while at the same time it has the comedy blended into the dialogue and scenarios so perfectly it never feels forced into the movie. The dark tone of the humor makes sure that it never needs to reconstruct it's tense nature whenever they want to throw some more zombies into the mix.

The cinematography, while obviously inspired by the countless other successful zombie films before it, makes a mark of it's own with "natural" shake in many of the walking shots and several sweeping shots and "uniquely" placed still shots. I say "unique" because while obviously all of these ideas have been done before (for the most part), it is mastering the timing of when to use all the shots. This applies to all of my reviews. I have to spell it out now because some people felt confused, as if all I wanted in my movies were ridiculous camera moves and anything else was simply too boring.

The small complaint I have with this film is simply that for some reason or another, Francesco feels somewhat absent. I can't help but feel slightly disconnected from his motivations and actions. You do love the character, but it feels as if we are missing a small dimension to make him a complete person.

Score: 4.5/5

Notes: Zombie Love, Zombie Children, and Zombie Boobs

The Ladykillers (2004; Joel & Ethan Coen)

2008-09-29T17:25:00.006-05:00

Ah, how I do love the Coen Brothers. I am sure it won't take me long to get most of their movies up, so to at least bring a flimsy curtain of variation in my reviews, I am going to simply scramble the order in which they are reviewed as to keep you guessing which Coen film is next. How exciting.

A widely different group of people are brought together by a "ring leader" of sorts (Tom Hanks with an obnoxiously funny laugh) to try and rob a casino in a small Mississippi town. I know I have been shying from horror lately, but that is just to prevent this site from being bogged down in it and nothing else. I have a feeling an influx of horror reviews will come soon after as I will feel that I have neglected the genre, but whatever. It's my site.

In this venture into cinema, the Coen's managed to once again take "bad" people and make them lovable. Everyone will find at least one of the gentlemen they can bond with and enjoy. Each one is frequently making the best (for us) of each situation as we laugh at what they will do for money. It even includes my favorite Coen trademark; the repeated lines of dialogue.

The camera feels a tad bit uninspired for a Coen film, but only a tad. Not like moving from a $600,000 home to a $100,000 home, more of a $600,000 to a $550,000 (you lose your added garage space or a few extra outlets in the basement). The score fits wonderfully with the setting and never out stays it's welcome.

As for criticisms, the ending was sort of seen from a mile away, and while not always a bad thing, it just seemed too generic, like as if you see a pretty blonde girl, only to approach her and find out her shirt says "I'm a princess". Sure, she is still pretty, but having that worn down attitude makes it a little less attractive.

And no, it isn't just you. I did use two long winded analogies in one review.

Score: 4/5

Notes: Yes, he did bring his bitch to the Waffle Hut.

TV Shows Pt. II

2008-09-27T23:27:00.007-05:00

I have been exceedingly lazy lately, so I thought I would at least try to contribute something to this blog before this month ends. So now I will show you three more television shows you need to watch.

1. Shark (2006; Ian Biederman): This seems like your basic law show, except for the fact that it is amazing. I feel there is a lot more dimension added to "Shark" as a character then what most law shows put into theirs, as well as the fact that this show puts a lot of stress on the many loopholes and flaws in our current system.

2. The Big Bang Theory (2007; Chuck Lorre & Bill Prady): While this is a relatively new show, it has shown that it is loaded to the brim with potential. Every episode is full of original humor with some very memorable characters.

3. The Universe (2007; Discovery Channel): Yeah, there is no creator listed, so I just put the channel. I thought I would stray off the beaten path and list a very interesting (and sometimes annoyingly dumbed down) show about what we are constantly learning about the Universe we live in. If you are a fan of science, give it a whirl.

Dnevnoy Dozor (2006; Timur Bekmambetov)

2008-09-23T20:56:00.007-05:00

Yes, I have very obvious trends to where most of my reviews go. Which brings me to, yes, I know I skipped Alien, but there is a reason for that. The reason is unimportant, just showing you that I am in fact, aware.

The Great Ones have come, so who will win the battle of light and dark? That really is as deep as I need to go about it. Sure, I could explain who does what and when they do it, but that is what watching the movie is for. It's like I am trying to tell you about a pie, and I convince you that it is a delicious pie. I then proceed to eat the pie, leaving you nothing to experience for yourself. I don't want to be the guy who steals your pie. That is just wrong.

Most of what applies about the cinematography and special effects from the Nochnoy Dozor review applies to this film as well, just toned down a slight degree.

However, this film picks up what the first left off and improves upon it. This film drops the clutter that apparently left a lot of people leaving the first with a bad taste in their mouth. This helps the film flow more smoothly for most, and leaves plenty of space in the movie for something very important. The development of character. We get a much deeper look into a lot of the characters from the first movie, adding another dimension to the enjoyment of the film.

The streamlining of this film, plus the added emotional dimension, knocks this film up to...

Score: 4.5/5

Notes: Sex Change, Transsexual

Nochnoy Dozor (2004; Timur Bekmambetov)

2008-09-23T18:01:00.007-05:00

Why do I use the original Russian title? Because that is the first title I heard when I first learned about this movie, and I believe it sounds a lot better then "Night Watch". There is nothing wrong with the English title, I just think Nochnoy Dozor steps up the bad ass..ness? (ity?) one more notch.

So the supernatural world in split into two halves, the bad guys and the good guys. In order to end the constant war they fought, they decided to reach an agreement. The bad guys would set up the Day Watch, which would regulate the good guys, and the good guys would set up the Night Watch, which would regulate the bad guys. I use the terms "good guys" and "bad guys" loosely, because a main theme... oh wait... I am supposed to save this for later. I am too impatient with this step, time to speed it up. Modern day, fighting, something, movie ends.

Alright, now, I use those terms loosely because a portion of the film feels dedicated to showing that just because their titles might try to imply their motives, you can never be too sure.

The entirety of this film has a very fresh and unique feel. Aspects of certain mythical creatures (Vampires, for example) are created to add a new depth. A new world for the supernatural is created (with it's own cinematography) to explain the movies own mythology. The construction of the supernaturals entering and exiting the natural world feels smooth and understandable. The characters are not dressed up all pretty (sorry, no mall goth heart throb vampires) as to the point of being ridiculous.

The cinematography is absolutely gorgeous. We trace through the wires of a doorbell as it rings, we follow a bolt as it falls from an airplane and ends it's trip inside an apartment of one of the important characters. The camera shifts between steady mid-range dialogue shots, to shaky, almost natural, face shots.

One part of this movie that is very uncharacteristic of me is the fact that I enjoy the computer animations used in the film. Computer animations play a large role (due to the subject matter) but the effects never kill the mood and tone that is already set.

If I had to find a weak point in the film, it might be that while genuinely enjoyable, most people would find the cluster of new ideas to be a little too chaotic. Chaotic to the degree that some aspects of the film lose a lot of the impact that was intended. While this flaw depends largely on the person and can be corrected with a second or third viewing, a movie deserving a ten should not have to defend itself with more then one sitting.

Score: 4/5

Notes: Naked Owls, Supernatural Abortion

One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest (1975; Milos Forman)

2008-09-19T23:20:00.005-05:00

I figured I would throw in some more old movies for you to enjoy. Keep up a little variety on here.

A criminal convinces the system he is mentally ill and get into an asylum. He then slowly bonds with the real mentally ill as he plans his escape out.

I am going to try and be hip again by changing my style up a little. The first part I am going to comment on is the performances by all the actors. Absolutely superb. They are all completely flawless and believable, and never feel like they are pushing their part too far. On a character study such as this, it really was essential to believe the bonds of the people in the hospital.

The camera is pretty plain, but at the same time well executed plain. While sticking with pretty generic angles, the shots have a wonderful sense of balance to almost (but not quite) make up for it. The score is a lot of fun, and seems to lend a lot to the tone of each scene as they play out.

Since it has been coming up in several reviews, I would like to point out that this is a good example of how to craft a longer movie. The pace is kept solid without ever tapering off or speeding up. Twists in the story keep the movie fresh, and it never feels obvious (and at the same time, never feels too spontaneous). That doesn't mean boring thriller twists, just general changes in the direction of the story. If it had a twist such as split personality, I don't think I could give it a score even remotely close to...

Score: 4/5

Notes: Indian Chief, Lobotomy, and Basketball

Dr. Strangelove (1964; Stanley Kubrick)

2008-09-18T21:12:00.005-05:00

I guess the only thing I really have to say here is that look how old this movie is, and yet still rings so true.

