Latest product :
Recent product
Tampilkan postingan dengan label Crap. Tampilkan semua postingan
Tampilkan postingan dengan label Crap. Tampilkan semua postingan

Special Effects (1984)

JUNE 28, 2008

GENRE: CRAP, THRILLER
SOURCE: DVD (ONLINE RENTAL)

Last week, fellow horror movie nut and loyal HMAD reader B-Sol wrote up a list of 10 major missteps from promising horror filmmakers. As with any list, I didn’t agree with some of the choices, but I can only assume that he just never saw Special Effects from Larry Cohen, because in my opinion it deserved the number 1 spot: it’s actually hard to believe that the guy who made It’s Alive and The Stuff could make a movie this dull, badly acted, and just plain lousy.

The plot is almost like something out of Hitchcock – a director kills a woman on film and decides to make a movie around the footage. Pretty awesome in theory, but the way this film is carried out, it almost seems like Cohen (who also wrote) was almost going out of his way to execute the story as badly as possible. The director’s scheme is needlessly complicated (involving framing a guy and then paying for his bail moments later, some nonsense about a rose, bringing in a cop to watch the dailies... all sounds exciting, huh?), which doesn’t help. Maybe at 75 minutes this would merely be disappointing, but 105 for a thriller in which only 2 people are killed (without any sort of suspense leading up to either) and nothing else of note happens until the final 10 minutes (rounding UP) is way too much to ask for, especially when the actors are as bad as they are in this.

Eric Bogosian (the director) is pretty amusing at times, but that is to be expected. But even he fails to keep viewer interest (in fact he himself looks bored at times). But the other two leads have to be the absolute worst I’ve ever seen in a major motion picture. The actress in particular, ZoĆ« Lund (playing two roles), manages to ruin just about every moment that, despite being poorly written to begin with, would have carried at least SOME weight. You know when you’re flipping around the channels and you come across a soap opera and someone is saying “I found out who the father of your baby is!” and you decide to watch and find out, even thought you don’t know who anyone is? THAT is more compelling than any one moment in this entire movie.

I honestly cannot think of a single reason to watch this movie. It’s too dull to be “so bad it’s good” entertainment, and it’s too long to use as a time-killer (if you have THAT much time, you should be watching something good). The only thing I got out of it was an understanding why I had never heard of it before adding it to my queue.

Also, I know I have been offering the trailers lately, but I couldn't find one for this. I assume they couldn't figure out how to take a minute of the film and make it look interesting and thus never bothered to cut one.

What say you?

{[['']]}

The Cave (2005)

MAY 20, 2008

GENRE: CRAP, MONSTER, SURVIVAL
SOURCE: DVD (OWN COLLECTION)

What the fuck is the point of a movie like The Cave going into theaters? It offers absolutely nothing that the weekly Sci-Fi original movies doesn’t provide for free (hell, I’d even argue that the SCOs are gorier – more on that later), unless you live in some sort of alternate universe where Eddie Cibrian and Cole Hauser are big stars, beyond what Sci-Fi can offer. But yet, shocking as it may seem, The Cave actually opened in theaters in August 2005, against films like Four Brothers and 40 Year Old Virgin. The fact that it even made 14 million is pretty surprising. I suspect it may have even been meant for TV, as there at least four fade to black moments in the movie after a big revelation or (lame) death of a character, the perfect place to stick ads for Battlestar’s next episode and maybe a car or two.

The only thing a theatrical release can offer that Sci-Fi cannot (at least, when it comes to generic “Monster in the water” movies like this) is R rated violence, profanity, and maybe even nudity. The PG-13 Cave offers none of these things. Gore? Half of the deaths are offscreen entirely, and the only blood is seen on minor wounds. Even SCOs offer one or two reasonably graphic kills per movie. Nudity? Well, I wasn’t really expecting any, but no. Profanity? Cole Hauser’s big final line to the monster is “Come on mother f.” Not “F-“, as if they cut away before he could finish. No, he actually just says “F.”, and the shot lingers on him for another second as if to reassure us that he’s not actually daring to swear.

Now, I’ve said more than once (twice) that PG-13 is not an automatic kiss of death for a horror film – Spiral, The Ring, Poltergeist, etc. all manage chills without resorting to these sort of things (and more importantly, never feel like they are MISSING them either). But for a movie like The Cave, which is about allegedly vicious sea monsters tearing people apart, who the fuck wants a PG-13 version of that? Go all out and offer the audience (who are likely just looking to escape from the heat for 97 minutes in August) the occasional visceral thrill.

See, without gore or anything, all the movie offers is the same old “team of folks run afoul of SOMETHING in the _____” (jungle, water, mountains, desert... take your pick!) monster movie. The closest it gets to doing anything original is instead of having a corporate team member who sells the team out to save his own ass, we have Cole Hauser slowly becoming one of the monsters (he gets stung by one early on). And thankfully, this doesn’t result in a finale in which Hauser stalks his own friends, but instead he uses his newfound insight into their world to help his friends escape (albeit with the occasional violent outburst).

Everyone else is standard monster movie fodder, and the only suspense stems from the fact that whoever built the opening credits put them in a weird order that doesn’t reflect either the actor’s ‘starpower’ or their amount of screen time. For example, Daniel Dae Kim, who at this point was one of the stars of the biggest show on TV, is billed after a few no-name actors, even though his character survives longer than any of them anyway. In fact, the movie takes its sweet ass time killing folks off (again, the only reason we are watching), with more than half of them still alive with only 15 minutes to go.

The survival elements are rather weak too - I never once really felt they were trapped or in danger from anything but the monsters, despite a few attempts to make you feel otherwise. Granted, seeing The Descent sort of ruins whatever little a movie like this could achieve, but still. There's more claustrophobic feeling in any one second of Marshall's film than there is in the entirety of this (and, given the PG-13ity of it all, you'd think they'd try to play up the survival elements to earn the suspense/scares).

Botching things even more is director Bruce Hunt, DP Ross Emery, and editor Brian Berdan’s mutual insistence on making the action scenes as incomprehensible as possible. I am a defender of the three Bs of confusing camerawork (Bourne, Blair Witch, and Bay), and even I had no idea what the fuck was happening during certain scenes. At one point, Eddie Cibrian and Lena Headey are about to travel down a current. She gets stuck, and he cannot fight the current in order to help her. So he is whisked away while she screams “Noooo help!” and things of that nature. 300 closeup shots and 12 seconds later, Cibrian is at the end of the current, he sees a monster or something, and then viola! Headey is right next to him. What the fuck?

