Hey guys. I know I have been following this before but thought you might like to check out the latest trailer for Joe Johnston's Wolfman remake.
Loving the old school look and feel of the piece, a potentially great homage to the original universal monster classics that has a lot of people excited. The acting for the most part looks excellent even if Hopkins veers dangerously close to cheesy and his old Van Helsing schtick. The special effects even look fine, despite the usual complaints. I'll certainly try and catch this next year...
Oh, and for the record Mr B Shaun of the Dead is an underappreciated gem... and dogs CAN look up.
MM
Tuesday, 27 October 2009
Monday, 26 October 2009
Top Ten End Of The World Films...
Check out this list over at Bloody Disgusting of the top ten end of the world films. What do you make of it? I'm still not convinced that Shaun of the Dead really is that great. In fact, I'd rather watch Zombieland again. Maybe brits love 'American things' more?
N.B. That last comment was one for the Alan Partridge fans out there...
N.B. That last comment was one for the Alan Partridge fans out there...
Zombieland - Some Thoughts
Really - if you haven't seen this yet then you really should. I rarely start reviews or rather commentary in such a way, but Zombieland is the exception that proves the rule that I should do so more often and give a direct suggestion.Spoiler alert!
The world has become a titular Zombieland, leaving poor Jesse Eisenberg confused, worried and full of not a little bit of angst. He sets out to see his parents and smashes a few zombie faces on the way, before bumping into Tallahassee (Woody Harrelson), Witchita and Little Rock (the two females of the group). They fight zombies, have adventures and bump into one of the greatest (and weirdest) cameo roles of all time. As I've said spoiler alert, you won't mind me saying that the sequence with Bill Murray is worth the price of admission alone - especially his rather nasty fate!
Moving on from spoiler territory, the greatest asset of the film is the tone. It's wonderful, simply put. Drama, comedy, action, you name it, it's all in there. The scripting is tight and the elements of the film blend wonderfully well together, making it seem like a great mix of The Wonder Years (Jesse Eisenberg's voiceover), Dawn of the Dead and Superbad (gross out comedy moments).
Zombieland is a movie that, taking each element separately, is merely average. However, thanks to various elements being blended so well, it really goes work. The characters are on the whole likeable though kudos has to go to Woody Harrelson for his turn as Tallahasee. If you were trapped in Z(ee)land, you'd want him by your side. A badass and man who knows how to have fun - although he does suffer from a candy obsession in the form of Twinkies.
Ultimately, don't expect Zombieland to tax your brain cells - but do expect it to provide some wonderful entertainment that gives many nods to the genre and provides a whole lot of laughs.
**** 4/5
Wednesday, 21 October 2009
Saw 5 - Review
Hi guys. If you read my previous posting you'll know that I promised this and part of the reasons behind it anyway but I wanted to add that this is here because I just finished watching the DVD. Yes I did buy it in part due to the hype surrounding the sixth installment's recent release but not for the blog alone, it's just the sort of thing I do anyway. I'm a sucker for hype but I quite enjoy that part of film fandom. I am hoping that will gain the piece some extra relevance though.
SPOILER COUNTRY - YOU KNOW THE DRILL!!!
In a nutshell this movie naturally picks up where the previous one left off. (find my review of that elsewhere on the blog). Detective Hoffman has picked up the torch of previous protagonist Jigsaw. With no loose end present one is presented as the FBI agent from the previous movie, Peter Strahm, is seen as supposed to die in the mass house death orgy that made up Saw 3, 4 and now the start of 5 but he survives in quite a clever way and with John Kramer dead sets out to find the new man responsible, putting Hoffman's secret in jeopardy. Along the way we see in flashback how he and Jigsaw met and, unknowing to us in the audience, the ways in which Hoffman was present at the events from all 3 films (conveniently with both other villains foolishly killed off). This is done surprisingly well despite being necessary but more on that later. Concurrently with the investigation and attempts by Hoffman to cover his tracks by framing his pursuer we follow a Saw 2 style set up of 5 victims (get it?) in a series of rooms set as traps as they attempt to survive grisly fates, and learn a valuable life lesson about morality. No sarcasm intended, you do get that in a non-overt or ironic way. Now to the review...
