Finished off the month with three movies tonight that I'd seen before, so I'm just going to hit them all at once, and briefly. We'll be back to our standard weekly format for postings starting tomorrow.
The Black Cat
Edgar G. Ulmer, 1934
This was my movie club pick, and didn't go over all that well. I also think it wasn't as good as I remembered, but I still like it, primarily for the fun of watching Karloff and Lugosi chew the scenery at each other and for the fantastic set design. 6/10
Behind the Mask: The Rise of Leslie Vernon
Scott Glosserman, 2007
One of the more clever horror movies I've seen in the past several years, even if not everything works as well as it could. The way they use the structural conceit, switching between documentary and horror movie, to influence the plot and characters is very impressive. Also, Nathan Baesel's performance as Leslie Vernon is fantastic. They do sledgehammer several points well beyond what would be reasonable, though, and the ending segment drags on a bit (not that it shouldn't end where it does, but some of the fat earlier in the segment could be trimmed). Still, very good. 7.5/10
Phantasm II
Don Coscarelli, 1988
I love the Phantasm series. They're ridiculous, cheap, poorly acted, and are largely incoherent from a storytelling standpoint, especially between films. But then there's that spark of creativity and fun that turns it into something special, completely unlike anything else out there. This may well be my favorite of the four; at the very least, it's the most rewatchable for me. 6.5/10
Saturday, October 31, 2009
35. Mil gritos tiene la noche (Pieces)
Juan Piquer Simon, 1983
The first and last time I saw Pieces was long, long ago. It was my first Eurohorror, although I didn't realize it at the time since they go to great (well, moderate. Well, they sort of try) lengths to make it seem American. Mostly what I remembered was that there was an abundance of a) blood, b) naked girls, and c) bad dubbing. I'm pleased to report that my recollection was correct, and Pieces is primarily made up of those three elements.
Actually, that's not entirely true. There is a fourth element - sheer madness. How else to explain such wonderful/horrible moments as skateboarding through a mirror, the kung-fu professor, the chainsaw in the elevator, "BASTARD!", or the ending? These are not the fruits of a logical mind. I can't even really explain them in any way that you would believe - you just need to see them for yourself. It's kind of funny - the movie is so bizarrely wrong most of the time that the occasional beautiful and/or atmospheric shot (like the killer walking into the dance studio) is extremely jarring.
In a way, I kind of loved this movie. It's terrible. Horrible. Awful. But I still kind of loved it. Doesn't mean it gets a good rating, though.
3/10
The first and last time I saw Pieces was long, long ago. It was my first Eurohorror, although I didn't realize it at the time since they go to great (well, moderate. Well, they sort of try) lengths to make it seem American. Mostly what I remembered was that there was an abundance of a) blood, b) naked girls, and c) bad dubbing. I'm pleased to report that my recollection was correct, and Pieces is primarily made up of those three elements.
Actually, that's not entirely true. There is a fourth element - sheer madness. How else to explain such wonderful/horrible moments as skateboarding through a mirror, the kung-fu professor, the chainsaw in the elevator, "BASTARD!", or the ending? These are not the fruits of a logical mind. I can't even really explain them in any way that you would believe - you just need to see them for yourself. It's kind of funny - the movie is so bizarrely wrong most of the time that the occasional beautiful and/or atmospheric shot (like the killer walking into the dance studio) is extremely jarring.
In a way, I kind of loved this movie. It's terrible. Horrible. Awful. But I still kind of loved it. Doesn't mean it gets a good rating, though.
3/10
Friday, October 30, 2009
34. And Soon the Darkness
Robert Fuest, 1970
A bit slow, but Fuest manages to build an tremendous amount of dread out of the idyllic French countryside and his love of deep composition keeps things visually interesting. Approximately half of the dialogue in the movie is unsubtitled French, which helps increase the feeling of alienation and was a very wise choice. The reveal of the killer at the end, while not a big surprise, was handled in a nicely creepy fashion - however, the final resolution left much to be desired. Still quite good on the whole, especially compared to a lot of what I've seen lately.
7.5/10
A bit slow, but Fuest manages to build an tremendous amount of dread out of the idyllic French countryside and his love of deep composition keeps things visually interesting. Approximately half of the dialogue in the movie is unsubtitled French, which helps increase the feeling of alienation and was a very wise choice. The reveal of the killer at the end, while not a big surprise, was handled in a nicely creepy fashion - however, the final resolution left much to be desired. Still quite good on the whole, especially compared to a lot of what I've seen lately.
7.5/10
33. The Unseen
Danny Steinmann, 1980
Not especially bad, but completely forgettable. Which is actually kind of worse, in a way.
1.5/10
Not especially bad, but completely forgettable. Which is actually kind of worse, in a way.
1.5/10
Thursday, October 29, 2009
104 in 2009 Week 43: Yet More (late) Horror
Whoops, forgot to put this up on Sunday. Yet another week of dubious quality, although I did very much enjoy the ineligible Cloverfield.
The House with the Laughing Windows 6.5/10
Asylum 4/10
The Psychic 2/10
Progress: 112 (Par +26)
The House with the Laughing Windows 6.5/10
Asylum 4/10
The Psychic 2/10
Progress: 112 (Par +26)
Wednesday, October 28, 2009
32. Creepshow
George Romero, 1982
This is kind of a sentimental favorite of mine, probably the first full-on (by that I mean R-rated and forbidden) horror movie I ever saw. So of course, I'll always love it. Fortunately, it's also a legitimately strong movie, so I don't have to be embarassed about it. The first two stories drag quite a bit, but after that you get three hits in a row. My favorite segment is the third one, with Leslie Nielsen and Ted Danson.
8.5/10
This is kind of a sentimental favorite of mine, probably the first full-on (by that I mean R-rated and forbidden) horror movie I ever saw. So of course, I'll always love it. Fortunately, it's also a legitimately strong movie, so I don't have to be embarassed about it. The first two stories drag quite a bit, but after that you get three hits in a row. My favorite segment is the third one, with Leslie Nielsen and Ted Danson.
8.5/10
Sunday, October 25, 2009
31. Sette Note in Nero (The Psychic)
Lucio Fulci, 1977
I'm at the point where the only Fulci movies I have left to see are lower-tier Fulci. Which makes me very sad, just like this movie does. The suspense is devoid of suspense, the characters are devoid of character, there's almost no gore to think of, the ending is even more abrupt than usual, and the plot is about the right size to fill a Twilight Zone episode, not a full-length movie.
2/10
I'm at the point where the only Fulci movies I have left to see are lower-tier Fulci. Which makes me very sad, just like this movie does. The suspense is devoid of suspense, the characters are devoid of character, there's almost no gore to think of, the ending is even more abrupt than usual, and the plot is about the right size to fill a Twilight Zone episode, not a full-length movie.
2/10
30. 28 Days Later
Danny Boyle, 2003 (US release)
Not as good as I remember thinking the first time I saw it, but still a solid, very effective movie. I hear a lot of complaints about the final 1/3 of the movie, once the soldiers come into the picture. I can kind of understand them, but I completely disagree - that segment is what makes the picture. Up until that point, it had just been a reasonably well-made post-apocalyptic movie, kind of like any other (outside of the aesthetic aspects). The soldier portion is where the more interesting ideas and moral ambiguity come into play. I think the issue for many may be that there is a strong fantasy component to all post-apocalyptic stories. As horrible as the events may be, there's a certain degree of "wouldn't it be cool/fun if. . ." This is typified by the shopping sequence, or by Selena's assumption that Jim's plan was for them to "fall in love and fuck," since there was no one else around. Once the soldiers come into play, the true ugliness of the situation comes to the fore and it's hard to look at things the same way.
8/10
Not as good as I remember thinking the first time I saw it, but still a solid, very effective movie. I hear a lot of complaints about the final 1/3 of the movie, once the soldiers come into the picture. I can kind of understand them, but I completely disagree - that segment is what makes the picture. Up until that point, it had just been a reasonably well-made post-apocalyptic movie, kind of like any other (outside of the aesthetic aspects). The soldier portion is where the more interesting ideas and moral ambiguity come into play. I think the issue for many may be that there is a strong fantasy component to all post-apocalyptic stories. As horrible as the events may be, there's a certain degree of "wouldn't it be cool/fun if. . ." This is typified by the shopping sequence, or by Selena's assumption that Jim's plan was for them to "fall in love and fuck," since there was no one else around. Once the soldiers come into play, the true ugliness of the situation comes to the fore and it's hard to look at things the same way.
8/10
29. Asylum
Roy Ward Baker, 1972
Typical fair to middling mid-70's horror anthology. Plusses include a stronger framing story than most (in fact, the framing story eventually morphs into the fourth tale), a solid ending, and Peter Cushing's herculean efforts trying to salvage his story. Minuses include a general dullness and apparent lack of enthusiasm, a ridiculously stupid penultimate murder, and the horribly overbearing and inappropriate use of Mussorgsky in place of an actual score.
4/10
Typical fair to middling mid-70's horror anthology. Plusses include a stronger framing story than most (in fact, the framing story eventually morphs into the fourth tale), a solid ending, and Peter Cushing's herculean efforts trying to salvage his story. Minuses include a general dullness and apparent lack of enthusiasm, a ridiculously stupid penultimate murder, and the horribly overbearing and inappropriate use of Mussorgsky in place of an actual score.
4/10
Saturday, October 24, 2009
Pogues in Denver!!!!!!
