Non Canon Review: Christine (1983)

JUNE 15, 2008

GENRE: POSSESSION, TECHNOLOGY

SOURCE: THEATRICAL (REVIVAL SCREENING)

In an old Fangoria (not from when the film came out though – maybe 10 or so years after), John Carpenter said that he felt like “a ho” when he directed Christine, as he did it for the money and without any real feeling for the material. He simply wanted to make something different that might not be hated, like his previous film was (The Thing – because 1982 audiences were apparently all fucking stupid). But it’s a testament to how good a filmmaker he was in his prime that even knowing that his heart wasn’t in it, it’s actually still one of his better films.

It’s also one of his longest (if not THE longest) at 110 minutes. But it doesn’t feel long. Like Stephen King’s Stand By Me, it’s not so much about the horror but about the nostalgia and well acted character dynamics. In fact, horror/violence only takes up maybe 15 minutes of the entire film (most of that in the climax), the rest is just detailing Arnie’s withdrawal from his old life, becoming, for lack of a better word, possessed by his own car. He ignores his best friend, freaks out his girlfriend so much that she eventually dumps him, and slaps around his own dad. Watching Arnie transform from the pathetic nerd in the first part of the film to the tragic and terrifying guy at the end is far more interesting than watching a car run over a fat dude in an alley.

And that adds even more the irony of Carpenter’s somewhat dismissive feelings on the film – it’s his only King film, and he’s gotten it right more than almost any of his peers. Hell even Darabont, great as Shawshank and Mist may be, felt like he was phoning it in on Green Mile (granted, the source material was far from King’s best either, but still – it’s a mechanical and overlong film no matter what). In the lengthy history of King adaptations on screen, it may not be the most faithful (in the book, the ghost of the owner was actually in the car with Arnie), but it’s one of the very few that successfully showcases an oft-forgotten fact about King – his characters are very real and easy to identify with, which is what makes the horror elements so compelling in the novels. This “boring” character stuff is usually the first thing to get tossed out in the films, in favor of the monsters and supernatural visuals. But Carpenter (and screenwriter Bill Phillips) went the other way – you almost get the idea that they would have left out the murders entirely if they could (indeed, all but one are offscreen), as the focus is on the three main characters (four if you count the car).

It’s also interesting how the two main stars have gone on to be filmmakers in their own right. Keith Gordon has made mostly smaller, independent films (including A Midnight Clear, one of the best war films ever, period), while John Stockwell has helmed a trio of recent water based movies, such as the underrated Turistas. And I dunno if Alexandra Paul has ever directed a film, but she’s certainly not IN enough of them, because, as we discover in the film’s bonus material, she’s still super hot.

Speaking of the bonus material (which I watched when I got home – like The Fog, I had never gotten around to any of it before), this may be one of the most packed special editions for a pre-laserdisc/DVD movie ever. There’s the usual Carpenter commentary, which is also much better than usual for him, since he is joined by Gordon, who was sort of his protégé. It may not be as funny as the Carpenter/Russell tracks, but it’s still a worthy listen. There’s also 3 featurettes that total about 45 minutes, with just about everyone (except King) contributing new interviews. Why they are broken up is not very clear – one focuses on adapting the book, which is fine, but another one is about the music and the film’s reception from critics, as well as how they feel about it today – why not include this material with the other piece (which talks about everything else: casting, shooting, effects). Weird. There are also 20 (!!) deleted scenes, totaling about as many minutes. Most of them are worth seeing out of context, but in the film I can see how they would slow things down. Definitely watch the longer version of the bullying sequence in shop class though – in addition to a surprising character detail about Stockwell (he laughs a bit when Arnie is being humiliated), Buddy’s taunts are just hilarious, and features more of his peculiar Travolta-esque acting.

I’m glad Sony put together a special edition for the film, giving it some of the respect it deserves in the process. It’s definitely worth re-evaluating, and even though it’s a 1983 movie that takes place in 1978, it still doesn’t feel very dated. The basic themes are still easy to relate to, and like The Thing, the effects work holds up better than almost anything else of the period. It's almost insane that he thinks less of this film than his last couple - anyone who thinks Ghosts of Mars is a better example of his talent is just a goon.

What say you?

Read more »

Based On Novel, Carpenter, Non Canon, Possession, Technology,

{[['']]}

Shutter (2008)

MARCH 23, 2008

GENRE: GHOST, REMAKE, TECHNOLOGY
SOURCE: THEATRICAL (REGULAR SCREENING)

I’m about at the point where not only can I not tell the Asian movies apart, I also can’t tell their respective remakes apart from one another (or the other originals). In short: they really need to stop fucking making any version in any language of a movie where a ghost haunts someone until they are properly buried. Shutter is the latest in a long line of films that are so formulaic and redundant, it’s a wonder they even bother shooting a new movie at all, rather than just release one of the others under a new title.

