Big Bad Wolf

SEPTEMBER 12, 2007

GENRE: COMEDIC, WEREWOLF
SOURCE: DVD (STORE RENTAL)

Yet another movie that was negatively recommended to me, Big Bad Wolf was actually pretty damn fun. As I’ve said before, I usually dislike werewolf movies, but I had a good time watching this, despite some groan-inducing moments, plus a big fuck you from the DVD company, who play some trailers when you hit the “PLAY MOVIE” option from the main menu. Remember kids: a movie and a trailer for other movies from the same company are TWO ENTIRELY DIFFERENT FUCKING THINGS.

Like I said, it’s not a perfect film. The wolf makes wisecracks, most of which are pretty terrible. Luckily there’s only about a dozen in the film. There’s also a truly idiotic moment where a guy breaks into the bad guy’s office to retrieve a DNA report the bad guy had stolen from him. Not only does he stick around to read the thing rather than just take it and leave, but then he stops to take a photo of it! It’s YOUR fucking report dude! Then he gets even STUPIDER, sticking around even longer by sending a text message! Christ. And while the werewolf is a genuine man in suit for the most part, the CG transformation is pretty bad (though we only have to see it once, and it’s quick).

Otherwise the movie is much better than I expected. Not only is it impossible to dislike a film that even features, let alone stars Richard Tyson (Buddy!), but there’s a lot of decent twists to what could have been a very generic movie. The first 10 minutes or so would have you believe that the film was going to be the umpteenth variation on the “A bunch of kids in a cabin get killed one by one by a monster” story, but then suddenly almost all the kids are gruesomely killed and the movie becomes more like The Stepfather (not surprising since a character’s name is Joe Ruben), implementing a surprising bit of suspense into the proceedings as the bland lead and his super cute (but unfortunately over-facially-pierced) would-be girlfriend go about trying to prove his asshole stepfather is in fact a wisecracking, refreshingly non CGI werewolf.

And the fairly-originality doesn’t stop there. The werewolf rapes one of the dumb girls, which elicits the response “She was a virgin you monster!”, and the ending is a bit of a downer. But most importantly, the movie comes up with the single best way to ‘prove’ the main suspect is a werewolf. I don’t want to give it away, but let’s just say it includes the love interest of the protagonist blowing his stepdad in order to get his DNA.

Oh, wait. Sorry.

There’s actually a lot of off-kilter sexuality in the film. In addition to the oral (the resulting fight between the girl and the kid is pretty amazing as well, with lines like “I’ll give you a call if I need someone to fuck him to death!”, complete with sad music) and the werewolf rape, there’s also a character who enjoys kinky sex with his girlfriend (the cute lead from the otherwise execrable Dead Man’s Hand), asking her if she will watch him jerk off while he wears her underwear (!!!). Later, they are making love against a tree and she keeps muttering how she can’t feel anything. What the hell? I’m surprised the director didn’t work in any incest while he was it (though there is a hint that the main kid’s uncle has designs on his brother’s wife).

There’s some other minor in-jokes and some decent gore throughout the film, adding to the enjoyment. And the end credits song is one of the best alt-rock power ballads I have heard in the end credits of a horror film since Brother Cane’s ‘And Fools Shine On’ in Halloween 6. Unfortunately the commentary is a total bore, as the director merely praises everyone (including the boom operator, and more than once) and points out filming locations and things that were shot after principal photography. Dude, you made a movie where a girl has to blow her boyfriend’s step-dad to prove he’s a werewolf; no one watching it gives a rat’s fucking ass that the driveway is in Griffith Park while the house is in Topanga.

What say you?

Read more »

Comedic, Werewolf,

{[['']]}

Halloween Night (2006)

SEPTEMBER 11, 2007

GENRE: SLASHER
SOURCE: DVD (ONLINE RENTAL)

Horror fans are probably familiar with the Asylum company, sort of a poor man’s Full Moon who usually produce quick knockoffs of big budget Hollywood films. Some titles include Snakes on a Train, When A Killer Calls, etc. So it’s almost sort of a big step for them to produce Halloween Night, a film that obviously owes its existence to Carpenter's classic and its sequels (particularly Resurrection, for some goddamn reason), yet was produced and released in 2006, a year without a Halloween sequel that unsuspecting folks might mistake it for. Bravo, Asylum!