The first time I saw the Pogues perform was eight years ago, at the Brixton Academy in London. It was part of their first (and at the time, presumably only) reunion tour, so I didn’t really think twice about flying halfway across the world to see them. It was a terrific show, absolutely worth the trip, but I figured that would be it – I saw them once, and never again. I never imagined that they would continue to play together on a part-time basis, and I never in a million years would have imagined that this could happen:
That’s right. This time, the Pogues came to me. For the first time in their 25+ year history, they came to Denver, for a single, sold-out show.
I’m pleased to be able to say that the intervening eight years have not taken their toll on the band. In fact, if anything, I’d say they’ve gotten better. Even Shane, who many suspect is only alive due to some sort of Keith Richards-style deal with the devil, seemed a lot stronger and more present than at the earlier show. To be honest, the first time I saw them I wouldn’t really have understood more than 5-10% of the words coming out of his mouth if I didn’t already know what they were supposed to be. This time, I could easily make out ¾ of what he said, and that monstrous, inhuman howl of his (see “Sickbed of Cuchulainn”, for instance) shook the building. He also seemed much more interactive and playful with the performance, even engaging in a (very) little bit of commentary between songs on occasion and, when singing “and they ruined my good looks for the old man drag,” flipping up his sunglasses to give us a look at his *ahem* good looks. I also want to make a note of his awesome sweater, this gigantic fuzzy monstrosity (and I say that affectionately). I can’t imagine how much booze that thing must have soaked up over the course of the tour.
The rest of the band may have been a bit older and more tired, but they didn’t really show it. Sure, James Fearnley wasn’t quite the explosive onstage presence he was last time, but he still took a leap off the riser and did a couple of slides across the stage on his knees (all with a 20 pound accordion strapped to his chest). And yes, there was a bit more sitting down between songs, but the important thing is that when they played, it was every bit as powerful and lively as it ever was. The Pogues, as instrumentalists, are an incredibly tight and skilled group, which I supposed you would have to be with Shane MacGowan on the microphone. When he decided that the second verse of “If I Should Fall From Grace With God” started two beats later than everyone else thought, they adjusted so quickly (and uniformly) that it was almost imperceptible.
The setlist was a good mix of songs, similar to but probably better (although slightly shorter) than the more “. . . Fall from Grace”-heavy set that I heard at the Academy. Granted, I kind of missed hearing “Medley” and “Fairytale of New York”, but, after listening to many, many covers and live recordings of Fairytale, I’ve come to realize that if you can’t get Kirsty MacColl to sing it, there’s not much reason to play it. And if you don’t have a time machine, Kirsty isn’t singing. As for “Medley”, if that’s the price I have to pay for “Kitty” and “Sunnyside of the Street”, I can live with it. I liked the order of songs a little better here than last time as well, with the terrific crowd-pleaser “Fiesta” finishing off the last encore instead of the more sedate “The Parting Glass.” Fiesta also contained one of the highlights of the evening, as Spider Stacy switched over to his secondary instrument:
Yes, that’s a beer tray. And yes, he played it with his head.
The night fell in to a pretty consistent pattern – Shane would sing a few songs, then go take a breather offstage while someone else stepped up to since their signature song. All told, five of the eight performers wound up taking a turn at the microphone, which is something I really appreciate about the Pogues. A particular treat of the live shows is getting to hear Phil Chevron sing “Thousands are Sailing” which he wrote and which is clearly built for his voice, but which was sung by Shane on the album. The album cut is also great, of course, but Phil’s version is something you don’t really get to hear outside of a show.
The crowd was good, enthusiastic and active but not, for the most part, crazy. The demographics skewed a bit younger than I expected – I figured I’d be one of the youngest there, but I was probably more toward the middle of the bunch. One group that was particularly amusing to me included a fifty-something year old man, who was jumping up and down and pumping his fist in the air through the show, and his wife and two college-age daughters, none of whom seemed happy to be there. Seems like kind of a shame to drag them along when that’s three tickets someone who wants to see the show couldn’t have, but I suppose that’s just the way things go.
Overall, it was a fantastic show (if you hadn’t picked up on that fact yet), worth every penny and then some. I don’t know if they’ll ever be back to Denver (I suspect not), but they certainly made this one count. I could not be happier with the show than I am right now.
Tuesday, October 20, 2009
28. Cloverfield
Matt Reeves, 2008
I was pretty excited about this movie in the months leading up to its release, but for some reason, never got around to seeing it until now. In a way, I'm glad I waited - the central conceit of the video camera plays much better on TV than I suspect it would in the theater. Of course, I generally have no problem with "shakeycam," so maybe it wouldn't have mattered. Anyway, it's a briskly paced, fairly exciting movie with monsters big and small, which means that there's not much that I could personally complain about. The character running the camera through most of the movie is pretty annoying, I suppose, and there are certainly segments of the movie that would work better if he would just shut the hell up. None of the characters have much depth, but there's just enough there to make you feel what you need to feel. The very end was nice, I thought, especially coming on the heels of a fairly anticlimactic moment that I expected to be the end. The actual end makes good use of the structural idea that the movie is being recorded on a used tape, so we occasionally get flashes of video recorded a month earlier. I think that was probably the best idea the producers had, and I wish they had made more extensive use of it.
Anyway, some complaints, not perfect, blah, blah, did I mention the scary monsters?
7.5/10
I was pretty excited about this movie in the months leading up to its release, but for some reason, never got around to seeing it until now. In a way, I'm glad I waited - the central conceit of the video camera plays much better on TV than I suspect it would in the theater. Of course, I generally have no problem with "shakeycam," so maybe it wouldn't have mattered. Anyway, it's a briskly paced, fairly exciting movie with monsters big and small, which means that there's not much that I could personally complain about. The character running the camera through most of the movie is pretty annoying, I suppose, and there are certainly segments of the movie that would work better if he would just shut the hell up. None of the characters have much depth, but there's just enough there to make you feel what you need to feel. The very end was nice, I thought, especially coming on the heels of a fairly anticlimactic moment that I expected to be the end. The actual end makes good use of the structural idea that the movie is being recorded on a used tape, so we occasionally get flashes of video recorded a month earlier. I think that was probably the best idea the producers had, and I wish they had made more extensive use of it.
Anyway, some complaints, not perfect, blah, blah, did I mention the scary monsters?
7.5/10
Monday, October 19, 2009
27. La casa dalle finestre che ridono (The House with the Laughing Windows)
Pupi Avati, 1976
This is very much a slow-burn movie, in that nothing of any real consequence occurs until about 20 minutes from the end. This isn't much of a problem, though, because a) when things do start to happen, it's a doozy and b) there's enough atmosphere and tension in the early phase that it's still reasonably gripping, even though nothing is happening. It's generally classified as giallo, which I would quibble with, a little - of course, defining giallo is like defining film noir. Everyone's going to disagree with everyone else about it anyway.
6.5/10
This is very much a slow-burn movie, in that nothing of any real consequence occurs until about 20 minutes from the end. This isn't much of a problem, though, because a) when things do start to happen, it's a doozy and b) there's enough atmosphere and tension in the early phase that it's still reasonably gripping, even though nothing is happening. It's generally classified as giallo, which I would quibble with, a little - of course, defining giallo is like defining film noir. Everyone's going to disagree with everyone else about it anyway.
6.5/10
104 in 2009 Week 42: I Win!
I got eight this week, plus two that don't count because they're too new and one that I'd seen before. Here are the (mostly disappointing) 104-eligible titles:
The Mad Doctor of Blood Island 1/10
White Zombie 5/10
Rosemary's Baby 3.5/10
Q: The Winged Serpent 6.5/10
Valerie and Her Week of Wonders 6/10
American Scary 4/10
The Birds 4/10
The Cat and the Canary 3/10
Progress: 109 (yes, that number is more than 104. We're in overtime, baby! Also, par +25.)
PS. Yes, I know overtime is not the appropriate metaphor to use here. Just go with it.
The Mad Doctor of Blood Island 1/10
White Zombie 5/10
Rosemary's Baby 3.5/10
Q: The Winged Serpent 6.5/10
Valerie and Her Week of Wonders 6/10
American Scary 4/10
The Birds 4/10
The Cat and the Canary 3/10
Progress: 109 (yes, that number is more than 104. We're in overtime, baby! Also, par +25.)
PS. Yes, I know overtime is not the appropriate metaphor to use here. Just go with it.
Sunday, October 18, 2009
26. The Cat and the Canary
Paul Leni, 1927
Kind of fun spooky-old house movie with some inventive visual tricks up its sleeve. The story itself is pretty dull, though, and the villain is painfully arbitrary. Some nice moments nonetheless.
3/10
Kind of fun spooky-old house movie with some inventive visual tricks up its sleeve. The story itself is pretty dull, though, and the villain is painfully arbitrary. Some nice moments nonetheless.
3/10
25. La Sindrome di Stendhal
Dario Argento, 1996
The first time I saw this movie, I thought it was probably a great movie, but it was hard to tell due to the atrocious dub. Now, I've seen it with the more appropriate Italian language track, and I think it is definitely an improvement - but paradoxically, I am less impressed overall. The first half of the movie is marred by some terrible CGI (the first ever used in an Italian production, apparently), and it drags pretty severely in places. There are, however, some very interesting ideas at play, and the whole thing comes together very well at the end. It's good, but not great - which is still better than anything else Argento had done in fifteen years (or has done in the thirteen years since, really).
7/10
The first time I saw this movie, I thought it was probably a great movie, but it was hard to tell due to the atrocious dub. Now, I've seen it with the more appropriate Italian language track, and I think it is definitely an improvement - but paradoxically, I am less impressed overall. The first half of the movie is marred by some terrible CGI (the first ever used in an Italian production, apparently), and it drags pretty severely in places. There are, however, some very interesting ideas at play, and the whole thing comes together very well at the end. It's good, but not great - which is still better than anything else Argento had done in fifteen years (or has done in the thirteen years since, really).
