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

¡Tintorera! (1977)

JUNE 10, 2008

GENRE: PREDATOR
SOURCE: THEATRICAL (REVIVAL SCREENING)

Much like any film that screens along with something like Pieces or Shocker, ¡Tintorera! didn’t really have a chance of being as lovingly received as Crocodile, because it’s more professionally made, doesn’t have as much action, and is largely lacking in anything that would be considered “visually exciting”. Billed as a softcore sex version of Jaws, it doesn’t have enough shark OR sexual action to really engage an audience. Maybe if it came first it would have been easier to deal with, but after the sheer bliss and insanity of Crocodile, it was just a giant bore for the most part.

Have you ever watched Pearl Harbor and wondered what the film would be like if Affleck and Hartnett decided to simply share Kate Beckinsale instead of fighting over her? That’s basically what you have here; the movie is less about a shark than a melodrama about two guys who at first fight over a woman, then bond, pick up a couple of local girls (who they swap back and forth), then meet another woman who is perfectly fine with being their shared lover. In the film’s best moment, the first woman, who is introduced and characterized in a manner that would lead you to believe she was the female lead, is killed about 20 minutes in, a nice sort of Psycho type twist (albeit in the middle of a shitty movie). After she is dispatched, there is almost no shark on human action for the rest of the film. Instead, the two guys occasionally kill sharks for sport (or food, I forget - either way these scenes are more cruel than anything else) in between bouts of incredibly unemotional sex (the woman even makes a speech about how love is never to enter the ‘triangle’).

At least, we can assume they are having sex. I can accept that the body count is low, but if it’s low because they are more interested in following the lives of our three leads, the least they can do is offer some actual sex scenes. Instead we are mainly just given pre or post coitus laughs and glances. In fact, one of the trailers before the film, for a movie called The Beach Bunnies, actually offered more nudity and sex than this film did in its entirety (though there is some nudity – all in skinny dipping situations). I don’t know if there is an audience who longs for a 5 minute sequence of three morons taking photos of one another as they walk along the beach, but I am certainly not part of it.

Finally, after an hour or so, one of the three is killed, which is surprisingly kind of sad (mainly due to the realization that the character’s ridiculous speedos and bad dubbing will no longer be with us), and they go after the shark. It’s still not very thrilling; I actually dozed off for a bit. Apparently 40 minutes were edited from the film, but my research (reading two other reviews) suggests this was for the better - the cut stuff was all just more of the romantic melodrama. None of the precious little shark attack stuff was removed (so I can’t imagine how goddamn boring this movie is in its ‘full’ form).

One thing though – the death of one of the leads is a great sequence; with lots of gore, exposed guts, and hilariously kicking legs that have been separated from their owner. Five or six scenes like that and the movie would be worth a watch, but since the clip is probably on Youtube, just watch that and skip the rest.


Hah! It is!!!

What say you?

{[['']]}

Chosen Survivors (1974)

JUNE 3, 2008

GENRE: PREDATOR, POST-APOCALYPTIC
SOURCE: DVD (ONLINE RENTAL)

Like, well, not many of the films I watch ("many" would be like, 250 at this point), Chosen Survivors is a film I never heard of until I saw a trailer for it at the New Beverly (which film it was attached to I can no longer recall, sadly). It didn’t look particularly good, but it did promise killer bats and cheesy 70s disaster movie scenarios. I figure, if nothing else, maybe there’s a joke from Airplane! that would make more sense after I saw it.

Nope.

It’s not a terrible movie by any stretch, but it’s painfully dated (again: THIS is the type of movie that should be getting remade) and jarringly paced. I wasn’t expecting nonstop killer bat action, but after a good 20 minute chunk in which the bats are pretty much the major focal point of the film, they all but completely disappear for another half hour or so, only to once again become the main antagonist again for the final act. In between these sequences is like something out of another movie, in which our eponymous characters try to cope with their situation, pair off in order to breed, etc. One film or the other would be fine, but they are combined so clumsily they end up canceling one another out; at no point do the two plotlines feel intertwined.

Essentially, it’s like a lost Michael Crichton adaptation. We have our group of experts in various fields stuck together in a situation that requires them to work together to fight off a common threat. You know, like Jurassic Park. Or Congo. Or Sphere. Or Timeline. Or Prey. Or...

One thing I never expected this film to have in common with yesterday’s was something that reminded me of Tourist Trap. Early on, as the elevator taking the characters down to their new home begins to crash, they all flail about in slow motion. However, the AUDIO is quite obviously recorded at the correct speed, with the actors just trying to SOUND slow. Thus, they just utter some hilarious “aaahhhh”s and “ohhhhh”s, sounds that remind me of my favorite Trap scene (where all the mannequins “scream” before falling on the girl). It’s the best part of the movie by far, but sadly, nothing else is as hilariously inept.

One thing that certainly isn’t funny is a would-be rape scene halfway through. Jackie Cooper (Perry!) suddenly attacks one of the female survivors and forces her to the ground. He keeps pressing on and yelling “I won’t hurt you!” and such, and then finally she says “All right!” and returns his kiss. Uh... no. In a straight up exploitation film this might be perversely hilarious, but in the middle of a melodramatic thriller it’s just awkward and wrong. Then again, for all I know there were more things of this nature; according to the IMDb, the film once ran 130 minutes, but all existing copies run only 99 (and thank god, even at that it gets pretty dull – another 31 minutes would be borderline torture).

