Free Watch World War Z (2013) Online Streaming

StorylineLife for former United Nations investigator Gerry Lane and his family seems content. Suddenly, the world is plagued by a mysterious infection turning whole human populations into rampaging mindless zombies. After barely escaping the chaos, Lane is persuaded to go on a mission to investigate this disease. What follows is a perilous trek around the world where Lane must brave horrific dangers and long odds to find answers before human civilization falls.

Remember Philly!

Movie details World War Z

Release : 2013-06-21
Genre : Action, Drama, Horror, Science Fiction, Thriller
Runtime : 116 minutes
Company : GK Films, Paramount Pictures, Skydance Productions, Hemisphere Media Capital

Cast

	Brad Pitt	as	Gerry Lane
	Mireille Enos	as	Karen Lane
	James Badge Dale	as	Captain Speke
	Elyes Gabel	as	Andrew Fassbach
	David Andrews	as	Navy Captain Mullenaro
	Abigail Hargrove	as	Rachel Lane
	Daniella Kertesz	as	Segen
	Ludi Boeken	as	Jurgen Warmbrunn
	Matthew Fox	as	Parajumper
	Fana Mokoena	as	Thierry Umutoni
	David Morse	as	Ex-CIA Agent
	Peter Capaldi	as	W.H.O. Doctor
	Moritz Bleibtreu	as	W.H.O. Doctor
	Fabrizio Zacharee Guido	as	Tomas
	Ruth Negga	as	W.H.O. Doctor

Search Result :

World War Z - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
World War Z: An Oral History of the Zombie War is a 2006 apocalyptic horror novel by Max Brooks. It is a follow-up to his 2003 satirical survival manual, The Zombie ...

World War Z (2013) - IMDb
Life for former United Nations investigator Gerry Lane and his family seems content. Suddenly, the world is plagued by a mysterious infection turning whole human ...

World War Z (film) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
World War Z is a 2013 British-American apocalyptic film directed by Marc Forster. The screenplay by Matthew Michael Carnahan is based on the 2006 novel of ...

World War Z Trailer, News, Videos, and Reviews | ComingSoon.net
Box Office Results: Gravity Blasts Off with Record $55.6 Million Opening! WB's Kevin Tsujihara Says 'We Need to Get Wonder Woman on the Big Screen or TV'

World War Z - Max Brooks Zombie World
Prepare yourself for the end of days today. Featuring the New York Times bestsellers The Zombie Survival Guide and World War Z (now a major motion picture).

Zombiepedia - World War Z - Zombie Wiki - Zombies, Undead ...
World War Z is a novel by Max Brooks which chronicles the fictional "World War Z" or "Zombie World War". It is a follow-up to his previous book, The Zombie Survival Guide

World War Z | Trailer and Cast - Yahoo Movies
Lens Flare Addiction and Other 'Star Trek Into Darkness' Apologies. Eyestrained Star Trek: Into Darkness enthusiasts the world over had their "A-ha" moment recently ...

World War Z 2012 Fan-Made Trailer - YouTube
A look ahead to the highly-anticipated zombie film, World War Z. For more, check out http://thekibitzers.com/

World War Z: An Oral History of the Zombie War: Max Brooks ...
World War Z: An Oral History of the Zombie War and over one million other books are available for Amazon Kindle. Learn more

Screen Rant - World War Z Will Begin In December 2012
Paramount has slated the adaptation of the best-selling zombpocalyptic novel 'World War Z' for theatrical release in winter 2012.

Read more »

Action, Drama, Horror, Science Fiction, Thriller,

{[['']]}

Free Watch The Hunger Games: Catching Fire (2013) Online Streaming

StorylineThe continuing adventures of Katniss Everdeen, which take place in a futuristic dystopian world, as she prepares for the Quarter Quell.

Every revolution begins with a spark.

Movie details The Hunger Games: Catching Fire

Release : 2013-11-22
Genre : Action, Adventure, Science Fiction, Thriller
Runtime :
Company : Color Force, Lionsgate, Alarm Clock Films

Cast

	Jennifer Lawrence	as	Katniss Everdeen
	Josh Hutcherson	as	Peeta Mellark
	Liam Hemsworth	as	Gale Hawthorne
	Sam Claflin	as	Finnick Odair
	Elizabeth Banks	as	Effie Trinket
	Alan Ritchson	as	Gloss
	Jena Malone	as	Johanna Mason
	Stanley Tucci	as	Caeser Flickerman
	Willow Shields	as	Primrose Everdeen
	Woody Harrelson	as	Haymitch Abernathy
	Philip Seymour Hoffman	as	Plutarch Heavensbee
	Donald Sutherland	as	President Snow
	Amanda Plummer	as	Wiress
	Meta Golding	as	Enobaria
	Lenny Kravitz	as	Cinna
	Lynn Cohen	as	Mags
	Toby Jones	as	Claudius Templesmith
	Stephanie Leigh Schlund	as	Cashmere
	Bruno Gunn	as	Brutus
	Maria Howell	as	Seeder
	E. Roger Mitchell	as	Chaff
	Patrick St. Esprit	as	Romulus Thread

Search Result :

The Hunger Games: Catching Fire (2013) - IMDb
Katniss Everdeen and Peeta Mellark become targets of the Capitol after their victory in the 74th Hunger Games sparks a rebellion in the Districts of Panem. IMDb

Catching Fire - The Hunger Games Wiki
Catching Fire is the second book in The Hunger Games trilogy by Suzanne Collins. It is the sequel to the 2008 bestseller The Hunger Games. The book ...

Catching Fire - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Catching Fire is a 2009 science fiction novel by American novelist Suzanne Collins, the second book in The Hunger Games trilogy. As the sequel to the 2008 bestseller ...

The Hunger Games: Catching Fire - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The Hunger Games: Catching Fire is an upcoming American science-fiction adventure film based on Suzanne Collins' novel, Catching Fire, the second installment in The ...

The Hunger Games: Catching Fire - Exclusive Teaser Trailer - YouTube
THE HUNGER GAMES: CATCHING FIRE begins as Katniss Everdeen has returned home safe after winning the 74th Annual Hunger Games along with fellow tribute ...

