Devil (2010)
Devil on Netflix Streaming
Having a helluva time catching up here. Anyway.
I've watched this one before. I gave it one star. And I stick to that, having watched it again. Blame Shama-lama-ding-dong beating his one trick pony to death. (Which is not a racist knock. It's a knock on the crap he's releasing as films, and how infantile I find them. He could be a prince from purple hermaphroditic frog people of Pluto, whom conquered the Earth and we all crave to become, and I'd still mock him however possible.)
Blame the boredom of the film. I was digging up information on Norse mythology when this was on, FFS, and didn't lose the plot.
Blame the narrow vision of the Devil. Not even a little smarm to smooth on the evil? Come on.
Blame the people who decided to fund this film.
But I'm not watching it again. He not only needs a new gimmick, he needs a new POV.
Would I watch it again? No.
Would I own it? Hell no.
Friday, November 15, 2013
Tuesday, November 5, 2013
Day 28: Hunger
Hunger (2009)
Hunger on Netflix Streaming
It's definitely schadenfreude that I chose this film to watch as catch-up after deciding on dinner. Dinner which I'm now plowing into. Sorry, characters. You make your tough, cannibalistic choices, and I'm going to eat re-heated kubideh and rice. Yum.
A low-budget film, but a well done one. Part of the Fangoria Frightfest, one of the few I enjoy enough to watch again.
And it is pretty standard, plot wise. Mysterious stranger captures a group of strangers and tests them. Forces them to violence, often against each other, and clearly enjoys it.
What catches my attention is the mix of grim reality, and the application of beauty. Again, with the choice of classical music to capture the tone, reminding jaded modern ears that it's not all elevator music.
This is nothing new. But there is nothing new in the world. All ideas are built on each other. To directly copy an extant idea is one thing, a lazy thing, but to take the core of the idea and expand on it in another way, another direction, is the essence of creativity.
Would I watch it again? Yes.
Would I own it? Yes.
Hunger on Netflix Streaming
It's definitely schadenfreude that I chose this film to watch as catch-up after deciding on dinner. Dinner which I'm now plowing into. Sorry, characters. You make your tough, cannibalistic choices, and I'm going to eat re-heated kubideh and rice. Yum.
A low-budget film, but a well done one. Part of the Fangoria Frightfest, one of the few I enjoy enough to watch again.
And it is pretty standard, plot wise. Mysterious stranger captures a group of strangers and tests them. Forces them to violence, often against each other, and clearly enjoys it.
What catches my attention is the mix of grim reality, and the application of beauty. Again, with the choice of classical music to capture the tone, reminding jaded modern ears that it's not all elevator music.
This is nothing new. But there is nothing new in the world. All ideas are built on each other. To directly copy an extant idea is one thing, a lazy thing, but to take the core of the idea and expand on it in another way, another direction, is the essence of creativity.
Would I watch it again? Yes.
Would I own it? Yes.
Monday, November 4, 2013
Day 27: Hostel III
Hostel III (2011)
Hostel III on Netflix Streaming
At the risk of defending the overall notion of the trilogy theme and Elite Hunting, and telling people to move past the lesser video quality, I like this one. It takes the idea of the first two-- rich assholes paying to kill other humans without reparation or punishment in the middle of nowhere-- and elevates it to a gladiator ring. Forget the characters in this, members bid on the right to kill, gamble on the number of shots taken or kind of victim pleas, and watch everything behind the safety of glass. Like a peep show for the bloodthirsty.
Some of the humour and quirkiness is gone, replaced with an action/thriller mood, but I really can't complain. It seems to be a bigger commentary on the setting of the new arena, that placing it stateside in the den of gambling and vice, it must be taken seriously.
Except it's still Hostel. And stripping some of the humour strips out some of the horror, too. Oh well.
Would I watch it again? Yes.
Would I own it? Eh, probably not.
Hostel III on Netflix Streaming
At the risk of defending the overall notion of the trilogy theme and Elite Hunting, and telling people to move past the lesser video quality, I like this one. It takes the idea of the first two-- rich assholes paying to kill other humans without reparation or punishment in the middle of nowhere-- and elevates it to a gladiator ring. Forget the characters in this, members bid on the right to kill, gamble on the number of shots taken or kind of victim pleas, and watch everything behind the safety of glass. Like a peep show for the bloodthirsty.
Some of the humour and quirkiness is gone, replaced with an action/thriller mood, but I really can't complain. It seems to be a bigger commentary on the setting of the new arena, that placing it stateside in the den of gambling and vice, it must be taken seriously.
Except it's still Hostel. And stripping some of the humour strips out some of the horror, too. Oh well.
Would I watch it again? Yes.
Would I own it? Eh, probably not.
Saturday, November 2, 2013
Brief Update
As it is now November, I'm aware that there are not 31 films/blogs here... and will catch up to them as soon as possible. My plan is to keep posting entries when I watch something, particularly something new, at least once a week. October is a busy month for this gorehound, but the last week of October is insanely busy. I've either been on stage or rehearsing to be on stage since last Saturday, and am shortly leaving to be on stage tonight again... Oh, except Monday, which was spent in the glory (/sarcasm) of a flame retardant cubicle doing what I do to keep paying for things like this horror film habit of mine. So it's been tough to carve out the time for a film.
Stay bloody.
Stay bloody.
Wednesday, October 30, 2013
Day 26: The Crazies
The Crazies (2010)
Mysterious plane goes down in marsh, contaminates water source, people go homicidal. Pretty standard, really. Faceless government stepping in to contain it by any means necessary... which then goes comically wrong? Also pretty standard.
It's another one of those films I can't really dig into and claw up something meaningful to muse over, but I enjoy it.
Moving on.
Would I watch it again? Yes.
Would I own it? Yes.
Mysterious plane goes down in marsh, contaminates water source, people go homicidal. Pretty standard, really. Faceless government stepping in to contain it by any means necessary... which then goes comically wrong? Also pretty standard.
It's another one of those films I can't really dig into and claw up something meaningful to muse over, but I enjoy it.
Moving on.
Would I watch it again? Yes.
Would I own it? Yes.
Tuesday, October 29, 2013
Day 25: Silent Hill
Silent Hill (2006)
If you know me, you know there's a list of certain actors I'll watch whatever they're in. Sean Bean is on that list.
Plus, it's Silent Hill. There's no way in hell the movie could measure up to the games. Not for plot, or characters, or the atmosphere. It can take a gamer hours--days or weeks if they do side missions-- to get through the convoluted and regularly bizarre story of the games, and they do so as the main character. They are the main character.
In a film, you follow the main character. Some perceptions of the main character, and the monsters, is immutable. There's a loss of control.
So, of course, gamers are going to complain. The film can never be as creepy as the game, and it doesn't try. It's an episode of the world, an alternate universe just recogniseable enough that people who know what details to look for can appreciate it, but the game-innocent isn't lost or bored.
Silent Hill, the world, is beautiful. Terrible and beautiful. It's the dark side of the magic Disney uses to lure in people and feed their imaginations. There is the physical, and there is the emotional connection to it. Everything has meaning.
Without knowledge of the games, it's easy to miss the meaning, to mark Pyramid Head as just another bizarre Hell creature and call it a day. To try and intentionally forget him. (Good luck.)
Gamers seeking a live action version of the mannequin screwing (I mean that literally) Pyramid Head of the second game hate that he's not the same avatar of rage and destruction, that their longer glimpse of him is somehow more human than the graphics and game designers of 2001 made him.
I love this movie. I always will. It finds that magic button in my mind and turns on my imagination. The games do that too, but this has its own magic. Hate it for not being pure, or being too weird to be mainstream.
But love it for being something different. Something terrible and beautiful. Plus, there's Sean Bean, and he doesn't die. That almost never happens.
Would you watch it again? Yes.
Would you own it? Already do.
If you know me, you know there's a list of certain actors I'll watch whatever they're in. Sean Bean is on that list.
Plus, it's Silent Hill. There's no way in hell the movie could measure up to the games. Not for plot, or characters, or the atmosphere. It can take a gamer hours--days or weeks if they do side missions-- to get through the convoluted and regularly bizarre story of the games, and they do so as the main character. They are the main character.
In a film, you follow the main character. Some perceptions of the main character, and the monsters, is immutable. There's a loss of control.
So, of course, gamers are going to complain. The film can never be as creepy as the game, and it doesn't try. It's an episode of the world, an alternate universe just recogniseable enough that people who know what details to look for can appreciate it, but the game-innocent isn't lost or bored.
Silent Hill, the world, is beautiful. Terrible and beautiful. It's the dark side of the magic Disney uses to lure in people and feed their imaginations. There is the physical, and there is the emotional connection to it. Everything has meaning.
Without knowledge of the games, it's easy to miss the meaning, to mark Pyramid Head as just another bizarre Hell creature and call it a day. To try and intentionally forget him. (Good luck.)
Gamers seeking a live action version of the mannequin screwing (I mean that literally) Pyramid Head of the second game hate that he's not the same avatar of rage and destruction, that their longer glimpse of him is somehow more human than the graphics and game designers of 2001 made him.
I love this movie. I always will. It finds that magic button in my mind and turns on my imagination. The games do that too, but this has its own magic. Hate it for not being pure, or being too weird to be mainstream.
But love it for being something different. Something terrible and beautiful. Plus, there's Sean Bean, and he doesn't die. That almost never happens.
Would you watch it again? Yes.
Would you own it? Already do.
Day 24: The Descent
The Descent (2005)
A bunch of women go down into an "unexplored" cave and run into monsters, and manage to not turn into screamy, useless cardboard cut-outs.
That's enough for me to like it, right there.
The claustrophobic cave passages will make you squirm, and the monsters are definitely nothing I'd want to run into in the middle of, well, anywhere.
And that's all I have to say about it, really. Go watch it. Go buy it.
Would I watch it again? Yes.
Would I own it? Already do.
A bunch of women go down into an "unexplored" cave and run into monsters, and manage to not turn into screamy, useless cardboard cut-outs.
That's enough for me to like it, right there.
The claustrophobic cave passages will make you squirm, and the monsters are definitely nothing I'd want to run into in the middle of, well, anywhere.
And that's all I have to say about it, really. Go watch it. Go buy it.
Would I watch it again? Yes.
Would I own it? Already do.