And while the image is fine (and to be fair, the special effects are generally quite good), the sound is also pretty lackluster. The surrounds have a lot of use, but the overall level of sound keeps dropping down at times (I checked my system with other movies and it seemed fine), and there is almost zero bass on the track (something other reviews have mentioned, though the level problem may be unique to my copy?). It’s really odd when a large rush of water is shown on screen and your subwoofer is barely making a whimper.

The extras are actually decent, strangely enough. One is about the technical advisors, who cave dive for a living. The two of them are far more interesting than anyone in the movie. The other is about Patrick Tatopoulos’ (part of why I wanted to see this movie is the inordinate number of crew who worked on Dark City, one of my all time favorite films) creature designs, which are pretty decent and wasted in this film. There are two commentary tracks as well, but I have a feeling that they won’t quite be worth my while.

What say you?

{[['']]}

Scarecrow Slayer (2003)

APRIL 7, 2008

GENRE: CRAP, SUPERNATURAL
SOURCE: DVD (ONLINE RENTAL)

Jesus Christ, Scarecrow Slayer makes Scarecrow look like Scarecrows. HMAD reader Jordan – you were right!

Yes, as bad as the original was, this one is even worse. Filmed for what seems like negative money, it features hands down the worst CG effects in the history of cinema (rest easy, Stephen Sommers... for now), abysmal acting across the board, horrendous attempts at humor, and yet: a pace that makes all of that seem boring. When you merely yawn at the sight of yet another badly composited scarecrow shot, something is rotten in Denmark. Not to mention in your DVD player.

Who are the audiences for these movies? Blind, drunken, mentally challenged 3 year olds? Who else could possibly be entertained by this crap, even on a “So bad it’s good” level (which the original at least KIND OF had, at times)? It offers absolutely nothing, even to me, the guy who recommends The Hitcher and Black Xmas. If you can’t even entertain ME, even mildly, you’ve really fucked up your stupid scarecrow movie.

The CG is what really kills the movie. The bad CG on the kill scenes is to be expected (thrill as “wounds” slide around unnaturally on people’s skin!), but this movie has more digitally “enhanced” shots than a Star Wars re-release. The Scarecrow seems composited into every shot, even when he’s just standing there, and several other shots in the film (featuring the human characters) suffer from the same problem. And the film predates Sin City and Sky Captain, so the “let’s film everything in greenscreen and add CG backdrops” attitude wasn’t in vogue yet. At one point, our hero is composited into a shot that doesn’t have anything in it! It’s just a dark background, yet clearly filmed separately from the actor. Whatever.

Director David Michael Latt also felt the need to put orange, blue, red, green, and whatever other color blurs over most of the film. And at one point, our heroine is shown in color while everything behind her is needlessly de-saturated to the point of almost being black and white. It’s like one of the editors had a bet going that he could use every single After Effects filter in the film, whether it made sense or not. Worse, they add CG effects when they are not even necessary. To show a cell phone not getting service, they (badly) paste some CG wavy lines and static on the cell phone screen, which looks as unnatural as an effect possibly can.

I’ve also never seen the camera as many times as I have in this movie. Sometimes it’s more subtle, like when you can just see some light glaring off the lens (in another blank background shot), but other times it’s hilarious how blatant it is. At one point a truck drives out of frame and you can see the camera, (with tripod, red light, the whole nine yards) on the left side of the screen. What makes this example even more inept is that the shot is being held too long, and had they just cut when the truck began moving out of frame (maybe even employing one of those Lucas-style vertical wipes!), the camera wouldn’t have been seen. If you make a bad edit that shows off the cinematographer’s ineptitude, do they cancel each other out? Nope. Adding to the cheapness is the audio, which frequently blows out when people shout or scream. And like the original, it’s presented in fullframe, despite the “making of” showing the clips in the 1.85:1 ratio.

The film’s only sort of saving grace is this guy Gavin. He’s the ex of our heroine (Nicole Kingston, who looks like Mary Elizabeth Winstead), and he’s kind of a noble jerk. The irony is, he’s like the only one in the film who’s not trying to be funny, but since no one actually IS funny, he comes off as the best part. He also has one of the quickest turnarounds in film history – the heroine is trying to convince him that the Scarecrow is coming to get them. “There’s no such thing! It’s a myth!” he yells. Then we hear a fairly small thud coming from down the hall. Instantly, he believes her ridiculous story and springs into action. It’s amazing.

Top-billed Tony Todd gets killed 25 minutes in, and spends most of his screen time sitting in a chair or laying down in a bed. It’s probably the closest the movie got to creativity – it makes him look like he’s in it a lot (in the first 25 minutes anyway) but his scenes probably took all of 4 hours to shoot.

Am I being too tough on the movie? No. When you make intentionally bad crap, there should be some charm to it, or actual fun. This movie fails to achieve that, even occasionally. Its worse crime isn’t being so woefully under-budgeted and pointless, but simply being boring. Even the scarecrow showdown at the end is dull (plus, the scarecrow seems to have lost his kung fu powers), and even if it wasn’t it would be far too little, too late.

And there’s a fucking THIRD movie! Which, judging from the decline in quality from the first one to this one, is very likely the absolute worst thing in all of existence. Yet, I’ll watch it.

I’d like to note that my disc from Blockbuster is obviously a copy from a real video store, and not Blockbuster (it has the original store’s logo on it). I like to think someone took a huge shit on the original copy, and then realized it would be a brown spot on their account, so had to buy the movie pre-viewed from a bricks and mortar store and send back that disc.

What say you?

{[['']]}

Cut And Run/American Gothic

MARCH 28, 2008

GENRE: HORROR?, INDEPENDENT, SURVIVAL
SOURCE: DVD (ONLINE RENTALS)

Here’s a first for Horror Movie A Day – A dual review! Why, you may ask?

As has happened a few times before, Blockbuster sent me the wrong movie. I had asked for American Gothic, which is a late 80s inbred horror thing with Rod Steiger. They sent me American Gothic, a short film by some guy named Carlos Batts. “Fine, whatever,” I said to no one in particular, and put in Cut And Run (aka Inferno in Diretta), a Ruggero Deodato film that had a plot similar to that of his Cannibal Holocaust, only it was a conventionally filmed movie, not a ‘mockumentary’. Except the problem is, despite what IMDb claims, it wasn’t really a horror movie at all. But after doing some research, I discovered that the short film WAS horror, so I will combine: Horror (short film), and (full length) Movie A Day!