The bat effects are actually pretty good. They obviously use real bats as often as possible, and there’s a scene where a few of them crawl (yes, crawl) around on one of the girls’ bed and attack her that’s actually pretty damn great. And the film’s most promoted setpiece, where one of the guys climbs up the elevator shaft to try to reach an emergency button (good place for it), is also pretty thrilling, and again, the effects are reasonably believable. Only in the final bat attack did the effects budget clearly run out, with bad projection and an odd blue outline around all of the characters being attacked. Oh well, can’t have it all.

On a two pack with the superior (and shorter, woo!) The Earth Dies Screaming, this is a pretty good deal for under 10 bucks. No extras, but in the age of Roland Emmerich, it’s sort of refreshing to see post-apoc movies with actual ideas, not effects.

What say you?

{[['']]}

Grizzly Park (2008)

APRIL 4, 2008

GENRE: PREDATOR, SERIAL KILLER
SOURCE: THEATRICAL (PREMIERE)

One thing about living in LA is that when you see someone who looks like a celebrity, there's a damn good chance it really IS them. So tonight when I went to see the premiere of Grizzly Park, I sat next to a guy who looked suspiciously like Ron Howard. If I knew for sure it was him, I would obviously grab him and yell "GIVE ME BACK MY SON!", but since I wasn't sure, I opted to just sit down. However, fate was on my side, as the trailers began, and there was one for a documentary/thriller thing about the same subject matter as Da Vinci Code. Halfway through the trailer, the woman who was on the other side of him asked "Is that your footage?" Bingo.

As it turns out, Ron is a very nice guy, and we continued to make small chat through the rest of the trailer reel. I wish I could have talked to him more about a few of his films, such as Apollo 13 (easily the best of the series) and, obviously, Ransom, which is my personal favorite of his films. Sadly I didn't get the chance. Oh well.

You might be wondering why I've devoted two paragraphs to a guy who has nothing to do with the movie. Well, that's because the movie is pretty bad. But it's NOT soullessly bad, like your Drive Thrus and what not. No, it's obvious that everyone was trying really hard, but that the film was noticeably shot without anywhere near the budget the script required. The result? LOTS of padding, very little action, ridiculously bad prosthetic effects, and just an overall feeling that had they had a decent budget, this one could have been a lot of fun.

Part of the problem is the lack of, well, GRIZZLY action. The bear only shows up seconds before he kills someone in a hilariously edited manner, amounting to probably less than 3 minutes of actual bear action. He's not even the only killer, as a wolf takes out one (possibly two) of the eight kids, and honest to dog, a SERIAL KILLER also accounts for 1/4 of the killings.

Yes, an escaped prisoner impersonates the cop who is supposed to be taking these delinquent kids (the "bad kids cleaning up" plot is lifted from the superior See No Evil, right down to the 'freezeframe w/crimes listed' sequence serving for introduction) into the woods, and he offs the real cop and another ranger before becoming the first (and for over and hour, only) bear victim. Hilariously, the guy seems pretty intent on impersonating the cop right down to the last detail, kindly bringing up sleeping bags and supplies for the kids.

And that's part of the problem with the film. 90% of it seems like deleted scenes from a better, funner movie. Why would the killer bring the goddamn sleeping bags up the mountain? Because it takes 2 minutes of cheap screentime up. At one point they just cut to poor Glenn Morshower (the film's sole bright spot) putting a clipboard up on a wall. Why are we watching this? There are also about a half dozen scenes of the kids discussing their crimes, none of which matter in the long run. And when the "twist" ending comes around, it renders some of what we saw earlier even more useless.

The twist(s) are so idiotic, I can't possibly spoil them for anyone (especially since the film isn't out on DVD yet, which is where I'm guessing 99% of its audience will see it). Suffice to say that the first twist is rendered pointless since it involves someone who dies literally 30 seconds later. Then the second twist is so dumb I actually joked about it 10 minutes before. Again, I won't spoil it, but let's just say that when I made the joke, it never crossed my mind that I was actually calling something that would actually happen, because it is so ridiculous. In between these two twists is a random, abrupt news report sequence in which the reporter says "(So and so) reporting live, from the woods", at which point I nearly lost my shit and probably scared poor Ron Howard.

I feel bad dumping on the movie, and to be fair, besides Morshower, it does have some good moments. The kills are nice (bad prosthetics aside), and there's a fantastic payoff to a minor subplot concerning one of the female characters' fake breasts. But honestly, I just fail to see why it was shot when they didn't have the money to pull it off correctly. It's not like the low budget horror scene is spread really thin and they needed to make SOMETHING to keep the genre afloat - it will probably be one of 29 horror movies to come out on DVD that week. And it bums me out, because I know that one of those other theoretical 29 movies will have the right amount of resources, but waste it on a totally worthless script. Team ups, people, team ups!

And why was Mr. Howard there? His dad, Rance Howard, was in the film for 2-3 minutes, also unnecessary padding. Ron also proved himself to be much smarter than me, dozing off for a good 20 minutes. He missed nothing. After the movie I told Ron that his dad fared far better in Sasquatch Mountain. But still, the guy needs to stay away from "Monster in the woods" movies.

What say you?