7/10
24. The Birds
Alfred Hitchcock, 1963
I'd avoided this one for a long time - it's probably the only "major" Hitchcock that I haven't seen. There was never a particular reason for this, it just never seemed to appeal to me. I recently read the short story by Daphne Du Maurier, though, so I decided to give it a shot. The result was about what I figured it would be, and can't begin to compare to the scary and downright apocalyptic story.
Things start off pretty well. The first half of the movie, or so, work pretty well in a romantic comedy sort of way. I was actually enjoying it quite a bit. Then the birds came in, and with them the troubles. The problem is that the bird attacks just don't really work on film. Action scenes aren't really Hitchcock's forte, and that's what these amount to. His rigorously storyboarded and structured style doesn't mesh with the content very well. An animal attack needs an organic ferocity that is anathema to Hitchcock's style. He doesn't embarass himself, and the scenes are never silly or anything like that - they just don't achieve much beyond perfunctory mechanics. Where the movie fares better is in the buildup to the attacks, where the birds are gathering ominously. There are a couple of nice sequences along those lines, like the crows gathering on the playground or the long walk to the car at the end - but even then, it feels kind of like Hitchcock is just doing the Hitchcock thing. There's no spark or life to it, just going through the motions. The ridiculously anticlimactic ending doesn't do much to dispel this impression. Everything about this movie is so very competent, but almost nothing about it is anything more than that.
4/10
I'd avoided this one for a long time - it's probably the only "major" Hitchcock that I haven't seen. There was never a particular reason for this, it just never seemed to appeal to me. I recently read the short story by Daphne Du Maurier, though, so I decided to give it a shot. The result was about what I figured it would be, and can't begin to compare to the scary and downright apocalyptic story.
Things start off pretty well. The first half of the movie, or so, work pretty well in a romantic comedy sort of way. I was actually enjoying it quite a bit. Then the birds came in, and with them the troubles. The problem is that the bird attacks just don't really work on film. Action scenes aren't really Hitchcock's forte, and that's what these amount to. His rigorously storyboarded and structured style doesn't mesh with the content very well. An animal attack needs an organic ferocity that is anathema to Hitchcock's style. He doesn't embarass himself, and the scenes are never silly or anything like that - they just don't achieve much beyond perfunctory mechanics. Where the movie fares better is in the buildup to the attacks, where the birds are gathering ominously. There are a couple of nice sequences along those lines, like the crows gathering on the playground or the long walk to the car at the end - but even then, it feels kind of like Hitchcock is just doing the Hitchcock thing. There's no spark or life to it, just going through the motions. The ridiculously anticlimactic ending doesn't do much to dispel this impression. Everything about this movie is so very competent, but almost nothing about it is anything more than that.
4/10
23. American Scary
John E Hudgens, 2006
Not actually a horror movie, but I think it fits into the Halloween spirit. This is a documentary about the people who hosted late night horror movies on TV, ranging from Vampira in the 50's to Neil Gaiman (yes, that Neil Gaiman) in more modern times. The most notable thing I took away from this movie is the realization that there are a lot of these hosts. Dozens and dozens, not just the well-known handful.
The greatest strength of this documentary is also its greatest weakness, and that is the wealth of archival footage showing the hosts doing their thing. It's fantastic stuff, and I could happily watch it for much longer than the current running time. The problem is that there just isn't enough of it. We spend a lot of time watching talking heads discuss all of the crazy things these hosts would do, when all I really want to do is watch them do the crazy things. I realize you can't just make a clip show and call it a documentary, but at the same time, I can't help but feel that the subject is more interesting than the documentary.
4/10
Not actually a horror movie, but I think it fits into the Halloween spirit. This is a documentary about the people who hosted late night horror movies on TV, ranging from Vampira in the 50's to Neil Gaiman (yes, that Neil Gaiman) in more modern times. The most notable thing I took away from this movie is the realization that there are a lot of these hosts. Dozens and dozens, not just the well-known handful.
The greatest strength of this documentary is also its greatest weakness, and that is the wealth of archival footage showing the hosts doing their thing. It's fantastic stuff, and I could happily watch it for much longer than the current running time. The problem is that there just isn't enough of it. We spend a lot of time watching talking heads discuss all of the crazy things these hosts would do, when all I really want to do is watch them do the crazy things. I realize you can't just make a clip show and call it a documentary, but at the same time, I can't help but feel that the subject is more interesting than the documentary.
4/10
Saturday, October 17, 2009
22. The Signal
David Bruckner, Jacob Gentry, and Dan Bush, 2008
The Signal is an odd movie. On the one hand, it's an anthology, made up of three segments that were written and directed by three different people. On the other hand, it's a single story following three characters in a world where a mysterious electronic signal is driving everyone crazy. Each segment picks up where the previous one left off (often backtracking as well) and presents its events from the perspective of one of the three principal characters. The tone of the movie shifts a little uncomfortably as a result of this structure, with the first section played as a straight up horror movie, the second as a pitch-black comedy, and the third hovering somewhere between the two. This makes a certain degree of sense, though, given that the comedic (and by far the best) segment is the one presented from the viewpoint of a crazy person.
Performances are as good as you could expect from a tiny production like this. Better than you would expect, really. The effects are also tremendously impressive given the budget. All three directors manage to create a strong sense of dread and unease, which even the abrupt tonal shifts can't undo. My only major complaint is that the third and final segment is easily the weakest, and kind of drags down the momentum that they had been developing. On the other hand, it also contained some of the best individual moments in the movie, including Ben and Mya's faux reunion and the oddly beautiful ending, which kind of touched me in ways I wasn't expecting and can't fully explain. I highly recommend this one.
8.5/10
The Signal is an odd movie. On the one hand, it's an anthology, made up of three segments that were written and directed by three different people. On the other hand, it's a single story following three characters in a world where a mysterious electronic signal is driving everyone crazy. Each segment picks up where the previous one left off (often backtracking as well) and presents its events from the perspective of one of the three principal characters. The tone of the movie shifts a little uncomfortably as a result of this structure, with the first section played as a straight up horror movie, the second as a pitch-black comedy, and the third hovering somewhere between the two. This makes a certain degree of sense, though, given that the comedic (and by far the best) segment is the one presented from the viewpoint of a crazy person.
Performances are as good as you could expect from a tiny production like this. Better than you would expect, really. The effects are also tremendously impressive given the budget. All three directors manage to create a strong sense of dread and unease, which even the abrupt tonal shifts can't undo. My only major complaint is that the third and final segment is easily the weakest, and kind of drags down the momentum that they had been developing. On the other hand, it also contained some of the best individual moments in the movie, including Ben and Mya's faux reunion and the oddly beautiful ending, which kind of touched me in ways I wasn't expecting and can't fully explain. I highly recommend this one.
8.5/10
Friday, October 16, 2009
21. Valerie a týden divu (Valerie and Her Week of Wonders)
Jaromil Jires, 1970
I'm not sure what to make of this one. It's both stunningly beautiful and almost entirely incomprehensible. Well, on a literal level, it's incomprehensible. Thematically and subextually, it's pretty much puberty.
The principal vampire, the Weasel, is one of the more unsettling vampires in film, and borrows a lot from Max Shrek's Count Orlock. That's actually a term that could be applied to the majority of the film: unsettling. It's never really scary, but constantly creepy. I suppose the fact that it focuses on the sexuality of a thirteen-year-old girl contributes to that as well.
I should note my frustration with the subtitles on the DVD that I watched. They were somewhat rudimentary and occasionally misspelled ("sing" instead of "sign," for instance"), which is a little annoying but not anything I can't get past. The thing is, though, that they were also horribly, horribly mistimed. In many cases, the subtitle didn't even appear onscreen until the line of dialogue had been finished! Amazingly enough, this wasn't a technical fault with the DVD - the subtitles were burned into the film print. I cannot express fully just how obnoxious this was, and it's a testament to the film's quality that its strengths were able to shine through.
6/10
I'm not sure what to make of this one. It's both stunningly beautiful and almost entirely incomprehensible. Well, on a literal level, it's incomprehensible. Thematically and subextually, it's pretty much puberty.
The principal vampire, the Weasel, is one of the more unsettling vampires in film, and borrows a lot from Max Shrek's Count Orlock. That's actually a term that could be applied to the majority of the film: unsettling. It's never really scary, but constantly creepy. I suppose the fact that it focuses on the sexuality of a thirteen-year-old girl contributes to that as well.
I should note my frustration with the subtitles on the DVD that I watched. They were somewhat rudimentary and occasionally misspelled ("sing" instead of "sign," for instance"), which is a little annoying but not anything I can't get past. The thing is, though, that they were also horribly, horribly mistimed. In many cases, the subtitle didn't even appear onscreen until the line of dialogue had been finished! Amazingly enough, this wasn't a technical fault with the DVD - the subtitles were burned into the film print. I cannot express fully just how obnoxious this was, and it's a testament to the film's quality that its strengths were able to shine through.
6/10
Thursday, October 15, 2009
20. Q: The Winged Serpent
Larry Cohen, 1982
Patently ridiculous, but well-executed and quite a bit of fun. Who doesn't love the idea of Quetzalcoatl coming to New York and eating a bunch of people? The key to making it work is the sense of humor - it's a funny movie, certainly not a comedy, but funny. I don't mean "laughing at it" funny either; Cohen displays some terrific wit in both the writing and directing. The acting is also better than you tend to see in a movie like this, which helps as well - you can't really go all that wrong with a pair of detectives played by David Carradine and Richard Roundtree.