The Hunger Games: Catching Fire | Trailer and Cast - Yahoo Movies
Katniss Everdeen has returned home safely after winning the 74th Annual Hunger Games along with fellow tribute Peeta Mellark. Winning means that they must turn around ...

The Hunger Games: Catching Fire - The Hunger Games Wiki
The Hunger Games: Catching Fire Every Revolution Begins With a Spark Director Francis Lawrence...

Catching Fire (The Second Book of the Hunger Games): Suzanne ...
Catching Fire (The Second Book of the Hunger Games) and over one million other books are available for Amazon Kindle. Learn more

The Hunger Games: Catching Fire - MovieTickets.com
The Hunger Games: Catching Fire - Buy movie tickets, find showtimes, read reviews, see trailers and more on MovieTickets.com

The Hunger Games: Catching Fire | Movies.com
Read the The Hunger Games: Catching Fire movie synopsis, view the movie trailer, get cast and crew information, see movie photos, and more on Movies.com.

Read more »

Action, Adventure, Science Fiction, Thriller,

{[['']]}

Special Effects (1984)

JUNE 28, 2008

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

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

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

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

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

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

What say you?

Read more »

Cohen, Crap, Thriller,

{[['']]}

Black Dragons (1942)

MAY 28, 2008

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

Honestly, I can’t take another one of these movies. I can’t even tell them apart anymore. Even though Black Dragons has a spy plot (with lots of racist overtones – I wasn’t aware major newspapers referred to our enemies simply as “Japs”), it’s essentially yet another movie that takes place in a large house, features a butler, a horror icon (Lugosi here), a wise talking cop, and a dame who is there to see someone with ties to her uncle (or her uncle himself in some of them). Murders are largely off-screen, bodies disappear, people run in and out of a lot of rooms with swinging doors, etc. It’s the same crap I’ve watched a dozen times on this set.

The odd thing about the movie is that the synopsis gives away the film’s twist ending. It says it’s about a guy who is imprisoned after performing plastic surgery on six Japanese men who plan to impersonate six different US leaders. But none of that is really even mentioned in the film’s first 55 minutes or so, it’s only revealed in the final 10 minutes what exactly Lugosi was up to and why he was killing some dudes. It’d be like saying that The Usual Suspects is about a guy named Keyser Soze who fabricates a story to a detective while he awaits bail for his assumed alias of Verbal Kint.

Then again, the synopsis also mistakes Lugosi for Karloff, so I should have known better than to put any stock into it.

It’s also one of the lesser transfers on the set. An entire chunk of the film has white noise over it (it actually sounds like popcorn being popped at an alarmingly delicious rate), and certain reels have sections with what could only be described as electronic mud on the right side of the frame. Somewhere in the world there exists a man who considers this to be his favorite film, and it’s sad to think that he can’t get a decent copy.

That aside, the rest is the same as the others, so if you haven’t seen any of them (and judging from the lack of comments for these movies, you haven’t), there is some mild entertainment to be had from the story, particularly the scenes where Lugosi holds an imprisoned dude down and forces him to ward off visitors by telling them that he is fine and doesn’t need their assistance (Lugosi’s operation on his face left him monstrous). And the dame (Joan Barclay) is pretty cute, which makes it all the more puzzling why not only does she never kiss our hero, but she is also revealed to be an undercover cop in the film’s final act, an issue that is never brought up again or resolved. Why not have her onscreen more? You get eye candy AND resolution of your own generic subplots!

I only have about a dozen movies left on the Horror Classics set; I hope like hell none of them follow this story template. If so I may be forced to take drastic action (like, watch something else that day).

What say you?

Read more »

Horror Classics, Revenge, Thriller,

{[['']]}

The House of Usher (2006)

MAY 15, 2008

GENRE: THRILLER
SOURCE: DVD (STORE RENTAL)

The Vincent Price version of Poe’s "Usher" story was pretty good, and for the most part escaped its short story trappings – it didn’t FEEL like a stretched out tale. I cannot say the same for The House Of Usher, which is so dull and repetitious that I don’t even think it would work as a half hour Tales From The Crypt episode.

Nearly 80% of the film is this: Boring Austin Nichols is writing. The occasionally American, usually Polish-accented Izabella Miko walks in and touches his arm or something. They have the following conversation:

Miko: “How’s it going?”
Nichols: “OK. Now that you’re here.”
Miko: “I have to go back soon.”
Nichols: “No. Stay. I need you here.”
Miko: “But what about my life?”
Nichols: “You can make a life here.”
Miko (looks out window): “I miss her so much.”
Nichols: “Me too.”
(Beth Grant watches disapprovingly from the doorway, then walks away).

Now this isn’t an exact transcript, but a general idea of what you will see over and over and over during the film’s (still too long) 80 minute running time. The other two scenes are Miko and Grant being cold to one another, and occasionally Miko seeing her friend who should be dead. Finally, with 15 minutes to go, the movie remembers to, you know, DO something, as Nichols begins running around trying to kill Miko, and the dead sister comes back to help... it’s still pretty boring, but the music and more frenetic camerawork makes you think otherwise.

Speaking of the camerawork – it’s really awkward. The cutting and blocking is very jarring at times, particularly in the first 20 minutes or so. It’s probably supposed to make you feel uneasy, but since there’s nothing in the film that is holding your interest, it just annoys.

That said, otherwise it’s at least a well made film – rainy Massachusetts is captured well, and the scope aspect ratio is surprisingly fitting, despite the fact that the entire film takes place in a house. And the attempts to modernize Poe’s tale are somewhat admirable; it doesn’t feel anachronistic at any rate.

I was surprised at how bad Beth Grant was in the film, too. She’s usually pretty entertaining (either as a villain or someone you’re supposed to like), but she’s incredibly stiff here. Miko’s uneven accent is too distracting to determine whether she can act or not, and Austin Nichols is as dull as they come. Look, if you want a guy with that “look” for your film, may I suggest Aaron Douglas, who plays Chief Tyrol on Battlestar. That guy is gold.

