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

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.

{[['']]}

Non Canon Review: My Bloody Valentine (1981)

FEBRUARY 13, 2008

GENRE: HOLIDAY, SLASHER
SOURCE: DVD (OWN COLLECTION)

Fuck you, Paramount. Fuck you in your mountain’s ass! The atrocity that is the Friday the 13th boxed set is nothing compared to the criminally weak treatment that My Bloody Valentine was given for its DVD release. I hope whoever decided “they don’t even need the trailer on this disc” was promptly fired and then shot for good measure. At least some of the F13 movies had commentaries and such. Christ.

See, unlike most of the other slasher films from 1981, My Bloody Valentine is actually quite good even without all of the gore. Something like The Burning or even Halloween II pretty much rely on their gore setpieces to keep viewer interest. But MBV is great fun even with almost zero splatter (with one minor exception, the only blood you see in the film is on already killed folks), all of which was removed by the MPAA (rumored to be around 9 minutes of footage!) for theatrical release, and never restored. Some of the kill scenes are rendered wholly incomprehensible, particularly the death of Howard (which is that one exception to the splatter I mentioned). Instead of, you know, what is happening, you just see a few drops hit the face of one of the heroines and then Howard’s body fall down a shaft. Huh? After about a dozen viewings now I am pretty sure that his body was hung from his neck and then thrown from above, and the impact caused his head to be severed, but when you’re talking about a genre that more or less exists primarily to showcase effects work, cutting it to the point of confusion seems a bit counterproductive.

Luckily, as mentioned, the film works without it. There is quite a lot of character development, but the film never feels slow (there are 3-4 kills by the 40 minute mark). And it’s still one of the only slasher movies with a cast of folks in their late 20s or early 30s (whether they are SUPPOSED to be teens is unknown, everyone refers to them as “kids” but maybe that’s just Canadian slang). I also consider Chief Newby, despite his stupid name, one of the best slasher movie cops ever, up there with Sheriff Garris in F13 part 6 and of course, the patron saint of the horror police force: Sheriff Leigh Brackett.

Also I am forever in love with Cynthia Dale, aka Patty, the hottest slasher victim ever (sorry, Vicky from F13 2):


It also works on a suspense/scare level, which is again, ironically not a strong point of any of these early 80s slashers. The scene of the Miner smashing all of the lights as he heads toward our heroines continues to impress, and the vicious attack on the poor old lady at the Laundromat (and who the hell is Jake, by the way?) is a great setpiece. I also think the mystery holds up, even on repeat viewings there aren’t a lot of “oh why didn’t I notice THAT!” moments, something that cripples Scream on a 2nd viewing (check out how many times Stu and Billy give each other weird looks).

So besides the abhorrent editing, is there anything I don’t like? Well, not really, though a couple things sort of bug me. One is the driving in this movie. Every scene of someone driving involves a car nearly swerving out of control. What the hell is up with these Canadians? I wouldn’t want to drive anywhere near a single character. Also, the accents are distracting, because they are thicker than any other Canada-lensed movie I can remember. I don’t think they ever specify that the film takes place in America or Canada (the town of Valentine Bluffs is fictional, so that’s no help), but still, hearing Axl say “We didn’t knooo waarrr you were!” sort of lessens the impact of the scene. Since they don’t say it’s Canada, I have to assume they are supposed to be Americans (don’t forget, 90% of all movies filmed in Toronto try to pass themselves off as being New York, Boston, etc). I also never got why TJ was so delighted to be climbing that ladder after finding some of his friends dead:


But those are mere distractions (and it's in my contract that I nitpick at least SOMETHING for every review). There’s nothing actually bad about the film other than the editing, and that’s the MPAA’s fault. The recent announcement of a remake is actually good news – maybe Paramount will finally get off their ass and release an uncut special edition DVD of the filjavascript:void(0)m. It’s widely considered one of the better of the genre (Tarantino himself counts it as his favorite slasher, and Entertainment Weekly called it “criminally under-appreciated”).

You may wonder why I haven’t mentioned the theme song. For 14 years now (literally half of my life!) I have been trying to find out who sang the damn thing. No one knows, and the internet doesn’t help, because if you Google “My Bloody Valentine song” all that comes up is either the Irish band or people asking about who sang it. I’ve just about had it. SOMEONE HAS TO FUCKING KNOW!!!

(*Robert Stack voice* UPDATE! Paul Zaza, the film's composer, confirmed via Email that he is both the composer and artist behind the theme song, which is titled "The Ballad of Valentine." I consider the matter closed.)

Speaking of my long association with this film, yes, I first saw it when I was 13 or 14 and have watched it every year since, on my illegal dupe, then on a VHS, and now DVD (maybe next year will be a Blu Ray?). I even wrote a treatment for a sequel when I was like 15, which would involve the staff of the mental hospital where the killer was locked up having a party and then, shockingly enough, being killed when he got out of his room (OR DID HE?). It was pretty awesome, if I do say so myself.

Anyway, I hope you celebrate tonight or tomorrow with a viewing of this classic. Butchering aside, it remains the all time best non-franchise slasher movie and serves as a reminder that you don’t need to have a lot of splatter (or any, in fact) to make an effective one.

What say you?

{[['']]}

Non Canon Review: Black Xmas (2006)

DECEMBER 23, 2007

GENRE: HOLIDAY, REMAKE, SLASHER
SOURCE: DVD (OWN COLLECTION)

You’re goddamn right the source was my own DVD collection! I like Black Xmas, goddammit, and I will defend it to the death! In fact, I even tried picking a fight at last week’s screening of the original by saying, loudly, “Morgan and Wong did it better!”. But no one bit (and for the record, I don’t really feel that way; Clark’s film is better, but Morgan’s is good too), probably because a lot of the haters are likely people who just hate the film without having bothered to watch it and thus don’t know who the filmmakers are.

I really don’t understand why this one gets so reviled. Most fans love the Final Destination films, and this film has a lot of the same elements (ridiculous death scenes with Rube Goldberg style setups, lots of gore, black humor, hot girls), albeit applied to a loose remake of a slasher movie. Bob Clark even gave it his blessing, and he was always a guy who spoke his mind, not a paycheck grabber like Carpenter, which leads me to believe he truly did approve of what they were doing. So what’s the problem, exactly?