Like the original, we have a very unlikable “hero” (he broke up with a girl simply because he didn’t want to deal with her problems, and then had his friends rape her while he photographed them), except here this is revealed as a twist, so as to delay our hating the main character for a bit. The fact that the original dared to introduce this only about halfway through or so was pretty much the only original thing about it, so now we’re left with absolutely nothing. Other than the fact that Pacey manages to utter two “Fucks!” in a PG-13 film, there is zero here that can possibly entice an audience unless they have never seen The Ring, The Grudge, Pulse, Dark Water, One Missed Call, The Eye, and/or any of the original versions and/or any of the sequels (either language). And if you’ve seen them ALL (man, when I list them all and realize that... Christ), it can almost be considered rude of Fox to ask someone to pay for the damn thing. The least the studios could have done would be to offer a buy two get one free deal for this year’s 3 remakes, where if you paid for One Missed Call and The Eye, you get Shutter for free.

And yet Shutter is probably the best of the three. Like Moe, it’s still stupid, just not AS stupid as Larry and Curly over there. Keeping the locale out of generic America (though strangely in Japan and not Thailand, like the original) certainly helps, and there IS one sort of effective scare scene (dark apartment with camera flashes being the only light source). Plus it’s shorter, so that’s nice of them.

Still, you can’t take that as a sign of the movie achieving “maybe it’s not all that bad” levels. The flash/light scene might be good, but the subway scene (the scariest part of the original) is completely botched, even worse than Alba’s Eye remake botched its respective elevator scene. They also use completely ludicrous cinematic shortcuts: at one point the lead girl (Rachael Taylor) figures out that the ‘ghost’ in Pacey’s photos is pointing at a certain level of a building. She goes to the building, and instead of spending, I dunno, 12 whole seconds just counting floors to figure out where she needs to go, she looks at a GIANT DIAGRAM of the building, which conveniently shows each floor number in relation to the building’s logo, allowing her to quickly understand it’s the 17th floor she wants. And this is a shame, because director Masayuki Ochiai was the director of Infection (aka Kansen), a movie that a. I really liked and b. would be much better suited for the remake treatment than Shutter, since it wasn’t about another goddamn ghost haunting another goddamn electronic device.

It’s also wildly inconsistent. Throughout the movie they keep seeing/hearing weird things, and yet over an hour into the film, when Pacey sees the ghost in the bedroom and screams, she wakes up and asks “What’s wrong?”, as if by then she couldn’t have just assumed that he once again saw the ghost that had been plaguing the both of them for a week or so.

Speaking of the ghost, when her “plan” is revealed, I almost laughed out loud. “She was trying to HELP me!” says Taylor, when Pacey tells her about his rape photography past. But it’s already been established that the ghost had been there for a while, so why the fuck did the damn thing wait until they were MARRIED to “help” her? Since the girl was long dead, and Taylor didn’t know anything about Pacey’s relationship with her (they are seen dating for quite a while in the flashbacks), you gotta figure there was at LEAST two years in between her death and the wedding that opens the film. And why wait until they got to Japan (the film begins and ends in New York) to make her presence known, when it’s also established that the ghost doesn’t exactly need a passport to get around? Of course, none of these movies make any damn sense, but at least some of them carry a bit of dread and even the occasional scare to make up for it (or keep you from noticing the plot holes at all). When they are going this by the numbers, these things become all the more apparent, and you would THINK that after half a dozen tries, they’d start to get it right, or at least try something different. Sadly, no.

The good news is that the movie didn’t make all that much money this weekend, and will probably sink like a stone. Maybe after another 6 or 7 failures, the studios will start to consider whether or not remaking every goddamn J-horror film ever made is still a financially sound idea. Here’s hoping!

What say you?

Read more »

Ghost, Remake, Technology,

{[['']]}

Mangler Reborn (2005)

FEBRUARY 28, 2008

GENRE: POSSESSION, TECHNOLOGY
SOURCE: DVD (ONLINE RENTAL)

3rd time’s the charm, I guess. Well, sort of.

While hardly a good movie, Mangler Reborn managed to do something that neither of the previous films in the series ever could: be professionally made, and even watchable. Thankfully ignoring the nonsensical storyline of the 2nd film, this one quickly acknowledges the existence of the first (and never mentions it again) and tells its own story. Luckily, the influences for this film seem to be Little Shop Of Horrors and maybe People Under The Stairs, and not the other Mangler movies.

Yes, like Stairs, this film takes place almost entirely in a single house in Los Angeles. Some folks (a father and son burglar team!) break in but can’t get out, find a girl trapped in there with them, and bad shit goes down. The bad shit is where the Little Shop allusion comes from – the villain of the film isn’t so much the machine, but a guy who is possessed by it (sure, why not) and feeds random folks to it. It also apparently gives him the power of invincibility, which is never quite explained (it results in a truly stupid and strangely inert epilogue), but again, why not? I’d rather watch any one plot element in this film than see the damn thing run down the street, or string poor Lance Henriksen up by cables and make him recite rap lyrics.

Unfortunately, the film’s low budget ultimately cripples the pace, as the lack of locations (and the fact that it’s not exactly a sprawling mansion) results in a movie that has a lot of padding; they could have easily cut about ten minutes out of the running time. Writer/directors Matt Cunningham and Eric Gardner will tell you they are building suspense, and to their credit, some of the film DOES have a bit of tension (particularly a scene when our would be heroine re-enacts the laundry chute scene from Halloween 5), but for every good suspense sequence, there’s yet another scene of someone walking as slowly as they possibly can around the hallways and bedrooms that the previous character(s) already walked through. It’s like watching one of those real estate walkthrough videos, only in 2.35:1 scope and occasional gore.