There’s a commentary, but I can’t imagine sitting through the film again to listen to it. Maybe though; as I write this, I’m not feeling well, so maybe I’ll put it on to put me to sleep.

What say you?

Read more »

Thriller,

{[['']]}

Do You Like Hitchcock? (2005)

MAY 4, 2008

GENRE: ITALIAN, THRILLER
SOURCE: DVD (OWN COLLECTION)

Enough of this thriller shit... tomorrow’s movie better be about monsters killing people in incredibly graphic ways. After the very “light on horror” Burbs and Godsend, I was looking for something more traditional. Thankfully, Anchor Bay answered the call, sending me the new Dario Argento Box set yesterday, which features two films already reviewed on HMAD (Trauma and Tenebrae), one I haven’t seen since I was a kid (Phenomena), and two I haven’t seen at all. One is The Card Player, and it better be more of a horror movie than Do You Like Hitchcock? (aka Ti Piace Hitchcock?), which features three kills in the entire film, and one is a goddamn chicken (and another is just a dude accidentally being hit by a car). If I have to stretch the criteria for what is and what isn’t a horror film for a goddamn Dario Argento movie, there’s something wrong!

It’s not a bad film at least (miles better than Phantom of the Opera, which was the most recent of his films that I had seen prior to this, and so bad I almost decided to never watch another of his recent films). In fact, considering it was a TV movie, it’s actually pretty solid, if not exactly top notch Argento. Also, on that note – what the hell kind of television does Italy have? This “TV movie” has a very graphic kill, rampant nudity and profanity, suggested incest, etc.... so really, saying “it’s good for a TV movie” is sort of giving it too much credit, since the medium obviously doesn’t have the same limitations that US television does. Also, it’s shot on video, which is a bummer no matter what medium/country you are working in, and even moreso when the film is directed by one of the most visually creative horror directors of all time.

None of the video looked really bad though, and in fact on a technical level, other than an odd glitch during the opening credits (why are they windowboxed?) it’s a perfectly good and professional looking film. But I expect nothing less from Dario.

What DID bug me was the setup of the video store that serves as the jumping point for several of the film’s plotlines. I spotted Green Mile filed along with several Hitchcock thrillers, and Mission Impossible 2 next to The Exorcist. Who the fuck alphabetized and categorized this place? There were other errors as well, not to mention a baffling amount of promotion for The Card Player (it’s almost as if the film was mocking me for not watching that instead).

And on that note, our protagonist is a pretty awful film student. He talks like your typical movie nerd guy, but then we see him watching Nosferatu on his widescreen TV, and he has the film stretched horizontally rather than at the correct square ratio. You fucking jerk! Look, no one likes to watch 4:3 movies on their nice 16:9 TV, but for Christ’s sake, don’t stretch out the image to make up for it! The movie looks like shit when you do that! Some fucking film student; he woulda gotten his ass kicked at my school.

As for the movie itself? It’s an interesting concept, but not enough is done with it. For some reason I was under the impression that the film concerned a serial killer who was killing people in Hitchcock homages (so like, he would kill someone in the shower, and throw a guy off Mt. Rushmore, or whatever). But instead it’s basically just a Strangers On A Train/Rear Window hybrid, with a bit of Dial M For Murder (and an affectionate mother that I guess is supposed to evoke Psycho, or at least Psycho IV), with our hero thinking that the femme fatale is copying the films on purpose. The film’s final scene is fascinating, as he realizes a pretty awful fact about himself; but that should have been the focus of the film, not a mini “twist” at the end.

Still, mediocre Argento is better than the best work of many others, and it’s certainly an entertaining piece. The Rear Window-esque finale is pretty suspenseful, and the hero’s never-fully explained flashbacks/dreams about two witches in the woods are vintage Dario. The box set is reasonably priced – just consider the film a bonus disc and you’re pretty much guaranteed an entertaining watch.

However, unless you speak Italian, don’t bother with the making of piece – it’s in Italian without subtitles. It’s not too hard to figure out what’s going on, but since these things are sort of worthless to begin with (there are no interviews included within) it’s even less appealing when you can’t really understand exactly WHAT boring things they are saying.

What say you?

Read more »

Argento, Italian, Thriller,

{[['']]}

The 'Burbs (1989)

MAY 3, 2008

GENRE: COMEDIC, THRILLER
SOURCE: THEATRICAL (BACKYARD SCREENING!)

Some may wonder why The ‘Burbs is included as a Horror Movie A Day entry, and it’s perfectly reasonable to do so. However, it meets my criteria (IMDb lists it as comedy/horror), and quite frankly – there is more legit suspense and (light) scares than in many “straight” horror films. So F you! It’s horror!

(I also like the fact that now I have two Tom Hanks - the least horror-ish guy ever born - movies reviewed here.)

It’s also hilarious. The reason I think the film works where so many others have failed is that it puts funny people into a standard horror movie situation, rather than try to make a funny situation scary (such as recent films like Killer Pad – which is about a crazy, out of control teen party that gets crashed by demons or something. I haven’t seen it, but the trailer made me want to slit my wrists). The plot is really no different than Fright Night or certain Twilight Zones – a guy becomes convinced that his neighbors are murderers. And the fact that (spoiler) they ARE certainly solidifies the film as horror, although it ends rather abruptly after this reveal.

I’m convinced that Tom Hanks is the only guy in the world who could have pulled off the role of Ray. A lot of big actors have certain “Everyman” abilities that the best (non big) character actors have, but still just don’t look right in certain situations. For example: Bruce Willis. Sure, I buy him as a regular detective, or a boxer, or whatever, but there is absolutely nothing sillier than the sight of him driving an SUV around suburbia in The Story Of Us. But Hanks doesn’t have that problem, and he’s friggin flawless here (asking his neighbor to look at his new tools is the film’s funniest moment). I wish the guy would do more non-romantic comedic work; after this he pretty much only did one more (Joe Vs The Volcano) and then it was all dramas and romcoms, with the occasional Road To Perdition to “stretch”.