{[['']]}

The Monster Walks (1932)

FEBRUARY 8, 2008

GENRE: PREDATOR, REVENGE
SOURCE: DVD (BUDGET PACK 2!!!)

Another Friday, another racist budget pack movie. While not nearly as offensive as King Of The Zombies, the character of Exodus (billed as Sleep n' Eat, for some reason) in The Monster Walks will most likely give a modern audience pause, especially in his final scene when Darwin’s theory of evolution is briefly explained to him (he believes it because his grandfather looked like an ape, only he was lazy). He also points a gun at himself while he talks. Nice.

Sadly that’s probably the only interesting thing about this dull movie. At only 59 minutes (the IMDb lists 63, so there are 4 possibly racist minutes left to the imagination) it still moves at a snail’s pace, and I don’t think I need to remind anyone how sick I am of movies in which folks in an old house kill each other for an inheritance. Granted, instead of a fake ghost or whatever, the villain sets up a poor ape as the murderer, which is a bit different, but not nearly enough to retain my interest.

Not helping matters is the odd audio problem over most of the film. Namely, it sounds like everyone is underwater. Now, none of the budget pack transfers are going to win any awards, but this an issue that is (so far) unique to this film. It wouldn’t be as much of a problem if there was a lot of action, but since 95% of the film is just people talking (the first 15 minutes are comprised of nothing but discussions over where everyone should sleep for the night), it’s a bit annoying.

Question for those of you who own and/or use whips – are there often handstraps on the handle that you use to secure the whip to your hand? The killer is done in because he couldn’t free his hand from the strap in time (the ape pulls him against its cage), but it seemed a bit silly that he’d even have such a thing. A good whipper should be able to hold onto his weapon!

What say you?

{[['']]}

Non Canon Review: Jaws 2 (1978)

FEBRUARY 3, 2008

GENRE: PREDATOR
SOURCE: THEATRICAL (REVIVAL SCREENING)

I debated whether or not to count Jaws 2 as my movie for the day. I had never seen the entire thing in one sitting, and some scenes I’m sure I had never seen at all (the gala that Brody shows up late to, for example). But I have seen the last hour what seems like a dozen times. In the end, I opted to watch something else (I do this for YOU!) and simply write a good ol “non canon review” for this one, which is considered the best of the sequels but is also the least interesting, in my opinion.

Unlike 3 (3D, water park) or The Revenge (a shark swims thousands of miles to hunt down and kill the Brody family, Mario Van Peebles), there is nothing really exciting or unique about Jaws 2. Structure-wise, it’s almost the exact same movie as the original – A shark kills at night, Brody is shown trying to run the police department, a body is found, suspicions arise, there’s a false alarm, Brody gets disciplined, and then the final hour is more or less one long scene of shark vs. boat (and the people on it).

But yet it’s still the best of the sequels, thank to better acting all around and less of a detachment from the original than the other sequels thanks to the cast (other than Dreyfuss, who is at least mentioned, all of the surviving principal cast from the original returned for 2; no one returned for 3 and only Lorraine Gary came back for 4) and music (this is actual John Williams, not a pale imitation). The kills are sort of exciting, if not very suspenseful, and while nothing is as “oh SHIT!” as the little kid being eaten in the original, the sheer number of teens stuck on the boat(s) make up for it – you’re not too sure if ANY of them will be safe, especially after that one broad dies trying to rescue Mike (or Sean, I forget which one’s which).

Speaking of the teens, the film is almost like a slasher film at times, with a shark instead of a guy in a mask. We cut back and forth between the fodder and the cops trying to get there in time; one gets picked off every now and then, etc. There’s even a couple of nerdy guys for good measure. Yet it predates pretty much every teen slasher of note (even Halloween). Weird.

One thing I don’t get – why does the deputy have a different name in this movie? Was it supposed to be a different character but the casting person was just really lazy? Did they just forget? You’d think at least the actor himself would be like ‘hey wait a minute...’. Imagine if in Bourne Ultimatum they just started calling him David or something. That’d be wacky!

I should note that before the film we were treated to a trailer for... Jaws 2. But not really. In addition to showing us how beautiful the print of the film itself was in comparison (Universal apparently just made a new 35mm print just for the screening), but the trailer was re-edited to include footage of a car chase movie and some sort of 60s beach party movie. It was fucking hilarious, and whoever did it should be commended. If anyone knows who did it (I forgot to ask), let me know so I can give credit to this wonderfully hilarious edit.

What say you?

{[['']]}

The Leopard Man

JANUARY 15, 2008

GENRE: PREDATOR, SERIAL KILLER
SOURCE: CABLE (TCM)

Just yesterday I was praising Turner Classic Movies (see?), and now I shall again. Although I heard about it a bit too late for the whole thing, last night they showed pretty much all of Val Lewton’s horror movies, along with a documentary about him, and I DVRed the hell out of the remainder of the marathon. The first I got was The Leopard Man, a film that sort of gives away its own ending in the title.

Yes, whenever someone dies in the movie, an escaped leopard is blamed. But the movie is called Leopard MAN after all, so you know it’s not that simple. Amusingly, the characters go at great lengths to blame only the poor leopard for the killings; both the guy who owned the thing and the graveyard keeper who locked one victim inside the graveyard (preventing her escape) are told they shouldn’t feel guilty. Yes they fucking should! Especially in the latter case, whether it’s a leopard or a man or a sandwich, the dude locked the poor broad inside, knowing that she was still in there! Asshole!