Is it a great film? No, not at all. They set up the 2nd killer to be some sort of surprise, but two girls die before the killer escapes. Also, there seems to be two of each girl: 2 bitches, 2 final girls, 2 dumb girls... as hot as they all are, they definitely could have combined a couple of them. And no, it’s not particularly scary (though there are some decent jumps and set-pieces). But really, that’s about it. Otherwise, it’s the exact type of modern slasher I would expect from Morgan and Wong, remake or not.

And as it only retains the basic plot and setting from the original, it can’t really be accused of bastardizing it in the same way the Psycho or Halloween remakes did. Say what you want about the film, but you can’t accuse them of copying the original scene for scene. Like Dawn 04, no characters were retained, no specific set-pieces (all of the murders are different, though the first girl to get killed again ends up in the attic by the window) were copied, the killer has a motive this time, and, unsurprisingly, there is ZERO social commentary (i.e. no abortion talk). Like I said the other day, from a thematic and sensibility standpoint, it’s more of a remake of Silent Night Deadly Night than Black Christmas.

In addition to all the hot girls, there's some bonus incest!

Plus, they do a great job of making the girls even in terms of survival probability. The Final Girl is a bit easy to pick, but the others are equal game, since they are given equal screen-time and also are about the same in terms of how famous they are in real life.

The DVD has some of the usual extras, though I am bummed about the lack of a commentary. It’s also unrated, but I can’t tell what’s different from the theatrical, though I think Michelle Trachtenberg (I’m glad she’s finally old enough that ogling her is OK) has a slightly different death, but that’s about it. I should note that the scenes in the trailer that are missing from the film were in fact only shot for the trailer, without Morgan’s knowledge. However, they do break the norm with a piece about, well, Morgan’s hatred of the film. While technically a making-of piece, he spends most of the time he’s on camera explaining why he hates these types of movies. He also points out that when he makes a movie that he likes (Willard), it bombs, so he has to cater to the audience just to get the opportunity to make something he DOES care about in the future. So there ya go, even the director hates the movie. I truly am the only one in its corner.

What say you?

{[['']]}

You Better Watch Out!

DECEMBER 21, 2007

GENRE: HERO KILLER, HOLIDAY
SOURCE: DVD (OWN COLLECTION)

I should have known from the start... You Better Watch Out! (aka Christmas Evil) is a movie that was recommended to me by someone who didn’t like the end of The Mist, and given to me by someone as an apology for losing my “treasured” Halloween: Resurrection DVD. What kind of pedigree is that for a movie? It’s a wonder I managed to even make it until the end.

The problem with the film is that it doesn’t go far enough in any direction to be worth a damn. It’s not scary or creepy, like your Black Christmases. It’s not overly mean-spirited, like Silent Night, Deadly Night. And it’s not particularly funny, like Black Xmas (or really, any of the other films mentioned). It’s just sort of there. There are attempts to go in these directions, but they are very half-assed, and it’s only in the film’s final 20 minutes that it shows any signs of life (and even then the film is hit or miss). In fact, according to the director, it’s supposed to just be a sort of off-kilter character study (hence the slow pace) about a guy’s mental deterioration, but even as that it doesn’t work, because all of the other elements, light as they are, distract away from this idea. It’s 4 different types of movies in one, and none really deliver.

Like The Burning, nothing much happens for the first hour, and then we get 4 kills at once. But UNLIKE The Burning, the sequence isn’t particularly good, nor does it offer any inventive gore or makeup work. It only sticks out because it’s pretty much the first time in the film that something has fucking happened.

There are a couple of future stars here though. Most famous is Patricia Richardson as the mother of a kid who’s deemed naughty for having poor hygiene and looking at a spank mag (but NOT actually pleasuring himself – which any other writer/director of a Killer Santa movie would surely have done). But also, Raymond J. Barry (who appears in The Ref, a much better “anti-Christmas” movie) shows up as a cop, and Darabont regular Jeffrey DeMunn plays the killer’s brother. So there’s something.

Also this guy. He’s a newscaster, but he looks like a sleazy pimp. And he comes across as sinister. As hilarious as this is, it’s yet another one of the film’s problems – the killer Santa Claus is never as frightening as the creepy Guido that’s merely discussing his crimes. And since almost nothing in the movie is particularly funny either (if anything, it’s sort of sad, since the guy is clearly a bit disturbed and lonely), it succeeds at neither horror or comedy.

But it has its fans, and the DVD (a director’s cut) has a nice collection of extras, including an entertaining commentary by John Waters (I wish he was solo, the director keeps interjecting things that aren’t funny), making it an easy recommend if you like the film (and props for making the deleted scenes anamorphic, something even big budget studio movies don’t often bother to provide). In fact, the most entertainment I got out of the disc was the collection of comment cards from a test audience. Most are negative, unsurprisingly, and many females indicate they want to meet Harry. Whores.

Incidentally, when I bought the original budget pack (Chilling Classics), the description of the set that I read online had this film included, but it was replaced (with what I’m not certain, I figured it out once but have since forgotten), likely due to the rights being bought by another company (in this case, Synapse). So if you have that pressing of the Chilling Classics, you got a good deal: this movie is worth just about 40 cents, and not much more.

What say you?

{[['']]}

Silent Night, Deadly Night Part 2

DECEMBER 19, 2007

GENRE: HOLIDAY, SLASHER
SOURCE: DVD (OWN COLLECTION)

You know, for years I bought into the belief that more than half of Silent Night Deadly Night Part 2 was recycled footage from the first film. Having only seen the film once, nearly 20 years ago, I couldn’t remember much other than it DID indeed have lots of “flashbacks”. Well, now that I’ve seen the film again, I can safely say “Fuck you” to them. For starters, the last bit of recycled footage ends before this film even REACHES its halfway point, and up until that point there is plenty of new footage mixed in with the old footage to boot. And Christ, even some of the “recycled” footage is actually new (the two people fucking in the orphanage, as well as a different actor playing young Ricky at the end of part 1). It’s still excessive, but wildly over-exaggerated nonetheless.