I also really dig the ensemble nature of the film. The best scenes are the ones with three or more of them doing something ridiculous in order to discover more about their neighbors. Hanks may be the star, but if it was just him vs. the neighbors, the movie would probably suck (especially since Bruce Dern is the one who delivers the film’s most quotable line – “You’re about a 9 on the tension scale, Rube!”). Again, this is part of why the ending feels a bit weak, as it comes down to just Hanks vs the head of the killer family (Henry Gibson), with the supporting cast all off somewhere else (Corey Feldman disappears entirely in the last 10 minutes, only resurfacing in the final shot). Maybe a scene of the family "in action" would have helped, though I can understand the reasons for not wanting to do so.

As you may have noticed, the film was watched in a backyard. My buddy Mike has a great projector setup, and since it was his birthday, there was plenty of delicious snacks for me to devour. As a bonus, the film’s editor (Marshall Harvey, a friend of Mike's), brought sardines on pretzels, the "awful" hors d'oeuvres that the family serves Hanks when they finally enter the strange house and meet the neighbors. I believe I was the only one who had any, and I’m certainly the only one who ate three. Look, sardines – good! Pretzels – good! I don’t really see the issue.

Also, the location added another thrill to the proceedings – when Dern sits on his roof you can see the same mountain in the background that you can see from Mike’s street (the movie was filmed on the same backlot at Universal that now serves as Wisteria Lane). That’s fucking cool. Imagine watching, I dunno, Star Wars and then looking out your window and seeing Mos Eisley or something? Actually that would mean I was in a fictional spaceworld and listening to the same annoying song for eternity, so I’d probably freak out.

What say you?

Read more »

Comedic, Thriller,

{[['']]}

Godsend (2004)

MAY 2, 2008

GENRE: KILLER KID, MAD SCIENTIST, THRILLER
SOURCE: DVD (ONLINE RENTAL)

Some movies, you watch and just wonder how they got made. There’s nothing particularly awful about Godsend, but at the same time, nothing very good either. They take an interesting concept (clones become crazy once they get older than their original counterparts) and do absolutely nothing with it, resulting in a movie that feels like the first act stretched out for 100 minutes. Certainly you can make an interesting religion vs. science debate type movie on the cloning issue, but these ideas are barely even mentioned, let alone explored; it's like the local public access version of presenting two sides of an important issue. Fucking Clonus Horror had more to say. And the ending is as half-assed as it gets; the movie doesn’t conclude so much as it just sort of stops. This is the type of shit I expect from a straight to DVD movie, but not one starring one of the greatest actors of all time, not to mention Robert De Niro.

It also features Cameron Bright as... a creepy kid! Seriously, what the hell is with his agent? Can’t he ever just play a regular kid? No, he’s gotta be the key to all human mystery or whatever the fuck (twice – X3 and Ultraviolet), or a weird son of a Russian who almost gets molested by Juliet from Lost (Running Scared) or simply being lusted after by Nicole Kidman (Birth). Get this poor little bastard into a talking dog movie or something normal like that.

At least he DOES something in the movie (kills another kid and dumps him in the river). Everyone else is content with simply sitting around talking about how strange he is. Hell, the bad guy (De Niro) is never even really confronted or fought – when Greg Kinnear finally threatens to tell the cops about his illegal clone factory, De Niro hits him over the head and knocks him out. Kinnear escapes somehow (the building in which he’s laying unconscious is also on fire), De Niro simply... moves to another town. Then Kinnear moves the family to a new town, where we see an additional 5 minutes of nothing continuing to happen. The DVD has 4 other endings (almost an hour’s investment), all of which are slightly better but still incredibly underwhelming. Was Godsend supposed to be a franchise or something? Why don’t they bother fucking CONCLUDING any of the film’s storylines? Our bad guy is neither stopped or victorious, our killer kid is neither cured or killed (or locked up), etc. The entire movie is just sort of there.

Considering that the director and writer both contribute to the disc's extras, one must imagine that the film wasn’t re-edited without their consent or anything of that nature (the only problems they allude to is not having enough money to film the ending they originally wanted, but with 5 different endings ordered by the studio, they ended up filming it anyway). So why is the film so incomplete? At the beginning, we see the kid having a party with all of his friends. He seems a bit more interested in talking to De Niro than playing with them, but still, he is obviously a sort of normal kid (until he passes the aforementioned threshold) . But when he begins getting weird, all of his friends disappear from the movie. We know his parents don’t care for his new behavior, but how is he acting with the other kids? The only interaction he has after that is with a new bully in school (played by the absolute worst child actor this side of Return of Swamp Thing), and of course, the one kid he kills. He's obviously the most interesting character in the film, and yet they ignore him as much as possible. Another example – it’s hinted that De Niro has interest in Kinnear’s wife (Rebecca Romijn), but again, this is never explored beyond him buying up a bunch of her crappy photos.

And for the love of Christ, how can you take a movie seriously when they try to make those metallic stress ball things scary? They literally try to evoke scares by playing the sound of the two balls scraping together REALLY LOUDLY. Ooooh, spooky.

No deleted scenes help explain any of this crap. Other than the alternate endings, the only other extra is a commentary by the pretentious Brit director, a track that is merely dull until the point where he suddenly invites his DP to join him, at which point they begin discussing lenses and film stock, rather than why their movie is so fucking pointless.

What say you?

- LOL @ BEST PRICE!!!

Read more »

Killer Kid, Mad Scientist, Thriller,

{[['']]}

Stuck (2007)

APRIL 24, 2008

GENRE: THRILLER
SOURCE: THEATRICAL (PRESS SCREENING)

Why can’t Carpenter follow Stuart Gordon’s lead? After dabbling with big budget, more studio friendly movies, Gordon retreated back into the world of independent cinema, resulting in a very strong output over the past 10 years. The latest is Stuck, and while it has a few problems, it’s the exact type of film I want to see from the legends of the 70s and 80s – a small film that maximizes its potential, rather than high concept garbage that falls flat (you heard me, Ghosts of Mars).