To the complete basics of it all, this film shows how easy it might be for a nuclear war to break out on accident. Obviously this film, due to it's age, is against the Russian Communists, however the main idea behind it still has a feel of familiarity. By the way, the entire thing is a satire, and is probably one of the greatest comedies ever written.

It almost feels as if every joke or gag in this film is gold. One of Peter Sellers' three characters is most likely the funniest part of the film, while his other two are mainly used to feed the hilarity of others. Every single important person in this film is so uniquely different and three dimensional that it is astounding. This is to such a degree that you almost feel that none of the characters overlap in any manner.

The camera is not shy at all, using one of Kubrick's favorite moves (face shots) quite frequently. The score is optimistically patriotic, which flows perfectly with the satire and chaos as it unfolds before us.

One day I am planning to extend my Top Ten into a Top Twenty, and you can bet your ass that this will find it's way onto that list.

Score: 5/5

Notes: Purity of Essence, Fluoridation of Water, Precious Bodily Fluids

The Pianist (2002; Roman Polanski)

2008-09-18T10:09:00.006-05:00

One thing.

1. I am not just going to give points to the movie because it touches a sensitive event. Just because the movie is about a jew in World War II, doesn't mean I am going to treat it like one. That is probably how it got it's Oscars.

Now that I have gotten that out of the way, I can begin. Brody's character (I could never remember how to spell his name, so I won't even try) is one of the most amazing piano players alive, but he is also a jew in Poland. Oh, and Germany has invaded. Oh, and it's during World War II. I am sure I don't have to explain the rest of the movie to you (oh, and there is a lot of it).

It has become apparent to me that people who adore this film bash on younger people like me who didn't enjoy this film because my generation is apparently the "A.D.D." generation, and we need violence, boobs, and short movies or else they aren't good.

Fuck you.

They are defending a movie that was created with racial stereotyping by using stereotyping. I gave "12 Angry Men" a 10/10. "Kingdom of Heaven" is also a 10/10 (three and a half hour movie). Just because I feel Roman Polanski didn't fully weave a masterpiece (and what a task it is to weave a two and a half hour movie like this) doesn't mean I am some hyperactive little joke of a child.

I have commented on long movies before, and let me give all the credit in the world to Polanski for this daring attempt. However, so many characters and so many scenes just feel so... inconsequential to the movie as a whole. You can sit there and film tragedy all day, but that doesn't mean it will be heart wrenching. When you are using these things in a film, you have to know when to put it to an end. Due to this very lengthy string of events, the film itself winds up extremely uncompelling. It could have had so much more power if he would have cut out just a half an hour.

I feel I could go on more about that, but I will cut it short as to prevent this review from taking the same tragic course the film did. The camera was crystal clear, with an effective use of lighting, and a clear eye for what he wants. The effects used are flawless and he never gets too ambitious as to detract from the reality of the subject matter.

So while Polanski clearly still has a keen eye and more talent then most, I feel he grew too ambitious, and felt too attached to the subject (he was in (Poland, I think) when these events took place) to actually cut out what he normally would have gladly done for anything else that wasn't so personal. This not only leads to a lengthy film and lessened impact, it leads to less replay-ability and a score of...

Score: 3/5

Notes: Tin Can of Food, Won Three Oscars (once again, you would be surprised how much that works)

Aliens vs. Predator: Requiem (2007; Colin Strause & Greg Strause)

2008-09-16T22:46:00.005-05:00

Round Two: Let's see if these guys can do a better job.

Same story, different people. Moving on...

I am going to start by addressing my two main issues with the first AVP. The Predator (singular now) has no emotions this time around. It is using any means necessary to make sure nothing knows what is going on. This leads to the Predator killing as many humans as Aliens. That is good.

The second issue was the gore. This problem was also addressed with the sequel. Heads were getting blown off all over the place, and it was glorious. They could have done more, but what they had was sufficient enough to satisfy most fans... including me.

Now, even with those problems fixed, a whole new slew of problems arose. This one takes place in a town, which leads to them adding a whole mix of stereotyped humans. These people are found to be an extreme annoyance. A fair amount of our precious time is spent getting us invested in each person, but they are so bland and two dimensional it just feeds your irritation.

Some small complaints are as follows. The Predator is not the hunter it once was. While it is back to being a bad ass, it loses it's hunter instinct. It simply walks right into the Alien hot spots and starts blasting away. There is a political message that is not only felt throughout the movie, they felt the need to drive it home with awkwardly placed dialogue to spell it all out just in case it wasn't obvious enough.

There is one quick positive I want to brush up on before I finish. This film brought a few nice additions to the mythologies of both of the races without adding anything new that might make explaining why it wasn't used in previous films very difficult. There is also a nice touch with the original Predator soundtrack placed briefly in certain spots to add a little something to make us feel comfortable.

Score: 2/5

Notes: Battle of the Pregnancies, Predalien (or Aliator)

Alien vs. Predator (2004; Paul Anderson)

2008-09-16T20:06:00.007-05:00

Yeah, that's right. I thought I would stick to a theme, so here it is. I barely remember watching this film way back in 2004. All I can remember clearly is hating it, and watching everyone else hate it. So after watching Predator again, I felt that I should give it another go and see if I would become this movie's knight in shining armor.

There isn't much to tell. The Predators brought the Aliens to Earth as part of a game. It was so they could hunt the ultimate prey on a planet that they could destroy in case they lost.

I just want to say, first off, that I loved that idea. It was almost Hollywood's answer to the people who believe that aliens created the Earth and taught humans, etc. I just really enjoyed the Predator's story as the ultimate hunter, and that we just get caught up in the crossfire.

I am going to take this movie for what it was meant to be, a fan boy movie. Paul Anderson made sure this film was loaded with goodies featured in other movies (a lot of similar camera shots, etc...) and for that, I applaud him. To a purely fan boy approach, I believe Anderson did a... decent job.

The humanization of the Predator is what bugs me the most. The ultimate hunter is not one who has emotions. The Predator is a tactically superb, ruthless killer. This movie pisses all over that, making them to be some creature we are suppose to care for. Hell, I get the idea that these aren't Predators that have passed their test, but come on. The Aliens got a little better treatment, as they are the same disgusting, gooey beasts we have always known them to be. The perfect adaption as a survivor.

The second biggest flaw in this fan boy movie is the gore. Why is it a problem? There is none. I mean, sure, there is some space creature blood, but that is it. When I see these movies I want fountains of human blood everywhere. That is just something that he should have understood.

The score is uninteresting. It carries the film, but is ultimately uninspiring. The camera feels the same way. It carries the film the whole way, but really doesn't make good use of the claustrophobic temple that most of the film is shot in. I get the idea that this movie is supposed to make all of us fan's happy, but that doesn't excuse you from being boring and plain.

So with his heart in the right place, but his vision skewed, I leave you with a (somewhat forgiving)...

Score: 2/5

Notes: Aliens, Predators, and No Fucking Blood

P.S. Feels good to have a low score again.

Predator (1987; John McTiernan)

2008-09-14T22:51:00.006-05:00

Okay, I have to get this off my chest. This movie is simply the epitome of a man's movie. You have huge explosions. You have men walking through the middle of battlefields without any cover. You have completely unnecessary weapons the size of the men themselves. Witty one-liners while killing people. Every part of this movie screams manly.

Group of hard ass rescue soldiers right out of body builders weekly are called in to rescue a diplomat. The rescue mission goes wrong, and the "forest comes alive".

Everyone who has been consciously aware of life around them pretty much knows this film, but that doesn't mean I shouldn't review it anyway. People who have trouble with the fact that this is a very exaggerated, manly movie might want to just stop reading the review here.

The film, for what the stereotypes are worth, are in fact well acted, and do give personalities to what seem like pretty two dimensional characters. The soundtrack and score are pretty much right on with it's generation. The camera is pretty basic; sitting still with dialogue and sweeping with gun fights. However, it does have a few moments (running in front of one of the men) and due to what the film calls for (pretty much a monster flick), it doesn't need to be anything more then that.

The effects are, while not quite up to date, plenty to carry the story along, and by no means bad enough to distract from the tension and claustrophobia. Speaking of claustrophobia, the films environment is very well constructed. Even though the entire film is shot in a wide open jungle, we can't help but feel trapped with the manly men as they find themselves cornered in the open. They have everywhere to run, but nothing to gain from it.