I WILL complain that the footage suffers from a cinematic pet peeve of mine: flashbacks from a character who wasn’t present when they occurred. Ricky (the brother of the killer from the first film) is the one telling these stories, and even if we assume that Billy, for some reason, told Ricky the story of his father being shot and his mother being sexually assaulted and stabbed on Christmas eve at some point, he certainly wouldn’t have been able to tell him about his exploits as the killer Santa, since Billy was shot and killed before ever speaking to Ricky again. And on top of that, these flashbacks also include scenes that Billy HIMSELF wasn’t even around to see. And they even try to explain this at first (Ricky says things like “Billy told me…”), but they give up after a while.

Lots of movies threaten this, but never follow through.

There are also some bizarre errors in the flashbacks. For example, Father O’Brien, the deaf priest who was shot in the first film after being mistaken for the killer, has become Kelsey the Janitor in this film? Why change that? A dead priest is way more crassly hilarious than a dead janitor. And why does Mother Superior look like she was burned when we are told she suffered a stroke? On the other hand, they also re-edit the antler scene in a manner that makes a hell of a lot more sense; making it seem that her boyfriend DOES hear the sound of her being thrown around and screaming. Nice work.

Also, at one point, Ricky goes to see Silent Night, Deadly Night, which defies pretty much all laws of cinematic physics. It’s one thing when the characters in H20 watch Scream (a film in which the characters watch Halloween), it’s another when a character goes to see the first film in his own series.

Hilariously enough, in addition to the 2 writers of the first film, there are FOUR credited writers with the story of this film, which is pretty astounding when the entire story of the new footage is “Ricky talks to a shrink, kills him, then goes and kills Mother Superior”. There are some other murders, including one committed by a “teen Ricky” who looks much older than the actor playing “older Ricky”. And, keeping with the series’ tradition, he looks absolutely nothing like any of the other actors who played the character – which totals about 6 at this point (7 if you count Bill Moseley, who played him in part 3). But these elements aren’t exactly story-heavy, amounting to nothing more than random killings; nothing that you’d need four people to come up with at any rate. Did each guy tackle a scene?

Cleanest decap in cinema history!

While nowhere near as awesome as the first, the sequel carries on the tradition of this reprehensible series pretty well, in my opinion. It’s just as ridiculous, mean-spirited, and downright wretched as the original, only less funny (“Garbage Day!” sequence aside). In fact, it almost seems at times that the filmmakers were trying to make the film too legitimate, what with diopter shots and lots of camera movement. Come on guys, no one is going to use this on their reel; just have some fun (i.e. kill more people for no reason).

What say you?

{[['']]}

Non Canon Review: Silent Night, Deadly Night (1984)

DECEMBER 18, 2007

GENRE: HOLIDAY, SLASHER
SOURCE: THEATRICAL (REVIVAL SCREENING)

At long last... I have seen Silent Night, Deadly Night in its proper context: in a theater, with 300 other people in various levels of sobriety (I was sadly completely sober, having flew over to the New Beverly from work and parking so quickly that I didn’t notice the no parking sign; my devotion to the film has now cost me an additional 45 dollars). Of all the times I have seen the film, it has never been with more than one or two others, and seeing it with a big group of like-minded folks is of course is part, if not most of the fun.

The film was actually picketed against when it was released in 1984, mostly by mothers (or, more likely, embittered women who never managed to put their shrill and sad attitudes aside for long enough to get knocked up) who objected to the ads depicting Santa Claus with an axe. Clearly, this could damage a young child, one who would be much better left at home alone while his mother picketed a movie she hadn’t seen so she could avoid basic parenting. This resulted in the film being pulled from theaters after a week or so, so thanks a lot, whores. Hell, according the liner notes in the DVD, the film never even played in LA, making this screening all the more exciting.

For the rest of the people in the world who aren’t complete idiots and at least WATCHED it before making an opinion, this movie is a delightfully wretched piece of mean-spirited cinema. Bad Santa could only WISH it was as gleefully cruel as this movie. “I’m on my lunch break”??? That’s got nothing on a group of kids seeing not one but TWO Santas (one a kindly deaf priest!) get shot to death in front of their eyes on Christmas day.

Of course, the most terrifying scene in the film is the one early on with the kid’s grandfather, a man who momentarily springs out of his comatose state to warn his grandson that Santa is coming to kill him later on. The look on this guy’s face and his delivery is nothing short of astounding, and sets the tone nicely for the classless joy that follows. Over the course of the next 80 minutes, we get plenty of gratuitous nudity, 30 year old bullies stealing sleds from 20 year old children, a truly bizarre montage of our eventual killer learning how to work in a toy store, sadistic nuns, a beheaded snowman… GOD I LOVE THIS FUCKING MOVIE.

I also noticed for the first time how many ties it has to the Halloween sequels. The Lily Tomlin-ish chick from part 4 who transfers Michael in the opening scene shows up as the toy store owner’s girlfriend, Leo Jeter (aka Curse’s Barry Simms) plays the boyfriend in the infamous antler scene, and Don Shanks (Part 5’s Michael) did some of the stunts. Weird. Speaking of the antler scene, the other day I pointed out how Jeter’s terrible peripheral vision was topped in Toe Tags, but looking at it again, I think it might be a tie:

How the FUCK does he not see her???

When I first saw this film as a 6 year old (I’ll say it again – my mom rules), I seriously believed that the filmmakers had to wait years to finish the film in order to give time for the kid playing Billy to age from 7 to 12 to 18. Of course, looking at it now, even if such nonsensical filmmaking tactics were true, they certainly wouldn’t be the case here, as the 3 actors couldn’t look LESS alike. I also like how my 6 year old self was smart enough to understand that it was only a movie (I still believed in Santa for another 3 years) but yet was stupid enough to think a film would be filmed in chunks over the course of a decade to accommodate the actor’s aging.

Maybe it's the habit... but I think Sister Margaret is hot.

This classic was just re-released on DVD, with some excised footage restored (though from a different video source, so it looks kind of stupid), but the original release had the sequel on the other side. Since I’ve only seen the sequel once (when I was like 8) I think I’ll make it tomorrow’s regular movie. Sadly, none of the other sequels (including part 5, which starred Mickey Rooney, who was one of the biggest protesters against the first film, going so far as to call the filmmakers “scum”) have ever hit DVD, and I think the pressing with 1 and 2 is now out of print. But really, in the end all you need is the original. The upcoming remake is wholly unnecessary, because unless they get someone with the appropriately sick sense of humor (like Joe Lynch and the Wrong Turn 2 team, or maybe even someone without any horror 'cred', like Louie CK), they will likely opt to make it more accessible to mainstream audiences and thus less awesome. As far as I am concerned, we already got a remake of sorts with Black Xmas (which thematically had more in common with this than the original Black Christmas, in my opinion). And if any of the people reading this review knew (or in fact, IS) someone who protested the film back in the day, I have a message for them/you: Get a sense of humor.