That’s not to say that the film is very good, mind you. But it’s far from a train wreck. The production value is decent, the HD DV work is well shot (looks great on an upscaled DVD player), the main theme is pretty good, and there are some nice kills (complete with mostly effective gore) sprinkled throughout. And while most of the actors are as bland as they come (and most of them resemble better actors: there’s a fake James Franco, a fake Breckin Meyer, a fake Erica Durance…) the lead actor, Derek Osedach (himself a fake Evan Goldberg), is like the Olivier of non-acting. He doesn’t act in the film so much as he just sort of hangs out in it, and nearly all of his lines are delivered in a sort of muttering, half-assed manner. It’s pretty much the exact way I would act if I was the lead actor in a direct to video movie about yet another escaped mental patient hacking up some folks in an isolated house. I was completely entranced by his pseudo-performance throughout the entire film.

However, the script has some giant lapses in both logic and pacing. For example, the film stops cold halfway through for a nonsensical prank that the lead and two of his friends are trying to pull off. The fact that the prank makes not one iota of sense AND is needlessly complicated (it involves having a distant friend annoy people at the party, a medieval torturer, fake cops, fake cop CARS, a roadblock…) would be fine if it didn’t go on for so long and stinks of padding. Plus, in a moment that rivals the scene in Halloween: Resurrection where Busta Rhymes ‘punks’ Michael Myers; the killer joins in on the prank, allowing himself to be held hostage, drive off with another guest, etc. It’s completely ludicrous, overlong, and only exists to get all the other partygoers out of the house, something Scream managed with a simple line of dialogue. And the ending is also lifted from Resurrection, as the killer swaps himself with another guy who ends up being killed by the heroine. One would assume it was just coincidence, but the writer is in fact a Fangoria writer, who would certainly be familiar with the films in question (and should know better than to recycle the lamest horror clichés, but that’s a whole other argument). There’s also a few too many homophobic slurs – it made sense in Hostel, here it just seems childish.

There are more than a few unanswered questions at the end of the film. Where did the Kendall character go? Why does Osedach carry a pinecone around with him for most of the film? Why does NO one notice that the killer (who they usually believe to be one of the other characters) has different (and quite visible) eyes than their friends? Why is the killer completely covered in burns when we see that he was merely blasted in the face with steam? And why is the fucking stereo/5.1 option placed inside the extra features, leading me to watch the film in bullshit stereo for the first 20 minutes?

I wouldn’t go so far as to RECOMMEND the film, but hey, like I said yesterday, so long as there’s evidence that the filmmakers are paying attention to what they are doing (though, like yesterday’s film, there’s a bizarre moment where the aspect ratio changes to 2.35:1) and I am more or less entertained, I am inclined to at least give the film a pass. I’ll never watch it again, but I’ve seen far worse just this month.

And there’s occasional lesbian action.

What say you?

Read more »

Holiday, Slasher,

{[['']]}

"Andrew Jackson and the Politics of Martial Law"

Matthew Warshauer is Associate Professor of History at Central Connecticut State University and author of Andrew Jackson and the Politics of Martial Law: Nationalism, Civil Liberties, and Partisanship.

His subject is already featured on the $20 bill and presides over Jackson Square in my hometown, so who would Warshauer cast in a film adaption of his book?

I’ve given a lot of thought to who could possibly play Andrew Jackson, especially in a military role and one that involved the first time that civil liberties were ever suspended in the United States. The difficulty is that the Battle of New Orleans involved such amazing contrasts, relating to both Jackson and what his various decisions generated in the city. On the one hand, he achieved a military success never paralleled in the young nation’s history. On the other, he utilized decidedly unconstitutional means in order to secure that victory. Moreover, he never lost a night of sleep in making such a decision. There have been a couple of movies on the Battle of New Orleans, the most well known of which was The Buccaneer, which starred both Yul Brynner, as the pirate Jean Lafitte, and Charlton Heston as Jackson. Produced way back in 1958, it had all the classic elements of a nationalist tale of heroism and challenge. It certainly did not portray Jackson as much less than the towering hero.