And the concept is a great one – Mena Suvari accidentally hits Steven Rea with her car, and rather than take him to a hospital, she leaves him bleeding and impaled around the waist area, through her windshield. The film is basically just Rea trying to escape and Suvari trying to hide him while she figures out what to do. Most of the film takes place in Suvari’s house/garage, and the cast is pretty compact as well. It allows Gordon to more or less fully flesh out an idea, rather than shoot for the sky and fall flat.

Hell, this would work even better had Gordon gone even SMALLER, particularly, for a Masters of Horror episode. While it’s hardly a long film (85 minutes maybe?), it does get a bit repetitive in the middle, particularly when Suvari’s friend shows up and she has to convince the girl that she simply hit a deer. The black humor doesn’t work as well here (it feels like a sitcom) and it’s just another complication when there are already several. Wiping this chunk (actually, the entire character, who is annoying throughout) out of the film would have improved it immensely, in my opinion.

I also would have liked to have seen a verbal showdown between Rea and Suvari. He’s a homeless guy, and she makes her living taking care of old folks at a nursing home (why someone who’s so good at her job that she is due for a promotion can’t even bother to bring a hurt man some water is another unexplored avenue, but not really an issue). Even if just a brief one, I think a full-blown conversation between the two (instead of brief exchanges, usually consisting of only a single line or two), would be one of the film’s best scenes.

Otherwise, it’s a solid suspense flick. Rea is fantastic, as always, and a scene where he attempts to remove a broken windshield wiper from his belly is a nice, bloody, cringe-worthy setpiece. The scene culminates with Rea making a phone call to 911, and having to deal with none other than Jeffrey Combs (voice only) as the world’s most impatient 911 operator. In fact, there are a lot of jokes at the expense of bureaucracy and “the system”, which got quite a few laughs out of me. And the finale is a surprisingly bloody and violent one, with everyone more or less getting their just desserts in a crowd-pleasing fashion.

This one is going into limited release, if you happen to live nearby you should check it out, if for nothing else other than to reassure yourself that the guys who made the films we grew up on still know how to make an effective film when they want to.

What say you?

Read more »

Thriller,

{[['']]}

The Sadist (1963)

APRIL 14, 2008

GENRE: BREAKDOWN, THRILLER
SOURCE: THEATRICAL (REVIVAL SCREENING)

I may be wrong (I often am, even when pointing out that I am often wrong), but I believe The Sadist may be the very first “Folks break down en route to something and run afoul of a psychotic killer” movie. Granted, it’s partially taken from reality (mainly the Charles Starkweather case), but the hallmarks of the sub-genre are all on display: the broken down car, the escape attempts, the cops showing up and nosing around, etc.

Unlike most of those movies, or, all of them, this one has an ace up its sleeve: Arch Hall Jr. If you’re unfamiliar with the lad, you’re missing out on 12% of all that is good in the world. He doesn’t act so much as he just sort of sneers and laughs (just look at the cover art!), and he often comes off more like a mentally handicapped kid playing guns than a sadistic killer. Still, he is quite effective, because he’s just so batshit and without remorse (nowadays, our killers always seem to have good qualities). It’s a phenomenal thing to watch, and luckily he’s on screen for almost the entire film.

And this IS a “film”. Not only is it one of the few in history to take place in real time (and pulls it off better than many of the other films that have tried it, such as Nick of Time, Johnny Depp’s sole attempt playing a normal guy in a normal action thriller movie), but it’s also wonderfully shot by a guy named William Zsigmond. Not familiar with the name? Well it’s a pseudonym (or really bizarre misspelling) of Vilmos Zsigmond, the legendary cinematographer who has gone on to considerably classier things, such as Close Encounters Of The Third Kind and Deliverance (and, for some goddamn reason, Jersey Girl). It’s to his credit that a movie with almost nothing happening, set almost exclusively on a patch of dirt in front of a gas station, with only five people, seems as alive and exciting as it does. Sure, it gets a little draggy near the end (the chase between Hall and one of the victims goes on forever), but otherwise, it’s an amazing achievement for such a small, obviously low budgeted movie.

Our hero, Ed (Richard Stiles) is also a delight. Early on, he delivers a howler – “I don’t want to shock you, but I don’t want to get my shirt dirty”, which he tells our heroine as he takes off his overly dressy shirt while he fixes the car. He’s wearing the tightest wifebeater known to man, and it’s obviously a bit cold during the filming of a few scenes. Really weird. He’s also incredibly inept and immune to, you know, DOING anything. There’s a bit where he goads Hall into firing off his last bullet, and then just stands there while a weaponless Hall grabs another clip and reloads. Fucking putz. This scene comes after one that had me rolling, as Ed tries to figure out just how many bullets Hall has left. He knows four shots have been fired, but then he just starts basically making shit up to account for the others, figuring “he probably shot someone else too!” and the like.

His ineptness continues to the very end of the film. Running from Hall, he tries to jump on a ledge that’s about 2 feet off the ground, and fails. He falls to the ground, then gets up and charges at Hall, who calmly empties a clip into the poor sod’s chest. Why the fuck didn’t you do that BEFORE, dumbass? The other guy in the movie is more intelligent, but he buys it early on, after a rather heartbreaking scene where Hall tears up the guy’s baseball tickets (they are heading for a Dodger game). I have a real weak spot for scenes like that, and the fact that the guy actually CRIES as Hall tears them up doesn’t help. It’s almost as bad as when someone loses their dog in a movie. Poor guy, it was probably the highlight of his year! Let him go to the damn game, Hall!

My sadness was equaled by my delight, however, when two cops show up. They are the most laid back cops in film history, as evidenced when they find a clip on the ground. “Hey, someone lost the clip to their .45.” one says, almost forlornly, before resuming his soda without any thought that just MAYBE the rather odd looking guy with a story full of holes might be up to no good.

In my notes, which were written on a napkin with a 2cm pen that protrudes from my Swiss Army knife, I have written what looks like “Faders”. No idea.