Score: 4/5

Notes: Big Guns, Manly Men, and Explosions

TV Shows

2008-09-14T21:16:00.007-05:00

I have contemplated for a very long time about whether I would attempt to make reviews of television shows or not. If I chose to, would I separate reviews by seasons? After much contemplation, I decided it would be too hard to effectively summarize television shows without leaking too much to make it sound interesting. However, as I feel television shows are too important to just completely pass over, I decided I would make several posts with names of shows I feel people should not live without. I believe I will do three a post. Here we go...

1. Six Feet Under (2001; Alan Ball): This is probably my favorite television series of all time. After I finished watching it all, I felt as though I missed all of the characters. As if I had just lost a best friend...

2. House (2004; David Shore): This is a well known show, so I don't feel I have to express much about it.

3. Twin Peaks (1990; David Lynch & Mark Frost): This is a very forgotten show by many it seems, and that is a great shame. While I am a very rare breed (a David Lynch hater), I feel this show is easily one of the greatest shows to grace the screen, and the one exception to my hatred for Lynch (so far).

That length feels about right, so with that, I shall end my first exploration of television.

Burn After Reading (2008; Joel & Ethan Coen)

2008-09-12T21:22:00.007-05:00

This review will be biased. I have a very strong... fondness for the Coen Brothers.

Look at them! Don't you just want to run up and take them...

Burn After Reading. Okay, so, in the most basic degree (very basic) a group of very dumb gym employee's (and owner) get a hold of a disc that previously belonged to an CIA agent (Malkovich with exceptional brilliance). They decide they should try and get some money off of the transaction, because as far as they are concerned, it could be one of the most important documents to exist in the USA.

To bring some excitement to this site, I am going to start employing new styles to keep things fresh. I will be hip. To launch this new wave of hip, I am going to change the order. I will start with the camera.

The camera, in true Coen form, stays reliably fresh, always seeming to find all the right corners at all the right times. Excitingly explorative (not a real word, it turns out), yet in a simple and consice manner.

The biggest problem I had with this film was the beginning. The first thirty minutes felt like a very slow drag into what is supposed to be (I assume) a faster paced film. Some of their jokes are not as succesful as I would have hoped, yet not complete duds either.

Back to positive now (told you I am hip). The dialogue, also true to Coen fashion, has their traditional awkward feel, which seems to always add to their dark comedy tones. Next point is, while I am sure this will get me crap, that I found the... structure of the film well crafted. The constant feeling of a grand scheme building up, yet there really is nothing to build. I felt that, while most likely leaving most people disappointed or frustrated, really was the genius behind the film.

So with a most likely violent shit storm for doing this, I give this film a...

Score: 4/5

Notes: Dildo Throwing, Nathaniel Fisher Sr. (that one is for me)

13: Game of Death (2006; Chukiat Sakveerakul)

2008-09-10T21:01:00.008-05:00

Oh boy, my first review from Thailand. How exotic.

Alright, so, this guy with glasses. Right there. Maybe there? Wherever he is. He is a failure. His girlfriend had recently dumped him, he just lost his job, etc... Life sucks. So he gets a call from these people (whom I shall dub as "X"). X says they are willing to pay him money for each of their 13 games he completes, but if he doesn't make it all the way until the end, he loses everything he made. He agrees and the game is on.

This film is quite the little trickster. If it weren't for the new name (Games of Death), at the beginning you would have no idea what this film turned into. It is very well constructed to lead you from a few innocent little games to the high stakes games near the end of the film.

13: Game of Death is as much as a character study as it is a horror film. We observe the change in behavior as our lead man is forced into all sorts of demeaning behaviors that eventually lead to very heavy police involvement.

The score was sort of bland, yet seemed to flow well with most of the movie. The camera was fairly adventurous, but never pushed too far beyond the safe zone. The special effects near the end really killed a lot of the impact the finale brought to us.

I should also point out that with this film, I am sure you could find one hundred or so things that don't really add up, but none of those one hundred things are even remotely important. This movie brings to mind The Game (1997 David Fincher). After it is all over, does it really matter how the company remained on top of everything? Nope. It is the same deal here. We are treated to a very nice character study of a man playing to the whims of others for money, and the side effects that carry with the man as he passes each test.

Score: 3/5

Notes: Feces, Flies, and Father Abuse

The Departed (2006; Martin Scorsese)

2008-09-10T16:39:00.007-05:00

To be completely honest, I really wasn't expecting much from this Scorsese crime movie. I mean, sure, Scorsese has made some good crime dramas, but the whole genre feels sort of dead to me. It all is starting to blend together (kind of like Westerns).

So one guy decides to be a dirty cop, and another guy decides (kind of) that he wants to be an undercover cop for the guy that the dirty cop is being dirty for. Yeah, if you thought that sentence was messy, imagine how they must feel. So the movie follows as both of the cops try to figure out who the other is before one of them is dead.

To stay in character, I will start with good and move my way to bad. This movie was in fact a thriller. Meaning that I was really interested in who was going to get caught by who first. That part of the movie really did have my attention, but some other things... eh... (that good thing didn't last long).

First thing you notice is that they stress being Irish a lot, however, I felt that whole part of the film really wasn't needed. Maybe they thought it would add more dimension to the characters, but I personally could care less if they are Irish.

The camera is very direct and to the point. That is good. It just isn't great. In a great movie, you want more from your camera then just normal. The score seemed sort of out of place in some parts, and even at times felt like they forgot to tell someone to stop the music, as it continues on into the next scene, out staying it's welcome.

I feel I should point this out. The problem with long movies is that for every fifteen or twenty minutes you extend a film past around an hour and forty minutes, the stress put on the pacing of the film is increased exponentially. I feel Scorsese, while handling it okay, needs a little more practice with it if he wants to continue making movies that are as long as this one (two and a half hours).

As most of those problems are very minor, and the story itself was very gripping, this film still walks away with...

Score: 3/5

Notes: Cocaine Shower, Impotence, Won an Oscar (Hey, that works on more people then you think)

Don't Look Now (1973; Nicolas Roeg)

2008-09-05T21:55:00.006-05:00

As the story goes, many a year back I was simply an average movie guy. I was only aware of the movies cranked out by Hollywood, and most of my cinema knowledge was wrapped up in stupid ass comedies that will never go away. One fateful night (Halloween to be exact) I saw a TV series on some of the greatest horror films ever made, and at that point in my life I really hadn't ever seen a horror movie, I just wasn't interested in it. Well, as I watched them preview the movies and talk about what made them so scary, three of the films struck me in a special way. I decided that horror is where I needed to be, and I would one day see those three films. The three I am referring to are Audition (1999), Peeping Tom (1960), and last but most certainly not least... Don't Look Now (1973)

I am going to make this summary REALLY quick, so I can spend the rest of the time expressing my very non sexual feelings for this movie (they aren't sexual). A couple has a daughter and a son. The daughter drowns. Later on, they are having trouble dealing with her death, and the husband ends up seeing her again while in Venice.

Wow. Even though I had no eye for cinema at the time, I must applaud my choices for inspiration. This film is absolutely breath taking. The score is gorgeous. The camera... orgasmic (in the non sexual way).

The film so smoothly transitions from a casual day to some of the most tense scene's I have ever been graced to see. I mean, this film completely shatters the rules of using the dark. One of the most intense scenes is made in the middle of a sunny day.

The camera is half of the battle. In the first appearance of his daughter in Venice, the camera zoom is delayed, as if to not show us what is happening, but to show us literally what he sees as he double takes and has to focus. We are not voyeurs to this hellish experience; we are apart of it.

The score is mostly classical, beautifully played to match the atmosphere set by traveling through Venice. However, when it comes time to get to business they know exactly where to stick it (in a non sexual way).

At the same time as the search for the daughter begins, murders start occurring throughout Venice. At this point, each and every person we see throughout Venice is so perfectly constructed as to be considered a suspect. The awkward glances and drawn out shots of faces feel as though we are being starred at... as if they are wondering if we are catching onto their scheme.

One last part that should be brought up before concluding this, the ending is one of the most powerful endings I have ever seen. It made me want to pull down my pants and have sex with the screen (in a non sexual way).

Score: 5/5

Notes: Boobs, Blind

The Haunting (1963; Robert Wise)

2008-09-04T23:38:00.006-05:00

I decided to shake it up a little (very little) by adding a movie from the 60's (real adventurous, I know). So I bring you the classic "The Haunting" by Robert Wise.