Here is the difficulty in adding my book, Andrew Jackson and the Politics of Martial Law, which addresses the duality of Jackson’s image; both his heroism and despotism. One of the big issues related to Jacksonian scholarship is Jackson’s character. Some historians think he was unhinged. I agree that Jackson could be brutal and quite willing to resort to violence, but I do not agree that he was a nutcase.

In considering who could play Jackson for a movie rendition of my book, I had to consider someone who could portray Jackson’s intensity and amazing magnetism, and also his intolerance for those who attempted to thwart his will, as well as his ability to explode into tirades. There is only one choice to play the role: Al Pacino. He’s got it all. Consider his role in Scent of a Woman. Viewers both loved and loathed him for his unique, complex, and oftentimes mean spiritedness. At the bottom, however, viewers came away with the sense that he did have something to offer, a quality and conviction that mattered, a devotion to some greater principle. This was most certainly Jackson. Pacino will have to work on a little Tennessee Southern twang, and perhaps stand on a soap box for height, but that can certainly be worked out. -- Without question, Al Pacino is the man.

Read more about Andrew Jackson and the Politics of Martial Law at the publisher's website.

Matthew Warshauer is also the author of the forthcoming Andrew Jackson: First Men, America’s Presidents. His articles have appeared in Tennessee Historical Quarterly, Connecticut History, Louisiana History, and New York History.

The Page 69 Test: Andrew Jackson and the Politics of Martial Law.

--Marshal Zeringue

Read more »

{[['']]}

Fright Club

SEPTEMBER 10, 2007

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

Yesterday, I got some constructive feedback from a blogger who apparently signed up just to provide his or her insight without being anonymous (much appreciated – down with anonymous!!!). Some of his/her choice comments were “You suck” “fuck, fuck”, and “Wow, you really suck.” Amidst these carefully and thoughtfully written posts was “Stop reviewing horror films.” Well, as I often do when a movie is as awful as Fright Club, I looked for other reviews of the film before writing my own, to make sure I wasn’t watching a practical joke someone had slipped into the DVD instead of an actual film someone thought enough of to release to a paying public. And I couldn’t find any! Not a single review on any DVD or review site. The IMDb message board only had one message, and Bloody-Disgusting had no information on the film at all. So I am sorry, opposer of me, but if I don’t review this thing, I ask you, who else will?

I should also probably take the time to explain my philosophy (I use the term as loosely as the word can possibly be used) behind reviewing a movie. The most important thing is story. Giving me something I haven't seen before will almost always please me. But if the story is nothing new, I simply judge a film based on how well it presents the story it is telling. Which is why, despite its status as one of the most hated films of all time, I really enjoy Armageddon. I know it’s a fucking stupid movie, and I’ve never claimed otherwise. But I defy anyone to make a superior version of a film about oil drillers flying into space to blow up an asteroid the size of Texas. The film is technically sound, doesn’t take me out of the narrative due to pointless cameos or incomprehensible camera/sound work, and delivers what it promises (the asteroid is indeed blown up). And since it is obviously a film that was made with genuine care and effort (the last thing you can ever accuse Bay and his crew of is being lazy), I am a lot more forgiving of its other faults (implausible story, cheesy ballads, silly dialogue, etc.). But if the film doesn't provide either originality OR technical competence, why the hell should I give it a pass?

You might say that I am too hard on some of these low budget horror films. Maybe, but think about it: would you read a book that had typos, varying fonts, and uneven page sizes? When someone reviews a film on the internet and it contains numerous typos, what’s the first thing someone says? “Why should I listen to you, you can’t even spell or use punctuation.” I approach a film the same way. There’s a difference between not having a lot of money and not having any respect for the audience. Unless you are telling an original story (which this certainly isn’t), making a film when you obviously do not have the money to make it right just means you’re just looking for a quick buck, a cynicism that will always translate onto the screen. And if you simply MUST make a generic movie, for the love of Christ, at least make it professionally. I don’t care if you have two dollars or two hundred million, there is no excuse for the lack of competence on display here.