Speaking of the ratio – how sad is this? Since literally EVERY movie I have watched this week has been either full frame or non-anamorphic (a trend that will continue with tomorrow’s movie), when I first began watching this film I thought for sure that the 2.35 image I was seeing was incorrect, and used the “zoom” function on my TV to “fix” it, displaying a 1.78:1 image to fit my HDTV. But during the credits I noticed that the sides were being cut off, so I checked, and sure enough – it was a legitimate scope image! Granted, this sort of thing goes unnoticed by many, but trust me – there are so few horror movies (particularly DTV ones) that are shot with a wide lens, it’s like an instant stamp of “The filmmakers actually gave a shit”, so kudos.

Listening to the commentary track certainly confirmed this. While they seem to think the film works as a whole better than it actually does, it’s easy to see (hear?) that they were hardly just phoning in their work here, and despite the fact that they were making a 3rd film in a series absolutely no one liked, they put far more effort into making the film than anyone expected (certainly surprised me, I was expecting “worst of the week” levels here, and sadly it’s probably the week’s best*.), so I laud them for that. I also like that they put Jeff Burr, the patron saint of horror sequels, in a small role as, and this HAS to be a vague wink at the source material, “Lawnmower Man”.

I wish I could sweat Nesquik.

With some tighter editing (or maybe just a plot complication or two), and maybe some more convincing violence (whenever the possessed guy hits someone with his hammer or whatever, it looks and sounds like he’s merely tapping them on the shoulder), this could have been a really solid little movie. The gore is fantastic, the acting is decent (Reggie Bannister plays the Marion Crane role), and the technical aspects are quite impressive. The opening credits sequence is also pretty well done, though it features a pet peeve of mine (obviously fake “headlines” mixed in with real newspapers), and the score (by the same guys who did the incredible Session 9) is again, much better than one would expect. And since it was released a few years ago, before Lionsgate up and forgot about putting any sort of effort into their DVD releases, it has a fantastic transfer (the menu is a bit nonsensical though, as scene selection and Spanish subtitles are hidden in the “Special Features” submenu). I am curious what these guys (this is also the 3rd movie this week to have two directors!) can do with more money and an original, non-completely stupid concept.

What say you?

*I need to find better movies.

Read more »

Possession, Technology,

{[['']]}

White Noise 2 (2007)

FEBRUARY 16, 2008

GENRE: GHOST, TECHNOLOGY
SOURCE: DVD (STORE RENTAL)

Assuming I ever got off my ass and finished writing/uploading all of the reviews from February of 2007 (this blog began in April or May of 2007), there would still be a missing entry for February 16th. I was traveling, and being new to the whole thing, I had yet to make seeing a daily movie an almost effortless occurrence. But anyway, that means that the second White Noise 2 reached its nonsensical conclusion, I had officially gone 365 days in a row of horror movie watching. Yay me!

White Noise 2 was surprisingly watchable, no worse (or better) than the original, so I’m not sure why they didn’t at least give it a chance in theaters. Then again, between One Missed Call and The Eye, everything WN2 covered was already bombing in theaters, so shipping it off to Blockbuster was probably a wise move. The film’s two stars are more known for their small screen efforts anyway. Strangely, they both have a lot in common – quick, which one is known for starring in a cult sci-fi show, having a brief villainous role on a revival TV show about a tough female fighter, and being in a really bad Dimension movie: Nathan Fillion or Katee Sackhoff?* And I must admit, it was nice to see a scene where a character uses the internet and he uses Yahoo!, not GenericWebSearch.com. Seems to me that it would make a lot more sense to just ask Yahoo or whoever to use their image in the film (possibly get a few bucks for the use while they are at it) rather than design a distracting and ridiculous fake one.

Unlike Boogeyman 2 and some other DTV sequels of late, this one doesn’t even try to tie itself to the original; they don’t even have the requisite newspaper article with a file photo of the original’s star accompanied by some helpful exposition (“this guy had the same problem as you. Now he’s dead!”) that is synonymous with these type of sequels. But I guess it sort of makes sense, since this movie doesn’t really follow the same themes as the original. Fillion sees EVP on living people and tries to prevent their deaths, instead of Keaton watching static for ghosts and solving mysteries. So, yeah, this movie doesn’t really feature a lot of “white noise”. But I guess “Goofy Light Ray Filters Surrounding People That Only Our Hero Can See 2” would be a really stupid title.

The one thing it DOES share in common with the original is the presence of an actor who can almost make anything interesting. I’ve long claimed that Fillion could be the next Harrison Ford, but the problem is no one is going to give him a Star Wars (well, they tried to) or an Indiana Jones to put him on that level. It’s a shame to see him more or less wasted on nonsense like this and in thankless guest starring roles on Desperate Housewives and Lost (where the lucky sod played Kate’s husband – and even that wasn’t enough for me to even slightly dislike the guy). Sackhoff, on the other hand, should stick to Battlestar, because between this and Halloween: Resurrection I think it’s safe to say that whenever she plays a perky girly girl, she simultaneously plays the most annoying person on the face of the planet.