There's not a tremendous amount to it, depthwise (although Cohen does have some fun with the religious criticism), but it's a decent way to spend an hour and a half, and you don't need to feel guilty afterward.
6.5/10
Patently ridiculous, but well-executed and quite a bit of fun. Who doesn't love the idea of Quetzalcoatl coming to New York and eating a bunch of people? The key to making it work is the sense of humor - it's a funny movie, certainly not a comedy, but funny. I don't mean "laughing at it" funny either; Cohen displays some terrific wit in both the writing and directing. The acting is also better than you tend to see in a movie like this, which helps as well - you can't really go all that wrong with a pair of detectives played by David Carradine and Richard Roundtree.
There's not a tremendous amount to it, depthwise (although Cohen does have some fun with the religious criticism), but it's a decent way to spend an hour and a half, and you don't need to feel guilty afterward.
6.5/10
Tuesday, October 13, 2009
19. Rosemary's Baby
Roman Polanski, 1968
I was really hoping to like this one, but it just wasn't meant to be, I suppose. It was Polanski's first American movie, and I wonder if he had a bit of a tin ear for the language, as the performances are pretty uniformly terrific when silent, but all seem to fall apart a bit during dialogue. Likewise, when Rosemary walks in on the Satanists at the end, it's quite atmospheric and unsettling. . . until everyone starts jumping around and shouting "Hail Satan," at which point it just gets silly. The real source of the problems, though, is probably the fact that it was adapted extremely faithfully (Ira Levin called it the most faithful adaptation ever). Movies need to be adapted from the page, not just translated.
3.5/10
I was really hoping to like this one, but it just wasn't meant to be, I suppose. It was Polanski's first American movie, and I wonder if he had a bit of a tin ear for the language, as the performances are pretty uniformly terrific when silent, but all seem to fall apart a bit during dialogue. Likewise, when Rosemary walks in on the Satanists at the end, it's quite atmospheric and unsettling. . . until everyone starts jumping around and shouting "Hail Satan," at which point it just gets silly. The real source of the problems, though, is probably the fact that it was adapted extremely faithfully (Ira Levin called it the most faithful adaptation ever). Movies need to be adapted from the page, not just translated.
3.5/10
Monday, October 12, 2009
18. White Zombie
Victor Halperin, 1932
Finally, a movie I can qualify as "good," if only just. Given that this pre-dates Romero, the zombies are of the voodoo variety, which is a not my favorite iteration. Still, there's nothing inherently wrong with the voodoo-style zombie, and White Zombie manages to wring some impressive creepiness out of them. There's also a surprising amount of visual inventiveness, with some multiple exposures that reminded me of Murnau's work in Sunrise, and a relatively sophisticated sound design (especially when you consider how crude the outcome was). Unfortunately, the end becomes kind of silly, and the final line is really painful. Also, the movie was sadly lost for several decades and, as a result, the surviving version is in pretty rough shape - little to no shadow detail, lots of jump cuts due to missing bits of footage, and sound that is so muddy it's unintelligible at times. It's a shame, really, because I think a lot more of the atmosphere would come through were it not so damaged.
5.5/10
Finally, a movie I can qualify as "good," if only just. Given that this pre-dates Romero, the zombies are of the voodoo variety, which is a not my favorite iteration. Still, there's nothing inherently wrong with the voodoo-style zombie, and White Zombie manages to wring some impressive creepiness out of them. There's also a surprising amount of visual inventiveness, with some multiple exposures that reminded me of Murnau's work in Sunrise, and a relatively sophisticated sound design (especially when you consider how crude the outcome was). Unfortunately, the end becomes kind of silly, and the final line is really painful. Also, the movie was sadly lost for several decades and, as a result, the surviving version is in pretty rough shape - little to no shadow detail, lots of jump cuts due to missing bits of footage, and sound that is so muddy it's unintelligible at times. It's a shame, really, because I think a lot more of the atmosphere would come through were it not so damaged.
5.5/10
Mad Doctor of Blood Island
Gerardo De Leon and Eddie Romero, 1968
Oh, god, make it stop.
And by that, I mean the whole movie, not just the egregiously abused zoom lens.
But also the zoom lens.
1/10
Oh, god, make it stop.
And by that, I mean the whole movie, not just the egregiously abused zoom lens.
But also the zoom lens.
1/10
Sunday, October 11, 2009
104 in 2009 Week 41: More Horror
Chugging along through October, with a decidedly weaker selection than last week.
Vampyr 3.5/10
Baron Blood 3/10
The Mummy's Hand 5.5/10
The Devil Doll 8/10
The Sender 2.5/10
Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde 4/10
Galaxy of Terror 2.5/10
Mutant 1.5/10
Progress: 101 (par +19)
Vampyr 3.5/10
Baron Blood 3/10
The Mummy's Hand 5.5/10
The Devil Doll 8/10
The Sender 2.5/10
Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde 4/10
Galaxy of Terror 2.5/10
Mutant 1.5/10
Progress: 101 (par +19)
Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde
John S. Robertson, 1920
Not all that bad, but not particularly good, either. John Barrymore makes for a fantastic Mr. Hyde, but he can't do much with the rather boring Dr. Jekyll. Sadly, Jekyll gets the lion's share of the screen time. Also, Hyde's rampages and general debauchery are pretty disappointingly mild (come on, this was pre-code!), which robs him of a good portion of his menace. There are still a few really nice sequences, nonetheless - in particular, Hyde's first spontaneous (non-potion) appearance and subsequent assault and the dream sequence in which Jekyll is embraced by a giant spider.
4/10
Not all that bad, but not particularly good, either. John Barrymore makes for a fantastic Mr. Hyde, but he can't do much with the rather boring Dr. Jekyll. Sadly, Jekyll gets the lion's share of the screen time. Also, Hyde's rampages and general debauchery are pretty disappointingly mild (come on, this was pre-code!), which robs him of a good portion of his menace. There are still a few really nice sequences, nonetheless - in particular, Hyde's first spontaneous (non-potion) appearance and subsequent assault and the dream sequence in which Jekyll is embraced by a giant spider.
4/10
The Sender
Roger Christian, 1982
The Sender starts with a great premise (a telepathic man who unconsciously projects his nightmares into other people's minds) and completely squandered it. The whole affair is extremely lifeless and clinical, and they take great pains to demonstrate that, while the telepathy is real, the hallucinations are not, which leaves you with kind of a "so what?" effect. Maybe it's more respectable that way, in the "we're not making a horror movie, we're making a psychological thriller" way that dominated the mid to late 90's. I guess, in that sense, The Sender was ahead of its time.
The bleeding mirror sequence was pretty great, though. If they'd tried more fun stuff like that and maybe designed the story so that there was something at stake for anyone ever, they might have had something.
2.5/10
The Sender starts with a great premise (a telepathic man who unconsciously projects his nightmares into other people's minds) and completely squandered it. The whole affair is extremely lifeless and clinical, and they take great pains to demonstrate that, while the telepathy is real, the hallucinations are not, which leaves you with kind of a "so what?" effect. Maybe it's more respectable that way, in the "we're not making a horror movie, we're making a psychological thriller" way that dominated the mid to late 90's. I guess, in that sense, The Sender was ahead of its time.
The bleeding mirror sequence was pretty great, though. If they'd tried more fun stuff like that and maybe designed the story so that there was something at stake for anyone ever, they might have had something.
2.5/10
Saturday, October 10, 2009
The Devil Doll
Tod Browning 1936
This was a surprising little gem, not particularly scary, but still very compelling. It's one of those odd movies where the villain (the escaped criminal who turns people into murderous little 1-foot dolls) and the hero (the wrongly accused man trying to clear his name and take revenge on those who framed him) are one and the same. The process shots used for the miniaturized people look pretty terrible for the most part, but as the movie goes on they seem to move more and more in the direction of oversized sets and props, which look uniformly fantastic. The central conceit, that our hero/villain is able to hide in plain sight by pretending to be an old woman, is pretty silly and ridiculous - and yet, Lionel Barrymore is able to make it work. There's also a very nice emotional core to the movie, centered around the relationship (or lack thereof) between Barrymore and his now grown daughter. The final scene atop the Eiffel Tower was far more emotional and touching than I ever would have expected. It's amazing the sort of wonderful movies that can slip through the cracks sometimes.
8/10
This was a surprising little gem, not particularly scary, but still very compelling. It's one of those odd movies where the villain (the escaped criminal who turns people into murderous little 1-foot dolls) and the hero (the wrongly accused man trying to clear his name and take revenge on those who framed him) are one and the same. The process shots used for the miniaturized people look pretty terrible for the most part, but as the movie goes on they seem to move more and more in the direction of oversized sets and props, which look uniformly fantastic. The central conceit, that our hero/villain is able to hide in plain sight by pretending to be an old woman, is pretty silly and ridiculous - and yet, Lionel Barrymore is able to make it work. There's also a very nice emotional core to the movie, centered around the relationship (or lack thereof) between Barrymore and his now grown daughter. The final scene atop the Eiffel Tower was far more emotional and touching than I ever would have expected. It's amazing the sort of wonderful movies that can slip through the cracks sometimes.
8/10
The Mist
Frank Darabont, 2007
I saw this one twice in theaters, but this was my first viewing of the Black and White version, which is apparently how Darabont wanted to release it in the first place. I think it is a vastly superior version of the movie, with crisper images, a bleaker tone, and better effects (the rough edges get kind of smoothed out by the conversion). I'm still a little troubled by the ending, though. I don't mind the change from the novella in general, but the juxtaposition of the two major events (I'm trying to be vague for spoilers' sake) is so close that it makes it seem more twist, more like a twilight zone ending or a sick joke. I would have been happier if David had just walked into the mist after (SPOILER EVENT), or if there had been more of a sense of time passing before (SPOILER EVENT 2). Still, the rest of the movie is more than strong enough to overcome my reservations about this.