Anyway, it’s a solid little thriller, refreshingly chilling (as dumb as he was, I really didn’t expect Ed to get killed), and holds up well despite all of the films to come along since that have a similar premise. The print was also quite good (little scratchy in parts, nothing too bothersome), which was a relief – the movie is more or less public domain (it’s on the upcoming 4th budget pack – Tales of Terror!), which usually results in terrible prints. It also had a fantastic trailer reel attached, including one for a movie called The Wild Roots Of Love. This trailer may be the finest ever cut together, and I wish it was on Youtube or whatever so I could share it with you, but alas.

What say you?

Read more »

Breakdown, Thriller,

{[['']]}

Bedlam (1946)

APRIL 11, 2008

GENRE: THRILLER
SOURCE: CABLE (TCM)

And so it ends... my Turner Classic Val Lewton marathon has yielded its final entry, Bedlam. As previously rambled, I missed Cat People and I Walked With A Zombie, so those will come down the line on pristine DVD (or, another TCM marathon). All in all, I liked what I saw. None particularly blew me away, but all entertained, and were certainly light years better than most of the 40s horror movie I watch, which come from my rather disappointing Horror Classics box (in comparison to the wonderful Chilling Classics set).

Now that I’ve wasted a good chunk of your time discussing where I get the movies I watch, let’s move on.

Bedlam is probably the least “horror”y of all the Lewton movies I’ve watched, but also one of the best. Karloff is a delightful prick early on in the film, and gets more and more sinister until the asylum inmates trovel and amontillado his ass. (<-- Hey look – two nouns used as verbs in a single sentence!). The rest of the cast is good too, particularly the Marcia Cross-y Anna Lee as the heroine. She’s sent to the nuthouse to be kept quiet, more or less, as she would like the asylum to actually cure its patients, regardless of cost. This one is due for a remake, and this very theme would be INCREDIBLY interesting nowadays, what with all the health care brouhaha. Let’s hope they get a good filmmaker behind it. And if not, well, cast Marcia Cross anyway.

My favorite character, however, was a gent named Barney. He’s not listed on the IMDb, so maybe I got his name wrong, but he’s a very fey sort of assistant to Lee’s character. He just seems so laid back and yet sort of optimistically sad in all of his scenes. He also looked like this dude I went to high school with, whose name I have forgotten but I want to say it was Tom. Anyway, he more or less disappears from the film’s final act for some reason, which is a bummer. Good guy.

The scene where Karloff takes her through the asylum and points out all of the different patients’ problems is also pretty good. I think Dr. Tarr ripped it off, because while my memories have faded for that film (uh-oh), I got a strong sense of Déjà vu at this point, particularly with the peacock guy. Still, his treatment is pretty great. “W let them think their delusions are real, and go from there.” And as almost always, none of the patients are merely bipolar or whatever, no, they’re all completely batshit, thinking they are animals or whatever. Ah, mental illness!

I must take issue with one thing though. At one point the movie fades to a woodcut for half a second and then to the next scene. Look, I love subliminal woodcuttery as much as the next guy, but here I felt it was just superfluous.

And is anyone well-versed in 18th century children’s games? At one point the bad guy’s little servant boy is sitting outside the man’s office, playing a game that looks incredibly dull. In each hand he has a string with a little cylindrical object at the end of it. He swings them at each other. What is the object of this game? How does one win? What is it called? Are there tournaments?

All that’s left, besides the titles mentioned above, is a Scorsese narrated documentary about Lewton, titled Man in The Shadows. I am interested mainly in seeing if Marty can shut up long enough for anyone else to talk, though if not that’s perfectly fine. Sadly, its nature as a documentary that IS real keeps it out of HMAD contention, but I hope to check it out in due time. However, I must ask – does it spoil Cat People or I Walked With A Zombie? Since those are his most well-known pictures, I assume the documentary covers them in greater detail than the others, and I’d hate to have stuff spoiled. But I’d also like to clear up my DVR. I’m torn!

What say you?

Read more »

Thriller,

{[['']]}

One Body Too Many (1944)

APRIL 9, 2008

GENRE: COMEDIC, THRILLER
SOURCE: DVD (BUDGET PACK 2!!!)

You don’t often get a spoiler right in the title, but One Body Too Many is an example. A guy goes to sell insurance to a man who, unbeknownst to him, has just died. That’s the One Body. But over the course of the film, which is the 33748th about people in a house fighting over an inheritance, only one other person dies, thus One Body TOO MANY. It's like, "this is what you're in for, we promise nothing more than what is in the title." Thus, I propose we change the title of Friday the 13th to 10 Bodies Too Many.

However, even with the relative lack of suspense thanks to the jerk title, this one’s actually pretty fun. The comedy is typical of the era, but I got a few laughs out of it, particularly during the reading of the will (or the introduction to the will, rather), where the guy mocked each and every one of his benefactors in writing. I plan to do the same. “And how can I forget you, Jeff and Kolleen, the schmucks who did not appreciate Joshua....”

The main guy is a hoot, too. His name is Jack Haley, better known as the Tin Man. Other than that, I've never seen him in anything else, but there’s one line alone that makes me want to watch every single movie he’s ever done just to see if he does it again. There’s a point in the film where he wants to leave, and he’s giving a big ‘farewell’ speech. At the end he goes “I’m leaving!” and then proceeds to let out a weird little groan/sigh/thing. I would spell it “Wyeeeaahhh!” It’s pure bliss.

The typically bad Mill Creek transfer results in some other laughs, such as when everyone gasps in shock at a line that was completely skipped over due to them using an obviously broken film print. There’s another scene where Haley accuses Bela Lugosi of being the bad guy (who can blame him?). He says “Then where’d you get the mud on your shoes?” At this point the camera pans down to presumably show said mud on said shoes, but damned if I can see a goddamn thing once the image gets darker with the down pan. I’ll take Haley’s word for it, I guess. Plus it’s Lugosi, he probably shot up at the bottom of a ditch between takes and they had to write his dirty shoes into the film.

Anyway, fun little movie, and even a tad longer than most Horror Classics, coming in at over 70 minutes. Audiences back then must have demanded an intermission.

What say you?