For starters, the film doesn’t even have a consistent aspect ratio. It’s an anthology, and the 1st story is presented in 1.85:1, even though the rest of the film is presented full frame (and bizarrely, at one point there’s a shot of the moon, likely stolen from another film, presented at 2.35:1). It doesn’t cost a goddamn thing to give all your film footage the same dimensions, so it’s not a budgetary limitation. If the filmmakers are so lazy that they can’t even crop, mask, or zoom into their footage in order to present it in a consistent and professional manner, why the hell should I care about what’s on screen?

Especially if what IS onscreen are boom mikes, dime-store vampire teeth, and a police station that is represented by a portable wardrobe and a card table. And a wrap around segment shot through a visibly dirty lens. Yet, none of that is as idiotic as when a vampire character, realizing his reflection is beginning to fade, ALSO fades from sight, along with his reflection, due to the effects guy clearly not understanding the basic principles of simple compositing.

The film is chockfull of laugh out loud moments like that. There’s another scene in a tattoo parlor where they try to “spook” us by zooming into a tattoo on the wall of a wolf (the story is an urban retelling of Little Red Riding Hood). So what? It’s just a generic tattoo display. There’s probably a dragon next to it. It doesn’t mean a goddamn thing. Another character explains his new style of music: “It combines hip hop with gothic. I call it Goth-Hop!” Inventive.

Plus, like many other anthology films, the stories are being told by characters in a wraparound segment. But if you think about that while we watch these stories, you realize that to the people listening, the story is needlessly incomprehensible. This is especially true in the middle story, which includes layered flashbacks and recalls. So the storyteller is saying “At this point, we return to the present, where the police captain says once again, that the dead people couldn’t be vampires. So then we cut back to a scene we saw earlier…” And why are they padding their own narratives? “Then the main character goes to a hip hop club, where he watches a girl dance for a bit. Then he leaves the club and the plot resumes.”

Still, the movie offers one highlight. The film is ostensibly about a group of the director’s friends who are trying to enter the “Fright Club”. To gain entrance, they have to tell scary stories. After the 3rd and final story, the guy in charge says “You are not worthy of Fright Club.” “Those were our best stories!” they exclaim. Well then no wonder you’re not allowed! If those were your BEST stories, I’d hate to hear your worst. Christ.

Then they all get eaten as the main guy cackles, the film ends, and I wonder if I should apologize to the filmmakers of Vampire Assassin(s) and A Brush With Death, films that are positively Kubrickian in their professionalism in comparison to this wretched piece of shit. It’s movies like that that make me wish that the money men would just meet up with other money men and combine their projects into one. Had the makers of this film and say, I dunno, Death Row, pooled their money together, we’d have 1 generic but probably passable ‘urban’ horror movie instead of 2 colossally bad and totally useless ‘urban’ horror movies.

And to the guy who said I should stop reviewing horror movies – believe me, after a movie like this, I am inclined to agree.

What say you?

Read more »

Anthology, Crap,

{[['']]}

Tell Me Something (aka Telmisseomding)

SEPTEMBER 9, 2007

GENRE: ASIAN, SERIAL KILLER
SOURCE: DVD (ONLINE RENTAL)

Like them or not, the one thing I have always enjoyed about Asian horror films is that they are far from run of the mill. They might not make a lick of sense at times, but damned if they aren’t trying to provide the horror genre with SOMETHING we haven’t really seen before.

Such is NOT the case with Tell Me Something, a film that’s only real surprise is how dull and uninvolving it is. Combining parts from Seven, Silence of the Lambs, Jennifer 8 (?!?!?) and all the other American films that ripped THOSE films off, only the occasional gruesome sight and familiar soundtrack lift make this a two hour trek worth taking.