The horror angle of Cut comes from Michael Berryman, playing a guy who seemingly lives in the river and seeks to murder drug dealers (and pretty much anyone else). His scenes, largely inconsequential in the grand scheme of things, are gory and violent, and could be mistaken for a Hills Have Eyes sequel. And being a Deodato film, the gore is over the top (beheadings, guttings, etc), something you certainly don’t find in many non-horror films. However, the rest of the film is basically an action movie a la Rambo II, in which a couple of folks (including that hot blond from Prince of Darkness) go into the jungle to rescue their friend, and kill a bunch of “bad guys” with automatic weapons and such. Not exactly horror, right?

The cast is also very HMAD friendly. In addition to Berryman and the Prince of Darkness woman (Lisa Blount, for the unnecessary record), we get Karen Black (Burnt Offerings), Leonard Mann (Flowers In The Attic), and Richard Lynch (Halloween remake). Plus the score is by Claudio Simonetti, aka Goblin.

As for the movie itself, well, whatever. 80s action movies of this type sort of just run along on rails, and if you take away the random gore (and Willie Aames’ ridiculous character) you’re left with any old Chuck Norris/Michael Dudikoff movie; the type that I can only appreciate if I grew up with it. Or I’m at the New Bev (this movie would be ideal for that place, actually). The idea of a group of natives going out of their way to kill drug dealers is pretty awesome, but the movie is kind of dull. There’s a lot of stuff that we really don’t need to watch, like Aames and some broad laying out and then lighting a bunch of flimsy runway lights. And for the life of me I can’t figure out what Eric LaSalle’s strip club owner character has to do with anything, or why he is tossed off a platform into a train by two guys we never see again.

Strangely, the end of the film seems to have influenced the execrable Welcome To The Jungle more than Holocaust did. Our heroes are kidnapped and then held hostage by the very man they were seeking (Lynch), who has now become a sort of Kurtz like madman, and the natives all serve under him. The only difference is, this movie had something fucking happen previously, so there wasn’t any need for him to kill off the heroes like in Jungle (which saved any sort of action or violence for this final minute of the film, and even that was mainly offscreen).

Anyway, not too great, but it was a fucking masterpiece compared to American Gothic. While it was certainly more of an actual horror movie than Cut (what with zombies, a guy covered in blood, etc), it was also an utterly awful and pretentious pile of crap.

The thing about experimental films like this that I don’t get is why anyone besides the filmmaker is watching them. They are experiments! Do scientists hold press conferences and then say “OK, we’re gonna try something”? Of course not. They do their experiments in private, and then show us the finish results. Why can’t these films work the same way? No matter, this experiment certainly failed. The idea is fine (the psychological horror behind the creation of Grant Wood’s eponymous painting) but the execution is as botched as anything can possibly be.

Here is the entire 25 minute movie: An old guy talks to himself, a montage of moving images animated with After Effects, a zombie lies on the ground, two zombies dance, three dead chicks play with children’s letter blocks, the old guy begins stabbing himself with his paintbrush while saying “I wandered aimlessly among the living” over and over, more After Effects, credits. Throughout this nonsense we hear some metal songs. In fact the imagery often resembles a Matt Mahurin music video (think "Unforgiven") but without a. the entire song (the metal songs fade in and out at random, or to allow the guy to say “I wandered aimlessly among the living” again) or b. a point being made in a timely manner. Why this needed to be 25 minutes, I have no idea. It’s pretty sad when a short film is padded and overlong.

Oh fuck you, movie.

There was a kid in my film school who made shit like this. Any time we’d have to present our stuff to the class, he’d show his and there would be utter silence (everyone else in the program made films that were more or less accessible). When the teacher asked about it, he wouldn’t even be able to explain it himself. I’m all for being weird or whatever, but the problem is that shit like this can literally be made by anyone. Film a bunch of random shit, edit it with a blender, throw in some “film damage” filters, and viola! Instant art film! And when someone questions it, you can just say “look, you don’t GET IT.” Oh blow it out your ass. If we’re too dumb to understand your masterpiece why’d you show it to us? And in this case, I got the point of it, I just didn’t get why it had to be so long and obtuse. Like the film Gothic, it’s a fascinating idea to me to show the “real” horror behind a well-known work of art, but I don’t see why it’s apparently so difficult to tell this type of story without being a pretentious windbag. I may not have the slightest clue what’s going on at times, but at least David Lynch’s films are nice to look at (save Inland Empire) and reasonably entertaining. This crap is ugly and boring to boot.

Whatever I watch tomorrow better be a full length horror movie or else there will be hell to pay! I’ll grab Michael Berryman and a few machetes and begin wiping out anyone who ever said “Well, my film is CEREBRAL...” in a dismissive manner.

What say you?


{[['']]}

April Fool's Day (2008)

MARCH 11, 2008

GENRE: CRAP, HOLIDAY, SLASHER
SOURCE: DVD (OWN COLLECTION) (for now)

Oh, April Fool’s Day, you fucking worthless excuse for a movie... why oh why do you exist?

Excluding cynicism, there are two reasons to remake a film: 1. To improve on a concept that was botched for whatever reason (studio interference, poor acting, whatever) in the original version, or 2. To introduce a once popular film to a new generation. Well, April Fool’s Day was NOT a popular film, and it’s only 20 years old, so the children of the teens that saw it in theaters when it was released are probably like 7 or so for the most part, and thus won’t really care. So does the film improve on the concept of the original?

(Note - spoilers ahead, but you'd almost have to TRY to not figure out the ending 12 seconds into the film).

No. Not even close. The original is actually a lot of fun, but it’s sort of spoiled by the ending, which reveals everything was a joke and no one’s really dead. So a remake would correct that, and have everyone REALLY die this time (or at least use AFD’s original ending and have the prank be revealed, and then suddenly a real killer shows up), right? Sadly, no one involved with this movie was that intelligent, apparently. In fact, they take their stupidity a step further – this movie actually has NOTHING in common with the original (different story, different characters, even a different setting entirely) EXCEPT for the idiotic ending!

Yes, once again, it’s all a prank. They try to sell one or two of the kills as real (one of them is an actress and thus has access to an entire Savini-style workshop, I guess), but for the most part they don’t even try. The main girl (Taylor Cole) is the only one who ever “sees” the murders, and even then she is always just stumbling on their bodies moments after they are “killed”. Maybe if you’ve never seen a horror movie in your life you will be fooled, but it’s so blatantly obvious that the killings are staged that I honestly thought for a long time that the twist would be that the killings WERE real this time around, and that the Butcher Brothers (squandering all of their promise from The Hamiltons, which wasn't much to begin with) were pulling a meta-joke on the audience – making real killings seem fake so the jaded audience familiar with the original would be surprised. Even the equally abysmal Catacombs did a better job at presenting a fake killer.