Two hundred paragraphs or so I mentioned The Eye: a film that also featured someone with the ability to prevent death. They also share a director, one Patrick Lussier, who reshot half the fhe other film after Lionsgate had problems with the original cut. And watching this film makes his contributions to The Eye all the more apparent; the guy has a serious hardon for symmetric tracking shots like this:

There are probably a dozen others, and there are just as many in The Eye. Maybe it's just some sort of Kubrickian homage, but the problem is he uses them so often they become a distraction, and the bulk of the movie is otherwise pretty standard (no fancy camera tricks and such), so they stick out even more than they should. And, much like his film Dracula 2000 (which featured Fillion in a small role – see how this all comes full circle?), WN2 has a lot of ridiculous religious ties. Granted, nothing in this film (or any other film, really) could ever hope to be as gloriously stupid as the idea that Dracula was in fact Judas Iscariot, but Lussier’s peculiar obsession grinds this movie to a halt when Fillion begins reading the Bible (out loud to himself, of course) and making numerology connections to Latin phrases involving Lucifer. Apparently, in addition to being the root of all evil, the Devil really enjoys coded logic puzzles. And, like any movie that features spiritual deadlines (everyone dies on the 3rd day of their being saved), the process is far too exact – I would think both God AND the Devil have better things to do than ensure that someone dies exactly 72 hrs to the minute after they were saved. It’s not quite as ridiculous as the Devil’s need to impregnate a woman by midnight in End of Days (“is that Eastern time?”), but it's still pretty silly.

There are a bunch of extras, including the most spoiler-filled “Making of” featurette I’ve ever seen on a DVD. Usually these things are promotional, not informative, so it’s strange to see one that shows a major character’s demise from the end of the film alongside all of the usual “fun” fluffy bullshit. There are also 30 minutes of extended/deleted scenes (most of them are worthless extensions, and on two or three of them I couldn’t even tell the difference) and a goofy piece about Fillion and some super cute PA chick walking around the allegedly haunted hospital where part of the movie was filmed. Finally, there’s a 20 minute segment on “real life” near death victims, all of whom apparently live in Seattle (the movie was shot in Canada, so your guess is as good as mine).

Oh and then there’s this guy, the fake Zach Braff:

Well, whatever. No one rents White Noise 2 expecting to be blown away. Fillion’s inherent charm is enough to keep the film watchable, and it’s nice to see him play “dark” for a change, but beyond that it’s nothing that will change your mind about the White Noise franchise.. Someone get the guy a good script, please?

What say you?

*Fillion was in Firefly, Buffy (the show, not the movie), and Dimension's Dracula 2000, Sackhoff is in Battlestar Galactica, the short lived Bionic Woman revamp, and Dimension's Halloween: Resurrection. Reaching? Maybe. But I like to demonstrate my worthless ability to make such connections.

Read more »

Ghost, Technology,

{[['']]}

Return In Red

FEBRUARY 2, 2008

GENRE: INDEPENDENT, POST-APOCALYPTIC, TECHNOLOGY
SOURCE: DVD (STORE RENTAL)

I wasn’t too kind to Ti West’s films The Roost and Trigger Man, two VERY independent productions that were far too slow and just plain uninteresting to me. I would hope those reviews (coupled with my admitted love of brain-dead action movies) wouldn’t lead anyone to believe I simply don’t like a movie that takes its time, because in reality, I am often quite compelled with this type of film. Such is the case with Return In Red, which is sort of an even MORE indie version of a film like The Signal.

Yes for the first twenty minutes or so (and several later chunks of time throughout the 101 minute film), the film is just comprised of small town folks just sort of doing their thing: fixing TV antennas, going to/from work, washing their hands, etcAnd even when folks begin going nuts/dying (due to a mysterious humming sound emanating from a white van that drives around the town), it won’t be mistaken for a Bruckheimer film; like West’s films, the violence comes suddenly and swiftly (at one point a guy died literally as I was saying “take your time, movie”). There’s really only one sort of horror setpiece in the entire film, as our heroine (by default) is besieged by the crazy folks inside a factory.

Those rare moments also include some unexpectedly top notch gore. Kudos to the team for pulling off the impressive effects on what couldn’t have been more than a few thousand dollars budget. On one occasion, a guy is repeatedly rammed with a forklift, until his head is partially severed. Good stuff.

Speaking of being impressed, this is the rare indie where you don’t see all of the same names in the cast as you do in the crew. In fact there are none other than the makeup guys playing (non-character) victims. The crew guys make the film, the actors act. Granted none of them are going to be up for a Spirit award, but then again they’re far from bad – the movie just doesn’t give them anything much to do. It’s an ensemble cast (hell, the guy that’s sort of the hero gets killed with a half hour to go), no one is more important than anyone else.

The end of the film is pretty chilling. SPOILERS – it’s never spelled out, but random radio voiceovers and the like suggest that the whole event was a government test. Indeed, the spots where the van was parked to play its sound are marked with orange flags, and the flags disappear at the end of the film. This idea is conveyed very subtly, and it freaked me out a little bit. Nice work.