8.5/10
I saw this one twice in theaters, but this was my first viewing of the Black and White version, which is apparently how Darabont wanted to release it in the first place. I think it is a vastly superior version of the movie, with crisper images, a bleaker tone, and better effects (the rough edges get kind of smoothed out by the conversion). I'm still a little troubled by the ending, though. I don't mind the change from the novella in general, but the juxtaposition of the two major events (I'm trying to be vague for spoilers' sake) is so close that it makes it seem more twist, more like a twilight zone ending or a sick joke. I would have been happier if David had just walked into the mist after (SPOILER EVENT), or if there had been more of a sense of time passing before (SPOILER EVENT 2). Still, the rest of the movie is more than strong enough to overcome my reservations about this.
8.5/10
Haunt Review: Frightmare
108th & Old Wadsworth, Westminster, CO
http://www.frightmare.biz/
I’ve been to Frightmare twice before. The first year was fantastic, the second less so – but it primarily suffered from the fact that it wasn’t all that different from the first time. After a couple of years off, however, I’ve returned to find that Frightmare is completely revamped – unrecognizable, really, and better than ever.
The greatest strength of Frightmare has always been its location. The outdoor farm fields with the creepy mill and cave and such adds a tremendous amount of atmosphere to the haunt. They’ve never (in my experience) done much with a theme or a story, but they don’t need to. They just have a nice, creepy world. One of my favorite elements this year was a lengthy unlit segment that you have to make your way through using a lantern. Even better, they manage to deliver and retrieve the lantern with actors in character, which was a wonderful surprise. Other than that, there weren’t a lot of particular standout moments, but it consistently solid. Actors stuck to character pretty well and usually did more than just jump out and say “Boo!” The new castle façade for the entrance is not as creepy as the old mine they used to use, but I do appreciate mixing it up. All in all, a strong finish to the night, although I have to admit I kind of miss the old crazy levitating exorcism effect.
8/10
http://www.frightmare.biz/
I’ve been to Frightmare twice before. The first year was fantastic, the second less so – but it primarily suffered from the fact that it wasn’t all that different from the first time. After a couple of years off, however, I’ve returned to find that Frightmare is completely revamped – unrecognizable, really, and better than ever.The greatest strength of Frightmare has always been its location. The outdoor farm fields with the creepy mill and cave and such adds a tremendous amount of atmosphere to the haunt. They’ve never (in my experience) done much with a theme or a story, but they don’t need to. They just have a nice, creepy world. One of my favorite elements this year was a lengthy unlit segment that you have to make your way through using a lantern. Even better, they manage to deliver and retrieve the lantern with actors in character, which was a wonderful surprise. Other than that, there weren’t a lot of particular standout moments, but it consistently solid. Actors stuck to character pretty well and usually did more than just jump out and say “Boo!” The new castle façade for the entrance is not as creepy as the old mine they used to use, but I do appreciate mixing it up. All in all, a strong finish to the night, although I have to admit I kind of miss the old crazy levitating exorcism effect.
8/10
Haunt Review: Twisted Fairy Tales and Your Worst Nightmare
Westminster Mall
5433 W 88th Avenue, Westminster, CO
http://www.twistedfairytaleshaunt.com/
This was another first year haunt, and was put on by another portion of the old Scream Park team. Unfortunately, it didn’t turn out nearly as well as City of the Dead, although a large part of that may have been a matter of circumstances – it’s a mall haunt, which is pretty limiting, and apparently came together in a very short period of time. The result has some nice touches, but is far too short overall, is way too sparsely decorated, and doesn’t have enough activity. I think it also suffers from the break into two haunts – you go into the space through Twisted Fairy Tales, stop to get some 3-D glasses from an employee, then go back out through Your Worst Nightmare. The break in the middle is a definite mood killer, and makes the whole thing feel shorter than it really is. Even if it meant ditching the theme, I think one longer haunt would have been more satisfying. The actors also didn’t seem to be as well-trained or enthusiastic as I would have liked. They mostly stood in their positions, waited for us to pass, then shouted out a scripted line or two. One of them, after bumping my leg with a prop, even stopped to apologize. I appreciate the sentiment, but it certainly wasn’t scary.
As for the nice touches I mentioned earlier, I feel I should point some of them out. The haunt started with a long, twisty black tunnel that was so dark you had to feel your way through. I liked this, as it acted a sort of sensory palette cleanser, and helped mitigate some of the effects of being in a mall. The giant spider was good. There was a white rat-bear-something creature in the sheet room that was a little unnerving. And the final gag (I won’t say what it was) is fairly clever and startling.
The fairy tale theme was interesting and has a lot of potential. I was really looking forward to seeing what they could do with it. Unfortunately, the answer turned out to be "not much."
3/10
5433 W 88th Avenue, Westminster, CO
http://www.twistedfairytaleshaunt.com/
This was another first year haunt, and was put on by another portion of the old Scream Park team. Unfortunately, it didn’t turn out nearly as well as City of the Dead, although a large part of that may have been a matter of circumstances – it’s a mall haunt, which is pretty limiting, and apparently came together in a very short period of time. The result has some nice touches, but is far too short overall, is way too sparsely decorated, and doesn’t have enough activity. I think it also suffers from the break into two haunts – you go into the space through Twisted Fairy Tales, stop to get some 3-D glasses from an employee, then go back out through Your Worst Nightmare. The break in the middle is a definite mood killer, and makes the whole thing feel shorter than it really is. Even if it meant ditching the theme, I think one longer haunt would have been more satisfying. The actors also didn’t seem to be as well-trained or enthusiastic as I would have liked. They mostly stood in their positions, waited for us to pass, then shouted out a scripted line or two. One of them, after bumping my leg with a prop, even stopped to apologize. I appreciate the sentiment, but it certainly wasn’t scary.As for the nice touches I mentioned earlier, I feel I should point some of them out. The haunt started with a long, twisty black tunnel that was so dark you had to feel your way through. I liked this, as it acted a sort of sensory palette cleanser, and helped mitigate some of the effects of being in a mall. The giant spider was good. There was a white rat-bear-something creature in the sheet room that was a little unnerving. And the final gag (I won’t say what it was) is fairly clever and startling.
The fairy tale theme was interesting and has a lot of potential. I was really looking forward to seeing what they could do with it. Unfortunately, the answer turned out to be "not much."
3/10
Haunt Review: City of the Dead
7007 E 88th Avenue, Henderson, CO
http://www.cityofthedeadhaunt.com/
Wow. Wow, wow, wow. I wasn’t sure going in what to expect with City of the Dead, since they are a first year haunt, but they seem to have skipped over all of the typical first year troubles, presenting a slick, well-oiled machine. From what I hear, some of the people from the now-defunct Scream Park are involved in this haunt, which may have helped them get up and running. It also didn’t hurt that someone clearly threw several large boxes of money at this haunt.
Before discussing the haunt proper, I’d like to mention the waiting area. They’ve set up several tents with vendors and food, as well as a hearse with coffins and zombies that you can have your picture taken with. I didn’t partake in anything, but I really appreciate it nonetheless because it gives more of a carnival atmosphere to the whole event. They also handed out a great prop souvenir, the Departed News:
This was probably intended to help people pass the time in line, but it was too dark to read in there. Still, nice touch. Fortunately, it was a moot point for me because, perhaps because it was early in the night, perhaps because it was early in the season, or perhaps because of the ridiculous cold, there were not very many other patrons. We only had a 10 minute wait, tops.
So – on to City of the Dead itself (SPOILERS here, primarily about the overall structure of the haunt). They have two major elements working in their favor here: Theme and scope. More than any other haunt that I can recall (outside of the movie-based ones at Universal Studios), they set a theme for the haunt and stick to it, start to finish. The idea is that there is a city hidden within Denver, which is just like any other city except that it is populated by the dead. You start out walking through a military checkpoint and security station, through what can only be described as undead customs, and finally emerge into the city. This is where that second element comes into play – the scope of this haunt is amazing. When you first emerge into the city itself, you find yourself at the end of an entire city block, cars and all. I’ve seen sets this big before, but not at an indoor haunt where everything has to be built.
For the rest of the haunt you wander in and out of buildings, passing through the barber, the butcher, the nursing home, the school, and several more. The actors in these scenes were generally pretty impressive – I’d say about 80% had settled fully into their characters and seemed well able to improvise interactions once they got through their scripted material, which is a pretty good percentage. I was also impressed that they would sometimes follow you around, popping up again in unexpected places far from where you first saw them. Also, the scope of the thing again came into play here – there were a tremendous number of actors, including several who seemed to essentially be part of the scenery, just wandering around the background looking creepy.
Eventually, you wind up escaping through the sewers, thus maintaining the theme and story to the very end. Extremely impressive the whole way through, which some shockingly elaborate costumes. Be warned, though – it’s much more of a gross-out haunt than most that I’ve seen, and it is quite disgusting at points. That just added to the fun for me, but your mileage may vary.