Monday, October 28, 2013
Day 23: Ghost Ship
Ghost Ship (2002)
I have a soft spot for Dark Castle remakes of William Castle films-- with the loud exception of "Gothika"-- and on the gore factor, they surely don't leave us wanting.
You could honestly watch "Ghost Ship" just for the beginning and credits, turn it off, and call it good for a splatterpunk fix. But then you'd be missing out. I like this one. I always have. This and "House on Haunted Hill," two faves that never get old. Gabriel Byrnes and Geoffrey Rush. Two heavies leading messy stories of crazy supernatural shit, with some nice humour embedded, a taste for atmosphere, and some real talent with score and soundtrack.
These are the kind of horror films I'd make. Slickly filmed and tightly scripted, just enough characterisation to connect to the characters, just enough gore-- and just enough exploitation of the gore.
And we're not even touching on the backstory of the Ferryman. Linger on him awhile, the whole complex mythos that exists behind his presence, and how wild it'd be to know we had that in our world.
No wilder than normal, probably. A few more jokes about crossing the River Styx, maybe.
I'll leave it at this: not everyone will love this film. But I do, and it's at least worth one watch. It'll never be a classic, but Gabriel Byrnes and homicidal ghosts make for a good evening's entertainment.
Would I watch it again? Yes.
Would I own it? Already do.
I have a soft spot for Dark Castle remakes of William Castle films-- with the loud exception of "Gothika"-- and on the gore factor, they surely don't leave us wanting.
You could honestly watch "Ghost Ship" just for the beginning and credits, turn it off, and call it good for a splatterpunk fix. But then you'd be missing out. I like this one. I always have. This and "House on Haunted Hill," two faves that never get old. Gabriel Byrnes and Geoffrey Rush. Two heavies leading messy stories of crazy supernatural shit, with some nice humour embedded, a taste for atmosphere, and some real talent with score and soundtrack.
These are the kind of horror films I'd make. Slickly filmed and tightly scripted, just enough characterisation to connect to the characters, just enough gore-- and just enough exploitation of the gore.
And we're not even touching on the backstory of the Ferryman. Linger on him awhile, the whole complex mythos that exists behind his presence, and how wild it'd be to know we had that in our world.
No wilder than normal, probably. A few more jokes about crossing the River Styx, maybe.
I'll leave it at this: not everyone will love this film. But I do, and it's at least worth one watch. It'll never be a classic, but Gabriel Byrnes and homicidal ghosts make for a good evening's entertainment.
Would I watch it again? Yes.
Would I own it? Already do.
Day 22: The Rig
The Rig (2010)
The Rig on Netflix Streaming
Not a high budget film. Which is not to say it's awful. The biggest aspect that bothers me isn't the acting, or the script, or the monster, or the editing. It's the cinematography, which, hey, cameras are expensive. Even to rent.
The use of "Figlio Perduto" ups my opinion of this film automatically. It might sound like a cliche, the use of classical music and/or opera in the middle of a film crisis, but much of it was written to convey just that. We lose the message when it turns into just a pretty song, but violins can evoke better emotion than Coldplay.
I like this one for it's simple charm. Level it down to TV movie, and it's great. It's less ridiculous than the Syfy movies of late. It can't stand up next to big budget Hollywood, and it's unfair to even try to do that. It's not even trying to be artistic. It's just a monster movie to kill an hour and a half with.
And if you want an actual review of this, with a tidy summary, Rotten Tomatoes has that. I'm not really here to review these films other than to lift out details that stand out to me, and parse some meaning into them, even if it means savaging them. (I'm looking at you, Ti West.)
Now, if you'll excuse me, I have to go put on some Ravel, backlight myself with a red lightbulb, and smile serenely at the cars passing by.
Would I watch it again? Nah.
Would I own it? No.
The Rig on Netflix Streaming
Not a high budget film. Which is not to say it's awful. The biggest aspect that bothers me isn't the acting, or the script, or the monster, or the editing. It's the cinematography, which, hey, cameras are expensive. Even to rent.
The use of "Figlio Perduto" ups my opinion of this film automatically. It might sound like a cliche, the use of classical music and/or opera in the middle of a film crisis, but much of it was written to convey just that. We lose the message when it turns into just a pretty song, but violins can evoke better emotion than Coldplay.
I like this one for it's simple charm. Level it down to TV movie, and it's great. It's less ridiculous than the Syfy movies of late. It can't stand up next to big budget Hollywood, and it's unfair to even try to do that. It's not even trying to be artistic. It's just a monster movie to kill an hour and a half with.
And if you want an actual review of this, with a tidy summary, Rotten Tomatoes has that. I'm not really here to review these films other than to lift out details that stand out to me, and parse some meaning into them, even if it means savaging them. (I'm looking at you, Ti West.)
Now, if you'll excuse me, I have to go put on some Ravel, backlight myself with a red lightbulb, and smile serenely at the cars passing by.
Would I watch it again? Nah.
Would I own it? No.
Day 21: Apollo 18
Apollo 18 (2011)
Apollo 18 on Netflix Streaming
Found footage, '70s style. Points for holding it the entire time. Points for looking accurate enough to the equipment of the time that either they were very inventive, or very well funded.
I never wanted to be an astronaut. Never. Good on those boys (and girls) who laughed in the face of gravity and air, and took to the moon like it was another golf course. You can have it. I find the inner depths of the mind, unfettered by physics, more tempting.
And while I'll be perfectly honest and say this film bored me... a lot... it isn't badly made. It's solid. It's a legitimate slow burn and not cheesy, but after a certain point, I just did not care any more. Give me the end. Let me move on.
Besides, if the moon is infested with life that is arachnid in nature-- I'm definitely never leaving this planet. The space lobsters can have it.
Would I watch it again? No.
Would I own it? No.
Apollo 18 on Netflix Streaming
Found footage, '70s style. Points for holding it the entire time. Points for looking accurate enough to the equipment of the time that either they were very inventive, or very well funded.
I never wanted to be an astronaut. Never. Good on those boys (and girls) who laughed in the face of gravity and air, and took to the moon like it was another golf course. You can have it. I find the inner depths of the mind, unfettered by physics, more tempting.
And while I'll be perfectly honest and say this film bored me... a lot... it isn't badly made. It's solid. It's a legitimate slow burn and not cheesy, but after a certain point, I just did not care any more. Give me the end. Let me move on.
Besides, if the moon is infested with life that is arachnid in nature-- I'm definitely never leaving this planet. The space lobsters can have it.
Would I watch it again? No.
Would I own it? No.
Sunday, October 27, 2013
Day 20: V/H/S/2
V/H/S/2 (2013)
V/H/S/2 on Netflix
Another set of short horror stories held together by the mysterious collection of tapes that strangers insist on watching, even though the (literal) set-up screams danger.
This does what "ABCs of Death" should have done. I'm not calling all the shorts in this one, and the first, better than ABCs, but there's a quality to these shorts that I missed with ABCs.
I also appreciate that the theme here seems to be what happens when you ignore the monster. A monster with no tolerance for bullshittery. Though, to be honest, that seems to be the point of most horror. Some victims you pity, but their deaths are not marked by slow swells of soundtrack and epitaphs that mark dramas and romance. Some victim-making you cheer, momentarily bothered by a moral compass reminding you that all life is sacred.
I'm not here to expound on that. I could... but I won't. That's not the point. Mostly horror is about survival. Not daily life, survival. When the primal lizard brain kicks in and eats the inner fear, and either you find the power to fight back, or you meet death with a savage smile. If it doesn't kick in, hit re-load and start the level again. And not just by putting a new movie in, or re-starting the game.
Life continues whether you like or not. It also kicks like a heavyweight boxer in steel-toed boots. Some people never get to experience this-- and I could envy them, except I don't, because living a charmed life and laughing at "Hostel" or "Texas Chain Saw Massacre" because there is no emotional foundation to understand the fear and the instinct that it takes to endure the situation from either side of the story. These are people who treat a hundred dollar bill like the end of the world because they've never seen a $13,000 bill. They self-diagnose themselves with multiple sclerosis from three idiopathic symptoms on webMD, because they've never sat in a doctor's office and been told that the trained professionals want to test you for cancer markers. It sets you up for total loss. The empathy is not there, and neither is the knowledge that things get better both randomly, and by power of will. Those are the people schadenfreude is meant for.
Horror genre isn't new, and it's not going anywhere. It's just adapting to the changes in storytelling methods. It exists for a reason. We can hope it's used as a tool for good (no, seriously), as a modern Aesop and Grimm. You'll just have to pardon us gorehounds as we enjoy it in ways you can't understand as we find the lesson within.
Would I watch this again? Yes.
Would I own it? Yes. Maybe.
V/H/S/2 on Netflix
Another set of short horror stories held together by the mysterious collection of tapes that strangers insist on watching, even though the (literal) set-up screams danger.
This does what "ABCs of Death" should have done. I'm not calling all the shorts in this one, and the first, better than ABCs, but there's a quality to these shorts that I missed with ABCs.
I also appreciate that the theme here seems to be what happens when you ignore the monster. A monster with no tolerance for bullshittery. Though, to be honest, that seems to be the point of most horror. Some victims you pity, but their deaths are not marked by slow swells of soundtrack and epitaphs that mark dramas and romance. Some victim-making you cheer, momentarily bothered by a moral compass reminding you that all life is sacred.
I'm not here to expound on that. I could... but I won't. That's not the point. Mostly horror is about survival. Not daily life, survival. When the primal lizard brain kicks in and eats the inner fear, and either you find the power to fight back, or you meet death with a savage smile. If it doesn't kick in, hit re-load and start the level again. And not just by putting a new movie in, or re-starting the game.
Life continues whether you like or not. It also kicks like a heavyweight boxer in steel-toed boots. Some people never get to experience this-- and I could envy them, except I don't, because living a charmed life and laughing at "Hostel" or "Texas Chain Saw Massacre" because there is no emotional foundation to understand the fear and the instinct that it takes to endure the situation from either side of the story. These are people who treat a hundred dollar bill like the end of the world because they've never seen a $13,000 bill. They self-diagnose themselves with multiple sclerosis from three idiopathic symptoms on webMD, because they've never sat in a doctor's office and been told that the trained professionals want to test you for cancer markers. It sets you up for total loss. The empathy is not there, and neither is the knowledge that things get better both randomly, and by power of will. Those are the people schadenfreude is meant for.