What say you?

{[['']]}

Non Canon Review: Black Christmas (1974)

DECEMBER 18, 2007

GENRE: HOLIDAY, SLASHER
SOURCE: THEATRICAL (REVIVAL SCREENING)/DVD (OWN COLLECTION)

Ladies and Gentlemen, I give you Black Christmas, Horror Movie A Day’s first dual source movie!

As I was stuck at work, I missed the first 50 min or so of the film’s annual screening at the New Beverly. Of course, the two years before I missed it entirely, so at least I am improving. Anyway, I rewatched the first part of the film on my DVD, which, now that I have an HDTV, I notice has quite a bad transfer. Overly grainy and suffering from frame stutter (not to mention an over-matted transfer, though you can’t really tell), it’s pretty disappointing, especially coming home from seeing a pristine film print.

Anyway, the film itself is of course, quite revered, and rightfully so for the most part. While I never shined to the film’s odd pace and tonal shifts (the silly “F-E-llatio” scene is immediately followed by Peter practically threatening to kill Jess for considering an abortion), the phone calls remain suitably frightening, and the POV scenes, unheard of at the time, hold up quite well despite 30 years of being copied to some extent.

I also kind of dig the movie’s insistence on not resolving a goddamn thing. The killer is never identified or caught, the subplot about the dead little girl in the park is never really proven to be a red herring or a related incident, there are no characters named Billy or Agnes, etc. I’m surprised they even bothered revealing the source of the phone calls, since by that point it’s largely incidental and obvious anyway. But one thing I DON’T care for is the abrupt conclusion with Peter suddenly showing up and then exiting the film offscreen. I guess it’s supposed to add to the ambiguity, but it doesn’t quite feel that way. It feels more like they didn’t have time or just plain forgot to film the whole scene.

Margot Kidder (way hotter here than in Superman, for the record) plays one of my favorite slasher characters of all time. Often drunk and swearing, she’s pretty much the type of girl I’d hang out with and get rejected by for being too nice. A shame she goes to bed like 20 minutes into the damn movie and doesn’t appear again until her death scene. The guys who did the remake tried to get her to play the house mother, but she declined, so we had to settle for Andrea Martin.

Seeing the film with a crowd is pretty joyous – especially final scene, when everyone just suddenly up and leaves poor Jess by herself. The crowd was in stitches, and for good reason; it’s fucking hilarious. Of course, the ineptitude of the cops provides a lot of the film’s highlights (not to mention the fact that if they were doing their jobs right they would have found poor Claire and Ms. Mac up in the attic and thus prevented most of the film from ever occurring). Nash in particular is the dumbest movie cop of all time, making even Dewey from Scream look competent in comparison.

Bad transfer aside, the DVD has a lot of good extras, though sadly no commentary and very little input from Bob Clark, who died a few months after this non-definitive release (making this year’s screening all the more somber, as he often attended for Q&A; this year was John Saxon as well as Zach Ward who was in Clark’s other holiday classic, A Christmas Story). Maybe in 2009, for the 35th anniversary, they will compile all of the releases into one whole 2 disc package, with a new transfer that does the film better justice. Here’s hoping!

Also, according to the IMDb and Wikipedia (two of the most reliable sources of information in the world), NBC pulled this off the air during a showing because people complained it to was “too scary”, which is like taking MST3k off for being too funny. Considering that the phone calls, the only scary parts of the movie really, had to have been edited down to nothing for a primetime broadcast, you gotta wonder just how lame people were back in the 70s.

What say you?

{[['']]}

October Extras #32 - Halloween (1978)

OCTOBER 31, 2007

GENRE: SLASHER
SOURCE: DVD (OWN COLLECTION)
LAST SEEN: 2006 (THEATRICAL)

In the FAQ, which I am beginning to suspect no one has actually read (considering THREE people just this week were unaware that I truly AM watching a horror movie or two every single day, not just reviewing one from memory), I specifically point out Halloween as being a film that I won’t review, because not only have I seen it (obviously), but there are enough reviews of it on the web. But then I began doing the “October Extras” feature, and obviously I wouldn’t let the film’s namesake holiday pass without giving it another look. But, to make things different, I won’t review it or even do my usual style of write-up for the film. Instead I’ll be presenting my rambling thoughts as the film unfolds. I hope it makes sense (might help to put the film on as you read!). Enjoy (it's fucking LONG though)!

OK, here we go... Compass International... and there’s the pumpkin! Halloweens 1-5 all have really sweet credit sequences (Dimension – fucking it up any way they can), most involving pumpkins. Also the music, still the finest theme ever recorded for a horror movie. Carpenter told a story about an exec passing on the film when she saw it without the score, then came back and told him it was the scariest movie she ever saw once she saw it again with the score intact..... I never understood what these kids were saying until DVD came along (there’s a few lines in the film that suffer the same fate).... it’s kind of a stupid poem...

Holy FUCK this guy is a quick lay. Seriously, like, what, 60 seconds has passed and he’s already dressed again? Hahaha the mask POV... I saw Halloween 4 before I first saw this movie, so the great homage at the end of 4 was totally lost on me. Oh well....

HAHAHAH the total non-reaction of Michael’s mom always kills me. Just stands there, hands in her pocket... 15 years later! Loomis! I fucking HATE how they added in “storm” sounds on the new DVD... but it’s either that or watch the film in mono. Come on now.... why does he even look at the matchbook? “Since when do they let them wander around?” Hahahaha oblivious....

Wow she is a really odd panic driver.... just hit the brake, dummy!.... Another bonus of DVD, seeing the wrench in Michael’s hand when he smashes the window... “The evil is gone!” and so begins Loomis’ obsession with saying “Evil” every other time he speaks.