Yes, for some reason, while the film is set in Korea and stars only Koreans, the soundtrack is straight out of a Dimension film. The Scream theme, a.k.. “Red Right Hand” from Nick Cave, plays a few times, and there are also appearances by Placebo and Enya, as well as some Bach and Mendelssohn to balance things out. Part of the fun of watching a foreign film, at least for me, stems from the introduction to their culture, and that includes soundtrack selections. But here, I’m constantly reminded of Scream. Whatever.

Like I said, there’s also a few nice gore setpieces that can reignite viewer interest. A garbage bag filled with body parts spills over a crowded elevator early on, and then later, another bag causes a bloody, massive car accident. Good stuff.

But the story itself is a bore. I guess it’s good to know that vague, dark, dirty cities in Korea are also stalked by mysterious killers who leave cryptic clues for cops to find in the middle of a downpour, and that their cops will begin to get “too close” to the case by falling for a key witness, and that they also have an abundance of burnt out factories and condemned apartment buildings to search, but otherwise there’s little new to offer here. And if you haven’t figured out or just assumed the twist ending beforehand, ANYONE can figure it out simply by looking at the ‘time remaining’ display and realizing there’s only one character left alive and 15 minutes to go.

And even though the film is overlong, it would be even longer had it been edited correctly. Several scenes end jarringly, as if there was still another line or two to be spoken, or at least a reaction to what was being revealed, that somehow got removed. “Where did you find that?” someone might say, and then SLAM! We instantly cut to the next scene, as the cop is investigating the next clue. It’s really annoying both in a storytelling and an editing sense.

But still, if you’ve never seen a film before, you might enjoy it I guess.

I also must point out the insulting manufacturing of the DVD. Being a foreign film, you have the option of a dubbed track or the original, as well as corresponding subtitles. But the menu programming is seemingly done by folks who never actually saw a DVD before. In addition to not including a “Play” option right from the setup menu, like every other DVD ever made, it also automatically goes back to highlighting “Korean” regardless of what option you pick, instead of “Main” (or “Play”, if it was actually there). Making matters worse, you cannot switch the audio or sub tracks while the film is playing, nor is there a “Resume” option on the main or setup menus (another button you would expect due to the fact that every other DVD developer in history took the time to include it). Now, this wouldn’t be a problem, but I decided to watch it dubbed because I wasn’t in the mood to read the movie. This proved impossible, however, as the dubbing was fucking atrocious, not to mention seemingly only done by about 4 people, making some scenes incomprehensible because the same guy would be doing both sides of a conversation. So I tried to switch it to Korean with English subs, but I had to go back to the main menu to do so, then fast forward back to where I left off. Assholes. Then, making matters worse YET AGAIN, the subtitles dipped below the image, into the black, which meant I couldn’t zoom in to correct the non-anamorphic image (at this point I almost expect the DVD producer to ignore us silly folks who spent upwards of a thousand dollars in order to watch their films in superior quality), because the subtitles would be cropped out as a result. And at one point, the sound just disappears entirely for two minutes. When a DVD is so un-user friendly and shoddily produced, it’s like they are saying “Fuck you” to the person who bought it.

Well you know what? Fuck you too, Kino On Video.

What say you?

Read more »

Asian, Serial Killer,

{[['']]}

The Bride (1985)

SEPTEMBER 8, 2007

GENRE: MAD SCIENTIST, REMAKE
SOURCE: CABLE (HDNET MOVIES)

Also known as "That Frankenstein movie that stars Sting for some goddamn reason", The Bride is another one of those films where I wasn't sure if it was even a horror or not. Sure, it's a re-telling of the Frankenstein story, but the description referred to it as a drama about feminism (!!!). However, the opening scene, which assumes everyone knows the Frankenstein story by now and simply begins with Frank making a bride for his Monster, has blood, a crazy head that babbles, and some makeup effects, so I think it will do for this.

You gotta appreciate a fairly unique take on the story, which is a minor remake of Bride of Frankenstein. While Frank (renamed Charles for some goddamn reason) teaches the Bride (named Eva) how to talk, eat properly, and read Shakespeare, the Monster (Clancy Brown, great as always) teams up with a midget to steal from churches and join a circus. These scenes are vastly more interesting than the ones with Sting and Jennifer Beals, since A. they aren't very good actors and B. come off as a gothic version of My Fair Lady a bit too often for my tastes.