Horror genre isn't new, and it's not going anywhere. It's just adapting to the changes in storytelling methods. It exists for a reason. We can hope it's used as a tool for good (no, seriously), as a modern Aesop and Grimm. You'll just have to pardon us gorehounds as we enjoy it in ways you can't understand as we find the lesson within.
Would I watch this again? Yes.
Would I own it? Yes. Maybe.
Saturday, October 26, 2013
Day 19: Paranormal Activity
Paranormal Activity (2009)
I decided to watch the first one, after realising with the fourth film, that viewing these as a comedy makes them better (without the Rifftrax, though it was very tempting), I should watch the first one. As I'm typing, it hasn't ended yet, and I told the DVD to play the alternate ending, which I don't remember offhand, but let's give it a go.
I decided to watch the first one, after realising with the fourth film, that viewing these as a comedy makes them better (without the Rifftrax, though it was very tempting), I should watch the first one. As I'm typing, it hasn't ended yet, and I told the DVD to play the alternate ending, which I don't remember offhand, but let's give it a go.
EXT: BORINGVILLE, AKA SAN DIEGO
PA DEMON
Why did she move in with that guy? Years trying to bring her into the fold, and now she dates that guy.
PAZUZU
So kill him. No big deal. The cult needs more people. Boss says so.
PA DEMON
It's not that easy! I nearly blew it with the fire, almost killing her and my vessel's mother.
PAZUZU
Dude. Humans are stupid. That's day one training. The vessel's mother sold you to the sister, and now you're moaning over some nerd with a camera fetish. So he catches you on camera, big deal.
PA DEMON
They'll make fun of me!
PAZUZU (flustered)
We make fun of you. Whose opinion do you care about more? Theirs, or ours. Go in, take control, and carve the boyfriend into an attractive streak.
PA DEMON
Help me.
PAZUZU
No!
PA DEMON
I'm not good at this.
PAZUZU
No shit. That's why you're the liaison for their cult. Low level hell-raising. You can't fuck up the high level stuff, you just can't... Look. It's this, or work in Hollywood.
PA DEMON
Shit, no. Not that. I'm going in.
"Paranormal Activity 1: Katie's Demon Job Interview," making millions of dollars while cashing in on the found footage genre. I don't know if I'm more annoyed by the success of a horror movie that inspires me to wash the dishes in another room, or that I'm not involved and not getting a paycheck out of scaring non-gorehounds. Probably the latter.
ALTERNATE ENDING: Katie says "no, thanks, I got a better offer. Christopher Walken just called." AKA she slits her throat. Now-- that doesn't kill the sequels, cause if she's already dead... Well, no biggie in their universe. It just causes more questions from the audience not gleefully filling in the blanks the second the screen goes black.
And then the credits go a little crazy with some blurry names in a three column list. I cared enough, I'd pause and read them, but eh.
Now-- where's the youtube version of this where someone's digitally added a Care Bear where the demon is standing?
Would I watch this again? Yes.
Would I own it? Yes.
Day 18: Paranormal Activity 4
Paranormal Activity 4 (2012)
Paranormal Activity 4 on Netflix streaming
And we start with a wild catching up on the blog, as Real Life (patent pending) is a merciless bitch sometimes. Moving on.
These movies need to be re-titled. They should actually be named "The Most Inept Demon Ever" parts 1-4. I'm not kidding. In watching the latest incarnation and some of the failures of the demon to kill the family, you could say "oooh, near miss, that was shocking!" or "dammit, not-Pazuzu, you can't drop a knife on someone's head when you have a clear shot?" I choose the latter.
Seriously, the only competent person this demon has working for it is Katie. Everyone else is either knee deep in issues that require a therapist, or too young to be a good minion. I own the first film on DVD and the Rifftrax for it. (Because I wanted to see the alternate endings to see if the first one could endear itself more to me, but Rifftrax makes it much easier to not be bored at.) I have friends who love these films because they're not gory, but they've got some scares in them. They genuinely enjoy the story and atmosphere. But they're not gorehounds. They won't watch any of the Saw series. Ever. I respect that, even if I don't understand.
I've seen the other two, middle PAs, and realise that these films never play it for the laughs, but when you start laughing at the ineptitude of the demon until Katie finally jumps in goes to work instead of dragging people across floors and throwing them around, it becomes more tolerable to someone jaded to spooks. It almost-- almost turns my opinion of Katie around.
It's like an office comedy. But for demons.
Paranormal Activity 4 on Netflix streaming
And we start with a wild catching up on the blog, as Real Life (patent pending) is a merciless bitch sometimes. Moving on.
These movies need to be re-titled. They should actually be named "The Most Inept Demon Ever" parts 1-4. I'm not kidding. In watching the latest incarnation and some of the failures of the demon to kill the family, you could say "oooh, near miss, that was shocking!" or "dammit, not-Pazuzu, you can't drop a knife on someone's head when you have a clear shot?" I choose the latter.
Seriously, the only competent person this demon has working for it is Katie. Everyone else is either knee deep in issues that require a therapist, or too young to be a good minion. I own the first film on DVD and the Rifftrax for it. (Because I wanted to see the alternate endings to see if the first one could endear itself more to me, but Rifftrax makes it much easier to not be bored at.) I have friends who love these films because they're not gory, but they've got some scares in them. They genuinely enjoy the story and atmosphere. But they're not gorehounds. They won't watch any of the Saw series. Ever. I respect that, even if I don't understand.
I've seen the other two, middle PAs, and realise that these films never play it for the laughs, but when you start laughing at the ineptitude of the demon until Katie finally jumps in goes to work instead of dragging people across floors and throwing them around, it becomes more tolerable to someone jaded to spooks. It almost-- almost turns my opinion of Katie around.
It's like an office comedy. But for demons.
INT: WOLFRAM AND HART, 3RD FLOOR, WATER COOLER
PAZUZU
So did you hear who they sent in to Henderson to add to that cult?
DAMIEN
No way! They didn't, did they?
PAZUZU (drinking coffee)
Yep.
DAMIEN
Satan's scrotum, that's-- what was the boss thinking? I hope Katie got sent in, too.
PAZUZU
Of course.
DAMIEN
I hate that guy! It's 'ooh door closing this' and 'spooky Xbox Kinect dots' that. Whatever happened to old fashioned torment and death?
INT: LUCIFER ENTERS, LOOKING FRAZZLED.
LUCIFER (stealing DAMIEN's coffee and finishing it)
It's demon week on Syfy. Everyone else is torturing those ghost hunters from Rhode Island. Now get back to work. Hell can't raise itself.
Would I watch it again? Now that I find it funny, yes.
Would I own it? Doubt it. Is there a Rifftrax for it?
Thursday, October 17, 2013
Day 17: Cabin Fever
Cabin Fever (2002)
And returning us back to the mindless idiocy of wasted youth and bizarre hick villains, is Eli Roth. The easy way to approach this is that nothing is sacred, and he will gleefully use all the grossness and gore to make sure you get what you paid for, or curl into a hateful ball of offendedness.
He's really good at it, too. It's like Troma grew up and looked for just enough legitimacy to not be underground, but like hell it's going to be mature about flesh eating diseases.
This is also another parable about mixing drugs and booze with camping in a place where most people would choose to sacrifice the deposit on the cabin and go back to town. Like horror films are the new Aesop. The Diseased Guy and the Douchebag.
I really want to hate this film, but something about it keeps me away from the remote control. Maybe it's because the Douchebag deserves what he gets, and much faster than we all see in real life. Maybe it's because the women aren't totally useless, despite the obvious T&A emphasis that happens when they're on screen.
But it's all a bit genius.The characterisations, the cinematography, the soundtrack choices, the random flashes of past and future during transitions... Eli Roth isn't stupid. He still grosses me out from time to time, but I think that's important. I'm not so jaded as to laugh it off. Like the adage goes, if you're not offended, you're not paying attention.
Would I watch it again? Yes, but not regularly.
Would I own it? Yes.
And returning us back to the mindless idiocy of wasted youth and bizarre hick villains, is Eli Roth. The easy way to approach this is that nothing is sacred, and he will gleefully use all the grossness and gore to make sure you get what you paid for, or curl into a hateful ball of offendedness.
He's really good at it, too. It's like Troma grew up and looked for just enough legitimacy to not be underground, but like hell it's going to be mature about flesh eating diseases.
This is also another parable about mixing drugs and booze with camping in a place where most people would choose to sacrifice the deposit on the cabin and go back to town. Like horror films are the new Aesop. The Diseased Guy and the Douchebag.
I really want to hate this film, but something about it keeps me away from the remote control. Maybe it's because the Douchebag deserves what he gets, and much faster than we all see in real life. Maybe it's because the women aren't totally useless, despite the obvious T&A emphasis that happens when they're on screen.
But it's all a bit genius.The characterisations, the cinematography, the soundtrack choices, the random flashes of past and future during transitions... Eli Roth isn't stupid. He still grosses me out from time to time, but I think that's important. I'm not so jaded as to laugh it off. Like the adage goes, if you're not offended, you're not paying attention.
Would I watch it again? Yes, but not regularly.
Would I own it? Yes.
Day 16: Ruins
Ruins (2008)
First: about the book. The book the film is based on has more details, more happenings on the way to the Temple, and characters' actions are swapped. It's also a decent read that clarifies the story about these killer plants. My main assumption is that they glossed over details for time, omitted survival methods because when gorehounds want survivalism they watch 'Survivorman,' and gave the girls some of the less sane behaviours because 1. it elicits more sympathy and 2. is a stereotype.
Still, not your typical screaming college girls and stupid jock boys, and we get flashes of both female and male nudity. It's fairly egalitarian, in my not wholly humble opinion. The natives will cause an eyeroll or ten-- if they're actually speaking a dialect of one of the (diminished and oppressed) native peoples, the accent is questionable. The film wasn't made in Central America. So... just ignore it and move on unless you're watching this as an example of Manifest Destiny still rearing its ugly Eurocentric head.
I like this one. Might be me enjoying some of that backlash against the tragically funny line of "four Americans just don't disappear!" Or that it's killer plants. Or that the gore is not as fast or silly as it could be, and this slow burn doesn't inspire me to wash the dishes.
If you get the blu-ray-- I'm assuming the DVD has the same extras-- there's an alternate ending which is less alternate and more "we added a scene that confirms exactly what you're thinking." I don't think it makes much difference either way, other than showing an awareness of consequences and black humour regarding the monster of the film.