Unlike the original, this one isn’t very fun either. The characters are all completely unlikable (only Scout Taylor-Compton, queen of the unnecessary remakes, plays someone who isn’t a snooty prick) and they aren’t amusing. The original’s group had a nice repartee; I believed they were friends. These assholes don’t even seem to like each other, and while some of the girls are ridiculously hot (Cole looks like the scientifically amazing offspring of Chrarisma Carpenter and Evangeline Lilly, thus making her one of the hottest women in the world) the fact that we don’t even get to see any of them actually die just makes the movie WORSE.

Actually, there is one small exception – the character of David, played by Hamiltons’ Samuel Child. He’s an idiot running for Senate, so this results in a few Republican jokes. He also delivers one of the film’s two memorable lines when he drunkenly tells a guy “I’ll have you raped by a wizard!” for some goddamn reason.

The other good line comes from Blaine, our would-be hero, who’s also the most insufferable of them all. Most of the time he’s just being a jerk, but he takes a quick break from that winning character trait in order to deliver what HAS to be a meta line about the film itself. Scout’s character (the actress) is appearing in a bad slasher movie, and he comments “who cares about that movie - it doesn't even have any big stars!” Brilliant.

Let’s see, what else sucked? Well there’s the 25 minute prologue* that should have been 5 (it’s a year earlier and some of the characters are planning a prank. We know someone’s going to die – get the fuck to it!), nonsensical plot (the whole town seems to be in on the prank), a lengthy “Inside Edition” type news show with the fakest screen graphics I’ve ever seen in a film (note the hilarious “sports scores”) that does absolutely nothing but hint at the film’s obvious plot holes that result from some rewriting/post production editing, etc.

Yes, in this news scene one of the characters (another guy from Hamiltons) has written a book about the prank gone wrong, and the reporter cryptically notes that it’s not the first time he’s been involved with a high profile murder. It’s never mentioned again. Later, the heroine is explaining why everyone is guilty of something, and mentions that David couldn’t keep his dick in his pants, which caused a problem of some sort. No idea what the fuck she was talking about there. It’s later alleged that he had an affair with the dead girl (presumably BEFORE she died), but again – it seemingly has no bearing on anything. One only needs to read the confusing screenplay credits to know that this was a script that went through a lot of hands (it’s “based on a screenplay by” both the original film’s writer AND the Butcher Brothers, and yet written by someone else entirely), and boy does it show.

Look how hot this girl is, and I’m STILL calling the movie “Crap”!

All in all, there is absolutely no reason anyone should watch this movie. The “unrated” label means absolutely nothing – this film is BARELY worthy of a PG-13 (hell, they probably got a PG from the MPAA and were embarrassed by it), there is no actual gore or nudity, the twist is obvious (though to be fair they add a little extra bit of business to it, however it’s of no real consequence), the characters suck, and they don’t even bother to give the killer a mask. Everyone was surprised that it didn’t go into theaters – having seen it, it’s more amazing that the studio ever even considered it. Even Lionsgate would probably pass on this shit. This is easily the worst remake of the current crop (and no, I haven’t forgotten Scout’s other one) – I have to go back to Psycho 98 to think of one so utterly worthless.

What say you?

*I should note that this may be the first movie tagline (“She has a killer party planned”) that only references the film’s prologue – because there is no party at any other point in the movie. Also, saying “she” would pretty much spoil the ending if they were referring to the actual movie, since there are only 3 girls – one dies early on and the other is the one seeing all the murders. Nice work.

{[['']]}

Catacombs (2007)

FEBRUARY 26, 2008

GENRE: CRAP, SURVIVAL
SOURCE: DVD (STORE RENTAL)

Let me begin my review by offering one half of an apology to one Ryan Rotten*, who writes for Shocktillyoudrop.com. Last week, he expressed his distaste for two films: Wrestlemaniac and Catacombs. As I had just gotten Wrestlemaniac, I checked it out the next night, and as you know, I thought it was a lot of fun. So I assumed I’d feel the same about Catacombs, and thus rented it the next day (yes, I rent movies often days before I have time to watch them – something that probably only makes sense to me). But now that I’ve seen it, Rotten was not only right, but he was almost too kind. This movie isn’t just bad; it’s a colossal piece of shit.

Just a heads up, I will be spoiling the (idiotic) ending in the review. But really, as stupid and inane as it is, it’s actually not just foreshadowed, but practically sledgehammered into the film, so you might figure it out before the big reveal. If not, well, all the more power to you.

So throughout the whole film, Shannyn Sossamon (between this, The Order, and One Missed Call, I’m gonna go ahead and hope I never see a single horror film with this woman again) is running from a guy in a goat mask. Literally 80% of the film is just her, running, screaming “Fuck!”, falling down, etc. Every now and then you see the guy chasing her, but he sort of disappears for a while and she just keeps running anyway. Right from the start of this abortion, she tells you that her sister and friends are all dead (the film is her flashback). So A. we have a film in which only one person is ever shown in danger, yet we know she survives (even without the flashback structure spoiling it, how would our only character die?), and B. we have a film in which supposedly all of her friends are killed, yet as time goes on, you will notice that other than her sister, no one is dying (or even present). Oh, and her sister keeps mocking Sossamon for being afraid of danger. And the friends play pranks. And one of the guys tells this wholly idiotic story about a killer in the tunnels, apropos of nothing. And again, nothing much is happening. Hmm... figure it out yet?

Yes, there is no “killer”. The sister and her friends just played a prank on Sossamon, in order to get her to “live a little” and "face her fear". In addition to simply being totally fucking lame, it’s yet another movie prank that would fall apart with any number of fairly simple actions. What if she stopped to take her "dead" sister’s pulse? What if she actually killed the guy playing the killer when trying to defend herself (which she actually does, but only at the end)? Etc. To its credit, the film actually DOES regain some semblance of sense halfway through, when the party everyone is attending is broken up by the cops and she is knocked out in the ensuing panic, leaving her down there all alone. As we learn in the big reveal, at this point her friends began looking for her, but their attempts to contact her were mistaken as screams from the killer by a now quite crazy and upset Sossamon. Fine. Still stupid, but fine.

But it’s not over. After the big reveal, which is presented like those in the Saw films (same producers after all), i.e. lots of flashbacks to things we just saw, all edited together in case we didn’t "get it" (there’s even a Charlie Clouser-esque instrumental here), the sister (who is played by Pink, for the hell of it) notices that Sossamon has just “stupidly” killed the guy who was attacking her. Pink then screams at Sossamon, as if SHE'S in the wrong for defending herself against a guy who for all intents and purposes was trying to kill her, and begins smacking her around. So what does Sossamon do? Swings a pickaxe at Pink, and then everyone else. In the end, our “hero” is the only one who actually kills anyone in the entire film.