These scenes are quite good (especially the first one, where the girl is pleading for help and her bitch of a mother refuses to unlock the door, thinking she is faking her terror). Unfortunately, the in between scenes that focus on the rather melodramatic lives of rival cigarette girls (there’s a rare term) aren’t as interesting, because, well, I could care less about the romantic lives of rival cigarette girls. Presenting them in soap opera fashion certainly doesn’t help matters. However, since the movie is only 66 minutes long, there isn’t a lot of room for these type of scenes; not enough to kill the movie at any rate.

What IS almost enough to kill the movie is the sound of one of the girls’ rattles that she uses in her dancing routine. It’s annoying enough to listen to during the routine, but she pretty much plays with it in all of her scenes. Put the damn thing away!

According to delightfully dull TCM host Robert Osborne, this was the final collaboration between Val Lewton and Jacques Tourneur (the actual director; Lewton was just the producer), the other two being Cat People and I Walked With A Zombie (which are the two movies I missed). I’ve never heard much about the others I got, so it’s kind of a bummer that I missed out on the most famous of the bunch. Still, there were like eight movies in all (I think they basically just ran the DVD box set listed below), of which I got five (I also skipped the Cat People sequel, per my “go in order” rule) so expect to see more Lewton-centric reviews in the coming week or so. Hurrah for TCM! This helps me slow down how many discs I rent from Blockbuster Online... I think I am singlehandedly to blame for them jacking up the cost of their ‘Total Access’ program, which I have abused the hell out of since its inception. Sorry bout that.

What say you?

{[['']]}

Graveyard Shift (1990)

DECEMBER 15, 2007

GENRE: BASED ON NOVEL, PREDATOR, MONSTER
SOURCE: CABLE (FEARNET)

I blame Fearnet for the one time I ever missed a movie. I was on vacation last February, and planned to use their online site, which offers crappy movies for free, for my daily film. But the horrible presentation and terrible buffering errors caused me to give up trying. Since their actual channel is not available on Time Warner, which is my cable provider, that was my only real experience with Fearnet until today, when I went to a friend’s house in Massachusetts. She had the channel, which offers about 40 movies “On Demand” per month, including Graveyard Shift, which is the one I opted for out of all the choices.

As I said in my 1408 review, a Stephen King short story usually translates into an awful film. Not that all of his full length novels have been successfully adapted, but the problems with the ones that don't usually stem from leaving out “favorite parts” more than anything else. With the short stories, the filmmakers have to pad the idea out in order to make a 90 minute narrative, which is no easy task. Sometimes, like 1408, this works. Usually, like Children of the Corn, The Mangler, The Lawnmower Man, etc. it doesn’t. So I was happy to see that Graveyard Shift came out pretty decent, if far from perfect.

The odd thing about the movie is that it’s about Brad Dourif and some other guys killing rats, only to discover that the REAL monster is a giant bat fucking thing living in the rat nest, and yet no one seems to be having any fun. The whole concept is pretty ridiculous, why not laugh it up? Even in the finale, when a Diet Pepsi can is used to save the day (best product placement ever?), director Ralph Singleton and writer John Esposito play the whole thing maddeningly straight. Even Dourif gets little scene-chewing to do outside of a long Vietnam speech early on (which has a line about Bruce Dern that sounds EXACTLY like something King would write, though I do not think that the line, or even Dourif’s character for that matter, are in the book), but that's about it. The rest of the film is kind of dour, if (heh) not entirely serious.

But it’s still enjoyable once it gets going, and the gore is sufficient. The acting is pretty decent for the most part as well. Brad Andrews, of “I guess they couldn’t afford Tom Berenger” fame, plays the lead, and Andrew “The Djinn” Divoff plays one of the other mill workers. The girl looks like Marisa Tomei, and her character’s final scene is pretty surprising. There’s also a howler of a final line by the requisite “evil human” character, who yells “We’re going to hell.... TOGETHER!!!” (“together” sounds like the chorus to a song, he shouts it for so long).

Also, they give some nice King nods – the mill is named after Richard Bachman (who wrong “The Long Walk”, my all time favorite book, and I am pretty sure that the mill is supposed to be the same one that the Pete McVries character in “Walk” worked at prior to joining the Walk), and there’s a Plymouth Fury glimpsed here and there. Of course, it’s not very likely that King is a fan of the film, though I think he should be impressed that they got as good of a movie as they did from his source story, which is hardly one of his better tales to begin with and also is only about 8 pages long if memory serves.

So, if you have Fearnet, and have never seen the film, give it a watch or two and tell us what you think. Otherwise... I dunno. Make a sandwich or something.

What say you?

{[['']]}

Altered States (1981)

NOVEMBER 25, 2007

GENRE: PREDATOR, MAD SCIENTIST, PSYCHOLOGICAL, WEIRD
SOURCE: CABLE (HDNET)

Well, after Gothic, I was certainly not clamoring for more Ken Russell movies, but I always heard good things about Altered States, and any movie with William Hurt AND Bob Balaban can’t be altogether bad, so I gave it a shot. And while I wouldn’t go so far as to say I loved it, it was certainly enjoyable for the most part, if totally fucked up and at times just utterly baffling.