This is actually my favorite piece of music in the film (really soft, over Laurie's introduction), and the sequels sort of ignore this one for whatever reason. I think it’s the most foreboding, even more than the usual DUN! DUNDUN! DUN! DUNDUN! DUNDUNDUNDUNDUN... here’s the West LA neighborhood scene. When I first moved to LA in 2005 it was pretty much the first thing I did, go look at all the filming locations I could find (also where Fletch’s apartment was!)... here’s another one of those lines that I always misheard on muddled VHS, I thought Tommy was asking “Will you rape me?” Hahaha, I’m surprised Zombie didn’t have her do just that in the remake....

Ah, here we go, the first of what will be many scenes that are TOTALLY FUCKING BOTCHED when you watch the movie in pan and scan. You hear Michael breathing but you don’t actually SEE him on the side of the frame, only Laurie singing her depressing song. Goddamn pan and scan.... Dr Wynn! “For god’s sake Sam he can’t drive a car!” A line that would serve to pretty much ruin the 6th film....

Sweet, the teacher just said “Collins” (that’s me!). What the hell book is she talking about anyway? Kudos to Laurie, she can daydream and still answer the question right. Hey Michael, with his mask on, hours before he steals it. A continuity error that Rob Zombie claims is just a nonsensical plot hole that he intended to correct in his film, which had, among other things, magic walls that reappear after being smashed.... hahah smash the pumpkin! There’s the mask again.... why doesn’t Tommy notice a car following him at like 2 mph?

Here’s another part Zombie bitched about, Loomis calling from the same place Michael got his coveralls. Look around, Rob, do you see a lot of civilization? They’re supposed to be in the Midwest, and it’s the 70s. It’s probably one of the few pay phones there actually WERE from Smith’s Grove to Haddonfield. Christ. I thought I was nitpicky...

Hell with understanding what they were saying, I never even HEARD these cheerleaders until the DVD came long.... why is the dance AFTER Halloween? Oh wait, it’s homecoming, not a Halloween dance. Never mind....

I wonder what Devon Graham looks like? He should be in one of the sequels... Does Annie even LIKE her friends? She just said that talking to Laurie is just as appealing as watching a child sleep. Christ, get different friends then.... OK this part I think was a bit botched. Carpenter’s hilarious cigarette smoke aside, it would have worked better if we never saw that Michael was gone (from Annie’s POV) until Laurie got there. Maybe just me. Oh man, this part... when I saw the film in 2003 on an actual film print, the print was totally messed up, missing lots of frames and such. And so when Annie goes “Bye!” the film jumped ahead like 10 seconds, so Annie was already inside. Perfect timing!.... What the hell time do the kids in Haddonfield begin trick or treating??? It’s like 3 o clock. And what the HELL does this “superstition” line mean? Even Carpenter says he has no idea on the commentary track.

Annie says she’ll pick Laurie up at 6:30, but that scene is totally bright. Looks more like 3:30, tops. Oh well. Charlie Bowles story!!! God this part is great. Someone needs to finish the tale... OK now Laurie is sitting outside with the pumpkin, and I STILL don’t see anyone taking the picture that Jamie has in part 4.

OK now it looks a bit later, still not 6:30 late though. “He shouts too!” is a great line. And kind of sad, last time his daughter speaks to him, she’s mocking his attempts to bond with her. Here’s another moment that totally sucks in pan and scan – you don’t see the car approaching on the left side while Loomis looks the other way... How far is it to the goddamn Doyle house? Hey I drove on this street (when they stop and turn right)! Looks pretty much exactly the same ... jeez, Michael follows so close. Back up, man!

OK, the whole “Sister” thing from the sequels really doesn’t make any sense in the context of this film. Not only did he follow Tommy around before, but he’s also seemingly more interested in Annie!... sweet, the Myers house. This whole reel had a farting noise over it at that screening I mentioned.... Another line I never understood on VHS (“You must think me as a very sinister doctor” I think?)...

Well if your mom doesn’t want you to have the comics why don’t you hide them in YOUR room, dumbass? And what’s so bad about Neutron Man? Sounds like he could learn some basic science from that one.

I love how Lindsay hangs up the phone when Paul asks her to go get Annie. Brat.... this is one of the best scares in slasher history (Michael at the door while Annie talks to Paul), and surprisingly it’s not botched on pan and scan... OK seriously, why not just say Annie was his sister? He doesn’t seem to have any interest in Laurie at all at this point. I like the moment where Annie feeds Laurie some popcorn, nice little touch.... Hahaha I sing this song all the time when I’m going to my car. “OH Paul, I give you all... no keys... but please, my Paul....”

Here’s another widescreen moment, but I’ve seen two versions of it on pan and scan. One holds on Annie so you can’t see him at all, and another just makes an edit as they shift to the left so you can see him sit up. Either way it’s fucking awful. This movie should never be viewed cropped, ever.

Wow, Loomis smiling non-maniacally. “Hey, Lonnie... get your ass away from there!” Hahaha. I like that Brackett thinks Loomis is over the top too. Fancy talk!

If you’ve seen the TV version, this line about Lynda’s blouse takes on new meaning. Not a very interesting one, but one nonetheless... Someone on IMDb commented that Bob is a pedophile because he makes the joke about Lindsay’s clothes. Moron...

Yet another scene that loses all its effect unless it’s widescreen ... and Michael is kind of a perv, watching them fuck.... And now he watches again! Also, Bob comes in 20 seconds. What is it with these guys? If I come in under like 4 minutes I feel ashamed. “Fantastic”??? Man....

The creepiest moment in slasher history.

Whoa, Tommy and Lindsay are sleeping in the same bed! Bob’s going to be jealous.... Oh boy, here we go, the dumbest moment in the film. Loomis is standing there all night and just NOW notices that the fucking car is across the street!!!.... Hey Laurie goes out of her way to get the keys, yet they disappear later... where’d they go?

“Meatheads” is such a terrible insult.... man, why does Michael go through all this trouble stringing up bodies and stealing headstones? And how the hell does the door with Lynda behind it even open?.... This is a great moment, amazing reveal. Cundey said it was like your eyes getting used to the darkness and seeing him. Amazing. But on the newest DVD (25th anniversary one) you CAN’T see him until after you hear the sting. Way too dark now, that’s why I actually prefer the 1999 release.