To be honest, had the entire movie before it not been so goddamn wretched, this wouldn’t have bothered me. In fact I almost think it’s kind of ballsy to have the heroine go batshit and wipe out all of her friends in 30 seconds. But by that point, I hated the movie so much, it wasn’t nearly enough to save it.

Making matters even more excruciating, Sossamon isn’t even remotely likable. Hot, yes, but not likable. She’s presented as a dour, whiny, mousy party pooper (why she’s like this is never explained). So let’s recap – it’s a horror movie with only one unlikable character spending 75% of the movie trying to escape when she tells us right from the start that she is the only survivor of the night, thus rendering any and all scenes of her in danger automatically un-suspenseful and un-scary. OK, movie.

On a technical level the film is a total waste as well. Do you know any epileptics you want to die? Make them watch this movie, which is about 50% strobe lights (even the goddamn flashlights blink on and off in a rapid manner in several scenes). The other 50% is, I’m not joking, just TOTAL fucking black screens. Unlike The Descent, which sold the dark empty caves brilliantly by usually showing one of the girls against an entirely dark background, these geniuses just chose to make the film just total blackness in several scenes, not realizing that this doesn’t make it scary – for all I know they are just cutting to a credit sequence or a commercial. You need to contrast the smallish bit of light around the character with the total blackness of the rest of the area, otherwise it’s not a BLACK screen, it’s a BLANK screen. You know, like the 5 seconds before the FBI warning.



OK, quick, which one of those is a still from the movie, and which is something I made in MS Paint? Correct! The more rectangular one is from Paint. How can you tell? Because it’s a rectangle and not a fucking square!

Yes, Lionsgate apparently hired a blind newborn baby to master the DVD, resulting in not only a non-anamorphic transfer (despite the fact that the goddamn menu IS 16x9 enhanced), but an image that looks like a full screen Youtube video (complete with black smearing and pixels in just about every scene), with the added bonus of a strange blue line running vertically on the side of the image. They also botched the setup of the DVD, and as a result the film wouldn’t even play at all on my DVD player, instead just looping the traditional 59 hours of LG trailers for infinity (I had to watch it on my PS3 instead). Funnily enough, when I noticed this error I thought it might have been my player that was malfunctioning, so I decided to grab another DVD to make sure it was working right. I purposely chose another LG DVD, knowing it would have a similar setup (i.e. 59 hours of trailers, plus the commentary warning). Anyway, the title I chose was High Tension, so it was fitting that this film turned out to have a similar (but far, far worse) “copout” ending.

The commentary is equally repulsive, as the directors seemingly have no idea that they have made the dumbest fucking horror movie in ages, and instead tell us how much people liked the shot of the Eiffel Tower (never seen it before in a Paris set film, thanks guys!) and inadvertently not only revealing how long this filth has been on the shelf, but also how little they understand about the concept of time:

Director 1: “We shot this right after 9/11...”
Director 2: “2005?”

Nice work. Not only does one of these schmucks think 4 years is “right after” a tragedy that has ZERO fucking relation to the movie (he brought it up because there’s an airport scene), but we also know that it took at least 2 years (giving them a generous amount of time to edit) for even Lionsgate, who will distribute home movies of your kid’s birthday if anyone with a mask appears in it, to finally toss this one out to the masses. Later on the track, they blame the death of producer Gregg Hoffman (which was in 2005) and the studio’s focus on the Saw films for a good chunk of the delays, but they also boast that because of the latter, they were able to take their time to edit the film, without interference from anyone. I was considering maybe the studio re-edited this into the mess that it is, but nope! They also contradict themselves on this matter, claiming at another point that they were “rushed” in the post production process regarding the sound mix.

I really fucking hate this movie.

What say you?

*Ryan also just informed me that heavy profanity will result in your website not being tracked by certain search engines. So uh... yeah I'm pretty fucked I guess.


{[['']]}

Hatchetman (2003)

FEBRUARY 14, 2008

GENRE: CRAP, SLASHER
SOURCE: DVD (STORE RENTAL)

When you rent a film from Blockbuster, you have the option of keeping it after a week or two. The price is on the receipt, it’s usually like 19.99 or 24.99. Well, keeping Hatchetman would have set me back a whole 3.99, which was a pretty good indicator of its worth. What I mean to say is: this movie is fucking worthless.

Unlike yesterday’s goofy Backlot Murders, this movie appears to take itself seriously. This is a problem when it’s completely fucking stupid. The problems are evident from the start: a girl gives her boyfriend a tie as a one year anniversary gift, we see the most matter of fact, half-assed mugging in cinematic history (“Give me money!”, the mugger yells. “OK, fine”, the girl replies, as if he was just a rather pushy Salvation Army Santa), and the one kill scene in the first 20 minutes has no buildup or anything associated with decent filmmaking.

Even stupider, the film is about a killer that seems to be specifically stalking the dancers from a sleazy strip club in LA. Nothing wrong with that, but they all seem to live together too! And seemingly all of the other people who live in the apartment complex frequent the joint. Even this would be fine if the two places were next door to one another (nothing beats proximity!) but they appear to be not even within walking distance of each other, as getting rides to and from work/home make up more than a couple conversations. But at least those conversations have something resembling a point, at one point the resident bitchy character enters Final Girl’s apartment for no reason other than to announce she’s going to work. Let’s ignore the fact that they don’t even like each other, but who the fuck walks into someone’s home just to tell them what they are doing without them?

Also, strangely, one of the most annoying things about the movie is the amount of nudity. For the first hour, every other scene is of the women stripping and “dancing”. But the film doesn’t seem sleazy, in fact they actually go out of their way to make the film seem a bit dramatic (after all, our Final Girl is trying to get into law school, of course, and there’s many scenes revolving around whether or not her relationship with Tie Guy is going anywhere). If any of this was presented as tongue in cheek, it would be fine, but since everyone’s so serious, it just becomes dull and pointless, and fast. You hate to think gratuitous nudity actually slows a movie down, but Hatchetman manages to do just that.

And take a look at this guy. Get a good look.


If you’re ever unfortunate enough to watch this film, at least now you are prepared for the sight of the single most annoying character in horror movie history. I’m not joking. It’s rare I loathe anyone so much in a movie, but this guy made me want to literally go back in time to when the film was being shot and convince the writer to brutally kill the guy in the film’s opening scene. Naturally, he’s the very last victim in the film. Thanks a lot, assholes.