Read more »

Comedic, Horror Classics, Thriller,

{[['']]}

13: Games Of Death (2006)

APRIL 3, 2008

GENRE: ASIAN, COMIC BOOK, THRILLER
SOURCE: DVD (OWN COLLECTION)

The central concept of 13: Games Of Death (aka 13 Game Sayawng) is a fantastic one (a guy is unwittingly placed in a game show that has him carry out thirteen tasks for an increasing amount of money; if he loses one or quits he gets absolutely nothing). It's a fantastic "what would I do if this happened to me?" concept (a sentiment shared by HMAD reader Chris, who recommended I watch it). But there are a couple big problems that keep it from being a fantastic movie as well, and instead it’s just “pretty good”.

One such problem is the length. It’s just shy of two hours, but the film tries to wring suspense out of whether or not he will do a task as they get more and more morally questionable. We know damn well he will get to the final task, so don’t delay us getting there! Luckily, two or three of the tasks are sort of glossed over (number 12 is one, and it seems to be backtracking: after having him unknowingly wipe out an entire group of bike riders, 12 is apparently “Eat some cow intestine”?) which keeps the film from being OVER two hours, but still, maybe just weeding it down to ten tasks would have helped.

Another problem is a plot hole that is impossible to ignore. He is playing this game and everyone around him seems baffled by his actions. But the game seems to be quite popular as well. Wouldn’t some of these folks know that he was playing? And with all of the cameras around, wouldn’t THOSE be noticeable by the bystanders (not to mention the police who just assume he’s a criminal)? It’d be like trying to sell Truman Show without putting his entire world in a dome first.

Still, it’s an engaging thriller, and the lead guy (Krissada Terrence) is an unconventional hero, which is a nice plus. The movie does a good job of establishing his desperation (financial and personal) rather quickly, so that when he begins the game, we can easily buy that he will go along with it, despite the fact that we don’t really know TOO much about him. There’s also a fantastic (if never quite explained) opening scene with a kid, an old lady in the road, and a bus. You do the math! And the aforementioned bike rider scene rivals the opening of Ghost Ship in sheer “Holy fuck!”ity.

This is based on a comic book I have never heard of, and some of the later developments in the film (particularly the “reveal” of the villain) probably work a lot better in a fleshed out comic than in a film. If it’s in English maybe I’ll check it out. Speaking of, I watched some of the movie in English because reading subs puts me to sleep and I was already a bit tired. The dubbing was strange – in an attempt to match the mouths of the real actors, the dubbers speak in. An. Oddly stilt. Ed man. Ner, rather than try to sound natural. It’s kind of amusing, but after a few minutes I promptly switched it back to the Thai language. And dozed off for a few minutes.

This one comes courtesy of Dimension Extreme, which, after a VERY bad start (Buried Alive and Broken... Christ.) has become a fairly and surprisingly dependable source of good movies (with the best, Inside, yet to come!). It’s kind of ironic that the studio once synonymous with horrible, “filmmaking by committee” garbage has become one of the few bright spots for modern horror releases. Then again, it should be noted that not a single one of these films were made under the watchful knife, er, eye, of the Weinstein brothers.

Also I should note that the horror elements are rather light, and one should CERTAINLY not pay any attention to the blurb on the back written by some broad from Hollywood Reporter who boasts about it being a "Supernatural thriller!". There is absolutely NOTHING supernatural in this film at all. Moron.

What say you?

Read more »

Asian, Comic Book, Thriller,

{[['']]}

Hide And Seek (2005)

MARCH 16, 2008

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

Ah, the first movie where the ending is spoiled by the LACK of a particular genre tag. If you notice, there is no “Killer Kid” listing for Hide And Seek, so despite all of the trailer’s (and movie’s) attempts to make you think Dakota Fanning is the killer, that’s simply (and sort of sadly) not the case. I won’t reveal who the killer ACTUALLY is, but it’s really not that hard to figure out. FOX clearly thought differently (they shipped the film without its final reel; those reels were hand-delivered and signed for at each theater in order to prevent the ‘shocking’ twist from getting out), so I’ll play along with their delusion.

DeNiro’s the killer.

Fuck! Sorry.

To its credit, the movie does a decent job of using clever editing to make it look like DeNiro couldn’t possibly be the killer. For example, there’s a scene of him in his office, writing notes. Then someone is killed. As the body hits the ground, he suddenly awakens from the nap he presumably fell into while working. But if you pay attention, he’s in a different spot entirely, and it’s darker outside. But you will be so shocked by the death that just occurred (which WAS a surprise, to be fair) that you won’t notice the discrepancy, or at least, so the filmmakers (and studio) hope.

Actually, I knew the ending before I watched the film (I forget who spoiled it, but it was when the film was still in theaters – at least I waited 3 years to be a dick), so it was kind of fun to watch how they tried to trick you (beats watching the film a second time). A lot of red herrings are set up, but again, the dialogue is very cleverly written. Early on, DeNiro sees Dakota talking to their neighbor, Robert John Burke. Since Burke was in Robocop 3, DeNiro is instantly suspicious of the guy. Later we find out that he lost his own daughter and Dakota reminds him of her. So near the end, the guy confronts DeNiro, and says “What’s wrong, I just saw you walking out of the woods with a shovel...” And the audience will not think of anything of that, because we too saw DeNiro with shovel, after burying his cat. However, that scene occurred the day before, so why would Burke be concerned now? But before we can process that (again, they hope), DeNiro stabs him in “defense” and there’s a chase scene. Nice work.

Sadly, they screw up the whole multiple personality thing. I’m no expert, but I do know that MPD sufferers don’t have any “memory” of their other personalities, yet the climax seems to suggest that the good DeNiro is remembering all of the things that the bad DeNiro did. This scene also suggests that a lot of what we saw the good DeNiro doing never actually happened (his notebook is completely empty, for example).

In fact, the entire ending leaves a few questions. In addition to the notebook thing, they also suggest that Dakota herself has a split personality, which is a bit odd. So were they both killers? Or is she just a jerk? Well, either way she gets a kiss from Famke Jannsen every morning and night now, so she wins.