10/10
http://www.cityofthedeadhaunt.com/
Wow. Wow, wow, wow. I wasn’t sure going in what to expect with City of the Dead, since they are a first year haunt, but they seem to have skipped over all of the typical first year troubles, presenting a slick, well-oiled machine. From what I hear, some of the people from the now-defunct Scream Park are involved in this haunt, which may have helped them get up and running. It also didn’t hurt that someone clearly threw several large boxes of money at this haunt.Before discussing the haunt proper, I’d like to mention the waiting area. They’ve set up several tents with vendors and food, as well as a hearse with coffins and zombies that you can have your picture taken with. I didn’t partake in anything, but I really appreciate it nonetheless because it gives more of a carnival atmosphere to the whole event. They also handed out a great prop souvenir, the Departed News:
This was probably intended to help people pass the time in line, but it was too dark to read in there. Still, nice touch. Fortunately, it was a moot point for me because, perhaps because it was early in the night, perhaps because it was early in the season, or perhaps because of the ridiculous cold, there were not very many other patrons. We only had a 10 minute wait, tops.
So – on to City of the Dead itself (SPOILERS here, primarily about the overall structure of the haunt). They have two major elements working in their favor here: Theme and scope. More than any other haunt that I can recall (outside of the movie-based ones at Universal Studios), they set a theme for the haunt and stick to it, start to finish. The idea is that there is a city hidden within Denver, which is just like any other city except that it is populated by the dead. You start out walking through a military checkpoint and security station, through what can only be described as undead customs, and finally emerge into the city. This is where that second element comes into play – the scope of this haunt is amazing. When you first emerge into the city itself, you find yourself at the end of an entire city block, cars and all. I’ve seen sets this big before, but not at an indoor haunt where everything has to be built.
For the rest of the haunt you wander in and out of buildings, passing through the barber, the butcher, the nursing home, the school, and several more. The actors in these scenes were generally pretty impressive – I’d say about 80% had settled fully into their characters and seemed well able to improvise interactions once they got through their scripted material, which is a pretty good percentage. I was also impressed that they would sometimes follow you around, popping up again in unexpected places far from where you first saw them. Also, the scope of the thing again came into play here – there were a tremendous number of actors, including several who seemed to essentially be part of the scenery, just wandering around the background looking creepy.
Eventually, you wind up escaping through the sewers, thus maintaining the theme and story to the very end. Extremely impressive the whole way through, which some shockingly elaborate costumes. Be warned, though – it’s much more of a gross-out haunt than most that I’ve seen, and it is quite disgusting at points. That just added to the fun for me, but your mileage may vary.
10/10
Wednesday, October 7, 2009
The Mummy's Hand
Christy Cabanne, 1940
The Mummy series is really the nadir of the classic Universal monster stable. Every one of the other sequels has embodied some degree of suck, so I wasn't expecting much here. As it turns out, though, it's actually a little bit good. To be honest, it's also not really a sequel - it has nothing in common with The Mummy other than the presence of a mummy, and all of the later sequels follow from this one. In fact, pretty much the entirety of the mummy lore comes from this movie.
It basically plays like an old adventure serial more than a horror movie. The mummy itself doesn't come into play until halfway through, and there's a strong overtone of scoundrel-y adventure. Think more Indiana Jones, less The Shining. There are no less than two comic relief characters among the principal cast, and amazingly, both are fairly amusing. I would even go so far as to describe Cecil Kellaway's "The Great Solvani" as wonderful, especially during the drunken conversation with his daughter in the hotel room, where he seems to compulsively perform magic tricks.
The ending is tremendously lame, as our hero defeats the mummy by dropping a bowl of fire on him while he laps up spilled tea from the floor. No, I'm not kidding. Even before that, the mummy never really exudes much of a sense of menace. And while the comic relief is solid, and George Zucco's villainous Andoheb is suitably menacing, the leads themselves are dull, dull dull.
Still, better than anything that followed it.
5.5/10
The Mummy series is really the nadir of the classic Universal monster stable. Every one of the other sequels has embodied some degree of suck, so I wasn't expecting much here. As it turns out, though, it's actually a little bit good. To be honest, it's also not really a sequel - it has nothing in common with The Mummy other than the presence of a mummy, and all of the later sequels follow from this one. In fact, pretty much the entirety of the mummy lore comes from this movie.
It basically plays like an old adventure serial more than a horror movie. The mummy itself doesn't come into play until halfway through, and there's a strong overtone of scoundrel-y adventure. Think more Indiana Jones, less The Shining. There are no less than two comic relief characters among the principal cast, and amazingly, both are fairly amusing. I would even go so far as to describe Cecil Kellaway's "The Great Solvani" as wonderful, especially during the drunken conversation with his daughter in the hotel room, where he seems to compulsively perform magic tricks.
The ending is tremendously lame, as our hero defeats the mummy by dropping a bowl of fire on him while he laps up spilled tea from the floor. No, I'm not kidding. Even before that, the mummy never really exudes much of a sense of menace. And while the comic relief is solid, and George Zucco's villainous Andoheb is suitably menacing, the leads themselves are dull, dull dull.
Still, better than anything that followed it.
5.5/10
Tuesday, October 6, 2009
Gli orrori del castello di Norimberga (Baron Blood)
Mario Bava, 1972
Huh. One of Bava's worst to be sure, especially if you only consider his horror films. The scripting is lazy and tedious, the acting is terrible, and the visuals are - well, not bad, admittedly, but not up to Bava standards.
3/10
Huh. One of Bava's worst to be sure, especially if you only consider his horror films. The scripting is lazy and tedious, the acting is terrible, and the visuals are - well, not bad, admittedly, but not up to Bava standards.
3/10
Vampyr
Carl Theodor Dreyer, 1932
I had high hopes for this one, since it's generally held to be a sort of long-lost classic. At first, it seemed to be living up to the promise - a creepy, surreal experience filled with interesting visuals like a shadow that wanders off by itself. Unfortunately, the plot eventually kicks in and it turns out to be a standard-issue vampire story, filled with endless shots of text from a book of vampire lore. There's still some interesting stuff to be had, like when the protagonist dreams of his own death, a rightly famous sequence. But as a whole, it really just falls apart.
3.5/10
I had high hopes for this one, since it's generally held to be a sort of long-lost classic. At first, it seemed to be living up to the promise - a creepy, surreal experience filled with interesting visuals like a shadow that wanders off by itself. Unfortunately, the plot eventually kicks in and it turns out to be a standard-issue vampire story, filled with endless shots of text from a book of vampire lore. There's still some interesting stuff to be had, like when the protagonist dreams of his own death, a rightly famous sequence. But as a whole, it really just falls apart.
3.5/10
Monday, October 5, 2009
104 in 2009 Week 40: My Neighbor Totoro and some horror movies
This should be short and sweet, since I've already talked about most of these. The qualifying movies from this week are:
Something Wicked This Way Comes 2/10
El Orfanato 9.5/10
Curse of the Werewolf 4/10
[REC] 7.5/10
The Body Snatcher 8/10
There's also one other movie I saw prior to October:
Tonari no Totoro (My Neighbor Totoro)
Hayao Miyazaki, 1988
A man and his two daughters move out to a small village while the mother is in the hospital. The youngest daughter encounters three magical beings that she calls "Totoros." Surprisingly mundane things happen to them after that, interspersed with cool fantasy sequences that may or may not be real.
I need to say right off that I don't feel entirely right evaluating this movie. The version that I saw was dubbed in the 80's by Troma, and, I think, dubbed very poorly. The structure of the movie requires that you connect strongly with the two young girls who stand at the heart of the movie - and that's very hard to do when they sound like screaming 30-year old women. In other words, the movie came across very badly. At the same time, there were plenty of great bits of Miyazaki-madness, like the wonderful catbus, and the direction the story takes is interesting and even kind of unconventional. So I suspect the movie is better than it seems. I'm giving a rating that kind of splits the difference between what I saw (which was somewhere in the 2-range) and what I suspect it would be with subs or a better dub (a 5.5 or 6).
4/10
Progress: 93 (Par +13)
Something Wicked This Way Comes 2/10
El Orfanato 9.5/10
Curse of the Werewolf 4/10
[REC] 7.5/10
The Body Snatcher 8/10
There's also one other movie I saw prior to October:
Tonari no Totoro (My Neighbor Totoro)
Hayao Miyazaki, 1988
A man and his two daughters move out to a small village while the mother is in the hospital. The youngest daughter encounters three magical beings that she calls "Totoros." Surprisingly mundane things happen to them after that, interspersed with cool fantasy sequences that may or may not be real.I need to say right off that I don't feel entirely right evaluating this movie. The version that I saw was dubbed in the 80's by Troma, and, I think, dubbed very poorly. The structure of the movie requires that you connect strongly with the two young girls who stand at the heart of the movie - and that's very hard to do when they sound like screaming 30-year old women. In other words, the movie came across very badly. At the same time, there were plenty of great bits of Miyazaki-madness, like the wonderful catbus, and the direction the story takes is interesting and even kind of unconventional. So I suspect the movie is better than it seems. I'm giving a rating that kind of splits the difference between what I saw (which was somewhere in the 2-range) and what I suspect it would be with subs or a better dub (a 5.5 or 6).
4/10
Progress: 93 (Par +13)
The Body Snatcher
Robert Wise, 1945
A creepy, effective morality play anchored by one of Boris Karloff's best performances. It also, for a movie that deals so directly with questions of right and wrong, has a surprising and welcome degree of moral ambiguity - and doubly so, when you consider when it was made. It's a little troublesome that no one really attempts the Scottish accent that the setting would suggest. This isn't something that I generally worry too much about, but the dialogue is still peppered with "ayes" and "laddies," so it kind of stands out. Also, the handsome young doctor whom we're obviously meant to identify with barely seems able to muster an emotion. Ever.
The direction and lighting are stylish and shadowy, just the way I like them, with the murder of the street singer as a highlight. It's also always a pleasure to see Karloff and Bela Lugosi on screen together, even if only briefly. I was very pleased with this one.