The police are the most inept in cinema history too, at one point or another they manage to accuse, arrest, or just kill every single guy in the movie EXCEPT for the one who’s the actual killer. Worse, when the killer is revealed, not only does he keep his mask on for another 10 minutes even though we know who it is, he also reveals a motive that doesn’t make any fucking sense. Apparently his mother was a stripper and he hates her and every other stripper too. Fine, but why did he go to the strip club early in the movie without any problem whatsoever? You’d think if the simple idea of it upset him to the point of murder, he’d at least be frowning when actually watching it and paying 7 bucks a beer to boot. In fact, his identity is actually revealed a bit sooner, once we learn he lives near the woods, since the film’s poster and DVD menu feature a killer standing in the middle of a forest, despite the fact that the entire film up until that point takes place in either a strip club, an apartment complex, or a standard office building subbing for the LAPD precinct.

The film also contains the worst digital blood in movie history:

It’s fucking blue for Christ’s sake!

The only thing I liked about this movie was a scene where a guy explains a cable splitter to another. As a fan of all types of AV components and adapters, I am pretty sure it was the first time I have seen an RF coaxial splitter used in a film. Nice. I also appreciate that there were no trailers for even worse films at the head of the DVD, something that’s almost standard with this type of DTV crap. Hilariously, the disc’s one extra feature is listed as “Trailers” (plural) on the main menu, and if you click on it, you just get a link for one trailer (for a movie about Boris Yeltsin, of all people). Nice work guys.

Fuck this stupid movie. 3.99? It’s still overpriced.

What say you?

{[['']]}

Lake Placid 2 (2007)

FEBRUARY 10, 2008

GENRE: CRAP, MONSTER

SOURCE: DVD (STORE RENTAL)

I think I killed Roy Scheider.

As I was watching Lake Placid 2, I commented how it made the original (which I wasn’t a big fan of either, though Brendan Gleeson was pretty awesome, as usual) look like Jaws in comparison. Then a few hours later I went to my PC and saw that Scheider had died a few hours earlier. Sorry.

Of course, the movie is supposed to be as funny as it is scary – but it doesn’t work in that matter either. Cloris Leachman replaces Betty White (she plays the original character’s sister) and her wicked old lady routine is supposed to amuse, but it doesn’t at all, and neither does anyone else. The only actual laugh I got out of the entire film is when some EPA guy picks up his dead friend’s leg and waves it around in a “Do you believe me NOW!” type moment. 1 laugh, 0 scares, 88 minutes. You do the math (if I provided enough information to solve the problem).

Suffice to say, Lake Placid 2 is a really fucking terrible movie, even by Sci-Fi standards. It’s not even goofy fun like the original or the average ‘original’ Sci-Fi film. Headless Horseman may not have been a classic, but I was at least entertained and the production value was high. This can’t even manage that, as (painfully obvious/bad) CG is not only used for every single shot of the damn croc, but even a goddamn seaplane (and they actually manage to make the plane look faker than the crocodile!). At least the CG editor knew how bad the plane looked, since after it docks it promptly disappears from every shot it should be in until they actually use it again. Nice work. And while they actually do a decent job of pretending that Bulgaria is Maine, the over abundance of Bulgarian cast members with thick Bulgarian accents sort of ruins the faƧade.

But abysmally bad production value on every level isn’t what sinks this film. What really brings it down (besides blatantly copying the character types from the original – Bill Pullman and Brendan Gleeson are combined into John Schneider, Sam McMurray plays an Oliver Platt clone, and some broad I’ve never heard of is the poor substitute for Bridget Fonda) is how nonchalant everyone is when they see this gigantic crocodile bearing down on them. Granted, there was nothing there (there’s a hilarious moment where a guy swings a stick, and we even hear it connect, but the stick doesn’t hit anywhere near the CG croc), and the damn thing’s size changes from shot to shot, but for Christ’s sake, ACT! At one point they simply sit there and watch the croc swim up and then demolish the boat they are sitting on; I don’t think they even bother to scream. Everyone is so matter of fact during the attack scenes that you can almost forget that they are in danger at all. If they aren’t scared (or fuck, even ENGAGED), why the hell should I be?

Sadly, the only frightening things in the film are Schneider’s hair:

And this dude’s bizarre chest hair patterns:

Another annoyance is the film’s ending. After Schneider delivers a record three (THREE!) one-liners to the crocodile and finally kills it, the movie drags for another 3-4 minutes as we learn that Schneider and the EPA chick are going to go out for dinner, and that his son is going to hook up with the girl who lives next door. Guess what, whoever wrote this crap – no one gives a rat’s ass about a single non-crocodile character in this film. Once the last croc is dead, the movie is over. If you’re going to keep it going, at least add in a little set up for the 3rd film, however unwanted it may be.

The disc also has 3 featurettes of equal value to the film itself (so, none whatsoever). One is a fast forwarded version of the film that only plays the parts with tits and gore, but since these moments are so botched those aren’t worth watching either; you’ll want to fast forward this version as well. The other two are just more or less clip reels. Thanks for wasting even more of my time, FOX (or Sony, whoever had the final say in this joint release). The only worthwhile thing on the entire disc is a spot for some Sam Jackson/Josh Hartnett movie that has 1.2 seconds of my beloved Rachel Nichols contained within; though that’s hardly enough to warrant even renting this goddamn abomination.

What say you?

{[['']]}

The Attic

DECEMBER 28, 2007

GENRE: CRAP, PSYCHOLOGICAL
SOURCE: DVD (OWN COLLECTION)

I don't even know who sent me The Attic. It came sans press notes or any sort of information at all. The mailing address just had the PR company that handles lots of outlets, so that was no help. I don't even know if I was supposed to review it for this or Bloody D. Well at any rate, whoever sent it should be tried for war crimes.

The terribleness of the film was made even more excruciating by the fact that I was actually somewhat excited to see it. It was directed by Mary Lambert, one of the few female horror directors of note, thanks to the Pet Sematary movies and the slightly-better-than-expected Urban Legend 3. Also, it starred not only John Savage, but Catherine Mary Stewart (the hot blond from Weekend At Bernies, whom I hadn't seen in a film since) and unconventionally hot Elizabeth Moss, who was on the highly missed Invasion for a few episodes. All in all, I expected something at least on par or above the quality of your average DTV movie.

But no. This is the type of movie where you can't even begin to understand why it was made, or how it attracted the talent (as C-list as they may be) that it did. There's no point, no originality, and certainly nothing even approaching suspense or scares. No, the film is largely comprised of scenes with little to no sort of cohesion or narrative flow between them. A scene will end with two characters at odds with each other; in the next scene they'll be completely fine. The main character, who has been seeing a Doppleganger outside (that's pretty much the extent of the plot, by the way), will say "I am staying in here until someone believes me!" when no one has given her any doubt, about anything, in the previous few scenes. At one point, they cut to a cat running down the stairs, despite the fact that at no point before (or after) was it established that they even OWNED a goddamn cat. And making matters worse, that's pretty much the whole scene. Daytime, stuff happens; nighttime, a cat runs down the stairs; then it's daytime again. The cat is never seen again. OK.