There is also a bit of levity in the film. At one point an old man does an impression of the humming sound. Not only does it not sound like it at all, but he also flaps his arms around a bit as he “hums”. It’s hilarious. There’s also a guy who runs the factory (where half the town seems to be employed) who constantly swears for no reason. “Get back to work!” will not suffice for this guy, it’s “Get the FUCK back to work!” He pretty much works in an F-bomb in every one of his lines, and it delighted me every time.

On the technical side of things, the movie is disappointingly presented full frame, but the 16mm footage is quite good. The movie looks like it was shot in the 80s (if not for a modern Coke machine with 20 oz plastic bottles selling for 1.25, you’d be hard-pressed to find anything to date this movie past 1987 or so), which in hindsight was a great choice on director/writer’s Tyler Tharpe – even though his film predates those other stories, people tend to be stupid when it comes to such things, and it doesn’t help that the film, shot in 2004, just hit DVD in 2007, when the Stephen King novel Cell had been out for a while and The Signal had already gotten some buzz from festivals.

It won’t be for everyone, and I can’t even quite explain why I liked it more than those other films, but either way I think you should give it a shot if you happen upon it. It’s worth it for the old man’s little ‘moment’ alone.

What say you?

Read more »

Independent, Post-Apocalyptic, Technology,

{[['']]}

Untraceable (2008)

JANUARY 10, 2008

GENRE: SERIAL KILLER, TECHNOLOGY

SOURCE: THEATRICAL (PRESS SCREENING)

For a while I thought I was a fan of Gregory Hoblit. I really enjoyed Frequency, and consider Hart’s War to be one of the most underrated films in Bruce Willis’ career (I am proud to say I am one of the 14 people who saw Hart’s in theaters). And Primal Fear is one of the few Ed Norton movies I can stand. But now, after the double whammy of Fracture and Untraceable, I realize that the guy doesn't really have any sort of style or recurring themes in his films, and just sort of directs whatever comes his way, much like your Roger Donaldsons or Stephen Hopkinses.

(I haven’t seen Fallen).

The problem with Untraceable is that it tries to cater to two audiences: those who like Hostel or Saw, and those who enjoy Diane Lane movies and “adult thrillers” (read: movies in which putting a child in momentary danger is considered “edgy”). And it ends up satisfying neither. The traps are incredibly weak, and the whole hook of the movie (that the more people who log into the website, the faster the victim will be killed) is never really explained. We see the numbers going up, and the music and look in the victim’s eyes tell us that THIS IS BAD, but it’s never clear what exactly the increments mean. For example, one trap involves the victim in a big vat of water. The computer tracker thingie is connected to a tank of sulfuric acid. The more people that watch, the more acid is pumped in. But it seems sort of arbitrary – the gas gets released at random hit levels (as opposed to something like “for each million viewers, 1 ounce of gas will be released”). Also, they don’t bother coming up with any sort of explanation for what would happen if people began logging off of the site.

But on the flipside, the 40ish women who flock to see Lane in things like Over The Tucson Moon or whatever the fuck will be grossed out by the “horrible” things on screen, like, well, a guy dissolving in a tub of acid. There’s also a guy who is burnt to death, another is bled to death, and a kitty is starved to death. Come on, only gorehounds will like that stuff, and they will be bored shitless by the rest of the movie. The soccer moms will be disgusted and walk out. So who wins?

Well, assholes like me do! The one saving grace of the film is reading the stuff people post as they watch the videos. Unlike pretty much anything else in the movie, the stuff the kids say in response to the video feels authentic, with “ROFL he’s ded” (sic) and “OMG WTF?!?!?!?” type things flashing by. Most of them are only funny if you’ve seen the respective video, or otherwise I would post more (my favorite is one guy’s anger at “watching a house”). Had the entire movie just been a nonstop scroll of these comments, it would probably be my favorite movie of the year.

Another thing they totally skip over is how an FBI agent manages to get captured by a guy smaller than him (I’m not giving anything away, the killer’s identity is not a secret and he is 'revealed' in the first half hour). Like the notion of people logging off the site, it seems whatever they couldn’t come up with a plausible explanation for, they just skipped it entirely. They set up that he’s the killer’s target, and then viola! He’s tied to a torture device.

I wish they kept this practice for a truly idiotic plot device involving Morse code. The aforementioned FBI agent begins blinking strangely, and Lane figures out that it’s Morse code. This is sort of dumb, but I probably would have went with it. Unfortunately, it’s foreshadowed by the clunkiest line of dialogue ever recorded in a film. Earlier in the film, the same agent comments “Too bad he wasn’t a boy scout, he could bleed in Morse code and tell us his location.” That doesn’t make any fucking sense whatsoever, and no human being would ever say such a thing, UNLESS he was setting up the usage of Morse later in the film. Fucking Christ.

However, I will admit that I liked how, for once, when the one guy who knows Morse begins transcribing the message, he doesn’t find himself magically at the beginning of the phrase. I always hate that in movies, the person translating the code somehow knows everything the guy said prior to the revelation. It’s like, “It’s Morse Code! (grabs pen and paper) ‘Beep BEEEEP Beep Beep BEEEEEP’.... OK he says he is being held at the St James Hotel in room 405 and that there are 12 guys on him with assault rifles and also...”