The film reminded me of old school Cronenberg (The Brood and Videodrome in particular) in which a ridiculous concept was taken deadly serious and paced very deliberately, favoring dialogue and a cerebral tone over typical action and horror. There’s also a lot of religious imagery (particularly in the first half hour or so, thankfully weeded out as the film progressed in favor of just discussing God rather than show dream sequences of blood pouring on a Bible), so crazy Catholics be wary.

The effects work is pretty phenomenal (then again, it’s Dick Smith, so that’s sort of a given), most of it holding up even today. The utterly baffling finale features a lot of truly horrible greenscreen/matte compositing, but the “ApeMan” suit as well as the frequent bulging muscles on Hurt’s arms and head are just as good as anything we see nowadays. I’m not sure if it’s really Hurt inside the ape getup, but the extended sequence is the most exciting in the film, and features the rare sight of a guy punching an elephant in the face.

I must admit I was pretty bummed that a good chunk of the film is supposedly set in Boston, yet they don’t even bother using an establishing shot to “prove” they were there (according to the IMDb they really did film there, but damned if I recognize any of it). Christ, there’s not even a shot of some rowers on the Charles, a Boston movie staple! I would love to see a full blown, legit horror movie in my beloved home capital, but until then, stuff like this and the Concord set House By The Cemetery will have to suffice.

And if you’re a Blair Brown fan, she gets frequently nude in this film. Keep in mind that the film was made in 1980, so it’s a lot more appealing than you might think if you only know her from her appearances on Law and Order or CSI. Also, Drew Barrymore pops up (not nude) as one of their daughters.

This movie came out on Christmas Day. I go the movies every Christmas, and even though one year’s movie was the roller coaster thrill ride that is Munich, I can’t imagine how this talky, brainy, strange film played to a crowd on such a festive day (especially considering that one character is described as wanting to fuck God). Fun for the whole family!

What say you?

{[['']]}

Monkey Shines (1988)

NOVEMBER 12, 2007

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

While Dawn of the Dead is one of my favorite all time movies (not just horror) and I pretty much love the shit out of the other four in the series, I have seen relatively few of Romero’s other films. I saw Dark Half as a kid, don’t remember a damn thing about it (future HMAD entry!), and obviously I've seen Creepshow, but otherwise I’ve somehow missed everything else. And my desire to watch something that might actually be good led to finally taking in a viewing of Monkey Shines, which I bought a while back and never watched until now.

It’s a bit too long, but otherwise it’s a really solid, creepy film. Everyone knows monkeys will eventually kill us all, so to see one slowly go nuts and take out the close friends and family of one crippled dude is as terrifying as it is prophetic. Plus, the damn thing is so cute (the part where the monkey turns off the lights so the guy is forced to stop reading and pay attention to her is ridiculously lovable), even when it’s killing folks I’m still going “Awwwww” every 5 minutes.

OK, the movie's kind of weird.

Lots of they-weren't-yet familiar faces in this one too (it came out in 1988). Stanley Tucci plays an oily prick of a doctor (his reaction to being introduced to the main guy’s coach is pretty priceless), Stephen Root shows up as a rival scientist, and Janine Turner (mmm) plays the main dude’s girlfriend, who leaves him for Tucci and, obviously, is immolated by a primate for her actions.

The only thing I didn’t like about the film was the music. It usually seems to contradict the scenes it accompanies. For example, during the suspenseful and freaky climax, the score suggests romantic comedy more than anything else. Maybe this is an intentional joke, but if so it doesn’t really work.

It’s a shame Romero didn’t get to make more films in his prime, as he was always the victim of projects falling apart (usually for financial reasons) just before production was due to begin. He’s always been one of the genre’s more intelligent and interesting filmmakers, which of course, is probably why many of his films failed at the box office (including this one). The DVD is bare bones, of course, but I still recommend it.

What say you?

{[['']]}

Kaw (2007)

NOVEMBER 5, 2007

GENRE: PREDATOR
SOURCE: DVD (STORE RENTAL)

Yesterday I walked into Blockbuster and scanned the shelves for a horror movie to watch, not really knowing what I was in the mood for. Slasher? Monster? Pretend someone is back from the grave in order to scam another person out of an inheritance (I really need to name this genre)? Then I spotted Kaw, which I had never even heard of previously. But seeing a giant bird on the box next to a “scary” font, I knew immediately that A. it was horror, and B. it would be a fun review to write. Come on, it’s fucking called KAW for Christ’s sake. It seemed like the film existed solely for me to make fun of it on HMAD.

So when I sat down to watch it today, and in a bad mood no less, I was saddened to discover that the film really isn’t all that bad. Obviously it’s no masterpiece, but I was entertained, the production value was high, it looked professionally made by people who weren’t just cashing a check, and the script genuinely surprised me in terms of who would live or die.

And Powder is in it.

The only bad thing I can really say about the movie is that the raven effects were wildly uneven. Good CG, bad CG, good editing with the real birds, bad editing with real birds... it ran the gamut. Obviously some CG is to be expected, so that’s not a real problem. But the inconsistency of the effects was pretty distracting.

Otherwise though, the film was pretty good. Whoever cast it should be commended, as not only are the actors good, but they seem natural in their roles. I hate a horror movie that casts the most beautiful women in the world as like, coffee shop owners or whatever. Come on now. But here, everyone is totally believable in their blue collar settings.