Also the opening credits promise Cary Elwes, but he doesn't show up until about halfway through, around the time Beals hilariously shrieks at the sight of a cat ("I thought it was a tiny lion."). Elwes plays the same sort of vague non-villain he always does, and oddly disappears without any sort of conclusion to his character arc a few scenes later. You don't fucking do that to Wesley!

There's also some other totally dropped plot threads, such as The Monster and Eva's apparent psychic link, which seemingly comes and goes at random. I never understood things like this in a film. You have to assume that other scenes concerning these subplots were filmed and then dropped, but doesn't anyone involved with the production ever notice that as a result, their film looks unfocused and incomplete? If a half asleep asshole who has trouble following the plot of Heroes can notice, everyone should!

Still, the film offers two delightful bonuses. One is a great twist on the "Monster meets a blind man" scene that seemingly finds its way into every Frankenstein movie, and the other is full frontal nudity (and an ass shot) of a female character in a PG-13 film!!! Hey-o!

What say you?

Read more »

Mad Scientist, Remake,

{[['']]}

Hatchet (2007)

SEPTEMBER 7, 2007

GENRE: SLASHER

SOURCE: THEATRICAL (REGULAR SCREENING)

A quick search of Hatchet will reveal I’ve plugged the film some 49059785 times on this blog, but now that it’s actually in theaters (!!!) I feel I should back up my praise.

Suffice to say, this will be one of the easiest reviews I’ve ever written.

Quite simply, Hatchet is the type of movie that can re-ignite someone’s interest in slasher films, after said interest had been all but completely annihilated by lame sequels (Halloween: Resurrection, I am looking at you), unfocused remakes of slasher classics (do I even need to name an example?), or worse, failed “throwback” alleged slasher movies like Dark Ride, Drive Thru, and A Brush With Death.

Those last examples are the worst offenders. The filmmakers are seemingly of the impression that all you need in order to make an effective slasher ‘homage’ to the classics of the early 80s is excessive gore, idiotic characters, and rampant nudity. The problem is, they are missing one very large and important ingredient: basic CHARM. There is absolutely nothing endearing about Drive Thru, a film which constantly insults its audience, is cynically produced on every level, and rips off other films blind without even the slightest bit of evidence that the filmmakers understand why those older films have endured. When some new format comes along to replace DVD, Halloween and Black Christmas will be upgraded to the new format due to fan demand and appreciation. Dark Ride will not be so lucky.

Hatchet, however, will be placed along those aforementioned classics (at least, if there’s any justice in the world). Because writer/director Adam Green succeeded where many others have failed, and made a film that not only oozes with genuine appreciation for the genre, but also proves that a new slasher film can be made in the post-Scream era.

For starters, Green has taken the time to infuse his script with genuine CHARACTER DEVELOPMENT. Shocking, I know, but it’s true. Sure, there are a few characters that you’ll want to smack in the mouth more than once, but even those folks are given more than ample time to grow, resulting in the rare slasher film that will actually make you feel bad when one of them dies. But therein lies part of the genius of Green’s script. No one is simply stabbed or whatever. No, Victor Crowley literally tears apart most of his victims, making each death scene unique and memorable. So while you like the characters, you’ll still cheer at their demise because of the basic awesomeness of it all.

In addition, the movie is flat out FUNNY. And the humor is genuine and natural, thanks largely to the well above average performances of Deon Richmond, Perry Shen, and Joel David Moore (who endeared himself to me by wearing a Newbury Comics shirt throughout the entire film - I love a good New England shoutout). They aren’t winking at the audience, or turning the film into a parody, they are just REAL. One of the funniest lines in the film simply comes from Richmond’s affinity for a particular Denny’s meal. Nearly all of the jokes sound like something any normal human would say, as opposed to something like Jason X, where someone watches their close friend die on a random corkscrew and then says “He’s screwed.” That’s not funny, and no one would ever actually say that (well I might, but I'm an unfeeling asshole). But Moore’s “Oh you gotta be fucking KIDDING ME!” is something anyone might say in the situation, and I laughed just as much the 2nd time as I did the first (a rarity for ANY movie humor for me). The balance between humor and horror is near perfect, with one never overpowering the other.