Well, whatever. It’s a Screen Gems movie, so who is expecting anything but the hope they won’t want their money back? I saw it for free (though I had to pay 3 bucks for parking AND fight an hour’s worth of traffic to get there) so I don’t qualify, but had I paid for it, I guess I’d be OK with the loss of 10 bucks. I like Lane OK enough, and the dude playing her partner was kind of funny, since he swore all the time. Generic time-killer, nothing more, nothing less. *shrug*

What say you?

Read more »

Serial Killer, Technology,

{[['']]}

One Missed Call (2008)

JANUARY 5, 2008

GENRE: GHOST, SUPERNATURAL, TECHNOLOGY
SOURCE: THEATRICAL (REGULAR SCREENING)

Somewhere in the world, possibly even reading this review (Hi there!), there exists a human being who thought One Missed Call might actually be pretty good. This person ignored all of the tell-tale signs (the PG-13 rating (meant to be R during filming); the early January release; the fact that it's the umpteenth remake of a J-horror film; the lead actress who can't actually act paired with the lead actor who simply chooses NOT to....) and said to themselves: "Yes, I want to be in the One Missed Call business."

Well that person's a dope. Everyone else in the world, even some of the teenagers who the damn thing was made for, knew this wouldn't be any damn good (my screening was like 90% empty, and the 15 year old girl in front of me was shaking her head as she left). And guess what? It isn't. It's not HORRIBLE, like Ring Two or Pulse were, but it's just so painfully by-the-numbers that you can almost see the script template on the screen.

Yes, once again, we have a vengeful ghost using technology to get back on people who had nothing to do with her (it's always a girl) unfortunate demise, with a ticking clock on our hero and/or heroine's life to maintain the suspense. There's a corpse who needs a proper burial, a lot of "you're going to think I'm crazy BUT...." conversations, a strange calling card that lets the heroes know the deaths are related (here, not only is it the phone call, but also a piece of hard candy in the victim's mouth). If FearDotCom and The Ring gang-raped The Grudge and got it pregnant, the result would be this movie.

But at least those three films offered SOMETHING to make it worth your while (Fear had gore and Udo Kier, Ring is actually good, and Grudge had... well, Sarah Michelle Gellar looked pretty good in it). What does this offer? Well I guess if you're one of those folks who think Shannyn Sossamon is the hottest woman in the world, you might get some enjoyment out of watching her do the bare minimum amount of acting in order to collect her heroin check. Ed Burns, the poor sod, doesn't even do that much; in several scenes he looks like he's one blink away from nodding off entirely (it's ironic, for once I actually stayed awake through one of these damn movies while everyone on screen looked like they'd rather be napping). Ray Wise is kind of amusing in his 35 seconds of screen time, and Margaret Cho (of all people) gets in a good line that sort of makes fun of the hard candy subplot. But all of these people have done better work in better films (though it's better than Sossamon's The Order, I'll give it that much).

There's also a nice little mean-spirited "p.s." in the first kill scene that made me laugh out loud. And Sossamon's friend gets hilariously nailed by a train. More stuff like this and the movie could have been a minor gem, but sadly after these none of the death scenes have any levity or black humor. Which is a major problem for the film - it takes itself too seriously. The concept is ridiculous (even moreso when we learn the back-story), and had the characters followed suit and just had some fun, again, this could have been something. But no, apart from a brief scene where Burns and Sossamon try to break into an apartment, there's absolutely nothing even remotely amusing (intentionally so anyway) in the film.

Although, Massachusetts residents might get a kick out of the area code in the film. Even though they never say where they are (that I can recall anyway), at one point the number being dialed has area code 508, which is a Mass code (or at least, it WAS - it was my area code for a while growing up, but a few years ago it was changed to 978, so maybe 508 got retired).

So there you have it: a film in which the highlights are an area code and a cameo by Leland Palmer. Enticing, no? No. I have yet to see the original (attempts to see it beforehand were thwarted by the "Long Wait" kiss of death on my queue) but from what I understand it was nothing special in the first place.

(I was going to make a joke about how the film wasn't screened for critics and screening phone calls, but why put more effort into wrapping up my review than they did writing their movie?)

What say you?

Read more »

Ghost, Remake, Supernatural, Technology,

{[['']]}

Deadly Friend (1986)

NOVEMBER 4, 2007

GENRE: MAD SCIENTIST, TECHNOLOGY
SOURCE: DVD (OWN COLLECTION)

As far as I am concerned, DVD took a decade to hit its peak. That would be last month, when they finally released Wes Craven’s Deadly Friend legitimately (a bootleg DVD popped up at conventions for years until Warner announced it as part of their Twisted Terror collection). The DVD is still wholly disappointing (mono sound, no extras, doesn’t even have a fucking scene selection menu), but I don’t mind. I hadn’t seen the film since I was like 8, and retained fond memories of it (if only of the film’s most memorable moments – i.e. the basketball kill) I was mighty curious to see how it would hold up now that I am older and wiser, not to mention stupider.