Also, there’s a pretty big cast (a dozen or so main characters), and in addition to some decent attempts at character development, it’s kind of hard to tell who will live or die. If anything, the movie sort of goes out of its way to kill off the nicer people in the movie, but not in a mean-spirited way (other than at some of the CG birds, I didn’t laugh once watching this movie, intentionally or not). Kind of like Tremors, they don’t go the usual horror movie route and kill all but two people, so it makes the attack scenes a bit more suspenseful when you know they aren’t out to simply whittle the remaining cast down to nothing in order to save on SAG fees.

Hell, they even give a decent enough explanation for why the birds went nuts. Whether it makes any scientific sense I have no idea, but I certainly don’t care either (drop a nuke into a hole a mere 800 into something the size of Texas and it will split in two and miss the Earth? Sounds good to me!). And it’s given about one minute of screen time, so even if you totally hate the ‘motive’, it’s not like it makes up the whole movie.

Now, again, this is no masterpiece. But for a direct to video movie (which I suspect may actually have been made for TV – the gore is incredibly light and there is no profanity at all) with almost no known actors or creators (and obvious script rewrites – the ‘story by’ credit is given to someone other than the names on the ‘screenplay by’ credit) I was fairly surprised at its relative professionalism and decency. I expected the worst, and I got OK. That’s more than I can say for like 75% of these “blind rents”.

So kudos, cast and crew of Kaw, for not making me angry!

What say you?

{[['']]}

Anacondas: The Hunt For The Blood Orchid (2004)

OCTOBER 22, 2007

GENRE: PREDATOR
SOURCE: DVD (ONLINE RENTAL)

A long running joke among me and myself concerns the inane number of (credited) writers on Halloween 4 (four of them), a movie that really has no story at all (“Michael returns to Haddonfield and kills some folks”). That film, which I love, was directed by Dwight Little, which is the only reason I bothered with his Anacondas: The Hunt For The Blood Orchid. So imagine my surprise to see SEVEN credited writers on it, a movie that is basically “Some folks get eaten by some snakes”. What the hell is with you, Little?

Now, I have never seen the original. J Lo AND Ice Cube in one movie? Christ. I caught some of it on TNT one day (apparently they lost their Shawshank Redemption DVD and had to put SOMETHING on) and it didn’t exactly compel me. If it wasn’t for Little being the director, I wouldn’t have bothered with this one either. Luckily, I had no trouble following the labyrinthine plot despite coming in blind to the dense mythology of the Anaconda franchise.

Actually, and surprisingly, the movie isn’t too bad. Sure, it’s junk, and the CG snakes are terrible 90% of the time, but there’s some semblance of effort to be seen, and it certainly moves along nicely enough. I “called” two characters certain deaths when they turned out to survive, always a plus (though no other characters take their place inside a snake’s belly – there’s eight people in the movie and four live!).

And come on, this shot is fucking cool:

The strange thing about the movie is that the resident “Bad guy” human was actually the one you want to see survive. Sure he’s a bit of a dick, but all he wanted to do, besides get rich, was bring back a rare orchid that could save the lives of millions. The “good guy” people more or less try to stop him so they can just go home (rendering the deaths of their friends wholly pointless)? One character even seems vehemently OPPOSED to the entire attempt, even before the snakes show up. “No, I want cancer to keep on killing”? Strange. The movie doesn’t even make clear if the surviving characters bother bringing any of the damn things home with them.

There’s also a hilarious moment where a boat capsizes, likely ruining all their high tech gear. This is emphasized, poorly, when a guy picks up a CD-ROM drive (even though they were all using laptops) and says “Hard drive’s ruined!”. So? What about the CD-ROM drive??? Will it at least read at the visibly promised 52x speed?

I remember seeing that this film would be released in theaters (where it actually made some decent money) and being amazed. Come on, a name-only sequel to a 7 year old movie no one really liked to begin with? Why did this movie even exist, let alone get a wide release? But hey, I remain relatively surprised with how un-awful it was. It reminds me of that classic Onion story: “Catwoman praised for not being as awful as expected”. The subtitle alone (who the fuck cares why they are there? Especially since the movie itself doesn’t seem to) is grounds for straight to Sci-Fi channel land, but kudos to Little and all 85916902 of his writers for pulling off a decent movie out of what had to have been initially conceived as a tax write-off.

What say you?

{[['']]}

The Rage (2007)

OCTOBER 19, 2007

GENRE: PREDATOR, COMEDIC, CRAP, MAD SCIENTIST
SOURCE: THEATRICAL (SCREAMEST LA)

A few months ago, I watched an advanced copy of The Rage, which was directed by Robert Kurtzman (the K in KNB). I didn’t like it at all, but I assumed the film was unfinished due to the terrible visual effects (the guy was one third of the greatest effects company of all time!), and it seemed the type of film that would benefit from a big crowd and maybe a few beers. So I gave it another chance at Screamfest, with crowd and said beers (well, one beer, before the movie. Close enough).

Sadly, it seemed even WORSE on the big screen. Not only did the film’s horrid acting and ridiculously overlong finale seem more troublesome, but the effects looked even WORSE on the big screen. What I saw WAS indeed finished; the effects just suck.