8/10
A creepy, effective morality play anchored by one of Boris Karloff's best performances. It also, for a movie that deals so directly with questions of right and wrong, has a surprising and welcome degree of moral ambiguity - and doubly so, when you consider when it was made. It's a little troublesome that no one really attempts the Scottish accent that the setting would suggest. This isn't something that I generally worry too much about, but the dialogue is still peppered with "ayes" and "laddies," so it kind of stands out. Also, the handsome young doctor whom we're obviously meant to identify with barely seems able to muster an emotion. Ever.
The direction and lighting are stylish and shadowy, just the way I like them, with the murder of the street singer as a highlight. It's also always a pleasure to see Karloff and Bela Lugosi on screen together, even if only briefly. I was very pleased with this one.
8/10
Sunday, October 4, 2009
[REC]
Jaume Balaguero, 2007
This is what you might call a great id movie. It's a fantastic roller coaster ride, executed nearly flawlessly, that doesn't really amount to much in the end. Still, it's hard to complain when you're fed a steady diet of scary zombies - and not just scary zombies, but that great European staple, scary demon zombies. The creature at the end, in particular, was tremendously upsetting. In the first long shot, I figured it had to be CGI - there's no way to make a person look like that for real. As it approached, though, I saw that it was indeed an actor in makeup, which made it all the worse. Good fun, and bring on the sequel.
7.5/10
This is what you might call a great id movie. It's a fantastic roller coaster ride, executed nearly flawlessly, that doesn't really amount to much in the end. Still, it's hard to complain when you're fed a steady diet of scary zombies - and not just scary zombies, but that great European staple, scary demon zombies. The creature at the end, in particular, was tremendously upsetting. In the first long shot, I figured it had to be CGI - there's no way to make a person look like that for real. As it approached, though, I saw that it was indeed an actor in makeup, which made it all the worse. Good fun, and bring on the sequel.
7.5/10
Curse of the Werewolf
Terence Fisher, 1961
Easily the worst of Hammer's early updates of classic Universal monsters, Curse of the Werewolf suffers from two main problems. The first is an assortment of overly broad, almost cartoonish performances that are very atypical of Fisher's Hammer films. Anthony Dawson's Marques Siniestro (ooh, that name) is probably the worst offender. The other issue is a very oddly structured plot, which spends half of the running time depicting events that would qualify as backstory, at best. It's fifty minutes before Oliver Reed, the ostensible star, ever appears on screen!
I do have to give it credit for the unusual take on the werewolf mythology, which posits that werewolves are people demonically possessed by animal spirits due the weakening of their own spirit, which in turn is a result of being born on Christmas Day (or something like that). Also, acting-wise, Oliver Reed runs circles around poor old Lon Chaney, jr. But in the end, it just doesn't really work.
4/10
Easily the worst of Hammer's early updates of classic Universal monsters, Curse of the Werewolf suffers from two main problems. The first is an assortment of overly broad, almost cartoonish performances that are very atypical of Fisher's Hammer films. Anthony Dawson's Marques Siniestro (ooh, that name) is probably the worst offender. The other issue is a very oddly structured plot, which spends half of the running time depicting events that would qualify as backstory, at best. It's fifty minutes before Oliver Reed, the ostensible star, ever appears on screen!
I do have to give it credit for the unusual take on the werewolf mythology, which posits that werewolves are people demonically possessed by animal spirits due the weakening of their own spirit, which in turn is a result of being born on Christmas Day (or something like that). Also, acting-wise, Oliver Reed runs circles around poor old Lon Chaney, jr. But in the end, it just doesn't really work.
4/10
Haunt Review: The Haunted Forest
45250 North Delbert Road, Parker, CO
http://hauntedforestparker.com/
Somewhere out in the wilderness near Parker, marked by a barely-illuminated sign, lies the Haunted Forest. It’s a bit difficult to find, and a bit pricy compared to other haunts ($20), but it’s absolutely worth the trouble and the cash. Unlike most haunts, the Haunted Forest doesn’t take place in a warehouse, or in a densely packed cornfield. It’s a long, meandering path through the woods, marked only by yellow police tape. The experience is kind of like taking a nice 20 minute hike, except that sometimes people chase you with chainsaws. They get a surprising amount of mileage out of the parts of the trail where nothing happens – to be honest, it would still be pretty spooky even if there were no actors.
Once you factor the actors in, though, it gets a little bit terrifying. They are generally few and far between – but they take advantage of the space to make sure that every person counts. My favorite encounter involved an actor in a Michael Myers mask who came at us from behind. Because of the sparse layout, he was able to wait until we were well down the path before moving, and was therefore able to reach a full charge before announcing his presence (with a really creepy grunting/snorting sound). In a situation like that, it’s pretty hard not to just run away as fast as you can – and, in fact, during one of the later chainsaw chases, I kind of managed to twist my ankle while doing just that. This is not a complaint – it’s a testament to the effectiveness of the haunt.
Like the Haunted Mines, there were a couple of early season kinks to work out. The actors in the big schoolbus setpiece that ends the trail weren’t ready for us, so we wound up standing outside it for a bit. The graveyard toward the beginning of the trail also didn’t seem to be completely up and running – there were some exposed electronics and patches where it seems they probably meant to stick another strobe light. All in all, though, these were pretty minor concerns. We were told that they expect to get much better as we approach Halloween, but they’re already in pretty good shape. I loved this one.
9/10
http://hauntedforestparker.com/
Somewhere out in the wilderness near Parker, marked by a barely-illuminated sign, lies the Haunted Forest. It’s a bit difficult to find, and a bit pricy compared to other haunts ($20), but it’s absolutely worth the trouble and the cash. Unlike most haunts, the Haunted Forest doesn’t take place in a warehouse, or in a densely packed cornfield. It’s a long, meandering path through the woods, marked only by yellow police tape. The experience is kind of like taking a nice 20 minute hike, except that sometimes people chase you with chainsaws. They get a surprising amount of mileage out of the parts of the trail where nothing happens – to be honest, it would still be pretty spooky even if there were no actors.Once you factor the actors in, though, it gets a little bit terrifying. They are generally few and far between – but they take advantage of the space to make sure that every person counts. My favorite encounter involved an actor in a Michael Myers mask who came at us from behind. Because of the sparse layout, he was able to wait until we were well down the path before moving, and was therefore able to reach a full charge before announcing his presence (with a really creepy grunting/snorting sound). In a situation like that, it’s pretty hard not to just run away as fast as you can – and, in fact, during one of the later chainsaw chases, I kind of managed to twist my ankle while doing just that. This is not a complaint – it’s a testament to the effectiveness of the haunt.
Like the Haunted Mines, there were a couple of early season kinks to work out. The actors in the big schoolbus setpiece that ends the trail weren’t ready for us, so we wound up standing outside it for a bit. The graveyard toward the beginning of the trail also didn’t seem to be completely up and running – there were some exposed electronics and patches where it seems they probably meant to stick another strobe light. All in all, though, these were pretty minor concerns. We were told that they expect to get much better as we approach Halloween, but they’re already in pretty good shape. I loved this one.
9/10
Haunt Review: The Haunted Mines
The Mining Museum, Colorado Springs
http://hauntedmines.org/
This one didn’t get off to a very good start. We arrived just after opening time and got a spot close to the front of the line – maybe fifteen, twenty people ahead of us. Then. . . we waited. And waited. And waited. They didn’t actually start up the haunt until more than an hour after the advertised start time. Fortunately, there were Simpsons’ Halloween Specials playing on a projector to help pass the time, and an amusing security guard/Jason Vorhees who did a good job of freaking out the little kids. He was also surprisingly limber, skittering up walls and across rooftops. The waiting area was pretty well designed in general, with a tunnel and some graveyard areas, so it really wasn’t as bad as it could have been. Plus, about halfway through, they got the fog machine hooked up. When I got my first whiff of chemical fog, a warm wave of happiness rolled over me, as if I had just smelled cookies baking in mother’s oven or somesuch.
Once we actually got into the haunt, I was very impressed with the layout and set design. It began with an elevator descent into the mines, followed by a twisting, turning trail on uneven ground, up and down stairs, through tunnels with crawling room only, and down slides. The main strength was definitely the use of physical discomfort – and I don’t mean discomfort as in pain, but discomfort as a removal from the comfort zone, more disconcerting. There were also several points where two pathways are presented (usually a crawling one and a walking one), which certainly would up the value of a return visit. There were also a few small mazes, which made for the best use of actors, as they would circle around and come at you from different directions.
Unfortunately, I don’t think they were up and running at full strength (even ignoring the delayed start). There were several lengthy dead spaces, and they failed to capitalize on some of their terrific set design. When I’m on my knees crawling through a dark tunnel, I’m a perfect target for a scare – but nothing happened. I spotted a few hiding places for actors that were unoccupied, and a few props that seemed to be deactivated.
Finally, I also have to give them credit for sticking the obligatory chainsaw smack in the middle of the haunt, rather than at the end. Not only that, but it was in a maze, which made escape. . . . well, difficult. Sadly, there was a side effect of this placement: The end just kind of petered out. Overall, it was a decent start, and I suspect that late in the season it might be very good. It’s just not there yet.
6/10
http://hauntedmines.org/
This one didn’t get off to a very good start. We arrived just after opening time and got a spot close to the front of the line – maybe fifteen, twenty people ahead of us. Then. . . we waited. And waited. And waited. They didn’t actually start up the haunt until more than an hour after the advertised start time. Fortunately, there were Simpsons’ Halloween Specials playing on a projector to help pass the time, and an amusing security guard/Jason Vorhees who did a good job of freaking out the little kids. He was also surprisingly limber, skittering up walls and across rooftops. The waiting area was pretty well designed in general, with a tunnel and some graveyard areas, so it really wasn’t as bad as it could have been. Plus, about halfway through, they got the fog machine hooked up. When I got my first whiff of chemical fog, a warm wave of happiness rolled over me, as if I had just smelled cookies baking in mother’s oven or somesuch.