Read the book after you watch this. Both are enjoyable, and I found waiting to read it made me fonder of the film, rather than reading it first and bitching over the screams that they left out this and that.
Would I watch it again? Yes.
Would I own it? Already do.
First: about the book. The book the film is based on has more details, more happenings on the way to the Temple, and characters' actions are swapped. It's also a decent read that clarifies the story about these killer plants. My main assumption is that they glossed over details for time, omitted survival methods because when gorehounds want survivalism they watch 'Survivorman,' and gave the girls some of the less sane behaviours because 1. it elicits more sympathy and 2. is a stereotype.
Still, not your typical screaming college girls and stupid jock boys, and we get flashes of both female and male nudity. It's fairly egalitarian, in my not wholly humble opinion. The natives will cause an eyeroll or ten-- if they're actually speaking a dialect of one of the (diminished and oppressed) native peoples, the accent is questionable. The film wasn't made in Central America. So... just ignore it and move on unless you're watching this as an example of Manifest Destiny still rearing its ugly Eurocentric head.
I like this one. Might be me enjoying some of that backlash against the tragically funny line of "four Americans just don't disappear!" Or that it's killer plants. Or that the gore is not as fast or silly as it could be, and this slow burn doesn't inspire me to wash the dishes.
If you get the blu-ray-- I'm assuming the DVD has the same extras-- there's an alternate ending which is less alternate and more "we added a scene that confirms exactly what you're thinking." I don't think it makes much difference either way, other than showing an awareness of consequences and black humour regarding the monster of the film.
Read the book after you watch this. Both are enjoyable, and I found waiting to read it made me fonder of the film, rather than reading it first and bitching over the screams that they left out this and that.
Would I watch it again? Yes.
Would I own it? Already do.
Wednesday, October 16, 2013
Day 15: Jack's Back
Jack's Back (1988)
Jack's Back on Netflix
This. This is the 1980s. Holy crap. Are you listening, Ti West? I'm (not) sorry to keep pooping on your parade, but I'm still bothered by the inaccuracies, however small, that 'House of the Devil' had, re-creating that decade.
This is also not much of a horror story. It's more of a crime procedural before the days of CSI. No splatterpunk here, not by a longshot. Netflix has it in their horror section. Regardless, the concept is horror enough so I'm posting this to the blog anyway. Because like some other gorehounds out there, some of my appreciation of the genre is in the forensics of it, the science of it, and science isn't always a gory mess. Sometimes it's about the cops solving a crime, with or without The Who screaming into a microphone.
For me, this'll be another short commentary as I'm not striving so much as to write reviews-- especially here, as it's 25 years old, there's been plenty already-- but I will say this: a modern Jack the Ripper makes for a good story when you start wondering how many mops it takes to get all that fake blood off the set.
Would I watch it again? No.
Would I own it? No.
Jack's Back on Netflix
This. This is the 1980s. Holy crap. Are you listening, Ti West? I'm (not) sorry to keep pooping on your parade, but I'm still bothered by the inaccuracies, however small, that 'House of the Devil' had, re-creating that decade.
This is also not much of a horror story. It's more of a crime procedural before the days of CSI. No splatterpunk here, not by a longshot. Netflix has it in their horror section. Regardless, the concept is horror enough so I'm posting this to the blog anyway. Because like some other gorehounds out there, some of my appreciation of the genre is in the forensics of it, the science of it, and science isn't always a gory mess. Sometimes it's about the cops solving a crime, with or without The Who screaming into a microphone.
For me, this'll be another short commentary as I'm not striving so much as to write reviews-- especially here, as it's 25 years old, there's been plenty already-- but I will say this: a modern Jack the Ripper makes for a good story when you start wondering how many mops it takes to get all that fake blood off the set.
Would I watch it again? No.
Would I own it? No.
Day 14: Carver
Carver (2008)
I dug this one up by adding the Frightpix channel to my Roku (after frying the heat sink of my 32" TV last night, replacing it with a 22", talking a salesman into buying 'Outlast,' and desperately playing catch-up on this blog, and video games). Added most of the free horror channels to the Roku, actually, so there should be no shortage of fresh meat.
For the cheap digital camera work, it's not as bad as I expected it to be. I specifically started dinner after I hit play so I had a ready excuse to walk away and listen to the screams in another room, but this one redeemed itself with me a bit with the meta commentary about the home videos the killer takes and calling them low budget. Like the movie they're in. The actors aren't bad. The makeup and gore is better than some big budget productions.
It's just your typical vacation gone (horribly) wrong flick, and definitely not the worst. But I can't think of anything else to say about it that's interesting, so we'll leave it at this: You could pick far worse.
Would I watch it again? No.
Would I own it? Nah.
I dug this one up by adding the Frightpix channel to my Roku (after frying the heat sink of my 32" TV last night, replacing it with a 22", talking a salesman into buying 'Outlast,' and desperately playing catch-up on this blog, and video games). Added most of the free horror channels to the Roku, actually, so there should be no shortage of fresh meat.
For the cheap digital camera work, it's not as bad as I expected it to be. I specifically started dinner after I hit play so I had a ready excuse to walk away and listen to the screams in another room, but this one redeemed itself with me a bit with the meta commentary about the home videos the killer takes and calling them low budget. Like the movie they're in. The actors aren't bad. The makeup and gore is better than some big budget productions.
It's just your typical vacation gone (horribly) wrong flick, and definitely not the worst. But I can't think of anything else to say about it that's interesting, so we'll leave it at this: You could pick far worse.
Would I watch it again? No.
Would I own it? Nah.
Monday, October 14, 2013
Day 13: The ABCs of Death
The ABCS of Death (2012)
The ABCs of Death on Netflix
26 short stories. Multiple languages. Multiple formats (including claymation). Keyword known only after the vignette is done.
Dude, some of these are just bizarre. Capital B with a side of 'Tampopo' bizarre. Some day I'll forget D and Z. Just not any time soon.
Some of them don't allow for explanation, which mostly works, and I hate to admit that I was laughing at the end of K, but I was.
I fast-forwarded through the rest of P as soon as I saw the cat. Look. I'm not squeamish. Vampires are my favourite monster. I love a good blood bath. (Edward can go fuck himself, but at least I read the books before I hated him even more on screen. Because if I'm going to pass judgement and hate on him and his "vampires" and the series, I have to read/watch it first. And I did. So fuck you, Edward.) I do not enjoy animal cruelty. I'm more likely to cross a street and defend an animal being attacked, than a human. It's not personal. I like them more, and their reasoning is often not the same as ours, so if I've got to be the swift kick of justice with someone of my own species, I will be. Especially cats. I have cats. I've had cats for many years. I will continue to have cats. They're smart and affectionate, and also demonic little buggers when so inclined, and that's why I love them. So a horror film that brings out an animal and then proceeds to destroy it will instantly land on my shit list. If it's a cat, the director is definitely not welcome to dinner.
I'll come back to this when I take on 'Cannibal Holocaust,' I'm sure.
A note to Ti West, as he did M, and I seem to be on a streak: Stephen King and Alfred Hitchcock. Study them. I'll be by next week with a test. I know you don't care what one random nerd thinks about the work that's getting you way more pots of cash than I'll ever see, but whatever. The only way I'll ever get through 'Innkeepers' is if there's a Rifftrax to go with it.
Would I watch it again? No.
Would I own it? No.
The ABCs of Death on Netflix
26 short stories. Multiple languages. Multiple formats (including claymation). Keyword known only after the vignette is done.
Dude, some of these are just bizarre. Capital B with a side of 'Tampopo' bizarre. Some day I'll forget D and Z. Just not any time soon.
Some of them don't allow for explanation, which mostly works, and I hate to admit that I was laughing at the end of K, but I was.
I fast-forwarded through the rest of P as soon as I saw the cat. Look. I'm not squeamish. Vampires are my favourite monster. I love a good blood bath. (Edward can go fuck himself, but at least I read the books before I hated him even more on screen. Because if I'm going to pass judgement and hate on him and his "vampires" and the series, I have to read/watch it first. And I did. So fuck you, Edward.) I do not enjoy animal cruelty. I'm more likely to cross a street and defend an animal being attacked, than a human. It's not personal. I like them more, and their reasoning is often not the same as ours, so if I've got to be the swift kick of justice with someone of my own species, I will be. Especially cats. I have cats. I've had cats for many years. I will continue to have cats. They're smart and affectionate, and also demonic little buggers when so inclined, and that's why I love them. So a horror film that brings out an animal and then proceeds to destroy it will instantly land on my shit list. If it's a cat, the director is definitely not welcome to dinner.
I'll come back to this when I take on 'Cannibal Holocaust,' I'm sure.
A note to Ti West, as he did M, and I seem to be on a streak: Stephen King and Alfred Hitchcock. Study them. I'll be by next week with a test. I know you don't care what one random nerd thinks about the work that's getting you way more pots of cash than I'll ever see, but whatever. The only way I'll ever get through 'Innkeepers' is if there's a Rifftrax to go with it.
Would I watch it again? No.
Would I own it? No.
Day 12: The Devil's Carnival
The Devil's Carnival (2012)
The Devil's Carnival on Netflix
I was just bitching about the lack of whimsy in 'House of The Devil,' and moved on to this. This has whimsy to spare.
I think the last time I went this wide-eyed at a macabre but brightly coloured musical that is absolutely horror, I was watching 'Repo! the Genetic Opera' for the first time. This is not quite so melodic, or playing on modern styles of music, but you will not be bored. It's an R-rated 'Nightmare Before Christmas,' old Tim Burton when he didn't have kids or care about mainstream profit. Plus, having fun with the themes of Hell and sin, like Aesop on LSD, is always something I'll watch.
This thing is short-- 55 minutes, according to the Netflix bar-- I could've done with more, if it had stayed as strong as it did the whole time. If not, thank you for cutting it off before it turned to schlock.
This one surprised me, and was watched at a friend's recommendation, knowing my love for the aforementioned gothic musicals. And I'm glad she did recommend it, because it's easy enough to be cynical and say there's nothing original left in the world, and all horror is the same, but it really isn't. Themes often repeat, Character types endure because they become beloved and/or expected.
And then something like this comes along, plays with the Devil and invites us in, and we're charmed and shown a whole new point of view. I already have a favourite song.