Like Devil Times Five, the film's screenwriter gave himself
a role as a retarded man. You can make the joke.


In terms of offering the viewer any sort of reward for sitting through all this crap, let's see... one throat slashing, not too bad. And then... oh wait, no, that's it. There's a few shootings and a wholly off-screen sex scene as well; both are even lamer than they sound. The other 80 minutes are just Moss yelling or whining about being agoraphobic and some nonsense about a forgotten twin. And the "twist" ending of the film pretty much invalidates most of the "action" in the film anyway.


And what the hell is the point of this? It's kind of hard to tell from one image, but when you're watching it (if you are unfortunate enough to do so), it's obvious that the guy is green-screened into the shot. But why? It's a fucking house! They couldn't put him in the house (or even A house, it's not like anyone would notice if the decorations on the wall changed) to say his dumb lines? Lucas at least composites people into other planets or alien deserts and things like that, not a standard Victorian living room.

Oh well, at least it was anamorphic.

What say you?

{[['']]}

Terror Toons

DECEMBER 12, 2007

GENRE: COMEDIC, CRAP, WEIRD
SOURCE: DVD (BUDGET PACK 3!!!)

The best, and pretty much only, good thing I can say about Terror Toons is that it’s the best movie I have seen so far on the Decrepit Crypt set. Out of two.

Otherwise it’s just a mess. I THINK it’s supposed to be funny, but it’s not, which makes about 90% of the movie fail from the start. We have guy in drag playing the mother of two girls who are supposed to be like 16 and 18, played by 20 and 34 year olds, respectively. OK. The plot about cartoon villains invading the real world is even stupider than it sounds, and the effects, cartoonish or not, look like shit.

Granted, there is a certain charm at times to the film, particularly in the opening sequence, which combines intentionally (I think) childish 2D cel animation with a “torture” scene, but it’s nowhere near enough to make the film even remotely worth watching. After that scene, it’s just one painfully unfunny scene after another, without a single thing such as inventive gore, wit, or even competent filmmaking to make up for it.

Also, cinema’s worst Devil. Ever.

The sad thing about this is that this movie was pretty much the only one on the set I had ever heard about before (not counting Matthew aka Scream Bloody Murder), and even looked forward to seeing it. Anyone who knows me or has read my reviews that allude to my cartoon knows how much I love the idea of combining humor and horror via animation. And yet the movie botches so much, I barely even THOUGHT about my own creation while watching this goddamn thing. I’m a pretty self-deprecating guy, but even I can safely say I could do a lot better than this.

Some folks I talked to (OK, one) got this mixed up with Evil Toons; which is pretty much the same movie from what I can gather. But it can’t possibly be worse, right? Anyone care to elaborate?

And I know someone else has the Decrepit set... tell me these are among the worst on the set, because if not I don’t think I will be able to get through the whole thing. I’ve already put the box back on my shelf at home rather than in my desk at work (which is where I would watch them, if ever).

What say you?


{[['']]}

Before I Die (2003)

DECEMBER 11, 2007

GENRE: ANTHOLOGY, CRAP
SOURCE: DVD (BUDGET PACK 3!!!)

Wow, a bad anthology movie? No! They’re always so great! Especially no-budget horror ones like Fright Club and House Of The Dead!

That enough sarcasm? Good. Let’s get to tearing apart Before I Die, a god awful piece of worthless shit that has set the bar insanely low for the Decrepit Crypt of Nightmares set (it was the first movie I watched out of the 50).

Filmed with what looks like a VHS camcorder from 1988, this movie is so mind numbingly dull and amateurish, it is borderline inconceivable that anyone involved in the film’s production had the drive to finish it at all once they began editing it together, and even more shocking that anyone, even Mill Creek, would put their name on it and distribute it.

The best thing you can say about it is that it’s somewhat short, clocking in around 80 minutes. They will FEEL like much more, but that’s neither here nor there. There are three stories here, each one marginally better than the one before it, simply because it’s shorter. Thus, the worst/longest comes first, a succubus tale with “comic” elements, mostly from a really horny guy that looks like the love child of Harold Ramis and someone who you might see on a local car dealership on Sunday morning TV.

Now, I hate to make an attack on someone’s physical appearance, but honestly, there’s no way around it: the girl playing the ‘temptress’ is one of the least attractive women I have ever seen in a film. This poses a problem for both the film itself (why would anyone want to fuck this woman at all, let alone follow her around the town as Ramis-lite does?), and for the audience (why would anyone want to see her engaging in sexual activity???). Ugh.

Some 4000 hrs, or 40 minutes, later, the 2nd story begins. This one is also highly sexually charged, as a couple goes to a remote vacation spot and proceed to fuck each other several times, in between bouts of oral sex (the guy's dick must resemble red gravel by the end of the 2nd day). After a while, they start hallucinating and then a giant head yells at them and they leave. The end. I couldn’t even begin to tell you the point of this one.

The third story is the best, and not only because it’s the shortest. This one features some actual action (a couple of slashings in the first few minutes!) and the cast’s only attractive female, who also spends a good deal of her running time in the buff. Thank Mill Creek for small favors. Unfortunately, this one also has the worst technical gaffes, such as a 3 shot stabbing sequence in which the knife is shown being held 3 different ways. Like some other anthology films, this one also ties in a bit to the wrap-around story, but it’s so dumb (not to mention a bit repulsive) it’s not even worth mentioning.

This guy must have gone to Castleton...

The wrap-around, I will mention, is a writer trying to write a followup to his book (movie? magazine? blog?) "Horrortales" or some shit like that. He spends the first 5 minutes of the film unnaturally talking to himself (read: the audience) as he explains what he’s doing, why he needs to do it, etc. Damn, if only film were a visual medium, these things could be conveyed without having a guy say things like “I have writer’s block. I need to get around it. What did I do last time I wrote?” to no one in particular!

The sound is all recorded through the camera, the actors are all terrible at best, the makeup effects are as inept as they come, and the myriad attempts at humor all fall flat. The same could be said about two films I made in high school, so maybe I should give Mill Creek a call and see if they’ll distribute them on their next budget pack. I think I’d be pretty psyched if, 20 years from now, some dude who was carrying on my e-legacy and literally watching any piece of shit horror movie he came across tore my own amateur movie apart.

50 movies for 20 bucks means you pay about 40 cents per movie. In this movie’s case, I am pretty certain that effectively put them back in the black.

What say you?