Once we actually got into the haunt, I was very impressed with the layout and set design. It began with an elevator descent into the mines, followed by a twisting, turning trail on uneven ground, up and down stairs, through tunnels with crawling room only, and down slides. The main strength was definitely the use of physical discomfort – and I don’t mean discomfort as in pain, but discomfort as a removal from the comfort zone, more disconcerting. There were also several points where two pathways are presented (usually a crawling one and a walking one), which certainly would up the value of a return visit. There were also a few small mazes, which made for the best use of actors, as they would circle around and come at you from different directions.Unfortunately, I don’t think they were up and running at full strength (even ignoring the delayed start). There were several lengthy dead spaces, and they failed to capitalize on some of their terrific set design. When I’m on my knees crawling through a dark tunnel, I’m a perfect target for a scare – but nothing happened. I spotted a few hiding places for actors that were unoccupied, and a few props that seemed to be deactivated.
Finally, I also have to give them credit for sticking the obligatory chainsaw smack in the middle of the haunt, rather than at the end. Not only that, but it was in a maze, which made escape. . . . well, difficult. Sadly, there was a side effect of this placement: The end just kind of petered out. Overall, it was a decent start, and I suspect that late in the season it might be very good. It’s just not there yet.
6/10
el Orfanato (The Orphanage)
Juan Antonio Bayona, 2007
In a word - terrific. And oddly enough, it's not really a horror movie, in a sense. Sure, there are some (very well executed) haunting sequences of the classical ghost story sort, but the supernatural elements are of arguable substance (I vote yes, but appreciate the ambiguity). It's really, at the core, a story about how the mysterious disappearance of a child affects the parents. On the other hand, that's a pretty horrifying scenario, and the ongoing mystery becomes very nightmarish (even if you ignore the ghosts). Then there's the. . . I don't want to call it a twist, exactly, but let's say revelation, near the end, which is tremendously upsetting (I'm trying not to delve into spoilers here).
So it is a horror movie, then. Just not the horror movie I was expecting.
I don't want to say much more, because it's really better to just see for yourself - although if you have young children, consider yourself warned. Let me just add that the biggest problem I had with this movie is that a prosthetic effect on a traffic victim was kind of silly. And that's not a very big problem at all.
9.5/10
In a word - terrific. And oddly enough, it's not really a horror movie, in a sense. Sure, there are some (very well executed) haunting sequences of the classical ghost story sort, but the supernatural elements are of arguable substance (I vote yes, but appreciate the ambiguity). It's really, at the core, a story about how the mysterious disappearance of a child affects the parents. On the other hand, that's a pretty horrifying scenario, and the ongoing mystery becomes very nightmarish (even if you ignore the ghosts). Then there's the. . . I don't want to call it a twist, exactly, but let's say revelation, near the end, which is tremendously upsetting (I'm trying not to delve into spoilers here).
So it is a horror movie, then. Just not the horror movie I was expecting.
I don't want to say much more, because it's really better to just see for yourself - although if you have young children, consider yourself warned. Let me just add that the biggest problem I had with this movie is that a prosthetic effect on a traffic victim was kind of silly. And that's not a very big problem at all.
9.5/10
Saturday, October 3, 2009
Zombieland
Robert Fleischer, 2009
The first thing I need to say is that all of the comparisons to Shaun of the Dead are overselling it quite a bit. The second thing I need to say is that it's still pretty good.
Basically, this is Woody Harrelson's movie. He's not technically the lead, and I suppose the main dramatic arc doesn't belong to him, but he dominates every scene he appears in. He also embodies the spirit of the movie more than anyone else (that spirit is badass silliness bolstered by misunderstood pathos). The rest of the cast is does what they need to as well, and the extended cameo by REDACTED provides one of the best laughs in the movie.
The tone can be a little inconsistent at times, but the director adds a lot of fun non-diagetic material that kind of papers over the holes. The most obvious example of this is the recurring device of onscreen zombie survival rules that pop up whenever appropriate. Unfortunately, although 32 rules are mentioned, only five or so are ever identified, and are then used repeatedly. Granted, the context usually changes enough that it works as a new, different joke - but it would have been nice to expand the material a bit.
This kind of sums up my feelings overall. Zombieland settles into a comfortable groove that's very enjoyable, but doesn't really stretch itself - which is where it falls short of Shaun of the Dead. It's a little disappointing, because I was expecting it to push the envelope a little more. It was probably just an unfair expectation, though, and Zombieland still does what it does very well. Besides, how could I possibly stay mad at a movie that features a zombie attack at an amusement park with a scene set inside a haunted house? It's like they did it just for me.
7.5/10
The first thing I need to say is that all of the comparisons to Shaun of the Dead are overselling it quite a bit. The second thing I need to say is that it's still pretty good.
Basically, this is Woody Harrelson's movie. He's not technically the lead, and I suppose the main dramatic arc doesn't belong to him, but he dominates every scene he appears in. He also embodies the spirit of the movie more than anyone else (that spirit is badass silliness bolstered by misunderstood pathos). The rest of the cast is does what they need to as well, and the extended cameo by REDACTED provides one of the best laughs in the movie.
The tone can be a little inconsistent at times, but the director adds a lot of fun non-diagetic material that kind of papers over the holes. The most obvious example of this is the recurring device of onscreen zombie survival rules that pop up whenever appropriate. Unfortunately, although 32 rules are mentioned, only five or so are ever identified, and are then used repeatedly. Granted, the context usually changes enough that it works as a new, different joke - but it would have been nice to expand the material a bit.
This kind of sums up my feelings overall. Zombieland settles into a comfortable groove that's very enjoyable, but doesn't really stretch itself - which is where it falls short of Shaun of the Dead. It's a little disappointing, because I was expecting it to push the envelope a little more. It was probably just an unfair expectation, though, and Zombieland still does what it does very well. Besides, how could I possibly stay mad at a movie that features a zombie attack at an amusement park with a scene set inside a haunted house? It's like they did it just for me.
7.5/10
Thursday, October 1, 2009
Something Wicked This Way Comes
Jack Clayton, 1983
What a muddled mess this was. It clearly bears the mark of massive studio meddling, not least of which are the scenes in which the two pre-pubescent protagonists suddenly appear to be a year older (hooray for reshoots). The tone is nostalgic and folksy nearly to the point of parody, and Bradbury's stylized dialogue doesn't really tend to work when it actually has to come out of someone's mouth. Also, those two kids I mentioned definitely don't pull their weight, acting wise. Jonathan Pryce is admittedly fantastic as Mr. Dark, though, and whenever he's onscreen the movie takes on an uncharacteristic spirit - but he's present for far too little of the running time. The confrontation between Pryce and Jason Robards in the library toward the end is excellent, but it's followed by a climactic battle (sort of) in the mirror maze that really sinks the whole production - not that it was in great shape before that point.
2/10
What a muddled mess this was. It clearly bears the mark of massive studio meddling, not least of which are the scenes in which the two pre-pubescent protagonists suddenly appear to be a year older (hooray for reshoots). The tone is nostalgic and folksy nearly to the point of parody, and Bradbury's stylized dialogue doesn't really tend to work when it actually has to come out of someone's mouth. Also, those two kids I mentioned definitely don't pull their weight, acting wise. Jonathan Pryce is admittedly fantastic as Mr. Dark, though, and whenever he's onscreen the movie takes on an uncharacteristic spirit - but he's present for far too little of the running time. The confrontation between Pryce and Jason Robards in the library toward the end is excellent, but it's followed by a climactic battle (sort of) in the mirror maze that really sinks the whole production - not that it was in great shape before that point.
2/10
Friday the 13th (2009)
Marcus Nispel, 2009
Given that I would be kicking off the month of Halloween late at night, I needed to start with something modern and, therefore, fast-paced. At the same time, I wanted to tap into a bit of that comforting nostalgia, so what better choice than a modern remake of an 80's franchise?
I say franchise, rather than movie, because the 2009 Friday the 13th draws from all of the first four Friday Friday movies and probably has more in common with part 3 than any of the others. This works very much to its benefit, because the first Friday the 13th is actually not very good. It's not until part 3 that things start to become interesting, and part 6 is the only one that could be considered a good movie outright.
Nonetheless, I was less than impressed with the modern Friday, but it certainly had its pleasures. The college kids were generally amusing and there were some impressively brutal kills- I particularly liked the deaths of the two kids who went boating. The movie is empty calories, but still reasonably tasty. And at least it's an improvement on its source.
3.5/10
Given that I would be kicking off the month of Halloween late at night, I needed to start with something modern and, therefore, fast-paced. At the same time, I wanted to tap into a bit of that comforting nostalgia, so what better choice than a modern remake of an 80's franchise?
I say franchise, rather than movie, because the 2009 Friday the 13th draws from all of the first four Friday Friday movies and probably has more in common with part 3 than any of the others. This works very much to its benefit, because the first Friday the 13th is actually not very good. It's not until part 3 that things start to become interesting, and part 6 is the only one that could be considered a good movie outright.
Nonetheless, I was less than impressed with the modern Friday, but it certainly had its pleasures. The college kids were generally amusing and there were some impressively brutal kills- I particularly liked the deaths of the two kids who went boating. The movie is empty calories, but still reasonably tasty. And at least it's an improvement on its source.
3.5/10
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)