We open as ever with a traditional straight-into-the-action trap. Like the previous movies this is the best one here and starts us off well, done excellently, presented well practically and with a later story purpose that justifies even the biggest annoyance that it was not "winnable", since this is, as we learn, Hoffman and not Jigsaw responsible, killing the man who murdered his sister and framing Jigsaw, much to his initial annoyance and setting up their partnership and to a degree all the previous films, or aspects of them. This playing with time and never hall marking where we are in all films' narrative is done better here than before, still bold but with more help than before for the clued in and up to date. This also brings up the best ideas from previous Saw's about the nature of Jigsaw's twisted morality and why these things are happening to people. This along with many other parts of the movie show a major shift away from gratuitous gore and so called "torture porn" to a half way decent story which kept this viewer intrigued and hooked. It is also more comprehensible than the previous attempt at this and easier to follow as a result. That said anyone with no knowledge of previous events would presumably still be very lost. It also brings me to one of my annoyances. I am angered by the idea, presented by ignorant and hack media types mainly, that these films, especially the continuous sequels, are just lowest-common-denominator set pieces and mass market fodder, there is way too much going on, here at least, and credit is due for that. This part of the plot takes in some frustratingly unexplained plot threads regarding Jigsaw's estranged wife but one assumes that is hedging bets for inevitable future revelations. The rest of the linked men's histories reminded me of the Scream 3 description of the last part of a trilogy, we do go back to the beginning and discover something we thought we knew which is shown differently, explaining things in this case, allowing us a whistle stop tour of the first few films which leaves fans feeling rewarded and tying things up surprisingly effectively, never feeling forced. The ending too is one of the better attempts at shocking us as we deeply empathise and encourage the newest victim, Strahm, to do as he is told and learn the rules, as justice is once again perverted and we end on an unfortunately jarringly gruesome scene but brave plot climax as the bad guy wins again, even covering up his deeds as they are blamed on the victim.
The other main plot is also surprisingly decent. We learn as we go the crime these 5 people have commited which made them a target for Jigsaw (though seriously he's dead, that's enough with the "oh but do just set up these last bad people" stuff). Their amoral actions led them to be targets but whats interesting is how clued up the film lets them be, and cleverer, since the audience would presumably be more savvy by now too as we follow along. This part shocks a couple of times by doing the unexpected, first killing off the groups seeming leader then again seeing the less moral-seeming guy saved as the helpless female character is persecuted and killed. The big twist is really cool as we learn that these 5 thought they had to be sacrificed one by one but actually should have worked together, this seems to earn the last, truly awful and grisly, trap a lot more as they have to allow their arms to be carved up to spill enough blood to open their final doorway to freedom. Ordinarily this would seem OTT, especially in lieu of the more reserved tone of the rest of the film but the plot makes it have more of a point, as it does with these people's presence, though like before they seem to serve no point to the continuous narrative being displayed and are just here to give us some main focus for this one film, not brilliantly woven in but still good enough as Jigsaw fodder generally. Another gripe, held over from previous reviews is how the traps again, like many of the franchise's traps, seem to have no basis in actual medical reality and are not nearly as survivable you're left feeling which can take you out of the narrative a tad.
The writing here seems vastly improved however, perhaps the best plotting since the first film or two and better than the last 2. The direction too is noticeably accomplished. Whilst constrained by the hyperactive flashes and cuts which have become the Saw hallmark there are a surprising couple of flourishes playing with time changes within the scene by cutting using a pendulum and other objects passing by camera. All in all a very enjoyable night in, less gratuitous and gross than the more inferior efforts, a great plot not too difficult to follow, some fan pleasing stuff without seeming overtly winking at the audience, great ways to still keep Jigsaw involved, which I was worried wouldn't work (and fear won't next time) but was well presented here. Solid, does what it sets out to and I can't find too much to fault and a fair bit to praise, though maybe that's relief after the dropping quality of the previous two films or a good mood, or just good old personal preference. I can't promise everyone will get the same as me out of this but similar viewers and fans will. Whatever, my final score is in...