A doctor has decided that he wants proof of haunted houses, so he gets the owners' okay to stay in the mansion shown above, "Hill House". He then hand picks three other people to accompany him and spend time observing the mansion. Shit hits the fan. (I agree, that last part really killed the flow.)

Where to start... I suppose with the scares. It really surprised me how well the scares held up over all these years. One in particular left me in a wee state of alarm. Due to the unseen driving most of the film, the lack of effects available at this era has absolutely no negative impact on the film at all. Some would argue that the lack of effects could limit ones imagination; restricting it to only the ideas they could even remotely construct on film. However, this film gives a feeling off that they knew exactly what they wanted, and it just so happened that it wasn't far off from what they really could pull off (quite convincingly I might add).

I will save some of you time by stating now, yes, there is a trend here. The unseen is always scarier then what is shown to us. My favorable (to put it lightly) review of The Blair Witch Project gives you a taste of how I feel about the unseen, followed by this review (consisting of unseen forces at work) and preceded by The Gravedancers (where I comment on how too much is seen). Some of you might consider this an unfair bias of mine. Well. You're wrong. The unseen is better.

The score is fitting of the era, and actually shows just how long the hectic noises have been used for jumps. The camera stays fresh, keeping a very fine balance in what seems like an amazingly clustered house (house is easier to type then mansion). The camera also shows a keen eye for angles and movement, providing very well done camera sweeps from above (or in circles).

I want to touch back on the house (mansion) real fast. First off, yes, the outside shots are of a real manhouse they found. However, the inside shots are all sets constructed for the film. I can not express enough how unique and wonderful all the sets feel. They each have their own theme going, with decorative statues that you would feel very comfortable around anywhere else but in this movie. I wanted to stress how much this hansion stood out, because for some reason, it really helps add a layer to the background (as in story background, but I guess it literally could be the background...) created for the film, and gives the film a whole other layer to it's personality.

The only solid complaint I can lay down is that I feel this movie lacks the ability to be replayed on a consistent basis, and that is something you should always want in a perfect ten score. Aany other complaints I had weren't important enough to remember, so here you go.

Score: 4.5/5

Notes: Lesbian, Affair (Almost)

Suicide (2001; Raoul W. Heimrich & Yvonne Wunschel)

2008-09-03T22:38:00.007-05:00

I must say that this was one hell of a film to track down. It only had one R1 release, from Troma, and was discontinued (or out of stock for a very, very long time) and whenever you type in the title, you get Suicide Club, Suicide Kings, and Suicide Girls. I managed to get myself a copy (bootlegged, but whatever, I got to see it) and it was worth the search.

Yeah, it really is that hard to find a picture. All I could get was a minuscule cover from the Troma release. Moving on, this film is a mockumentary about a couple who film people committing suicides for a website. That's it.

If you read other reviews of this movie, you will hear people complain that no one, not even the couple shooting the film, get enough attention to develop a real sense of character to better understand their motives. I disagree. I feel over the brief time we see the actual couple, we get a real sense on a lot of their feelings about what they are doing. They themselves seem confused at times as to what is really happening. The man keeps convincing himself that he will only shoot one more, but then some force draws him back again. As the body count rises, we really begin to get a deeper insight about who they are as a couple.

I must give a lot of credit to the suicides. As these desperate people tell their stories for the camera, you almost get the feel that what you are watching is real. I was tricked several times by their desperation and anguish. The struggle of the couple to keep the film going gives the feel that the movie actually has progression, instead of just scene after scene of people killing themselves. It really sort of ties it together and gives it a solid conclusion.

Not much can be said about the score (because there is none, it's a mockumentary) or the camera (because you should already know the style... it is a mockumentary). This makes it easier for me to concentrate on the story being told without having to worry about a poor choice of song or what not.

However, due to the subject matter and how it is made, this film relies very heavily on the special effects to carry along it's validity (or pseudo-validity). It is a mixed bag here, with some truely convincing death scenes, and with some very obvious fakes. Those fakes kind of lag down the film, because then (even though you already know it's fake) it has you looking for how fake the others are. This gets distracting.

Not to be cruel, and it doesn't really matter much, but because it is Troma, the subtitles had quite a handful of grammar errors to keep you equally frustrated throughout. So with that one major grip about effects (and one minor about subtitles) that leaves this film with a...

Score: 4/5

Notes: Dicks, Murder (In a Suicide Movie :) )

Inside (2007; Alexandre Bustillo & Julien Maury)

2008-09-01T22:03:00.010-05:00

I need to get two things off my mind in this introduction.
#1. Yes, this is another fetus movie, but that is just a coincidence.
#2. Fuck. It has been a long time since I have been graced by such wonderful violence.

Okay, so, this lady is left alone half way through her pregnancy as her fella is killed in a car crash. The night before she is due, she gets a visit from a lady in black who knows all about the crash and who very clearly wants inside her house. Inside her.

I just want to say that first off, holy shit was I caught off guard with this film. When you see the words "gore" and "bloody" on DVD cases, they could very easily be marketing a PG-13 movie. However, if you see those words on this box, they mean it. This film has GORE. No, it isn't the goriest thing I have ever seen, but shit yeah is it fucking violent.

The effects in this film (that weren't all CG) really were amazing. If it was not for those rare CG spots in the violence, then you could be easily convinced that some of the actors really were killed in the making of this film. The film starts out with a casual horror tone, with just some eerie background music with creepy images, however that atmosphere gets completely dumped as the rest of the film is shot almost completely in a red tint (as seen above) and covered in blood (yes, they are separate, which is why I chose the picture above to demonstrate it).

Now, for the people who really couldn't care less about screens covered in mindless gore (me most of the time). The camera work stays fresh, with uncomfortable close shots to show you every drop of sweat and blood on a persons face, to bizarre angles you really wouldn't expect from a film that revolves around gore. It really adds a whole other layer to my appreciation of this film knowing that a lot of the power of the film is created with it's creative use of it's camera. You are usually shown just enough to where your imagination can't help you try and pretty up what you aren't shown. While other times you just get to stare straight into their faces as they are torn apart.

The score (and lack there of) really helps carry the films tense violence-laced story along. The timing and nature of the "music" makes the silence just as tense as the very hectic score. While this is off topic of the score, I just want to point out that this film is also a perfect example of how well fetus' can impact the intensity if used skillfully.

While the film fully accomplishes what it sets out for, and the story is just thin enough to hold the violence together without getting too in depth where it is not needed, I feel that having a movie with absolutely no depth to it at all always loses a little in subsequent viewings. When I say depth, I don't mean Miike/Lynch confusion, I mean just any form of third dimension. Something, anything, that requires even the simplest response from your brain besides "blood good". Even nudity would have had more depth then this film. One last point, the intermittent images of the fetus do nothing but harm the film.

Score: 3/5

Notes: Broken Windshield Wiper, Smoking is Bad, Zombie?

Blame (2006; Narciso Ibáñez Serrador)

2008-09-01T00:33:00.007-05:00

To be honest, when I heard about "Films to Keep You Awake", a Spanish TV series (supposedly) ripping off of The Masters of Horror, I was pretty excited. While never having actually watched a single episode from the semi-popular US series, something about the idea makes me, and many others, happy. So when I noticed the DVD release was so cheap (unlike the high priced American cousin) I knew that it had to be worth a shot.

Alright, so this very generous and very lesbian doctor opens up her large home to a friend in need (who has a daughter) in exchange for some help with her home clinic. The friend in need (dubbed for now on as "Tease") later finds that the clinic actually performs abortions (Oh! Ah! Controversy!) and feels that she should help the kind doctor (dubbed "Lez") to try and repay her for her help. Later on, Tease ends up pregnant and is stuck with the decision whether she should go through with the abortion or try and feed two children with her abysmal salary. Lez finally convinces her to abort, and the procedure has some very shocking consequences.

What kind of summary was that? With that sort of vague ending I feel I should be taking Ebert's place as a useless man who gets paid too much to talk about how much of an idiot he is.

Moving on...

What I feared would actually be a very weak film in the series of six turned out to be a very pleasent introduction for me. While suffering from a problem I notice in TV movies (I will explain later) it ends up correcting itself near the end as it actually starts to build an eerie atmosphere. Seriously. It does. I am not kidding.