See, I can accept a bad CG effect or two in a film, but The Rage literally goes out of its way to make the filmmakers/VFX team look inept. A character dies via a pipe in the backside, and CG poop flies out of the pipe’s open end. Another character is beheaded, and excessive CG blood spews out of it for far longer than necessary. Why “add” to your effects when it just makes the movie look more amateurish? We know the guy is dead, why ruin the scene by adding in another, unnecessary visual gag? And why is the blood CG?

And it’s amazing how stunningly bad Erin Brown (aka Misty Mundae) is in this film. She turned in a great performance in the short In The Wall, which showed at the festival a few days before, but here she is simply atrocious. She constantly looks like she’s laughing when she’s supposed to be scared, and her delivery is awkward, making even simple “Come on!” type lines sound forced. Reggie Bannister fares no better in a small cameo, making a truly wretched Phantasm joke that no one laughed at.

The film also seemingly goes on forever. There’s a moment where you think it’s about to end, as the lab where the finale takes place catches fire, heading toward some oxygen tanks, but there’s at least another 10 minutes of additional banality before the damn lab explodes and we are allowed to go on our merry way.

Can’t say I didn’t give the movie a chance.

What say you?

{[['']]}

Island Of Dr. Moreau (1996)

AUGUST 18, 2007

GENRE: PREDATOR, MAD SCIENTIST
SOURCE: DVD (ONLINE RENTAL)

Much like Gilliam's The Brothers Grimm, Island Of Dr Moreau the film is nowhere near as exciting or entertaining as the behind the scenes troubles that accompanied it. Sure, a film like Waterworld has a lot of ‘bad press’, but it was all “filming was delayed because of the weather” type stories. There was nothing totally batshit like the stuff that came out of Moreau. Like, I dunno, Marlon Brando, one of the greatest actors of all time, having his lines fed to him via walkie talkie, one which would occasionally pick up other radio chatter, leading The Don to say thing like “There’s a robbery at Woolworth’s” in the middle of a scene.

My favorite story involves the film’s original director, Richard Stanley. Fired after only four days (allegedly for not getting along with Kilmer, who at that time was considered box office gold thanks to Batman), he actually snuck back into the film as one of the random monster extras. Some crew knew, but the other actors and new director John Frankenheimer (poor sod) had no idea. That is amazing! Yet, the DVD has no commentary, and the featurette is worthless.

The film itself is just a bore. David Thewlis’ character goes back and forth between desperate to escape and fairly at peace with his imprisonment at random, and nearly all of the novel’s ideas and themes are either botched or missing entirely. It felt like one of those films that could end at any given moment and no one would care or even notice.

At one point I had so many questions I couldn’t even follow what passed for the movie’s plot. Why the ice bucket on Brando’s head? Why the blue thing on Kilmer’s arm? Why is Brando top billed when he only shows up during the film’s 2nd act? Why does Kilmer suddenly act (and talk) like Brando? Why does this monster movie end with a goddamn True Romance-style shootout? Why aren’t I just playing Far Cry instead?

The DVD has poor compression too. Like the film itself, you gotta wonder why they bothered at all. We all have better things to do, like refill our ice helmets. “Forcefully, forcefully…”

What say you?

{[['']]}

Black Sheep (2006)

JUNE 14, 2007

GENRE: PREDATOR, COMEDIC, MAD SCIENTIST, ZOMBIE
SOURCE: THEATRICAL (PRESS SCREENING)

Look at all those genres! And none of them “Crap”! Does that mean that, for the first time all week, I really liked a movie?

At a recent premiere afterparty, I met Zoe Bell (who, in an amazing coincidence, played a character named Zoe Bell in Grindhouse), who is from New Zealand. And much like I usually do whenever I am speaking to a beautiful woman, I managed to insult her, when I mistook New Zealand for Australia. Apparently, that’s like… I don’t even know what I could compare it to, if I wanted to compare it to something else people are always confusing (Bill Pullman and Bill Paxton?). But look, I don’t know the difference; I’m never going to know the difference; just deal with it.

I certainly lump the two together when I think about horror movies such as Black Sheep. I dub them all “Australian”: Black Sheep, Undead, Wolf Creek, Dead Alive… probably some others. But really, other than Dead Alive (and Bad Taste), I have never really enjoyed one (in fact, the two Peter Jackson films I mention I am more of a fan of the technical stuff, not so much the storytelling, acting, etc.). Undead was actually one of the first movies I watched for Horror Movie A Day (prior to the birth of the blog – some of the films I have gone back and added reviews for, but not all), and I thoroughly disliked it. The humor didn’t work, the story was generic, and the effects ranged from OK at best to downright terrible. And Wolf Creek I consider one of the most overrated horror movies of the decade.

So basically, when it comes to horror movies, I’m Kiwi-ist.

But Black Sheep changed that. While it doesn't really work as a remake of the Chris Farley movie, I really dug it. The main plot (i.e. sheep running around killing folks) begins almost immediately, after some quick setup and back-story, which is nice. Writer/Director Jonathan King knows that people are there to watch carnage, so the necessary background information is given swiftly. Our actors, none of whom I recognize, are universally appealing, especially Tucker, played by Tammy Davis (a guy named Tammy?). He reminded me of Desmond from Lost. "Yeh gonna die, brother!"