I can't recommend this for just anybody. Some people don't do musicals as a rule (I don't know many of those people). Some people will be bothered by just how unrepentantly strange it all is. Some people will mourn the lesser amount of blood than in other films Darren Lynn Bousman has made.
But I was instantly charmed. So there's that.
Would you watch it again? Yes.
Would you own it? Yes.
The Devil's Carnival on Netflix
I was just bitching about the lack of whimsy in 'House of The Devil,' and moved on to this. This has whimsy to spare.
I think the last time I went this wide-eyed at a macabre but brightly coloured musical that is absolutely horror, I was watching 'Repo! the Genetic Opera' for the first time. This is not quite so melodic, or playing on modern styles of music, but you will not be bored. It's an R-rated 'Nightmare Before Christmas,' old Tim Burton when he didn't have kids or care about mainstream profit. Plus, having fun with the themes of Hell and sin, like Aesop on LSD, is always something I'll watch.
This thing is short-- 55 minutes, according to the Netflix bar-- I could've done with more, if it had stayed as strong as it did the whole time. If not, thank you for cutting it off before it turned to schlock.
This one surprised me, and was watched at a friend's recommendation, knowing my love for the aforementioned gothic musicals. And I'm glad she did recommend it, because it's easy enough to be cynical and say there's nothing original left in the world, and all horror is the same, but it really isn't. Themes often repeat, Character types endure because they become beloved and/or expected.
And then something like this comes along, plays with the Devil and invites us in, and we're charmed and shown a whole new point of view. I already have a favourite song.
I can't recommend this for just anybody. Some people don't do musicals as a rule (I don't know many of those people). Some people will be bothered by just how unrepentantly strange it all is. Some people will mourn the lesser amount of blood than in other films Darren Lynn Bousman has made.
But I was instantly charmed. So there's that.
Would you watch it again? Yes.
Would you own it? Yes.
Day 11: The House of the Devil
The House of the Devil (2009)
All the reviews keep calling this so effectively retro, that some have mistaken it for actually being filmed in the 80s. I would agree, but there's just a little 1990s going on, instead of 1970s. It's nothing that can be precisely pointed out, but every once in a while something slips and I'm thinking of the next decade.
That's just me being nitpicky. Enjoy the flashback.
The last half hour finally picks up, finally starts adding blood to the formula, and some good ol' fashioned devil worship. It's not too little too late, but it's certainly not enough to bail out the whole film. You can see the twist coming at the end, but because it's not a Shyamalan twist, I kept from throwing the DVD out the window (which is especially good, because I borrowed the DVD for the blog).
Pacing is good enough. Like the actual films from the era. It's missing some of that coke-addled whimsy that you find in that era's films... which might be why I'm smelling the '90s in this. We got a whole lot less whimsical around then.
So when I say this, I mean it sincerely. Ti West? Stop directing. Maybe not forever, but at least until you pull out of mediocrity, or hone your skills on shorts (like the 'V/H/S' short).
Would I watch this again? No.
Would I own it? No.
All the reviews keep calling this so effectively retro, that some have mistaken it for actually being filmed in the 80s. I would agree, but there's just a little 1990s going on, instead of 1970s. It's nothing that can be precisely pointed out, but every once in a while something slips and I'm thinking of the next decade.
That's just me being nitpicky. Enjoy the flashback.
The last half hour finally picks up, finally starts adding blood to the formula, and some good ol' fashioned devil worship. It's not too little too late, but it's certainly not enough to bail out the whole film. You can see the twist coming at the end, but because it's not a Shyamalan twist, I kept from throwing the DVD out the window (which is especially good, because I borrowed the DVD for the blog).
Pacing is good enough. Like the actual films from the era. It's missing some of that coke-addled whimsy that you find in that era's films... which might be why I'm smelling the '90s in this. We got a whole lot less whimsical around then.
So when I say this, I mean it sincerely. Ti West? Stop directing. Maybe not forever, but at least until you pull out of mediocrity, or hone your skills on shorts (like the 'V/H/S' short).
Would I watch this again? No.
Would I own it? No.
Thursday, October 10, 2013
Day 10: The Bleeding House
The Bleeding House (2011)
Bleeding House on Netflix
This little indie jewel is proof that you have to dig through a lot of crap to find something that is far from crap. It's a quiet little story, with moody, dulcimer laden music, a slow build and more story than blood.
And if you're a sucker for a silvery Southern accent that would be a better guiding voice for Dexter Morgan than his father, the mere presence of the antagonist will make you smile. Dressed in a slick white suit with an old fashioned doctor bag, carrying on like the Good Samaritan as he contentedly serial kills his way across the countryside, this is a devil you wouldn't mind meeting.
The family is hardly a set of caricatures, either. Everyone in this film has their own spark, and thanks to a lack of exposition, we get enough backstory to know that the devil knocking on their door is less messed up than they are.
I'm trying to find a complaint about this film. I really am. But it's solid. It's not splatterpunk, and it's not suspense that plucks at your nerves. You can't cheer for anyone, or hate them either. You can sense, if you dig for comparison, some Stephen King sensibilities. But it's better because it's got more polish (and I say that with love, Mr. King), and a lack of expectation because it's a random indie flick stuffed in the Netflix horror section.
A repeated watching gives me more sympathy for Blackbird, whereas the first time I was a mostly fascinated, and annoyed that she'd be herself and usurp the power of killing in the end. All of the women in this film are fascinating, different each of them, not overly sexualised, and big parts of the puzzle. Just like the men. Everyone is a big part of this beautiful, blood-soaked puzzle.
Fine, I admit it. I love this film. There's too much celebrated death-- rather than the heaps of blurry corpses every Oscar winning war movie racks up-- to win mainstream hearts and accolades. There's no one particularly famous to rile up Hollywood with. No one's particularly pretty. The production values are quality, but nothing deeply memorable. This film leaves your brain on while it tells its story, but it never tries to dazzle you.
For that, I own it. This is not a DVD (not available on blu-ray) I lend out lightly, but if you haven't seen it, fix that. Now.
Would I watch it again? Yes indeed.
Would I own it? Already do.
Bleeding House on Netflix
This little indie jewel is proof that you have to dig through a lot of crap to find something that is far from crap. It's a quiet little story, with moody, dulcimer laden music, a slow build and more story than blood.
And if you're a sucker for a silvery Southern accent that would be a better guiding voice for Dexter Morgan than his father, the mere presence of the antagonist will make you smile. Dressed in a slick white suit with an old fashioned doctor bag, carrying on like the Good Samaritan as he contentedly serial kills his way across the countryside, this is a devil you wouldn't mind meeting.
The family is hardly a set of caricatures, either. Everyone in this film has their own spark, and thanks to a lack of exposition, we get enough backstory to know that the devil knocking on their door is less messed up than they are.
I'm trying to find a complaint about this film. I really am. But it's solid. It's not splatterpunk, and it's not suspense that plucks at your nerves. You can't cheer for anyone, or hate them either. You can sense, if you dig for comparison, some Stephen King sensibilities. But it's better because it's got more polish (and I say that with love, Mr. King), and a lack of expectation because it's a random indie flick stuffed in the Netflix horror section.
A repeated watching gives me more sympathy for Blackbird, whereas the first time I was a mostly fascinated, and annoyed that she'd be herself and usurp the power of killing in the end. All of the women in this film are fascinating, different each of them, not overly sexualised, and big parts of the puzzle. Just like the men. Everyone is a big part of this beautiful, blood-soaked puzzle.
Fine, I admit it. I love this film. There's too much celebrated death-- rather than the heaps of blurry corpses every Oscar winning war movie racks up-- to win mainstream hearts and accolades. There's no one particularly famous to rile up Hollywood with. No one's particularly pretty. The production values are quality, but nothing deeply memorable. This film leaves your brain on while it tells its story, but it never tries to dazzle you.
For that, I own it. This is not a DVD (not available on blu-ray) I lend out lightly, but if you haven't seen it, fix that. Now.
Would I watch it again? Yes indeed.
Would I own it? Already do.
Wednesday, October 9, 2013
Day 8 and 9: The Alien Series
Alien (1979)
Aliens (1986)
Alien 3 (1992)
Alien: Resurrection (1997)
As a first note, I find that the blu-ray menus are a little surreal. Like Weyland is about to take over my TV and everything else I own, including my chest cavity for their little pet project. They've even left a wallpaper on my screen after the film's stopped, and ejected from the tray. Not comforting.
Anyway. This is one of those science fiction universes that if you are not familiar with it, you aren't acquainted with the originator of many standards of space gone wrong. The latter two films, they're not so memorable, and often the fodder of fan critique. Harsh fan critique.
But I'll defend the fourth film individually.
This is not standard gorehound fodder. It's not even really for the science fiction crowd-- too gritty, too low tech. Ellen Ripley is an unwillingly tough hero that narrates us through time and the far reaches of space, and has introduced us to nightmares. Maybe a dog alien is pushing the audiences' suspension of disbelief, and definitely the Ripley-alien hybrid, but what do you expect when people still talk about John Hurt's chest exploding on the dinner table, or quote one of the easily quotable marines?
Even Giger might've scratched his head at topping what the first two films gave the audience. The third film mixed it up a little, changing the people and the setting they get killed in. Throw in some commentary on the state of the prison system and a bald Sigourney Weaver, and you can forgive it for refusing to stop when there was money to be made and more story to tell.
'Resurrection' is a Joss Whedon piece. Go ahead. Watch it again, with 'Firefly' specifically in mind. Hear the quipping that the other three films lack, spot his character types.. and recognise part of the Serenity.
Puts an interesting spin on the whole thing, doesn't it?
It's not a great film. Not even a good one, not really. Building on twenty years of history, Ellen Ripley's story is extended and literally mutated into being in a shinier universe. She's not the same Amazon with awful luck, but a savage, hot hybrid with alien bits enhancing her. The aliens have some of her in them. That, in itself, is a lot to accept after the previous three films.
The biggest problem is that it requires a significant leap of education to appreciate how far the villainous corporation has fallen, and the necessity of the hero to have superhuman powers to win. No more grunts, or prisoners, or panicked cargo crew.