This wasn’t even four years ago!!! *sigh*

I had to laugh at one part of the commentary – the director points out how he believes that you should be able to follow a film even if its on mute. I myself watched the bulk of the film more or less without sound, as my wife was vacuuming/rug cleaning for about 75% of the time I was watching it (hey, my daily movie can’t always be under the best circumstances), so I was watching with subtitles on most of the time. The subs were pretty amusing, because they point out every sound in the film ([“Sighing”], [“Wind blowing”], [“Owl hooting”]). However, the rest of the track is pretty dull, and it’s also noticeably edited, as the 3 (the DP and the writer are there too) are pretty chatty, but there will suddenly be abrupt gaps and then when they resume the topic will be different.

The deleted scenes don’t amount to much (though thankfully they are actually deleted scenes, not “deleted shots in the middle of scenes you just watched”), nor do the “previz” sequences (scenes that were never shot, presented in storyboard form). One exception is a scene of Dakota with a really cute babysitter, which would have been good to leave in the film, as it features a really cute babysitter. There’s also a brief bit of typical EPK cocksuckery (sadly, DeNiro is nowhere to be found – I would have loved to hear him say “I always wanted to work with Robert John Burke” or something). Like the movie itself, there’s nothing particularly BAD about the extras, but at the same time, their existence is largely moot – no one but die hard fans of the film would find any of this stuff interesting, and there’s no such thing as a “die hard fan” of Hide And Seek. It’s a movie you watch, nod at more or less approvingly, and forget all about 10 minutes later.

What say you?

Read more »

Psychological, Thriller,

{[['']]}

Underbelly (2008)

MARCH 12, 2008

GENRE: INDEPENDENT, THRILLER, WEIRD
SOURCE: DVD (SCREENER)

Sometimes a movie I watch for the day is sort of contrarian to the original idea of Horror Movie A Day, which is to basically “talk” about a horror movie, albeit in internet form (as opposed to a typical review). But a movie like Underbelly doesn’t quite fit the bill, because it’s not out yet. It’s just now gearing up for a festival run, and as far as I know, has no distribution as of yet. Hopefully that’ll change soon so some of you folks can check it out with relative ease.

On the flipside, the movie is actually ideal for this site’s intentions, because the film doesn’t explain or spell out a lot of its horror elements. It is open to interpretation, so everyone will probably come away with a different idea of what happened at the end and want to post their thoughts.

As this is an independent film, the actors are hardly well-known. However, they are all surprisingly good. More surprising, none of them share the same last name as the director. Likewise, the production value is good across the board – then again I’ve said before that it would actually take effort to make Texas look bad on film; it’s the most photogenic state there is! While it’s a small film, there are a lot of different locations, allowing the film to seem bigger than it is in actuality.

I say that because this is a rather slow film, with very little action. Like The Lost, it’s bookended by some top notch thriller stuff, but the middle can get a bit slow (not nearly as crippling as The Lost though). Writer/director Matt Cade made the interesting choice to follow not the “hero” of the film, but the villains instead (the film centers on 2 disappearances, the hero’s wife and the villain’s sister). They are a largely unpleasant lot, but they also have a dark sense of humor that permeates their actions. This presents some tonal problems (it’s kind of hard to laugh at a guy’s ironic joke after he’s just raped someone) but the unique point of view is enough to keep these matters from permanently damaging the film.

Aside from that, I really dug the movie’s strange tone. There are occasional musical numbers, and a full minute of the film is given to a guy beating the shit out of a cell phone (which he’s not very good at, after like 12 stomps the damn thing still looks intact). There’s also a gonzo scene where the villains visit the site of David Koresh’s cult compound and the leader waxes philosophic about his admiration for the group, while an acoustic ballad with reversed lyrics plays over the soundtrack (I plan to utilize the PS3’s handy “play sound while in reverse” function and see what the guy is saying). Fans of David Lynch will appreciate these moments.

Speaking of the music, it’s great. There are songs and score, all seemingly done by the same group of folks, and I enjoyed them all. There are a few songs that remind me of The Refreshments/Peacemakers, which is always a good thing as far as I’m concerned. If you’ve never heard the Freshies’ "The Bottle And Fresh Horses", you’re missing out on some grade A southern flavored pop rock.

Also the composer/star of the movie is a guy named Fritz Beer. That’s the best name ever.

Like I said before, the horror elements are left largely to interpretation. Discussing them would be spoiler-ish (I don’t do spoilers when it’s likely not a single reader has seen the film yet), but suffice to say that those who like everything spelled out (or even generally explained) will be frustrated by the film’s lack of answers. I didn’t mind not understanding them all, but I DO wish there was a little more tension to the plot, which would make these scenes more effective. The disappearance of the two women seems largely forgotten for a while, to the point where I was wondering if that plotline was merely a macguffin – but the fact that the climax revolves around the conclusion to this story thread nullified that as an option. Hell, one character disappeared for so long I forgot what he looked like. But, it’s rare I see a movie (especially now, when I’m watching so goddamn many) that I am still thinking about a few hours later, replaying scenes in my head to try to see if information I got later in the film gave them new meaning. Hell, I may even watch it again!

Like Return In Red, this is the type of movie where you gotta be patient and accept that it’s not going to have a big Bruckheimer-ian climax. And like that film, Underbelly more or less overcomes the limitations of a REAL independent production (I love when I look at Boxofficemojo and they point out the record breaking figures for “independent” films like Rob Zombie’s Halloween) and turns out pretty good. It’s not for everyone (what movie is?), but I enjoyed it overall, and for once it’s nice to see an indie where none of the problems are technical and/or acting related. If it’s playing at a festival near you, check it out (movie's website is HERE).

And thank CHRIST, it’s actually an anamorphic DVD! So for those keeping score – DVD that was possibly burnt on the director’s home computer – anamorphic; Multi-million dollar movie from a major studio starring Shannyn Sossamon – non anamorphic. Fuck you, Lionsgate!

What say you?

Read more »

Independent, Thriller, Weird,

{[['']]}