Controversy over the subject of abortion really has begun to lend itself more and more to the horror genre as people slowly begin to realize that the idea of extracting soon-to-be children actually is grotesque. This, mixed with other controversy's can lead to some very powerful ideas that directors really need to play more with (see the movie "Dumplings" for a good example).

Now, I suppose I should address the little problem I feel seems to haunt TV horrors. Lighting. I don't know what it is, but when given the chance to shoot horror for TV, people grow attached to their lights. It seems they just refuse to shut them off at all during the movie, having some scenes in the middle of the night be as bright as scenes where the camera is making us stare right into the sun. As I pointed out earlier, however, "Blame" corrects itself as the movie progresses, eventually leading to it letting go of it's unhealthy relationship with it's lights. For anyone who might want to shove hundreds of examples of TV horror's that have good lighting, I just want to point out again that I haven't seen The Masters of Horror yet, so those don't count.

I suppose to make this more complete I should touch on some other things. The camera seems pretty basic, almost making you think that they were scared they might break a TV rule about using style. Also the score is decent, nothing too catchy, but it gets the job done and is in no way distracting from the rest of the film.

Score: 3/5

Notes: Private Places Are Used For Two Things; Birth and Sin

Christophe Gans

2008-08-30T23:30:00.004-05:00

I felt it was time again to throw another director profile at you, and to keep things fresh, I thought I would do a director I can appreciate.

Christophe Gans is a man I feel people should watch out for. While he only has one well known film in the US (Silent Hill) and one that has been gaining more recognition with it's new release on Blu-Ray (Brotherhood of the Wolf) his talent has managed to poke it's head out on occasion, and while I disagree with his choice to go into video game movies (Silent Hill and his upcoming Onimusha) I will not give up hope that he will bring out some original works to keep us amazed.

Born in France in 1960, Christophe Gans apparently took up cinema at a young age and went on to develop his skills throughout the rest of his life. That is about all the biography you are going to get from me.

As I see him, the man has a very good eye for cinematography. His camera work can sometimes astound me with it's beauty. On the same note, he also knows how to cool it down to the basics, as to not distract the viewer during important dialogue scenes or that ilk. Another trait of his deals with an apparent hatred for religious extremists. His hatred almost seems too strong, as it can lead to some very out-of-place visuals, and, if continued, will give away the bulk of the rest of his films (meaning the bad guys will most likely be part of a cult/sect/etc...). While I personally understand his distaste, I feel toning it down would do his works a lot of good.

Some other notes:

Created the cinema magazine "Starfix". I have never heard of it, but maybe that is because I don't follow magazines.

While starting in his native French language, it appears the rest of his films will be purely English (which I find to be a shame). Most likely reason is for the longing of even larger audiences.

Most Well Known Films Include: Silent Hill, Brotherhood of the Wolf

Blair Witch Project (1999; Daniel Myrick & Eduardo Sánchez)

2008-08-30T23:04:00.008-05:00

Ah yes, the first review from my top ten. I have been putting off writing reviews for any of the top ten because I feel I will try to delve too much into detail or just leave reviewing behind totally and go straight into worshipping. However, I feel now is as good a time as any, so without any further waiting...

This review, I feel, was the first that was needed for two reasons. Number one, I am continually astounded by the amount of people who still haven't seen this movie. If any of you are reading this, go out and buy two copies. One copy to watch, and the second copy to replace the one you should have had years ago. Number two, I just watched it again.

Three film makers go into the woods to make a documentary about a local legend, "The Blair Witch". Basically a spirit that haunts the local forest near Burkittsville. As time passes in the woods, the unease of the three amateurs starts to become obvious, tension builds between the group itself, and the once comfortable forest seems to grow a whole lot larger.

As people should know, this film is shot from the perspective of our three friends, as we are watching the footage found in their cameras. This leads to endless possibilities in the horror genre (a lot of which are still being explored to this day) and makes for a very unique experience to those unfamiliar with the style. The switches between black and white and color seem to coincide perfectly with the events as they unfold, adding another layer to the already gripping atmosphere.

Without trying to spoil anything, I will say that most of the chills and scares in this film are never shown on camera, leaving the noises we hear and our imagination to piece together what we think is really happening in this forest. To top that off, as days go past and the group becomes lost deeper and deeper in the woods, tempers flare constantly as sanity slowly slips through their fingers.

It was only supposed to be a movie.

Score: 5/5

Notes: People Don't Own This (Make Them)

Silent Night, Deadly Night (1984; Charles E. Sellier Jr.)

2008-08-30T21:29:00.005-05:00

When it comes to christmas horror movies, there is absolutely no shortage. The idea of a warm, chubby Santa visiting just makes the soon-to-be-victims feel so at ease. Unfortunately, people seem to think not letting go of this idea will make it better. Whatever. Bring it on.

Fuck, I hate this part. Young Billy (Bill, William, What-have-you) goes to visit his grandfather when he is young. His grandfather is in a mental hospital sitting around, apparently unable to talk. As his family steps out of the room for a minute to see what the doctors think of their poor grandfathers condition, the old man glides his eyes over to Billy and tells him to beware of Santa Clause. I forgot to mention that this is on Christmas Eve, but whatever, it is a Christmas movie, and he is talking about Santa Clause, so I suppose I really shouldn't need to spell it out. On the way home from the mental place, they run into a man in a Santa suit who seems to be having car troubles. The man turns out to be a psycho, and proceeds to kill Billy's parents.

Billy grows up, is haunted by that night, and blah blah blah starts killing people dressed as Santa. Look, I tried to get detailed, but I just couldn't take it any longer. It had to end.

For what I expected to just be a nice night with a shitty movie ended up being a nice night with a pretty enjoyable film. I can not stress this enough however, do not take this movie seriously. If for one minute you actually try to watch this as a serious movie, just shut it off. While this film offers some pretty decent gore, I personally don't find gore itself very serious. I find it is only serious when the tone of the film as a whole is serious (see any comedy/horror in existence as proof of this).

Like I just said, this film displays some fair amount of gore, (and like I didn't just say) a good amount of nudity, and a decent amount of those two combined (see the still above). As anyone remotely interested in horror knows, those ingredients never get old (mixed together is always preferred... I am not creepy at all).

So what I guess I am trying to get at, is while this film really doesn't prove itself as a gem (no inspiring camera or color work) if you approach it with a light heart, you will find yourself having a fantastic time.

One last thing to point out: I really enjoyed the score in many parts of this film, so if you have the pleasure of watching this piece, take note of it.

Score: 4/5 (Slasher Score)
or
2/5 (Taken Seriously)

Notes: Nun Sex, Spanking

Rogue (2007; Greg Mclean)

2008-08-24T00:29:00.008-05:00

I don't care what people say, no matter how corny monster movies are made out to be, and no matter how many people claim they are above that, there is nothing like sitting down to a good one to have a few laughs and jumps.

Rogue, a very new addition to the monster movie table brought to us by a fairly new face to the horror world (and who has actually made quite a name for himself already) Greg McLean. Okay, by the amount of bias I have already thrown at you, you can already tell I really loved this movie, so I will just move along and spill my love affair later.

If it is not already obvious, I try my hardest to find excuses to make summary's as short as possible. There are two main reasons (and a million minor ones) as to why I do this. The first reason is that I hate spoiling much of anything in a movie, because even the slightest details might be important to the films construction of atmosphere as a whole. The second reason is I am a lazy bastard. Anyway...

Our hefty crew of characters (always need a hefty crew for monster flicks) are taking a tour (or giving one) of the Outback (steakhouse). Who they really are never matters in a monster flick (ever) so I will just skip that and say they act good. Our hefty group is then put in a spot of bother when a very big crocodile (yeah, get over it) punctures their boat (well, really, it only belongs to one of them) leaving them stuck on a very small patch of land (Gilligan). The rest of the film follows the hefty group as it gets less hefty and they try to find a way to survive (witty).

Now for the compliments, which, if this movie is anything like a girl, will lead to me being a very happy man tonight. The first thing you notice when you start watching this is that the landscape is absolutely breathtaking. I mean, you might as well be watching the Travel Channel, because you are shown some shots that almost make Australia look habitable.

Rogue constructs itself very much like most monster flicks do (and should, any who don't follow these rules sucks) by starting off with a very light-hearted venture with a few silly jokes and a light score. The hefty (I knew I could use it again) group then is thrown into trouble (about 7 meters of it) which is followed by killing and running. Rogue showcases the perfect balance of these parts (in the right order too, I hate to see them getting killed before a monster even exists) which creates a throroughly enjoyable monster romp.