Hahaha I love how Michael drops when she stabs him with the needle. Dammit, don’t drop the knife!.... OK I never got this – why does Loomis have Brackett check the back of the houses when he’s the one with the car? YOU fucking go out back, Loomis! Oh well, I guess it works out OK for him... Hahaha “You can’t kill the boogeymaaaaaah!” Can’t see this part right on pan and scan either. Carpenter’s just a fucking master of the wide image. Or at least, he was back then... the old Media VHS version had a strange error here. When Michael walks down the hall, the glint on his knife used to smear across the screen. Hurrah for DVD! Ah, the Mackenzie’s, always the destination of horror movie characters.

Hahaha “It was the boogeyman!”, which became, for some reason “What’s the boogeyman?” in the remake.... I dig this ending, with all the different locations... hey wait a minute; the knife is back on the floor by the couch!

Oh well, all done. God this movie is so fucking great. My family has been informed that I am to be buried with it (and a copy of Bat out of Hell). I won’t go anywhere without it! I want all 12 of the people who said the remake was better to explain themselves. What the fuck could you possibly find more appealing about the remake? “I prefer incoherency and white trash to atmosphere and suspense”? *Sigh*

What say you?

{[['']]}

October Extras #31 - Halloween 5 (1989)

OCTOBER 30, 2007

GENRE: SLASHER
SOURCE: THEATRICAL (REVIVAL SCREENING)
LAST SEEN: 2006 (?) (DVD)

I think I just watched Halloween 5 again last year, when the new DVD came out. Or maybe I just watched the commentary. I dunno, who cares. Also, I'd like to point out that the "Revenge of Michael Myers" subtitle does not appear in the actual film, which I never noticed before.

Way to start the review off interesting, huh?

Like H20, 5 has great things, and terrible things, and it really depends on my mood which way I go with it. On one hand, it’s got some great and fairly unnerving sequences (Jamie in the laundry chute, the barn chase, and Rachel’s death), but on the other, its got those goddamn goofy fucking cops (with their even more annoying circus music), one of the series’ most annoying characters (Tina), and the fucking “Man in Black” that served to ultimately destroy the franchise. You can literally pinpoint the second the remake wheels began turning: when the man in black first appears, kicking a dog as he gets off a bus.

Yes, for reasons I forget, someone decided this film needed to begin to boost the mythology of Michael Myers a bit, so we have this mysterious man in black following him around throughout the movie, and shown as having the same tattoo as Michael has apparently always had (and, bonus of the large projection – the symbol appears on the wall at the Myers house near the end. Never noticed before.) At the end of the film, while Michael hilariously sits in a jail cell with his mask still on, the man comes along, fires what looks like a tommy gun into the police station, killing everyone and taking Michael away. Six years later, we found out it was a guy who was in one scene of the original, leading some nonsensical cult. Whatever.

There are so many moments in this film that just baffle me to no end. For starters, how does “Mikey” hear Tina calling him from what appears to be 3 blocks away as he DRIVES A CAR!?!?!? Why does Rachel scream in pain before picking up the phone to tell Loomis that Max is gone? Why does Mikey need to apologize to Sam? Why would Michael drive Tina to her party? Why has the Myers house suddenly become a giant gothic thing (complete with spiral room)? Why does “Cookie Woman” suddenly break Jamie’s mute status? Why does the title card say it’s one year later when everything else (Jamie’s age, the time since the night he first went after Laurie) puts it at two years since 4? Why would someone whose best friend’s family was destroyed by Michael Myers be so insensitive/stupid as to play a prank in which her friend pretends to be him (in front of cops no less)?

Speaking of that friend, has there ever been a stranger character in a slasher movie than “Spitz”? He laughs like Dr. Giggles almost non-stop, sings love songs to another guy when his super hot girlfriend is standing right there, and his name is Spitz. At one point in the film, I began to fear for the characters not because of Michael, but because of him. He seems more unbalanced than Michael and Loomis put together.

And yes, Loomis reaches the apex of his insanity in this one (he would only make one more appearance, in Curse, and was relatively subdued in it, when he wasn’t edited out entirely). He borderline assaults Jamie on more than one occasion, and even holds her up as bait at the end. Most of his dialogue is just beyond any sort of rational thought, and even when he does say something normal, he screams it (“If that GIRL! DIES TONIGHT!!!”). And his odd fascination with a scarecrow sitting outside the hospital always gives me a chuckle.

Before the two films, we were shown a brief little retrospective about their creation, with most of the principals in new interviews, plus archive interviews of those who are sadly no longer with us (Moustapha Akkad and Debra Hill). One notable exception is Dominique Othenin-Girard, who is represented only with archive footage from the set of 5. Come on man, even Carpenter offered a few words, and he had nothing to do with these two! But the real highlight was a disturbing recollection from Danielle Harris (who is so goddamn hot now it’s ridiculous), who talks about how Don Shanks (who played Michael in 5) would give her massages and they’d take photos together... it’s probably quite innocent but it sounds so goddamn creepy (especially if you have seen the 25 Years of Terror documentary, in which the film was revealed to have had a fairly ‘wild’ set). The rest of it was nothing special.

As with Halloween 4, the film looked far from great in the manner it was projected, but the sheer size of it, not to mention seeing it with other people (I don’t think I’ve ever watched this one with even a single other person, let alone a crowd) made it a lot of fun regardless. The occasional top notch set-piece elevates this one, albeit slightly, over the bulk of the ones that followed, but nothing can change the fact that this was officially the end of the series being truly special. Thanks a lot, Halloween 5!

What say you?

{[['']]}

October Extras #30 - Halloween 4: The Return Of Michael Myers (1988)

OCTOBER 30, 2007

GENRE: SLASHER
SOURCE: THEATRICAL (REVIVAL SCREENING)
LAST SEEN: 2005 (?) (DVD)

I remember it vividly... October 17, 1989. I was mad at my mom for renting Halloween 4 instead of The Great Outdoors. “I haven’t seen the first 3” I told her. She said it wouldn’t matter (now that I think about it – it’s kind of odd that a mother would make her kid watch an R rated horror movie instead of a PG comedy, but whatever), so I decided to give it a shot. On my way downstairs to watch it, I slipped and fell down the last 5 stairs, hitting my arm on the marble foyer (eerily – pretty much at the exact moment, the San Francisco earthquake occurred – and no that’s not a fat joke. I’m not even fat!). Assuming the sharp pain running up my arm would go away, I sat down and tried to watch the film. Right around the point where Loomis first appears, I asked my mom to take me to the hospital, which she wanted to do in the first place (I was afraid she’d be mad if it turned out to be nothing).