The monster in the end is also, officially, the last alien I'd want to be stuck in a room with. The others-- the facehuggers, the soldiers, the queen-- they're going to attack you, and if you're lucky, kill you quickly. That one peculiar beast, however, is close enough to human to think it tameable, or less dangerous. That's fatal. It does not show you its weakness, or how it fights. There is no time to learn how to defeat it.
For classic horror-- for classic film making-- you watch the first film. For a movie version of a first person shooter game, you choose the second. For a post-apocalyptic jaunt with a side of post modern politics, pick the third.
And for a long shot revival of a story that had already reached its end, written by a god among geeks, and given zero chance to shine amongst its peers because it was never given a chance to, choose the last one.
Or just leave me to enjoy Sigourney rocking those talons. I'll be in my bunk.
Would I watch them again? More so the first one, yes. I also recommend the Rifftrax.
Would I own them? Already do.
Aliens (1986)
Alien 3 (1992)
Alien: Resurrection (1997)
As a first note, I find that the blu-ray menus are a little surreal. Like Weyland is about to take over my TV and everything else I own, including my chest cavity for their little pet project. They've even left a wallpaper on my screen after the film's stopped, and ejected from the tray. Not comforting.
Anyway. This is one of those science fiction universes that if you are not familiar with it, you aren't acquainted with the originator of many standards of space gone wrong. The latter two films, they're not so memorable, and often the fodder of fan critique. Harsh fan critique.
But I'll defend the fourth film individually.
This is not standard gorehound fodder. It's not even really for the science fiction crowd-- too gritty, too low tech. Ellen Ripley is an unwillingly tough hero that narrates us through time and the far reaches of space, and has introduced us to nightmares. Maybe a dog alien is pushing the audiences' suspension of disbelief, and definitely the Ripley-alien hybrid, but what do you expect when people still talk about John Hurt's chest exploding on the dinner table, or quote one of the easily quotable marines?
Even Giger might've scratched his head at topping what the first two films gave the audience. The third film mixed it up a little, changing the people and the setting they get killed in. Throw in some commentary on the state of the prison system and a bald Sigourney Weaver, and you can forgive it for refusing to stop when there was money to be made and more story to tell.
'Resurrection' is a Joss Whedon piece. Go ahead. Watch it again, with 'Firefly' specifically in mind. Hear the quipping that the other three films lack, spot his character types.. and recognise part of the Serenity.
Puts an interesting spin on the whole thing, doesn't it?
It's not a great film. Not even a good one, not really. Building on twenty years of history, Ellen Ripley's story is extended and literally mutated into being in a shinier universe. She's not the same Amazon with awful luck, but a savage, hot hybrid with alien bits enhancing her. The aliens have some of her in them. That, in itself, is a lot to accept after the previous three films.
The biggest problem is that it requires a significant leap of education to appreciate how far the villainous corporation has fallen, and the necessity of the hero to have superhuman powers to win. No more grunts, or prisoners, or panicked cargo crew.
The monster in the end is also, officially, the last alien I'd want to be stuck in a room with. The others-- the facehuggers, the soldiers, the queen-- they're going to attack you, and if you're lucky, kill you quickly. That one peculiar beast, however, is close enough to human to think it tameable, or less dangerous. That's fatal. It does not show you its weakness, or how it fights. There is no time to learn how to defeat it.
For classic horror-- for classic film making-- you watch the first film. For a movie version of a first person shooter game, you choose the second. For a post-apocalyptic jaunt with a side of post modern politics, pick the third.
And for a long shot revival of a story that had already reached its end, written by a god among geeks, and given zero chance to shine amongst its peers because it was never given a chance to, choose the last one.
Or just leave me to enjoy Sigourney rocking those talons. I'll be in my bunk.
Would I watch them again? More so the first one, yes. I also recommend the Rifftrax.
Would I own them? Already do.
Monday, October 7, 2013
Day 7: Two Headed Shark Attack
Two Headed Shark Attack (2012)
2 Headed Shark Attack on Netflix
Check your brain at the door for this one. The shark roars.
Accepting the fact that even porn actors need to get paid for roles that don't involve a lot of towels (and ignoring the fact that I could be wrong and called a bunch of starving artist actors that hate restaurant work porn stars), you may need intoxicants to really enjoy this. It was almost enjoyably bad. At least three of the kids are over 30, and it's one thing to maintain your body and intentionally try to look young, but eighteen year old models and thirty year old models do not look alike.
Watching this, it may have illuminated the appeal some gorehounds find in horror films, though, something I hesitate to admit on the internet lest the director thinks he just did me a favour. It's not the lack of intelligence we enjoy as part of the body count-- it's the ones who panic, those people who freak out at the first sign of trouble that we don't miss. I don't know about anyone else, but if a character in the horror genre can survive the whole film, to me they've moved beyond panic and dumb luck, and proved that they do have a brain. And a strong stomach. That's the person I want to fight a two-headed shark with.
Syfy level computer animation, but it's more entertaining than the live action. It really builds in the end, if you want to cheer the shark. As if the shark is cleaning up this hot mess of crappy acting for us.
I really can't get past the shark roaring. Next it'll be a cyber-shark, which will have DTS quality roars, and a chainsaw for a tail. (I'd probably still watch it.)
Would you watch it again? With friends. Who bought an entire pitcher of margaritas. For me.
Would you own it? No.
2 Headed Shark Attack on Netflix
Check your brain at the door for this one. The shark roars.
Accepting the fact that even porn actors need to get paid for roles that don't involve a lot of towels (and ignoring the fact that I could be wrong and called a bunch of starving artist actors that hate restaurant work porn stars), you may need intoxicants to really enjoy this. It was almost enjoyably bad. At least three of the kids are over 30, and it's one thing to maintain your body and intentionally try to look young, but eighteen year old models and thirty year old models do not look alike.
Watching this, it may have illuminated the appeal some gorehounds find in horror films, though, something I hesitate to admit on the internet lest the director thinks he just did me a favour. It's not the lack of intelligence we enjoy as part of the body count-- it's the ones who panic, those people who freak out at the first sign of trouble that we don't miss. I don't know about anyone else, but if a character in the horror genre can survive the whole film, to me they've moved beyond panic and dumb luck, and proved that they do have a brain. And a strong stomach. That's the person I want to fight a two-headed shark with.
Syfy level computer animation, but it's more entertaining than the live action. It really builds in the end, if you want to cheer the shark. As if the shark is cleaning up this hot mess of crappy acting for us.
I really can't get past the shark roaring. Next it'll be a cyber-shark, which will have DTS quality roars, and a chainsaw for a tail. (I'd probably still watch it.)
Would you watch it again? With friends. Who bought an entire pitcher of margaritas. For me.
Would you own it? No.
Sunday, October 6, 2013
Day 6: The Bay
The Bay (2012)
'The Bay' on Netflix
A serious gripe I want to get off my chest, now that the found footage genre is officially a genre: tell us when it's found footage genre. It's not that I'm tired of it; a little innovation thrills me, in fact, but if I have to watch professional cameramen pretend to be shaky-handed amateurs instead of a film shot on a ten thousand dollar camera, warn me in advance, dammit.
Although, this film might be more of amateurs being amateurs without the ten thousand dollar camera. Doesn't matter. When a film makes you miss James Cameron's cinematography work, it's time to discuss quality vs. quantity.
Strange narration style. The main character/narrator is awkward in her delivery, and it's either the actress or the director's fault. I don't care either way, to be honest, but character says they should have hired a professional to narrate the footage. I agree.
Make-up effects aren't bad. Actors aren't awful. Dialogue is stilted because it tries too hard to be natural and off the cuff.
It's just... this could have been a great story. Remove the preachy Greenpeace tone about pollution and the evil of human works, carve the clunky parts out, and make the experts more like actual experts.
When I shifted my Roku to free a DVD mid-movie, it cut out and flashed a "content disabled' warning in a 1980s emergency broadcast style font... it's too bad that wasn't part of the film.
Here, have a palate cleanser. I give you Mike Rowe vs. giant bells:
Would I watch it again? No.
Would I own it? Oh god no.
'The Bay' on Netflix
A serious gripe I want to get off my chest, now that the found footage genre is officially a genre: tell us when it's found footage genre. It's not that I'm tired of it; a little innovation thrills me, in fact, but if I have to watch professional cameramen pretend to be shaky-handed amateurs instead of a film shot on a ten thousand dollar camera, warn me in advance, dammit.
Although, this film might be more of amateurs being amateurs without the ten thousand dollar camera. Doesn't matter. When a film makes you miss James Cameron's cinematography work, it's time to discuss quality vs. quantity.
Strange narration style. The main character/narrator is awkward in her delivery, and it's either the actress or the director's fault. I don't care either way, to be honest, but character says they should have hired a professional to narrate the footage. I agree.
Make-up effects aren't bad. Actors aren't awful. Dialogue is stilted because it tries too hard to be natural and off the cuff.
It's just... this could have been a great story. Remove the preachy Greenpeace tone about pollution and the evil of human works, carve the clunky parts out, and make the experts more like actual experts.
When I shifted my Roku to free a DVD mid-movie, it cut out and flashed a "content disabled' warning in a 1980s emergency broadcast style font... it's too bad that wasn't part of the film.
Here, have a palate cleanser. I give you Mike Rowe vs. giant bells:
Would I watch it again? No.
Would I own it? Oh god no.
Friday, October 4, 2013
Day 5: The Poughkeepsie Tapes
The Poughkeepsie Tapes (2007)
And now for something entirely dark. Gore, torture porn, psychological torture, actual torture, sexual sadism, found footage... this fake documentary has it all. I, for one, am entirely glad this one isn't a real one, because while the amount of crimes the unnamed serial killer commits is sometimes a bit implausible-- remember, though, that the period of the film pre-dates Amber Alerts-- they seem, at times, more realistic than the things splashing across our news broadcasts.
Technically, this film was never released. It's one of "those." Part of that treasure trove of hard to find and/or hard to watch horror pieces. Something memorable, partially because it's not part of the mainstream horror schlock that is consumed as a Friday night date movie, nor part of the standard repository of required viewing on Halloween night after a party and a couple beers.
It lives up to that standard. The overall tone, the narration of investigators and experts cutting in between old VHS style home video footage that was made by the serial killer, is bleak. Morbid. Savage. There are no laughs, and just as you might be relaxing, thinking that the worst is past, the film expertly shocks you out of complacency. It's the kind of film you bring out when a friend is commenting that they'd like to be a forensic investigator, or a criminologist, and aren't entirely sure they have the stomach or sanity to do it. Even the music feeds to the darkness and tension, with the expert commentary sometimes more realistic than the coached interview of a real documentary.