Does this film bring anything new to the monster table? Not a thing. We have a big crocodile. We have people getting picked off. We have an escape. This lack of anything even remotely close to anything newer than 1980 means I should probably take a point or two off of the score. The one part that does feel new about it is the use of amazing CGI and special effects, I mean, this croc looks real, and it looks angry. This complete lack of originality by no means detracts from the movie itself. You will leave this film with a content smile, having reaffirmed to yourself that monster movies are very much alive, and very much... well... kicking ass.

Score: 4/5

Notes: Fly Coffee, Hotel Reviews, No Human Emotions Added To Create Sympathy For Crocodile

The Exorcist (1973; William Friedkin)

2008-08-23T22:46:00.008-05:00

Yes, the "horror classic" of old, The Exorcist. That is about all I got for an introduction.

I have a feeling that almost every single person has seen this movie, so I will make the summary very, very brief. Lady and daughter. Daughter gets possessed. Priests try to save her. Stretch that out for around two hours and you got the idea. This movie is a classic and that would mean you should expect a solid 8, 9, or 10 from me. However, I have a surprise for you.

Why this film is a classic sort of stumps me. Is it the decent looking scares? Is it having a child actor that some people can actually tolerate? Is it having said child actor begging to be fucked? Who knows. I find this films pacing to be quite painful at best, having most of the film crawling like a baby on it's back while sleeping, only to then wake up, join the Olympics, and set a new record for the 100 meter sprint. I suppose that would mean your child would also turn Jamaican. (hah. hah.)

The camera I find very unimaginative, and it feels they only used it because somewhere along the process of making this movie, they learned they needed to. I doubt they even paid someone to use it. They most likely just set it on a tripod and filmed the whole thing from that.

Now, the one thing I will give a decent amount of credit for is the scares. They had the right idea by throwing some very unique feeling moments to add to the mood. I won't list them, because whether you have actually seen it or not, I am sure you can still name every single one of them. All of them were simplistic enough that not much was needed for the effects, making them feel a lot more real.

One last pointer before the score, it has come to my attention that the creators of this film actually do believe in exorcism, which while I know I shouldn't let that effect my judgment of the film, I can't help think of those idiots when I watch it, which leaves a bad taste in my mouth.

Score: 3/5

Notes: Pissing, Flying Priests (Who Then Crash)

Gay Niggers from Outerspace (1992; Morten Lindberg)

2008-08-12T00:15:00.005-05:00

Yeah, really. That is the name. I am not actually going to write a review, I just thought posting this would make some of you aware that it exists. With something like this, you already know if you are going to like it or not by the time you finish reading the title. It really isn't even worth putting a score up, because the film is just so ludicrous.

Long Dream (2000; Higuchinsky)

2008-08-11T23:51:00.007-05:00

I noticed that I was leaning way too far into American cinema, so let me switch gears and move to something a little more... not American.

It depresses me thinking that the only picture I could find was the cover. It is not that it is a bad cover, it is that there aren't enough people out there who know about this film to post actual stills. This fantastic work was brought to us by Higuchinsky, a man who is terribly under worked (only having two full lengths and this under his belt) and whose best known film, Uzumaki, has been considered one of the most imaginative movies around. One reason this short (not really a short... it is somewhere near the one hour point, which makes it more of a... silm? fhort? I will stick with fhort) has gotten so little attention is because for some reason no one wants to release it? Why that is is absolutely beyond me, as the story of the film is very thought provoking to say the least.

Nagai Yume (literally Long Dream when translated) has a character with a very troubling problem. Whenever he goes to sleep, it feels as if his dreams are the lengths of whole days. He soon discovers that each time he goes back to sleep, the dreams feel longer and longer, to the point where months or even years go by in the dream, which begins to have effects on not only his mental stabilty but his outward appearence as well. One night he asks his doctor a very important question that no one could think of an answer to. What would happen if the dreams got so long, they lasted forever?

True to his form in Uzumaki (why that film doesn't feel the need to be translated like the rest is beyond me) Higuchinsky brings us a very interesting concept in a very stunning manner. His use of colors is simply captivating to me and while his scores never really seem to stay in my head long, everytime I do hear them again, I get the comfortable feeling of nostalgia.

My main problem with the fhort was how the story had to close with the doctors not the patient (I am trying to be as vague as possible). I feel that leaving the doctors as minor characters and focusing only on the patient would have made it a much more compelling piece of work.

Score: 3/5

Notes: Aliens, Romance

Curse of the Cannibal Confederates (1982; Tony Malanowski)

2008-08-11T23:21:00.007-05:00

Okay, before I step anywhere near this review, I just want to point out that this is a Troma release. I want to stress that very carefully. For those who don't know Troma, they release the shittiest quality films just because they are too ridiculous to let die with VHS.

No, that is not a shitty still from the film, that is what it really looks like. I know it almost seems unfair to review a Troma film so harshly, but for the safety of non-Troma fans, I must go on.

I am going to make this short and sweet. We follow three couples (that is six people) on a hunting/picnic adventure that they apparently do quite often. However, the men decide (they are so brave) that they would rather take a new trail then retread the same tired path over and over. They happen to stumble upon a church with a graveyard... zombies... end.

Okay, I must stress this again, that is really what the film looks like. Once night strikes, the film becomes an orgy of indecipherable masses flailing about. That becomes exceedingly annoying when we are forced to watch zombies rise out of the ground for roughly ten minutes. That's right. We are shown pictures of people in masks standing up for ten minutes. There is a reason that most good zombie movies either never show that or only show it for a brief few seconds. The reason being that it is fucking boring.

Pretty much the rest of the film is trying to guess what you can see through the darkness. If any of you have the pleasure of going through this wonderful piece of cinema, try looking for Waldo, he might be there for all I know.

Note: There is one certain point in the movie that does bring about a sense of unease. It is during a point where, as far as I could tell, the zombies were eating some people, and the only thing you could hear was slurping and chewing for anywhere from five to ten minutes. It made me cringe, which is more then most decent horror movies can say, even if it is for a ridiculous reason. So after saying that...

Score: 1/5

Notes: Chomping, Slurping, Asians (Yes, Asians)

Irreversible (2002; Gaspar Noé)

2008-08-10T19:31:00.010-05:00

I am going to be completely blunt. This film almost perfectly demonstrates a balance between beauty and destruction.This film just goes from one extreme to the other so casually and smoothly you almost feel that such devastation and romance go together. We are voyeurs to the entirety of the act, floating so casually over each step.

The entirety of the film is not stretched, so we are really watching ninety-seven or so minutes of these peoples lives, yet the consequences of the acts performed in those drastic minutes are so far reaching it is almost incomprehensible. The story is unfolded to us backwords (Memento style for those who know it) and is infinetely more powerful. We are told the tale of a woman's (Alex; Monica Bellucci) night with her current boyfriend and her ex as they go to a party. She gets in a fight with her boyfriend and leaves to go home and sleep. On her way back, she goes through an underground tunnel where she is brutally raped. I am talking brutally. This has to be one of the most emotionally potent scenes in cinema. After they discover what has happened by seeing her on a strecher (whether she died from the abuse or trauma or is just unconscious we never know) the men take matters into their hands.

The cinematography only adds to the impact. We are flown around on a freeroaming camera that seems to explore every possible angle of certain rooms. That sensation of being floated around leads to the sense of us simply being voyeurs to the crisis as it unfolds, and never feels over done or distracting. The only time I can recall the camera sitting still is during the one time we beg for it to move.

The color pallette used during the first half is dramatically different then what is used at the end. We are completely drenched in dark reds and black to where when we are finally treated to the rest of the color wheel we feel liberated and the tense nature of the colors becomes non-existant. This, of course, corrolates directly to the events in the film, which means the only uncomfortable feeling you have when the rape is over and the film tones down is the haunting memory that will continue to play through your head for a long time to come.

The film plays with some very heavy themes as well. It dabbles with the importance of dreams and the powers of time. Near the end of the film, at the start of their day, Alex tells her boyfriend the events of her dream, how she was traversing through a tunnel of red until it suddenly broke in two. The point where her old life ends and her new life begins.

I could go on for a long ass time, but I will cut it off there, having only touched each area of the film I felt was important so that you will have a feel of the film, but not come to full grips with it until you are thown into Alex's life yourself. The only flaw that detracts from this film is that it will suffer from more then one viewing.