**** (4/5)
MM
In a nutshell this movie naturally picks up where the previous one left off. (find my review of that elsewhere on the blog). Detective Hoffman has picked up the torch of previous protagonist Jigsaw. With no loose end present one is presented as the FBI agent from the previous movie, Peter Strahm, is seen as supposed to die in the mass house death orgy that made up Saw 3, 4 and now the start of 5 but he survives in quite a clever way and with John Kramer dead sets out to find the new man responsible, putting Hoffman's secret in jeopardy. Along the way we see in flashback how he and Jigsaw met and, unknowing to us in the audience, the ways in which Hoffman was present at the events from all 3 films (conveniently with both other villains foolishly killed off). This is done surprisingly well despite being necessary but more on that later. Concurrently with the investigation and attempts by Hoffman to cover his tracks by framing his pursuer we follow a Saw 2 style set up of 5 victims (get it?) in a series of rooms set as traps as they attempt to survive grisly fates, and learn a valuable life lesson about morality. No sarcasm intended, you do get that in a non-overt or ironic way. Now to the review...
We open as ever with a traditional straight-into-the-action trap. Like the previous movies this is the best one here and starts us off well, done excellently, presented well practically and with a later story purpose that justifies even the biggest annoyance that it was not "winnable", since this is, as we learn, Hoffman and not Jigsaw responsible, killing the man who murdered his sister and framing Jigsaw, much to his initial annoyance and setting up their partnership and to a degree all the previous films, or aspects of them. This playing with time and never hall marking where we are in all films' narrative is done better here than before, still bold but with more help than before for the clued in and up to date. This also brings up the best ideas from previous Saw's about the nature of Jigsaw's twisted morality and why these things are happening to people. This along with many other parts of the movie show a major shift away from gratuitous gore and so called "torture porn" to a half way decent story which kept this viewer intrigued and hooked. It is also more comprehensible than the previous attempt at this and easier to follow as a result. That said anyone with no knowledge of previous events would presumably still be very lost. It also brings me to one of my annoyances. I am angered by the idea, presented by ignorant and hack media types mainly, that these films, especially the continuous sequels, are just lowest-common-denominator set pieces and mass market fodder, there is way too much going on, here at least, and credit is due for that. This part of the plot takes in some frustratingly unexplained plot threads regarding Jigsaw's estranged wife but one assumes that is hedging bets for inevitable future revelations. The rest of the linked men's histories reminded me of the Scream 3 description of the last part of a trilogy, we do go back to the beginning and discover something we thought we knew which is shown differently, explaining things in this case, allowing us a whistle stop tour of the first few films which leaves fans feeling rewarded and tying things up surprisingly effectively, never feeling forced. The ending too is one of the better attempts at shocking us as we deeply empathise and encourage the newest victim, Strahm, to do as he is told and learn the rules, as justice is once again perverted and we end on an unfortunately jarringly gruesome scene but brave plot climax as the bad guy wins again, even covering up his deeds as they are blamed on the victim.
The other main plot is also surprisingly decent. We learn as we go the crime these 5 people have commited which made them a target for Jigsaw (though seriously he's dead, that's enough with the "oh but do just set up these last bad people" stuff). Their amoral actions led them to be targets but whats interesting is how clued up the film lets them be, and cleverer, since the audience would presumably be more savvy by now too as we follow along. This part shocks a couple of times by doing the unexpected, first killing off the groups seeming leader then again seeing the less moral-seeming guy saved as the helpless female character is persecuted and killed. The big twist is really cool as we learn that these 5 thought they had to be sacrificed one by one but actually should have worked together, this seems to earn the last, truly awful and grisly, trap a lot more as they have to allow their arms to be carved up to spill enough blood to open their final doorway to freedom. Ordinarily this would seem OTT, especially in lieu of the more reserved tone of the rest of the film but the plot makes it have more of a point, as it does with these people's presence, though like before they seem to serve no point to the continuous narrative being displayed and are just here to give us some main focus for this one film, not brilliantly woven in but still good enough as Jigsaw fodder generally. Another gripe, held over from previous reviews is how the traps again, like many of the franchise's traps, seem to have no basis in actual medical reality and are not nearly as survivable you're left feeling which can take you out of the narrative a tad.