My one complaint is about the unlikelihood of Cheryl Dempsey being allowed to go home unsupervised by medical (and psychological) professionals. She's the one glimmer of hope the film deliberately offers, and then takes away. Maybe the parents refused it all. Maybe someone screwed up at the hospital before the involuntary commitment went through. And maybe I just need to shut up and let the story be told.
I don't hate this film. I want to, but that savage edge of curiosity, that driving need to follow the story to the end, it overwhelms the disgust. It's less of a shock for committing to film various acts that many horror films won't touch, and more of a lightning rod for the gorehound, giving him (or her, thank you) exactly what is craved, but also refusing to allow a sense of pleasure with it. This one haunts you later, when you don't expect it.
It's enough to make one want to watch Monty Python until the serial killer's voice is forgotten.
Finally, a fair warning to those who haven't seen it: you may never look at balloons the same way again.
Would I watch it again? To show it to someone else who would appreciate it? Yes. On a whim, no.
Would I own it? You can't, technically, and... no.
And now for something entirely dark. Gore, torture porn, psychological torture, actual torture, sexual sadism, found footage... this fake documentary has it all. I, for one, am entirely glad this one isn't a real one, because while the amount of crimes the unnamed serial killer commits is sometimes a bit implausible-- remember, though, that the period of the film pre-dates Amber Alerts-- they seem, at times, more realistic than the things splashing across our news broadcasts.
Technically, this film was never released. It's one of "those." Part of that treasure trove of hard to find and/or hard to watch horror pieces. Something memorable, partially because it's not part of the mainstream horror schlock that is consumed as a Friday night date movie, nor part of the standard repository of required viewing on Halloween night after a party and a couple beers.
It lives up to that standard. The overall tone, the narration of investigators and experts cutting in between old VHS style home video footage that was made by the serial killer, is bleak. Morbid. Savage. There are no laughs, and just as you might be relaxing, thinking that the worst is past, the film expertly shocks you out of complacency. It's the kind of film you bring out when a friend is commenting that they'd like to be a forensic investigator, or a criminologist, and aren't entirely sure they have the stomach or sanity to do it. Even the music feeds to the darkness and tension, with the expert commentary sometimes more realistic than the coached interview of a real documentary.
My one complaint is about the unlikelihood of Cheryl Dempsey being allowed to go home unsupervised by medical (and psychological) professionals. She's the one glimmer of hope the film deliberately offers, and then takes away. Maybe the parents refused it all. Maybe someone screwed up at the hospital before the involuntary commitment went through. And maybe I just need to shut up and let the story be told.
I don't hate this film. I want to, but that savage edge of curiosity, that driving need to follow the story to the end, it overwhelms the disgust. It's less of a shock for committing to film various acts that many horror films won't touch, and more of a lightning rod for the gorehound, giving him (or her, thank you) exactly what is craved, but also refusing to allow a sense of pleasure with it. This one haunts you later, when you don't expect it.
It's enough to make one want to watch Monty Python until the serial killer's voice is forgotten.
Finally, a fair warning to those who haven't seen it: you may never look at balloons the same way again.
Would I watch it again? To show it to someone else who would appreciate it? Yes. On a whim, no.
Would I own it? You can't, technically, and... no.
Day 4: Slither
Slither (2006)
Happy Friday to me, here's a film I know well. I sing the songs used in the soundtrack loudly (and somewhat off key after a certain volume), I know more than a few lines. I won't say much here so I don't ruin the moments I still love, so they can be enjoyed for the first time.
See, I get more confused looks over this film than others; but not because people don't see the appeal. Because they haven't heard of it, or they saw the name, the poster, and wrote it off as standard B movie crap. Or they love 'Firefly' or 'Castle,' but they don't watch horror movies because they're stupid.
The latter group is welcome to their opinion, but they're missing out.
It's a bit silly, and it's not a new story, but it is funny, and it is well done. Nathan Fillion works this role as well as Malcolm Reynolds. Better, maybe, because there's so much more room for campiness and expression herein.
Not the goriest-- though the grossness isn't lacking-- and far from dark, it's just fun. It'll weed out the squeamish in your life regardless, but make sure to repeat the jokes to them later when they're not running in disgust from the worms and tentacles.
Now go watch it.
Would I watch it again? Easily. Happily. I haven't memorised all the lines yet.
Would I own it? Already do. I dare you to pry it out of my hands.
Happy Friday to me, here's a film I know well. I sing the songs used in the soundtrack loudly (and somewhat off key after a certain volume), I know more than a few lines. I won't say much here so I don't ruin the moments I still love, so they can be enjoyed for the first time.
See, I get more confused looks over this film than others; but not because people don't see the appeal. Because they haven't heard of it, or they saw the name, the poster, and wrote it off as standard B movie crap. Or they love 'Firefly' or 'Castle,' but they don't watch horror movies because they're stupid.
The latter group is welcome to their opinion, but they're missing out.
It's a bit silly, and it's not a new story, but it is funny, and it is well done. Nathan Fillion works this role as well as Malcolm Reynolds. Better, maybe, because there's so much more room for campiness and expression herein.
Not the goriest-- though the grossness isn't lacking-- and far from dark, it's just fun. It'll weed out the squeamish in your life regardless, but make sure to repeat the jokes to them later when they're not running in disgust from the worms and tentacles.
Now go watch it.
Would I watch it again? Easily. Happily. I haven't memorised all the lines yet.
Would I own it? Already do. I dare you to pry it out of my hands.
Thursday, October 3, 2013
Day 3: Dead Space: Downfall
Dead Space: Downfall (2008)
This is a tougher one to break down. There are two perspectives: those who have played the Dead Space games, and those who have not. I'm making an effort here-- more so than usual-- to keep spoilers out of what I say for the n00bs, and anyone still hot to be surprised by the game canon. I'll try to skew towards the POV of those who haven't played the games, but full disclosure? I'm very familiar with the games. Love 'em. Ask me about my favourite necromorph.
Also, and let get this out of the way, this film is animated. But it is not for the kids. Nope. Nopenopenope.
Sci-fi and horror, life in space and monsters. Catnip for people like me. A nice little mystery covered in blood, and if this is your first exposure to the Dead Space universe, you don't know what's coming. And for that, I envy you a little bit. The creators of this universe don't play to campy tropes, and to learn that for the first time? Jealous here. And if you're like me, and know exactly why characters are losing their minds and lives left and right, you can't help but anticipate the messy, apocalyptic, gory action.
Strong female roles and a nice take on the paranoid perils of space, this film can stand by itself as a part of the bigger story, and while the bodycount is high (so very high), these characters are not so easily forgotten. Just-- a quick tip from the gamer side-- don't get attached to anyone not named Isaac Clarke. (And you won't meet him in 'Downfall.')
If this is your first trip onto the Ishimura, good luck, you'll need it. If you're an old pro at the limb cleaving, grab a plasma cutter, and stay the hell away from the Marker.
Would I watch it again? Infrequently, but it's a nice second choice when you want more plot than shooting gallery.
Would I own it? Eventually, since it's not likely to hit Netflix/Hulu rotation anytime soon.
This is a tougher one to break down. There are two perspectives: those who have played the Dead Space games, and those who have not. I'm making an effort here-- more so than usual-- to keep spoilers out of what I say for the n00bs, and anyone still hot to be surprised by the game canon. I'll try to skew towards the POV of those who haven't played the games, but full disclosure? I'm very familiar with the games. Love 'em. Ask me about my favourite necromorph.
Also, and let get this out of the way, this film is animated. But it is not for the kids. Nope. Nopenopenope.
Sci-fi and horror, life in space and monsters. Catnip for people like me. A nice little mystery covered in blood, and if this is your first exposure to the Dead Space universe, you don't know what's coming. And for that, I envy you a little bit. The creators of this universe don't play to campy tropes, and to learn that for the first time? Jealous here. And if you're like me, and know exactly why characters are losing their minds and lives left and right, you can't help but anticipate the messy, apocalyptic, gory action.
Strong female roles and a nice take on the paranoid perils of space, this film can stand by itself as a part of the bigger story, and while the bodycount is high (so very high), these characters are not so easily forgotten. Just-- a quick tip from the gamer side-- don't get attached to anyone not named Isaac Clarke. (And you won't meet him in 'Downfall.')
If this is your first trip onto the Ishimura, good luck, you'll need it. If you're an old pro at the limb cleaving, grab a plasma cutter, and stay the hell away from the Marker.
Would I watch it again? Infrequently, but it's a nice second choice when you want more plot than shooting gallery.
Would I own it? Eventually, since it's not likely to hit Netflix/Hulu rotation anytime soon.
Wednesday, October 2, 2013
Day 2: Blair Witch 2
Blair Witch 2: Book of Shadows (2000)
The year of release isn't so much to comment on my taste-- even though it does, I suppose-- but also to help capture its era. I have plans to rewind the horror clock and watch some oldies, and have been told (ordered) to see a newer release to the point of being handed the DVD. Anyway. Onward.
Less found footage and more characterisation. Helpful when the first film specialised in making the audience motion sick, and honestly, I still don't care about those kids from the first one. Not that I care much about this lot, either.
Jeffrey Donovan, a fellow (and now former) Masshole, leads the bunch of walking victims as a diagnosed patron of the mental health professionals; paranoid schizophrenic, if I had to guess. So, trusting him, they go into the woods, things go wrong, and yadda... yadda... yadda. Ghost stories and intoxicants around the campfire. Missed medication and leaving a hospital AMA. Disappearance and death. Stupid choices and hysteria. A story told through the frame of an investigation by a cop with a grudge.
Also, tip: when researching a serious topic, even one Fox Mulder might roll his eyes at, one should usually avoid booze, pot, and questionable information sources. And-- backups.
Sorry, I'm being too harsh. Let's assume the Blair Witch is real and this isn't a pack of stupid people having psychotic breaks. Or-- perhaps these are psychotic breaks being had by people being directly influenced by a supernatural presence that left a psychic scar on the woods and its ruins. Vulnerable mental states being toyed with by a malevolent spirit. Technological issues mixing with ethereal bad luck. A PTSD-addled ghost that doesn't like tourists any more than the living residents do.