Score: 4/5

Notes: Performance Problems, Philosopher, Bondage (Not In Rape)

Murder-Set-Pieces (2004; Nick Palumbo)

2008-08-10T17:18:00.007-05:00

Still dumping old reviews out at you...

Sideburns. If you could sum up any movie that easily, you could know what to avoid and what to watch. Well, with this movie, you can. Sideburns.

Our unnamed lead (Sven Garrett) is a photographer working in Las Vegas. He is a very big sideburn.

Let me try again. Our unnamed sideburn…

Our unnamed lead (Sideburns)…

Our unnamed lead (Sven Garrett) is a photographer working in Las Vegas. When he is not “working”, his days consist of killing. Well, really, when he works, he just kills. This movie is getting really hard to write about.

Ok, our guy (You know his name already) pretends to be a photographer so he can kill girls. That is it. The movie follows Sven’s sideburns around Vegas as he finds naked women and kills them. I have no problem with naked women, and I have no problem with slashy movies. I do have a problem with it being very unimaginative. All the deaths were never shown. This movie, wanting to be one of the goriest movies out there, cuts out during all the deaths. They aren’t even exciting pre-deaths, they are just your average, everyday pre-deaths.

As I watched the first few pre-deaths, I realized that most of the money for this film must have gone into showing boobies. I could think of no other reason for it to cut out as much as it did. I only remember seeing one interesting pre-death, but the rest of the film was so dull and mind destroying, I forgot what it was. I think it had something to do with teeth.

If you want exciting deaths, or even pre-deaths, you can pretty much watch any other movie where someone dies and at least get an equivalent to this film. That's right, even Bambi. If you want boobies, just watch a porno. If you want death and boobies, just watch zombie porno. It is out there. If you want sideburns, then this movie will absolutely blow your mind.

Edit: My review is on the apparently edited copy of this film, which would explain the existence of the pre-deaths. I am not one-hundred percent sure if my copy is actually the edited one or not, but if I assume it is, the gore would still not make up for the terrible ending of the film which I never brought up because I had so many other complaints. I hate children in film. Obviously I could point out movies that I loved where children are in them, but as a general rule, they suck. Keep them away.

This film was also the subject to boatloads of hype about how gory it was and how it was banned in some location I do not remember at this time (use IMDb if you need to know that badly, you lazy people). I can't imagine why that is so, so cut it out. Even with these added notes, that doesn't sway my opinion in either direction, giving it a final of...

Score: 1/5

Notes: Nudity, Sideburns, Nudity

Mazes and Monsters (1982; Steven Hilliard Stern)

2008-08-10T16:56:00.009-05:00

To get this site some bulk so people have something to read, I figured I would have to post frequently at the start and then slow myself to about once or twice a week, and what better way then to take old reviews I wrote about movies a long time ago and post them up here now. It feels like cheating to me somehow, but I did write them, so whatever. I will tweak them a little bit so they feel more recent to me at least.

As I sat with my very nerdy friends and talked about movies, one of them turned to me and said he had something he wanted me to watch. You see, me being the only person who really cares a lot about cinema in that group, my opinion tends to carry a lot of weight, and if his movie gains approval from me, the rest of them will want to watch it and he will be the hero of the day for finding such a film (we have small time ambitions). He pulls out this. A very old, very Tom Hanks movie based off of my friend’s favorite game in the world, “Dungeons & Dragons”. Now, I try to be fair, so I just smiled and said I would give it a run through. I am also very honest, so I told him I wasn’t expecting much of... anything for this experience. Well, I paid for my fairness.

The basics are that Tom Hanks… I mean… Robbie Wheeling and a group of college buddies decide that, as thrilling as their addicting game, WoW… I mean Mazes and Monsters is, they want to kick it up a notch. They decide to start playing the game in the local, legendary cavern that no one is allowed in. The movie follows Tom… Robbie and his friends as fantasy and reality begin to blur as the game seems to become their life.

The idea behind the movie wasn’t really that bad, at least to me. I have friends who base their lives around games like this, so I understand where it is coming from. It could have been a really fun movie to watch, however, an idea doesn’t make a movie good. This film excelled at failing. It failed so bad that I could be easily persuaded to believe that they made this movie bad on purpose to scare people away from such games. I was expecting huge mazes and exciting monsters. Instead I got a cave, a city, and a lizard man. Who appeared like... once.

On the positive side, like I said earlier this movie had a fun idea. This movie also had Tom Hanks. I am not saying that Tom Hanks makes it good in anyway, but something about his name...

Score: 1/5

Notes: Tom Hanks, Robbie Wheeling, Tom Wheeling, Robbie Hanks

12 Angry Men (1957; Sidney Lumet)

2008-08-10T15:31:00.007-05:00

While my taste in cinema tends to lean very heavily into the horror genre, I decided I would try as hard as I could to keep my entries as broad as possible to keep things a little more interesting for people who don't care as much for horror as I do. So with that in mind, I bring you my thoughts on the 1957 masterpiece, 12 Angry Men.

12 Angry Men can be summed up very quickly, as all but about five minutes of the film are shot in one single room. In what appears to be one of the easiest murder cases alive, the twelve jurors are sent in to determine if an eighteen year old from the slums was responsible for the murder of his father. With several witness statements stacked against the boy, it seems quite obvious to the jurors that the verdict is guilty. However, a single man, juror #8 (Fonda in a remarkably commanding role) thinks they should at least try and give the boy a chance before sentencing him to death.

I will go no further in my summary, for to ruin even one small piece of the jury's debate would be to spoil so much. One thing I will say, however, is that building up the guilty verdict before juror #8 brings up his first disagreement makes that first disagreement that much more powerful. Not only is Fonda left with the duty of changing the minds of the other eleven jurors, he has to change ours as well.

One thing to pay very special attention to, is the way the cameras are controlled. As the movie progresses, the general height of the cameras is dropped, which adds a sense of the room enclosing upon us as if it was already not small enough to begin with. At the beginning we are generally placed above the jurors, and by the end of the film, we are at their feet. An extra step that pushes us into that room with those men is the fact that the temperature of the room is made so palpable, you yourself might start to sweat.

There is mountains more I could discuss about how well crafted and shot the film was, but that would require me spoiling bits and pieces, and that is something I will refuse to do with such a film. So having said that, there is only one thing left to do.

Score: 5/5

Notes: Man Sweat, Man Anger, Men, No Women

Automaton Transfusion (2006; Steven C. Miller)

2008-08-07T17:02:00.008-05:00

Okay, I, like so many others, love zombies. They are just loads of fun. However, the one problem with zombies is that while they are great, their movies are not. I feel that no matter how much I want to believe that most zombie movies are just fun and not good in any real way, I am constantly reminded that more often then not, they are just not good... and that is all. So on that note I bring you...

Automaton Dysfunction

I want to make this clear right now; the movie is still running as I write this review. I want to make that perfectly clear so people realize that while I find it very wrong to never finish a movie by shutting it off, I have no shame in just not paying attention to it. This movie has been called the greatest zombie movie in years, which I found very hard to swallow. This movie is just so awful that I am not even going to discuss the theme, I am just going to try and remember as many things I hate about it as possible.

1. Most of the zombies are in white shirts. Why? They were too cheap to get fake blood on any real shirts.
2. The fuck is up with the camera? Is that suppose to be style or just not a good camera? The picture blurs with a lot of movement and it gives me a headache.
3. I know watching high school stereotypes is obnoxious in most cases, but hiring what appears to be real high school quality actors as well... come on.
4. No, Evil Dead references are not funny.
5. Black characters who make witty comments are not hard asses, they are just annoying.
6. Zombies are not going to sit in front of your gun while you proclaim "I think you have had enough to eat for one day".
7. Fuck.
8. The sharp point through the eye was great... when it was done first. Copycats.
9. Which leads me to believe that the fetus eating scene was stolen too.
10. GOVERNMENT CONSPIRACY! SPOOKY!
11. Christ, that music. No real person likes that obnoxious noise except for teenagers who want attention, which leads me to...
12. The director must be a teenager to be responsible for such garbage.

On the bright side, the gore effects were pretty decent. They also had a good idea on lingering on a few deaths, which adds to the uncomfortable feeling of someone dying.