{[['']]}

Ice Spiders

DECEMBER 5, 2007

GENRE: CRAP, MAD SCIENTIST, MONSTER
SOURCE: DVD (STORE RENTAL)

Had I known that Ice Spiders was a goddamned Sci-Fi original movie, I wouldn’t have rented it. Granted, at some point I will run out of horror movies to watch if I keep this up, so I can’t exactly be choosy, but for the love of God, 99% of all Sci-Fi movies are the exact same goddamn thing anyway. And all the clues were there: rated R for “Creature violence” and nothing else (even a few damns and hells will get you a language note), a team of military guys figuring into the plot, and a running time that is just shy of 90 minutes. So I have only myself to blame, as it's only when they break out of this mold that they occasionally make something that is worth my while (like Headless Horseman, a film that I actually thought WASN'T a Sci-Fi original, since it was actually a lot of fun, but then I was (pretty rudely) corrected by my old pal Anonymous).

Still, I can’t help but be a little curious about a film that has not one, not two, but THREE Melrose Place alums in it. Patrick Muldoon (some guy that fucked Jane, if memory serves), Vanessa Williams (Rhonda: the first cast member to leave, if memory serves), and Thomas Calabro (Michael: the only cast member to remain with the show from pilot to finale, if memory serves) are all here, though Calabro and Muldoon don’t share any scenes together. Any one episode of Melrose was vastly more entertaining than this (except for maybe the ones when it first started, when everyone liked each other. Show got way more awesome once they all started fucking and/or killing one another), so it’s a shame they couldn’t bring some of its charm along. Nor can Muldoon, who was probably cast for the Starship Troopers connection more than anything else (his attempts at playing a burnout ski bum are atrocious and distracting), can’t be bothered to do anything as awesome as he did in that film (namely, getting his fucking brain sucked out).

The CG is occasionally decent; which leads me to believe that perhaps a few different FX houses worked on it, some clearly more concerned with the quality of their work than others. Here’s a few examples:

Not too bad at all.

Meh.

Are you fucking kidding me?

And once again, we have a shitty horror movie set at a ski resort. It is simply amazing how no one can manage to wring one iota of suspense when combining something as usually upsetting as a monster or a killer, in this case giant spiders (especially giant spiders that are still sort of tiny – it’s not like they are big enough to knock over skyscrapers), with skiing (one of the most dangerous sports ever when you think about it), but Ice Spiders joins Shredder and Iced in the bottom of the barrel. There’s an occasional moment of fun, such as when one moron skier plows directly into a spider that’s just finished eating a guy, but it’s nowhere near enough to save it from the tedium, horrible acting, laughable CG, annoying characters, etc.

Plus, they don’t even take advantage of something that I would think would be an obvious set piece. Skiers, shockingly enough, wear ski boots. Anyone who has ever skied knows what walking is like with these goddamn things on. So do they have a scene where a guy tries to run but is forced to do that weird stilted thing you call walking when you have the damn boots on? Nope. In fact, everyone seems to be wearing regular footwear, as they run constantly without any sort of problem. Dumbasses.

In all fairness, I would like to point out that this scene almost elevated the movie out of “Crap”. I must admit, I have never before seen someone wield a trophy in order to attack a badly composited spider. They don’t call them Sci-Fi “originals” for nothing I guess!

Also, the DVD is in 5.1 but all the sound is compressed into the front left and right. The surrounds don’t do shit. There’s a scene with a lot of machine gun fire and it sounds like it’s coming out of headphones. Fuck you movie, if you can’t even deliver that much.

For no reason I’d like to point out that yesterday’s movie (Ring Around The Rosie) had a trailer for Hostel and today’s movie has a trailer for Hostel 2. Everything is connected!!!

What say you?

{[['']]}

Ring Around The Rosie

DECEMBER 4, 2007

GENRE: CRAP, GHOST (?)
SOURCE: DVD (STORE RENTAL)

Scorsese. Spielberg. Scott (both Tony and Ridley). Stone. And hell, why not: Sonnenfeld. Not only do many of our most revered modern directors apparently have names that begin with the letter "S", but they also all, at one point, put Tom Sizemore in their high profile films. How does a guy go from working with some of the greats to starring in a total piece of shit like Ring Around The Rosie (directed by the non-S Rubi Zack)? Oh, right. Drugs and hookers. Fuck the “this is your brain on drugs” ads, I think the youth of today should just watch Saving Private Ryan and this goddamn thing (or worst, Bottom Feeder) back to back so they can see how truly fucked up their life can become.

At least Bottom Feeder had the good sense to attempt to be fun, and actually include something, you know, HAPPENING every now and then. Rosie does not follow suit. Instead, we have the Jeepers Creepers girl walk around a house getting scared at just about everything, falling down a lot, getting leered at by Sizemore, engaging in uncomfortably close behavior with her sister (there were at least three instances where I thought for sure they were about to start making out), and getting scared at other things. Ironically, I thought the film was going turn out to be a gem, as she begins seeing things and getting spooked almost immediately after arriving at the requisite “inherited old house”, but as anyone else unfortunate enough to have seen this thing already knows, the movie basically peaks at that point, roughly 15 minutes into the film.

I guess when you can’t afford Oliver Hudson you just get this guy?

For the next hour, nothing else happens of note. Literally. Sizemore teaches her how to ride a horse in the film’s biggest action sequence. Then, finally, with about 10 minutes to go, Sizemore suddenly tries to rape the two girls, one of them dies, and then Jeepers girl’s douchebag-y boyfriend shows up and provides a twist ending that is not only stupid but also fails to resolve the film’s central storyline. Some kind souls on the IMDb posted some theories, I just read the first and accepted it as canon just so I wouldn’t have to think about the movie anymore. Let’s just say the movie is a ripoff of A Tale of Two Sisters (the review is linked, but don’t bother reading it, all it says is “I have no idea what I just saw, but I liked it.” I was really lazy that day).

Shockingly, there are FIVE credited writers on this goddamn thing. I think that’s a record for a non Bruckheimer production. I wonder which of them came up with the scene where the douchebag drags a dead deer off the road, or the scene where a bunch of postcards and photos fly around a room for no reason. Was it in the script that two sisters who look a lot alike as children would grow up to look as un-alike as any two women in the entire world possibly can? And who among the five decided that it would be easier to tape a "D" over the "C" in "Candyland" rather than get permission to show it in their shitty movie?

Oh, Sizemore. *shakes head sadly*

What say you?

{[['']]}
 
Support : Creating Website | Johny Template | Mas Template
Copyright © 2011. blog baru buat - All Rights Reserved
Template Created by Creating Website Published by Mas Template
Proudly powered by Blogger