As it turns out, my arm was broken. I got a cast and went home, watching the rest of the film at my grandmother’s the next day. And while I liked the film, I had no idea that I was getting my first taste of a franchise that would come to pretty much be synonymous with my love of movies (not just horror). While I obviously would have loved to have seen the original without “knowing” that Laurie was Michael’s sister (then again, I am pretty sure the first time I saw the film, it was the TV version that pretty much said as much anyway), I think 4 is a great place to start, as it represents the best of both worlds. It works as a slasher movie; there are a number of deaths in the film, some of which are even a bit gory; but it also works as an homage to the benchmark that the original set. Many will disagree, but Halloween 4 has the most emphasis on suspense over “action” out of any of the sequels, and has decent character development to boot. Dwight Little is easily the best franchise director since Carpenter (and he wasn’t even matched in the ones that followed, let alone topped); the scenes of Rachel and Jamie running around Haddonfield looking for each other are fantastic, drenched with atmosphere (something sorely missing in the other films), not to mention an actual feeling that the film is on Halloween.

Loomis is even more batshit insane in this one (not as much as he is in the next film though), so there’s plenty to enjoy there. He’s seemingly learned from his mistakes (first thing he does is ask the cops to call the TV and radio, something he advised against in the first film), and he’s got a lot of his more memorable lines here (including the immortal “You talk about him as if he were a human being. That part of it died years ago.”). As Brackett’s replacement, Meeker (Beau Starr) is a perfectly good substitution, with little bits of dialogue and character action that help his scenes come to life (necessary, since he’s got to do a lot of the same things Brackett did, right down to finding a dead dog with Loomis).

And of course, the rednecks. Haddonfield seems to be a bit “too” Midwest in this film, as none of the others ever gave off the impression that the little town was populated with such types, but that’s OK. Red, Earl, Al, etc. are a blast, driving around town with their shotguns, half drunk and shooting poor Ted Hollister. Of course, seeing the film with a big crowd makes the scenes even more entertaining, as everyone cheers their fairly ridiculous actions (the scene where they “posse up” is pretty much the funniest thing in horror movie history. “S’go wake up the sheriff!”). And Bucky... well what else needs to be said about him?

You also gotta love the horribly mean little kids Jamie goes to school with. “How can she [make a costume], her mommy’s dead!” “Jamie’s an orphan!!”, etc. Christ! Then later, she even hangs out with one of the little bastards! I’d fucking curbstomp the little prick. Then again, their parents are obviously assholes as well, as they go around town picking up their kids, leaving poor Jamie all alone. Nice.

Some folks dislike the mask in this one, but I’m not sure why. I think it’s pretty creepy. The hair is maybe a bit too neat, but it’s far superior to the ones in the last 2 sequels at any rate, not to mention 5’s ridiculous one. Someone pointed out in one of my other reviews how insensitive it is that the town would carry the mask at all, which is something I never really thought about, but now that I am, I think it’s great. Also, in a brief note about the town’s history – Rachel has a friend named Lindsay and Brady’s buddy is named Tommy... could be Wallace and Doyle, respectively, right? I always think of them that way, anyway.

The DVD projection, as expected, looked pretty bad, and the sound was seemingly in stereo rather than 5.1 (or even faked surround sound), but that’s OK. It was a blast seeing the film projected larger than life, and even though the crowd was nowhere near as big as it was for Halloween III the other night (not to mention last year’s screening of the original), I’m still glad I chose it over some of the other local revival options tonight (such as Nightmare on Elm St 2!).

Of all the sequels, only two of them really felt like they got what made the original work (that would be this and H20), emphasizing suspense and character over kills and gore. And while H20 was dampened by two annoying characters and some now-dated “Scream” style attitude, 4 remains as effective to me today as it was when I first saw it as a kid. And it was pretty much all downhill from there. It’s not a flawless film (I still haven’t a fucking clue what is happening when Loomis shoots at Michael at the gas station) but the last thing you can accuse it of is being lazy. Little and writer Alan McElroy (and the other 3 guys who worked on the story, presumably) really put in the effort to make a film that lived up to the original, and I think they more or less succeeded.

What say you?

{[['']]}

October Extras #27 - Halloween III: Season Of The Witch (1982)

OCTOBER 27, 2007

GENRE: CULT, TECHNOLOGY, WEIRD
SOURCE: THEATRICAL (!!!!)
LAST SEEN: OCTOBER 2006 (DVD)

I must credit the source of today’s October Extra to Ryan Rotten of ShockTillYouDrop.com, who informed me of a theatrical screening of my beloved Halloween III: Season Of The Witch right here in LA. I skipped multiple parties and had to listen to Game 3 of the World Series (which the Sox won, wooo) on the goddamn radio in order to attend this rare event, but I have no regrets at all.

More than probably any other entry in the series, III deserves to be seen with a big crowd and on a big screen. It’s such a delightfully odd and mean-spirited film, there’s no way one could TRULY experience it without the film being presented larger than life, in a room full of appreciative fans. As many times as I have seen the film, I never noticed the totally fake fireman hat in the early hospital scene until it was magnified and pointed out by an audience member. Go back and watch the scene (widescreen version only) after the guy blows up at the hospital, and keep your eye on the fireman on the left. It’s breathtaking in its cheapness.

Also, come on people, let’s be honest: Tom Atkins is Oscar-worthy here. From his rampant hitting on of every woman who crosses his path, to his utterly horrified reaction to a generic cartoon playing at the bar (the one he frequents so much that his co-workers “said he could be found here” – keep in mind he’s a doctor), to his ass scene, the crowd cheered almost every time he appeared on screen. The scene where he calls his wife and tells her he has to go to some medical conference before grabbing a six pack and heading off to visit a mask factory with some chick he just met a few hours before (and of course, nails a few hours later) is possibly the greatest scene in any Halloween film.