Score: 1/5

Notes: Fetus, Gore, Cheerleaders

The Gravedancers (2006; Mike Mendez)

2008-08-06T16:46:00.009-05:00

Ah, yes. The wonderful After Dark Horrorfest. A newer horror festival that showcases eight horror films a year. I, having not seen all of them, can really pass no judgment on the festival as a whole, but what I can say, is out of the ones I have seen...

This festival is nothing special.

Now to the feature of this review, The Gravedancers. A horror film that had me going at first, but grew too ambitious and suffered from a very common mistake that people just cannot seem to get over.
On to the bulk of this review... We are thrown right into this movie screaming. Not so much are we screaming, it's more the woman on the screen who is screaming. We are shown a brief struggle with an invisible foe (more on that later) then she is thrown over a staircase and is hung. I must add, it is a very nice shot, and I commend whom ever was in charge of the camera.

One year later... We are dropped into a funeral with the camera focusing on three snapping people in there... twenties? I don't know, I can't judge age. Anyway, there is a dude, and two girls. As to make one-hundred percent sure that we realize this, we are shown many times the tension between the girls over the dude, so I am just getting that out of the way now.

To make this short and simple so I can get into the more enjoyable part of actually reviewing, another guy comes along, three of the four characters dance on some graves while drunk, and then they become haunted.

Now, for the opinions. This movie (after the opening scene of the girl getting hung) has a very strong first half hour or so when it is dealing with just the first dude and his wife (I don't use names because I don't care enough about this film; on films I love more I promise I will use their names). There are some very real chills, and even some scares. Which brings me to the.. ghost/zombie things. I am torn, in all honesty. As shown above, they are very scary looking fellas, and I was very impressed at how scary they actually look. However, the director (Mike Mendez, director of The Convent. Never seen it myself, but it is suppose to be enjoyable? Don't take my word for that until I review it one day) felt the need to add some really obnoxious computer animated... smoke? around them (it looks like Dragon Ball Z characters when they are "charging up") which really kills any form of enjoyment while they are on screen.

Talking about the monsters takes me to the opening scene, and the thing that too many people do that I hinted at in the very start of this. First off, fights with invisible things are not scary. They aren't even enjoyable. You are just watching some person flail about and scream. I don't care how well they can act, I will never be able to get past that, and therefore will never enjoy scenes like that. Second, the thing people do too much. Stop showing so much of the monsters. People really need to learn that it is often scarier to leave the "bad guy" in the dark throughout most of the movie. The main characters actually get into fights with the monsters, so you see them on the screen for extended periods of time. No. Monsters are only effective if they are flashed at you for very brief moments of time or if they happen to be absolutely disgusting, foul concoctions that you can't help but want to throw up at the very mention.

As for the over ambition, Mike Mendez must have decided that the Dragon Ball Z monsters weren't scary enough, and seeing as he was so impressed with his (actually not very good) computer animators, he felt that he would make the last twenty minutes buried in it. Needless to say, if I wanted to watch cartoons (which is essentially what computer animation is, sorry if that upsets you) I would watch them on television for free.

Even after that very extensive list of complaints, I will manage to pull a small list of good notes. Some of the camera work (mostly during the first half that I enjoyed so much) worked very well, and gave off the sense that they knew what they were doing. The score is nothing to write home about, but it also could have been a hell of a lot worse.

So after all of that writing...

Score: 2/5

Notes: Actually has some tense moments; No gore (frown)

Uwe Boll

2008-08-06T15:14:00.007-05:00

I had this idea to make other movie related columns to make this site more then just some person ranting on movies. So now, with this idea, I will have a site that has a person ranting on movies AND directors. I know that the common person in the United States does not put much thought into the directors, and in all honesty, they should. However, most fine citizens of the United States rely more on actors (Tom Cruise) and their religions (Scientology) and their personal life as guides to how good a movie will be. I am not condemning watching movies just for an actor, I do it on occasion, but as a rule of thumb, directors tend to be more important.

To kick off my director "spot light" column, I decided that I would use a man who was the butt of a joke from my Aristocrats review, because I figured some people might not get it, and could use this as an easy way to figure it out.
Uwe Boll! Yes, that man right above. Just look at that smile. You think a man who has never created a movie worth shit on a stick would have trouble smiling so innocently. No, really. I would not even trade my own shit for one of his films. I would rather suck my own dick then give him a penny. Hell, I would rather suck his dick. I would rather suck both dicks and swallow. Before I go any further, I would like to point out that he has a problem dealing with critics, so just incase he finds this, no, I am not really going to suck your dick. I'm sorry. Not even a little.

A little history to start us out, the man was born in Wermelskirchen, Germany. I tell you this, because out of all the places on the globe, that is the place that most likely hates him the most, meaning it is most likely the last place you will find him if you want to get away. He later went on to go to get his doctorate in literature in places I refuse to name for I do not want to harm their reputations (if it really is that important, I will put an IMDb link).

Some other bits of information:
Boll challenged several of his critics to a boxing match that would be put into one of his films (Postal). Being trained in boxing, he naturally beat up the critics (told you he had a terrible way of dealing with critics). I mean, what kind of baby is the man that he resorts to beating up people because of bad reviews? Pathetic.

Has a very creepy obsession with making movies bent on ruining the possibility of the video games they were based on ever getting rights to sequels.

According to IMDb, four of his more well known films are on the 100 worst movies list. I haven't checked, but I'm pretty sure his newest suck-orgy-piece-of-shit, "In the Name of the King: I Suck Dick" is on that list with the rest of its bretheren.

This really isn't anything official (honestly I am just making this up because it would make since to me) but I am pretty sure he gives handjobs to all male actors in his films, because even the biggest sell outs could not possibly agree to take part in one of his softcore interacial gayfests he calls film.

Most Well Known Films Include: House of the Dead, Alone in the Dark, BloodRayne, In the Name of the King: A Dungeon Siege Tale

The Aristocrats (2005; Paul Provenza)

2008-08-06T09:54:00.012-05:00

"You'd never hear a physicist going, "It's a muon, you cunt."

The Aristocrats. The self proclaimed "dirtiest" joke to exist. Paul Provenza goes out in his documentary to have this inside joke between comedians explained to the general public.

"My grandmother, on the stage, has an abortion!"

A documentary on a joke is really hard to write a review about, because the only piece to the story, plot, or even theme, is the joke. So I could simply end this review by saying it is a good joke. Alright, bye.

No, no. I could never leave it at that. I will try to make this review deeper than an Uwe Boll film. I know that it really doesn't make any logical sense to proclaim a joke to be the dirtiest joke or the funniest joke, because those are simply subjective. However, the circumstances of this joke, the rules you have to follow to craft it, make it possible for this joke to be the dirtiest joke ever.

"Lemme tell you, when my seven year old daughter is giving my eleven year old son a blow job, it's priceless. "

I do not want to go into explaining the joke, as that is the job of the film, and boy does this film do it well. I am not a fan of stand up comedy. I do not really enjoy watching people sit around and tell jokes. I always needed to have more substance behind the material, or else it just felt like I was watching a guy jack off on stage. This fear of mine played into me putting this film off for a very long time, because no matter how bad I wanted to witness "The dirtiest joke ever," I had trouble assuring myself it would be funny.

Provenza does a good job keeping the joke, and film as a whole, entertaining throughout. Every time the joke is told, you think that that is as funny as they could make it, but then the next performer comes along and tops it. By the half way point, you feel like you have been in on this inside joke for years, and you almost bond with the little people on your screen. Even the camera use in the film is a joke, with very abrupt, drastic angle changes, making not only you, but the performer uncomfortable as the joke is told.

"Once for Hannukah he gave me a box of slim Tampax, and he says, "Leave them out so men will think you're really tight."

Now as the first review of the page, I will explain the very easy to understand scoring system. I will give it a score out of ten, and then add keywords and phrases to peak your interest. Later on I might decide to make it more complex, but this will suffice

Score: 4/5

Notes: Scat, Incest, 9/11, Bob Saget

The Beginning

2008-08-05T21:53:00.002-05:00

Hello. I have decided to construct a blog to post a collection of many thoughts and reviews as I go deeper and deeper into cinema to find the perfect films that make it all seem worth my while. This page will be kept secret from anyone who isn't me until I discover I can keep it active enough to keep other people's interest.

I shall call this an exercise in my own patience and discipline to further express my love for the art of cinema. Each film a piece of glass to add to my mosaic of film exploration. My Cinemaic.