The technical aspects were uniformly great as well. It’s beautifully shot, even more impressive when you consider that King is a first time director (DP Richard Bluck has done a couple features). The score is also quite good; it reminded me of the better Danny Elfman scores. And the makeups are some of the best I’ve seen all year. Of course, it’s the WETA guys doing it, so that wasn’t really a surprise, but it’s still worth mentioning. This also means the DVD runs the risk of having 13 hours of bonus material devoted to how they crafted sheep hooves, all narrated by Richard Taylor, the droniest sleepy voiced man in human history. But that’s not the film’s fault.

I do wish, however, that we got a full blown transformation scene a la American Werewolf. In the film, when bitten by the infected sheep, they do not turn into zombies, but “weresheep”. This is awesome, except we never see the transformation. Instead, the bitten character will suddenly get wide eyed, then raise their arm or whatever and have a sheep body part. Then we cut away to a reaction or something, and when we come back they are full weresheep. Blah (I was tempted to write “Blaaaah” but I opted not to).

There’s also a subplot about a guy who fucks the sheep. It’s tastefully done.

My only regret is that I saw it in one of the most uncomfortable theaters in all of LA: The Laemmle’s 5 on Sunset. With non-reclining seats that would better suit an amputee fetus than an average size human being since the rows are spaced about half an inch apart, I couldn’t wait to get out of there. Luckily, the movie is short (87 min) because King, unlike his fellow Australians, doesn’t bloat his film to be over 3 hours long or introduce idiotic subplots like alien takeovers. Kudos, sir. My legs still hurt, but not as much as they would have had you gone the “more is more” route of your brethren.

The movie comes out next week, not sure how wide of a release it’s getting, but the Weinstein’s are distributing it, so it should at least get the same respect thatFeast got.

…

What say you?

{[['']]}

Cujo (1983)

MAY 27, 2007

GENRE: PREDATOR
SOURCE: BACKYARD SCREENING (!)

I can’t recall if I ever saw Cujo in its entirety. It seems like some scenes I have seen like 20 times (particularly the one where Ed Lauter and his Ricky Jay-ish friend get drunk and scare Cujo), while other parts I felt I had never seen at all (like Dee Wallace’s affair with the handyman). And still other parts I wish I still hadn’t seen, like the one where the kid attempts to cheer up his parents by making Jaws references. Not cute, guys.

But I know for sure that it was the first time I saw it projected in someone’s backyard.

Yes, a friend of a friend has his own little backyard theater, and I tagged along for a viewing of the film. The print was quite well preserved (though it was cropped to 1.33:1) and had a trailer for REVENGE of the Jedi attached to it! Sweet. It made me think of a certain section in Kevin Murphy’s outstanding book “A Year at the Movies”, which chronicled his attempts to go see a movie every day for a year. One might assume I stole the idea for this blog from him, but I would like to point out that A. His experiment was only a year, whereas I intend to do this until I die or forget to do it., 2. All of his movies were theatrically screened or at least seen in some sort of public space (like an airplane), and D. He would see the same movie multiple times. I think I counted like 9 screenings of Jurassic Park III alone. Also he charged people for his stories/reviews! The bastard! Then again, if I was even a tenth as funny as he was I’d probably be in a position to charge for this too.

Anyway, back to Cujo. It’s definitely one of the better King adaptations (that did not involve Romero or Darabont), so there’s something. I never read the book, but I do know the ending was changed so as not to be awesome (i.e. the kid now lives). I also know the book was partially told from the dog’s perspective, a strange idea which Lewis Teague make a valiant effort to retain. Maybe I’ll read it over the summer.

Several times during the film, I found myself wondering if the film was actually directed by Victor Salva. Throughout the running time, no less than 4 male characters are seen shirtless (including the young kid, who also goes sans pants for the final third) and yet during the sex scene, Dee Wallace is not only not nude, but actually wearing a GIANT RED SWEATER. Given that a major plot point hinges on the fact that it’s the peak of hot summer, why the hell she would have a sweater on is beyond me.

But whatever minor problems the film may have, at least Cujo always looks threatening once he is rabid, unlike the barely interested and occasionally happy looking dogs of The Breed.

In closing, I would like to say that I wish all films featured subplots about ad campaigns for breakfast cereal.

What say you?

{[['']]}

The Breed (200?)

MAY 18, 2007

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

I have no idea what year this movie is technically from. The DVD says 2005, the IMDb says 2006, and it was released in a couple of theaters and on DVD in 2007. At any rate, I am referring to the one about the killer dogs who never actually appear threatening and starring that one guy from Black Xmas.

A few reviews back I pointed out a line that was just as useless as "He'll be unstoppable, unless we stop him." I forget which movie it was (probably a Rebane one) but it doesnt matter, because The Breed had one that topped em both: "He wouldn't be caught dead dying." WHAT?

There is also a 10 minute segment of the movie consisting of nothing but foreshadowing: from the car that doesn't always start, to the fact that one of the guys is handy with a bow and arrow, to the fact that the house has a zipline. It's borderline parody.

The level of dog violence is impressive: shot with arrow, slammed into tree, a couple get run over... the dogs settle for just biting the humans. But it's not enough to keep the movie from earning the increasingly common "Crap" label.

And fear not! The movie carries the fine "Wes Craven Presents" tradition of hiring a complete vacuum of screen presence as the lead (this time, uber bore Michelle Rodriguez, an actress whose appeal will never make the least bit of sense to me) and a much more interesting actress (Taryn Manning) as her friend. But then again, nothing about this movie really bothers to be different so I guess it's no surprise.

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