What I didn’t remember was how fairly goofy the movie was. It’s essentially a kid’s movie, but with insane gore. I mean, he’s got a big yellow robot; he meets cute with not only a girl but a guy (the movie’s kind of weird); fights with a neighborhood bully, plays Halloween pranks... there’s even an old woman neighbor who they all fear. It’s sort of like a less whimsical Monster House. I honestly think the target audience for this movie are folks who were kids who were allowed to watch horror movies when it came out and are now easily amused assholes. Because really, who the fuck else could possibly enjoy this movie if they saw it for the first time as an adult? But on the flipside, you couldn’t be considered a very good person to recommend it for small children, what with all the rampant gore and violence.

Jesus, LOOK at this fucking thing.

Of course, the basketball kill is pretty much the most famous scene in Wes Craven’s career; the type of thing Youtube was invented for (strangely, going by the trailer, one would assume this kill was a reshoot, as the spot shows the victim being killed by getting smashed into a door). And it still holds up (i.e. makes me laugh my ass off) as well as it did back in 1987 or so. However, there aren’t many other kills in the film (the killer robot/zombie angle isn’t even introduced until about the 2/3 mark), but there’s enough gore in them to keep gorehounds happy.

Kristy Swanson has never been better, playing an expressionless robot.

The ending is pretty astounding. Showing signs of the “What the FUCK”ity of the Craven who would make Shocker, the conclusion finds a fully formed robot somehow nested inside the corpse of the girl. It bursts through her skin, complete with big monster teeth, and presumably eats the hero (offscreen). Then we hear, for about three straight minutes, the film’s non-theme theme song, which is just some guys going “Bee-bee. Buh-buh-buh-Bee-bee BEE-BEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE” over and over. What the christing hell? Shocker may be the finest moment in Wes’ career (in terms of sheer awesomeness, not actual quality), but it is now abundantly clear to me that Deadly Friend laid the foundation for it.

This one’s based on a book simply called "Friend". I can’t imagine it’s anywhere near as hilarious, but I must know. Someone please buy it for me for Christmas.

What say you?

Read more »

Based On Novel, Craven, Mad Scientist, Technology,

{[['']]}

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?

Read more »

Cult, Halloween Series, Holiday, October Extras, Technology, Weird,

{[['']]}

The Signal

OCTOBER 20, 2007

GENRE: INDEPENDENT, PSYCHOLOGICAL, TECHNOLOGY
SOURCE: THEATRICAL (SCREAMFEST LA)

All year I have been hearing about The Signal, most of it good (though one friend hated it, calling it “Horror for people who drink lattes”, which is hilarious even if I disagree). So expectations were high, but luckily they were met...

...for the first hour. The film is presented in 3 acts, or “transmissions”, and while I loved the first two, the third sort of fell apart, becoming repetitive and gimmicky.

Each part had a different director, and while it doesn’t really show in terms of shooting style, storywise they are admirably unique from one another. The first (also the best) is a straight up, “beginning of an apocalypse” style episode, as the signal (which comes from TV, not cell phones as some have reported in comparing it to Stephen King’s (inferior) novel titled "Cell") hits. The outbreak scenes are intense, and not without some humor. This is good, because the 2nd story is almost ALL humor. It’s a day later, and while some people are fully aware of what’s happening, others are oblivious, reflected by a new year’s eve party in which one character is so hell-bent on getting laid that he doesn’t seem to mind the fact that his friends are covered in blood from previous actions. There’s some great, dry comic touches throughout this part, plus more broad moments. Not much happens in terms of action in this part; if the first part was Night of the Living Dead, than this is more Shaun of the Dead.

That leaves the 3rd part, which is, I dunno, Not Very Good Movie of the Dead. While not a disaster, it just doesn’t offer any new characters or situations. Also, one side effect from the signal is that the affected person will confuse people in reality (so for example, one character “sees” his wife when the person is really a stranger), a gimmick that is overused and fairly obnoxious in this section; the film reaches a point where people are claiming to be other people to further add to the confusion. It would be fine had they DONE something with the concept, but it’s merely smoke and mirrors; serving only to provide the film with a more “exciting” climax.

Still, it’s not enough to totally derail the film, and it’s astounding how good the film looks considering how little it was shot for. Atlanta is a vastly underused shooting location, especially in horror, so that helped give the film a different look (rather than the umpteenth cinematic end of the world via Los Angeles). The acting is also quite good across the board, all unknowns.

The film is being released by Magnolia, who also released 2 of the year’s most interesting horror movies – The Host and Severance (and also the not-really-horror Right At Your Door, an apocalypse film set in... Los Angeles). Hopefully they won’t become another Lion’s Gate (a studio that is rapidly becoming another Dimension), because so far they are 4 for 4 this year.

What say you?

Read more »

Independent, Psychological, Technology,

{[['']]}

The Brink

SEPTEMBER 15, 2007

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

DID YOU KNOW:

That The Brink is so bad, it actually makes the execrable White Noise (which has a similar plot) look good in comparison?

I bet you didn't! Let's see what else we can learn from this otherwise worthless movie!