Which brings us to the most controversial aspect of the film: the total lack of Michael Myers (something that escaped Roger Ebert, who, in his review, claimed that “the film begins where II left off, with the killer being immolated in the hospital parking lot” – dumbass!). Since we see clips of the original in the film, we are to believe that III exists in the “real world” (if so, I need to buy more 6 packs and make up more medical conferences than I already do), despite retaining the Halloween name. Everyone by now knows that this was Carpenter’s intent all along, to make a different film about Halloween every year, but he was vetoed by the money men and thus left the franchise after this one, and the “franchise entry” Halloween 4 was made, apparently by the people who survived the likely apocalypse at the end of this film. The long running argument is “If they didn’t call it Halloween I would probably like it”, which just speaks volumes as to how ignorant people are. If The Godfather was called “Horse Head In A Guy’s Bed”, I’m pretty sure it would still be a great movie.

Back to the film itself and how amazing it is. Let’s see, we got a kid’s head turning into snakes and insects because a computer chip with a piece of Stonehenge inside it reacted to an epileptic TV commercial, and... well really, what the fuck else do you need out of a movie? Atkins’ ass has already been mentioned.

The film’s most memorable contribution to pop culture is of course, the Silver Shamrock theme. Set to the tune of London Bridge, it is simply impossible to watch the film and not sing along to the ad (which we hear about a dozen times) at least once. Carpenter and Howarth’s score is one of their best collaborations (love the main theme over the computerized pumpkin assembly/credits), and even a die hard Myers fan would be hard-pressed to claim otherwise.

One thing I don’t get about the movie is the timing of the “Big Giveaway”. So this tiny mask company somehow convinced all major networks to show Halloween at the same time across the country (starting at half past the hour no less), and everyone was watching it? At one point, Cochran is told “they” are getting a 41 share, so maybe he owns all the networks and just chose not to sink any of his money into a more impressive factory.

But who cares. I love this movie, and watching in theaters with a couple friends and 30 other like-minded folks was one of the best theater experiences I’ve had this year. Another friend didn’t understand why I would pay 10 bucks and miss out on a party to go see a film I have on DVD (twice in fact) – but people like that just don’t get how important the theatrical experience is in terms of enjoyment. I almost feel bad when I see a film (especially one that wasn’t direct to video) for the first time on DVD. And revival screenings such as this are even more fun, because you get to sort of see the film for the first time again.

I usually never censor my comments, but I will make an exception here – anyone who posts “This movie sucks because there’s no Michael Myers”, even to be sarcastic, that comment will be deleted. I want good feelings and love here! Myers or not, there’s nothing anyone can do to convince me that any of the last 4 films (though H20 I can go either way on) is somehow truer to the spirit of Halloween (the film or the holiday) than III. BUT, if you can explain in a way that has nothing to do with Myers, or the title, why this film is somehow bad, I am all ears. Or, eyes, I guess, in this context.

What say you?

{[['']]}

October Extras #20 - Halloween: Resurrection (2002)

OCTOBER 20, 2007

GENRE: SLASHER
SOURCE: DVD (OWN COLLECTION)
LAST SEEN: NOVEMBER 2002 (DVD)

For all the shit I give Halloween: Resurrection, it’s really not as horrible as I say it is. I once considered it to be the worst slasher film ever made, but I’ve seen many this year (many beginning with the word “Dark”) that are far worse. Where Resurrection fails is not as a slasher film, but as a Halloween film.

Offering the least amount of Halloween atmosphere in any of the films to date (even Zombie’s remake was more successful in this department) and forgetting its own goddamn history (the stuff Howard says at Smith’s Grove is almost entirely inaccurate) is almost forgivable, but the fact that the film is so far removed from what made the original film work is not. It’s even more insulting when you consider that, as far as Dimension is concerned, this is really Halloween 4, not 8 (since 4-6 are ignored and III is in another, well, dimension, entirely), and a direct sequel to one of only two films in the franchise that truly did try to live up to the standards John Carpenter’s film originally established.

Instead, this film is more or less a standard dumb kids slasher movie, complete with sexual hijinks in totally inappropriate situations, nonsensical deaths (there’s like 3 beheadings in this one), an almost total lack of suspense (though to be fair, they DO try a little near the end), and, ironically, a total lack of motive for Michael. Yes, he had no motive in the original and that’s part of what made it work. But that’s no longer the case. Now it is firmly established that he is just out to kill his family. So why, after killing Laurie in the film’s first (and best) 15 minutes, does he focus his attention on a group of college kids who are hosting what would otherwise be the world’s worst reality show in history? They are trespassing? Then why didn’t he kill the folks who spent so much time setting up fake skeletons in the basement and non-stale fennel (you got me) in the kitchen? Why wait until like 10 people were there? Was he just looking for a challenge?

Like all the sequels, there are some random elements from the other films in (mostly botched) attempts to tie it in thematically with the others. Our Final Girl talks about fate with her professor (played by Rick Rosenthal, who with this film became the first and likely last director to come back to direct another in the series); Howard wears a clown mask not totally dissimilar to the one Michael wore when he killed Judith; and the house actually does somewhat resemble the one in the original (a far cry from the gothic mansion in part 5). Well, B for effort I guess, but the rest of your movie still reeks of being written by a machine that read the Wiki entry for the original film.

And what the fuck is with the mask in this one? It looks it has makeup on. I guess it’s a step up from the one in H20, but otherwise, Christ. It’s funny how much people rag on the one in 4, it’s probably the 3rd best in the whole series.

Of course, no review of this film is complete without some making fun of Busta Rhymes. Well, he’s awful. Everyone knows that. He talks to himself constantly, making absolutely no sense half the time; he says mutha-fucka with just about every line (sometimes twice); and yes, at one point he even “pwns” Michael, in a scene so asschristingly idiotic I actually cheered it when I first saw the film in theaters (it remains the only midnight movie I ever attended in which I stayed awake for the entire thing – I was so aghast I could barely even blink), because I was amazed that anyone, even a goddamn soulless Dimension executive, allowed such trash to be shown to the public.

Of course, this movie was so bad that it literally ended the franchise as we know it, resulting in the remake. So you can either blame or thank Resurrection, depending on your feelings for Zombie’s film. Personally, I wish I could just forget that neither this nor the remake ever happened, and that the series ended on a relative high (or at least conclusive) note with H20, but I don’t have that bad of a memory. If Eternal Sunshine technology ever becomes a reality, you can guarantee that this thing will be 2nd or 3rd on my list of things to wipe.

(1st, of course, would be Dark Ride).

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