So are there any flaws? Well, no, not really. Some might wish the killing would start a bit earlier (despite its marketing campaign, the film’s pace is closer to that of the original Halloween than a Friday the 13th sequel), but that didn’t bother me in the slightest, as I enjoyed ‘hanging out’ with these characters. And the carnage and mayhem that ensues is nearly nonstop once it starts, which should more than make up for any ADD viewer’s problem with going a half hour or so without any kills. I wish the marketing campaign had emphasized this a bit more, but oh well. It's also a bit short (82 minutes), so I would have liked maybe another obstacle or something to spread out the mayhem in the film's third act. Not that it feels rushed, but another 5 minutes or so certainly wouldn't be a problem with me.

Also, I should mention the gore. It’s been widely reported (well, on horror sites and messageboards anyway) that the film had to be edited to receive an R rating. Well that’s true, but I have seen both versions of the film, and I only noticed one cut. It’s still balls out gory, with plenty of blood spraying and limbs torn asunder in each and every kill. This isn’t My Bloody Valentine or Friday the 13th 7 (films that were rendered incomprehensible at times due to the MPAA hackery). Green and makeup supervisor John Carl Buechler (ironically, the director of F13 7, probably the most MPAA-abused film of all time) were smart enough to make the kill scenes WAY over the top, which gave them bargaining room with the MPAA. So let’s say in a normal slasher movie, the killer will take one or two hacks with a machete. The MPAA would say “no machete hacking can be seen”. Green and Buechler, on the other hand, had THIRTEEN machete hacks. So the MPAA allowed them four or five. The result? Four or five more machete hacks than you’d normally get.

I cannot stress enough how fucking good this movie is. I’ve watched 230 of these goddamn things in a row, and anyone who has read the site enough knows I very rarely flat out love a film. And more importantly, the film was made 100% independently, and even its theatrical release is born out of hard work and self promotion. Some of you might not even know the film is playing (there are no TV spots or billboards, and the trailer aired with few films). It’s only playing in about 80 cinemas, which almost guarantees that some of you won’t be able to see the film this weekend. But if the film does well over the next three days, it WILL open wider. Halloween Remake will be dropped by lots of theaters next weekend (the 14th-16th), and any theater would love to have a new horror movie take its place. If Hatchet performs well this weekend, you can almost guarantee that the film will be playing in your area in the next week or so.

And if it IS in your area, I IMPLORE you, PLEASE buy a ticket and show your support this weekend. If you’re reading this site, you must have an interest in horror movies, so there is absolutely no reason why you shouldn’t be interested in this. Come on, do you really want Halloween to be the only horror success story this year? Even if for some reason you dislike the movie (I’d LOVE to know why if that’s the case), you have to agree that we need more films like this in theaters. Much like the upcoming Wrong Turn 2, a film made without studio enforced limitations, and made by genuine horror fans, will always be better than committee-written, focus-group appealing studio shit.

Regardless of the film’s theatrical success, Adam Green and his crew deserve every prop in the world for getting the film into theaters in the first place. It’s like horror’s own version of Rocky. And if I haven’t sold you on the film yet, just Google “Adam Green” and “Dee Snider story”. It’s the story of how Adam’s inspiration to keep at his dream, of which Dee inexplicably played a huge part. He told it at Comic Con and damned if I didn’t almost shed a tear (something I NEVER do unless Bruce Willis is saving the world AND his daughter’s fiancée with one rip of an oxygen tube). If you watch that story and still aren’t inspired to check out what the fuss is all about, then you’re just not human, and there’s nothing else I can do to convince you that Hatchet is the best horror film in a very long time.

Oh wait, you also see Harmony from Buffy’s tits.

OK now I really got nothing left.

What say you?

Read more »

Slasher,

{[['']]}