Regardless, this movie is best enjoyed with no emotional attachment to the characters, and an appreciation of their messy ends. Call me heartless for enjoying the catharsis, but real life doesn't wrap up with credits and a heavy metal song.
Would I watch it again? Sure, as a popcorn and boredom horror flick.
Would I own it? Already do. It's Jeffrey Donovan.
The year of release isn't so much to comment on my taste-- even though it does, I suppose-- but also to help capture its era. I have plans to rewind the horror clock and watch some oldies, and have been told (ordered) to see a newer release to the point of being handed the DVD. Anyway. Onward.
Less found footage and more characterisation. Helpful when the first film specialised in making the audience motion sick, and honestly, I still don't care about those kids from the first one. Not that I care much about this lot, either.
Jeffrey Donovan, a fellow (and now former) Masshole, leads the bunch of walking victims as a diagnosed patron of the mental health professionals; paranoid schizophrenic, if I had to guess. So, trusting him, they go into the woods, things go wrong, and yadda... yadda... yadda. Ghost stories and intoxicants around the campfire. Missed medication and leaving a hospital AMA. Disappearance and death. Stupid choices and hysteria. A story told through the frame of an investigation by a cop with a grudge.
Also, tip: when researching a serious topic, even one Fox Mulder might roll his eyes at, one should usually avoid booze, pot, and questionable information sources. And-- backups.
Sorry, I'm being too harsh. Let's assume the Blair Witch is real and this isn't a pack of stupid people having psychotic breaks. Or-- perhaps these are psychotic breaks being had by people being directly influenced by a supernatural presence that left a psychic scar on the woods and its ruins. Vulnerable mental states being toyed with by a malevolent spirit. Technological issues mixing with ethereal bad luck. A PTSD-addled ghost that doesn't like tourists any more than the living residents do.
Regardless, this movie is best enjoyed with no emotional attachment to the characters, and an appreciation of their messy ends. Call me heartless for enjoying the catharsis, but real life doesn't wrap up with credits and a heavy metal song.
Would I watch it again? Sure, as a popcorn and boredom horror flick.
Would I own it? Already do. It's Jeffrey Donovan.
Tuesday, October 1, 2013
Day 1: Event Horizon
Event Horizon (1997)
A favourite to start out the month, and one of the few films on my "do not fall asleep to this" list. It's not because I find space devilry or mostly naked Sam Neill nightmare inducing, but something about it occasionally monkeys with the twisted part of my brain and reminds it that being a gorehound doesn't exempt you from being creeped out. It just happens less.
Sci-fi gone wrong, supernatural horror, and Sam Neill losing his mind (and eyes). It's a gritty flick, not romanticising space, but it doesn't oversaturate the set in blood.
That said, if you ever need a reason to up the rating, go frame by frame on the found footage. It must've been entertaining filming those brief sequences. Also very sticky.
A serious beef I've had with this film since the beginning: the Latin drives me nuts. It says "free me," as in liberate. This changes the initial translation into less of a rescue and more of a mystery, until later on the full message and full translation reduces the importance of the translation of the verb in the sentence. 'Free yourself from hell' and 'free me' pull the plot along without betraying it. 'Save yourself from hell' and 'save me' mislead the characters and audience into believing that there's still someone to save there until, whoops, no, just gotta get out of the trap we all walked into. I still don't know where that error crept in, but if it's the scriptwriters fault, I owe you a firm kick, fifteen years later.
Though, and here's a thought induced by this October challenge, the translation is intentional. In which case, permit me to headslap the character for such a fatal fumble.
That aside, it's good. It's aged well, with a nice look at Morpheus before 'The Matrix,' and Lucius Malfoy before the blond hair. The FX holds up, being mostly practical.
Wish the blu-ray had more new special features and a cleaner cut, but I hardly expected to own it this way when I was handed the VHS that fateful day and told to watch it (as the owner left the room, refusing to watch it again so soon). It could also be a case of a film and its extras too old or lost for a digital makeover.
Parting shot: watching this after the Dead Space games (the first one, specifically), I agree with others. There seems to be definite, connectable inspiration in 'Event Horizon,' helping it create an awesome (series of) game(s).
Would I watch it again? Yes. Frequently.
Would I own it? Already do. And if something replaces blu-ray in ten years, I'll buy it in that format again.
A favourite to start out the month, and one of the few films on my "do not fall asleep to this" list. It's not because I find space devilry or mostly naked Sam Neill nightmare inducing, but something about it occasionally monkeys with the twisted part of my brain and reminds it that being a gorehound doesn't exempt you from being creeped out. It just happens less.
Sci-fi gone wrong, supernatural horror, and Sam Neill losing his mind (and eyes). It's a gritty flick, not romanticising space, but it doesn't oversaturate the set in blood.
That said, if you ever need a reason to up the rating, go frame by frame on the found footage. It must've been entertaining filming those brief sequences. Also very sticky.
A serious beef I've had with this film since the beginning: the Latin drives me nuts. It says "free me," as in liberate. This changes the initial translation into less of a rescue and more of a mystery, until later on the full message and full translation reduces the importance of the translation of the verb in the sentence. 'Free yourself from hell' and 'free me' pull the plot along without betraying it. 'Save yourself from hell' and 'save me' mislead the characters and audience into believing that there's still someone to save there until, whoops, no, just gotta get out of the trap we all walked into. I still don't know where that error crept in, but if it's the scriptwriters fault, I owe you a firm kick, fifteen years later.
Though, and here's a thought induced by this October challenge, the translation is intentional. In which case, permit me to headslap the character for such a fatal fumble.
That aside, it's good. It's aged well, with a nice look at Morpheus before 'The Matrix,' and Lucius Malfoy before the blond hair. The FX holds up, being mostly practical.
Wish the blu-ray had more new special features and a cleaner cut, but I hardly expected to own it this way when I was handed the VHS that fateful day and told to watch it (as the owner left the room, refusing to watch it again so soon). It could also be a case of a film and its extras too old or lost for a digital makeover.
Parting shot: watching this after the Dead Space games (the first one, specifically), I agree with others. There seems to be definite, connectable inspiration in 'Event Horizon,' helping it create an awesome (series of) game(s).
Would I watch it again? Yes. Frequently.
Would I own it? Already do. And if something replaces blu-ray in ten years, I'll buy it in that format again.
Monday, September 23, 2013
Outlast (video game)
A quick sidestep into video game genre.
As the intro of the game states, you can only run, hide, or die. No weapons. Just you, a camera with night vision, and a ton of "people" out to scare and/or kill you.
If you'd rather watch it (and don't mind the gamer hosting the playthrough talking as he plays [but stops when characters are talking]) than play it, I present you all with a link to the (awesome) theRadBrad's playthrough:
Hollywood could take a lesson from the scares in this. It gets my hackles up regularly, and while I'd probably scream if my phone went off next to me, it's nice to see that something out there can still do it.
As the intro of the game states, you can only run, hide, or die. No weapons. Just you, a camera with night vision, and a ton of "people" out to scare and/or kill you.
If you'd rather watch it (and don't mind the gamer hosting the playthrough talking as he plays [but stops when characters are talking]) than play it, I present you all with a link to the (awesome) theRadBrad's playthrough:
Hollywood could take a lesson from the scares in this. It gets my hackles up regularly, and while I'd probably scream if my phone went off next to me, it's nice to see that something out there can still do it.
Sunday, September 22, 2013
A new blog, and the first movie rundown.
A brief about me: Nothing is sacred. I regularly get challenged with the classic lines: "Oh, have you seen ____?" If I have, I say yes. If I haven't, I usually track is down and form my own opinion. I also dig through Netflix and Hulu for fresh meat, even if a lot of it is painful, badly made crap. But you don't find the little gems unless you do that. So I'll get this out of the way now.
Yes, I have seen:
Poughkeepsie Tapes
A Serbian Film
Martyrs
Inside
Oldboy
Cannibal (fill in the blank)
And a bunch of others that send most casual horror fans running for the door. It's hard to keep track sometimes, but those are the ones that usually come up. I own one of those above films. I refuse to see a different one of them ever again. I won't tell you which, because I won't influence anyone's choice to watch any of them. Go ahead, love 'em. Someone should.
American Mary
An interesting, if convoluted ride. One wonders if there's a backstory to the final product, because a few characters that aren't important get more time than an important one. Decently gory, but not as much medical gore as there could be. The Saw series has much more, and a worthy warning here of a rape scene. AT least it's not completely exploitative.
But it's revenged. There's something about this movie that bothers me, and it may be down to execution (pun aside). The use of police to step in and sniff around for the source of the blood loss is sometimes ignored, but not here, and maybe that's the problem-- this seems a peculiar cross between American Psycho and I Spit On Your Grave. But then the police procedural trope keeps butting in and throwing off the progress of the story, rather than advancing it, and Mary makes a few stupid choices that could've kept her out of trouble longer. You empathize with her, there are efforts to make the audience understand her choices, but in the end it's a decent time killer that was stuck between sending a message and delivering the gore.
Would I watch this again? Yes.
Would I own it? No.
Yes, I have seen:
Poughkeepsie Tapes
A Serbian Film
Martyrs
Inside
Oldboy
Cannibal (fill in the blank)
And a bunch of others that send most casual horror fans running for the door. It's hard to keep track sometimes, but those are the ones that usually come up. I own one of those above films. I refuse to see a different one of them ever again. I won't tell you which, because I won't influence anyone's choice to watch any of them. Go ahead, love 'em. Someone should.
American Mary
An interesting, if convoluted ride. One wonders if there's a backstory to the final product, because a few characters that aren't important get more time than an important one. Decently gory, but not as much medical gore as there could be. The Saw series has much more, and a worthy warning here of a rape scene. AT least it's not completely exploitative.
But it's revenged. There's something about this movie that bothers me, and it may be down to execution (pun aside). The use of police to step in and sniff around for the source of the blood loss is sometimes ignored, but not here, and maybe that's the problem-- this seems a peculiar cross between American Psycho and I Spit On Your Grave. But then the police procedural trope keeps butting in and throwing off the progress of the story, rather than advancing it, and Mary makes a few stupid choices that could've kept her out of trouble longer. You empathize with her, there are efforts to make the audience understand her choices, but in the end it's a decent time killer that was stuck between sending a message and delivering the gore.
Would I watch this again? Yes.
Would I own it? No.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)