Did you know that Thomas Edison died from an axe wound he received when attempting to defend himself against a ghost that he had brought into our world via his newest invention - a radio that could talk to the dead?

Or that the best place to open a suitcase containing important documents is the side of the highway, with trucks and cars whizzing by inches away?

Or that the only engineers that have the ability to revive Edison's invention are not older dudes in their 40s, but incredibly cute girls in their 20s?

Or that someone could remember a doll that she had as a newborn infant?

Or that 71 minutes (with a listed running time of 74 minutes) could still feel endless, and include lots of padding?

Or that most episodes of Goosebumps are not only scarier, but less idiotic to an intelligent viewer?

Or that IMDb lists this film as being Action, Drama, Horror, Sci-Fi, AND Thriller, and yet fails to achieve even the most basic principles of any of those type of films?

If you did not know any of those things, then I recommend The Brink to you! Otherwise, it's 74-but-really-71 minutes of your life you will never get back, unless Thomas Edison had also invented a machine that allowed you to do so.

What say you?

Read more »

Crap, Ghost, Technology,

{[['']]}

The Mangler 2

JULY 14, 2007

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

Well, at least no one can ever accuse me of abandoning the Mangler franchise.

You know you’re in trouble when the biggest star in the movie, besides poor Lance Henriksen (or, as the credits spell it, Henricksen, the fucking idiots), is Will Sanderson, a.k.a. “The guy from all the Uwe Boll movies.” You know you’re in even MORE trouble when you wish you were watching him in one of those instead. Yes, The Mangler 2 is so bad, you could find yourselves saying “I wish I was watching House of the Dead”.

It almost takes a certain kind of talent to actually make a movie that fails to live up to the original film, which, if you don’t recall (and hopefully you don’t), was about a giant laundry machine running around killing folks. But yet, Michael Hamilton-Wright (why does he have a maiden name?) managed to do just that, making an “in name only” sequel that manages to make other “in name only” sequels look like they’re on a LOTR or Star Wars level of franchise consistency. It’s almost admirable that they came up with something even stupider than a rampaging laundry machine (a computer virus that somehow can control assorted cables and wires and use them to grab garden shears and kill a guy offscreen), but how they got away with still calling it a Mangler movie is beyond me. Kudos, gents.

Supposedly there was a pressing of the DVD that was somehow missing two minutes of the movie. I wish I had one of those. Instead, I got the whole goddamn thing. From the “French” cook who sounds more like an Italian with a cold, to the incoherent kill scenes (one, involving a fire axe, ranks as one of the most bafflingly vague kill scenes in history. The TV edit of Friday the 13^th Part V is more coherent), to the fact that the filmmakers seemingly do not understand how to count (a clock counting down what should be 15 minutes is actually 15 hours if you pay attention), to the 20 LITERALLY NONSTOP minutes of techno music during the 3^rd act, all the way to the idiotic notion that 5 potheads and misfits would be in charge of the dorms at this college, there is literally not a single point in the film where you may find yourself entertained.

Actually I take that back. There is a scene that is seemingly grafted in from another movie that I enjoyed in a ‘so bad it’s good’ way (as opposed to all of the other scenes, which were more of a ‘so bad I want to skullfuck myself to death’ way). A girl appears out of nowhere (the school is supposedly deserted, and the lass has never been seen prior) and begins doing laundry. A cupboard door starts banging from the inside. So she opens a different cupboard, and surprisingly enough, sees nothing. Then she drinks some gin. Then the whole scene more or less repeats twice. Finally, a giant steam press of some sort (this is the closest the film comes to having any relation to the original) which has no business being in such a high tech school’s laundry room (?) in the first place, somehow manages to get a hold of her hair, pull her inside, and I guess flatten her head. Like all of the other kill scenes in the film, it’s edited and shot in order to hide, well, everything. I am only assuming what happened to her, as all we get is a shot of some hair going through the roller thing, and then some blood spraying on the wall. They never even set up that the steam press is in the room. It’s so inane I had to laugh, before I resumed crying.

It’s a shame to see Lance slumming in garbage like this. The guy is one of the best all time genre actors, and while he may not have the best sense in choosing scripts, he usually elevates a film simply with his presence. But he has no such luck here. He plays his final scene suspended by some of those magic cables I mentioned earlier, and speaking dialog like “Show me what you want, what you really really want.” Oh… oh Lance… *shakes head*.

I was hoping the commentary track would at least be honest, with the filmmakers making fun of the film and pointing out all the gaps in logic, storytelling, etc. But no, they are seemingly of the impression they made a good film, and instead of dishing dirt on the shitty effects team or whatever, they go on and on about lighting, point out “homages” to vastly superior films and directors (“This is my Scorsese shot” he says, without even a trace of irony), and praise just about everyone, including themselves. They’re also fond of reciting the actors’ résumés, even reminding us twice of why we usually would be excited to see Lance (“He played Bishop in Aliens”, they tell us after he first appears and then again later for good measure). There’s some other extras on the DVD, but life is too short. Hell, even if I was a goddamn immortal, life would be too short.

I cannot not recommend this movie enough.

What say you?

Read more »

Crap, Technology,

{[['']]}