The writing here seems vastly improved however, perhaps the best plotting since the first film or two and better than the last 2. The direction too is noticeably accomplished. Whilst constrained by the hyperactive flashes and cuts which have become the Saw hallmark there are a surprising couple of flourishes playing with time changes within the scene by cutting using a pendulum and other objects passing by camera. All in all a very enjoyable night in, less gratuitous and gross than the more inferior efforts, a great plot not too difficult to follow, some fan pleasing stuff without seeming overtly winking at the audience, great ways to still keep Jigsaw involved, which I was worried wouldn't work (and fear won't next time) but was well presented here. Solid, does what it sets out to and I can't find too much to fault and a fair bit to praise, though maybe that's relief after the dropping quality of the previous two films or a good mood, or just good old personal preference. I can't promise everyone will get the same as me out of this but similar viewers and fans will. Whatever, my final score is in...
**** (4/5)
MM
Saturday, 17 October 2009
The Dead Zone - On Five USA Right Now!
Some Stephen King adaptations are an absolute pile - they become some sort of weird, convoluted mess that does no merit to either the film or the book. The Dead Zone however is a classic - made all the better by a star turn by none other than Christopher Walken.
Thoughts naturally to follow, as well as those concerning a certain Zombieland, which I was fortunate enough to watch this evening at the cinema.
Thoughts naturally to follow, as well as those concerning a certain Zombieland, which I was fortunate enough to watch this evening at the cinema.
Monday, 12 October 2009
One Hundredth Post!!!
Wow. It's crazy to think already how this blog has influenced my life. Now seems a good time to take stock, and point out that because of this and my friendship with Mr B I have watched so many odd and varied horror films over the last 4 months. Do check out the reviews. Likewise because of it I have bought DVD's recently of Saw 5, the original A Nightmare on Elm Street and Ju-On: The Grudge 2 which I hope to watch and review over the coming weeks (or knowing me, months). Also the horror holiday of Halloween is coming up so I will probably end up doing some variation on the usual horror movie marathon (more on that at a later date). Similarly I'm pretty psyched for the DVD release of the film Drag Me To Hell, which I have on pre-order. I would like to thank everyone who is visiting the site, Mr B and I know you're out there and whilst he wishes to remain somewhat anonymous I offer heartfelt congrats on the milestone to him from me too, anyone else wishing to get in touch can find me on Facebook here, Twitter here or here. Do get in touch with thoughts, opinions, comments or anything regarding the horror genre. Finally to celebrate this landmark number, because everyone loves lists and because it feels like I'm occassionally too negative here are the films I do genuinely love, my considered and much mulled over personal top ten horror films of all time, in reverse order:
10. The Evil Dead
9. Night of The Living Dead (1968)
8. The Shining
7. Carrie
6. Profondo Rosso (Deep Red)
5. Psycho
4. Scream
3. Aliens
2. Ju-On: The Grudge
1. Halloween (1978)
10. The Evil Dead
9. Night of The Living Dead (1968)
8. The Shining
7. Carrie
6. Profondo Rosso (Deep Red)
5. Psycho
4. Scream
3. Aliens
2. Ju-On: The Grudge
1. Halloween (1978)
I fully expect controversy for what wasn't included, rather than what was. For the record just missing out on making the grade were such diverse films as The Birds, Scream 2, American Psycho, and the original Texas Chain-Saw Massacre. Likewise some of the films mentioned above might have made it in had they been fresher in my mind or after a considered re-watch (particularly Nightmare). I now throw down the gauntlet to Mr B to share his list, undoubtedly very different, to compare tastes and because it's a great way to judge a person's area of fondness for the genre. Look forward to seeing it and you over the next hundred...
MM
Sunday, 11 October 2009
Event Horizon - Discussion
Coming at Event Horizon from a slightly different angle than MM's post, I'd like to tell you all first off that I'm a fan of the piece. As correctly highlighted, Alien showed that sci fi and horror could mix (and for my money, not just that but that sci fi could actually be interesting and offer something beyond a guy with a Mars bar stuck to his forehead being angry).
Overrated or not, it set out the stall for what we were to see in the future, and the impact of the film can still be seen today with the likes of Outlander (what a bizzare mix of genres that is!).
Anyway, coming back to the film in question, Event Horizon actually poses an interesting question. Were we to somehow develop technology that could bend space, exactly where would we end up? There are allusions to hell in the film, as well as 'chaos', which I think is probably a more apt description of where the Event Horizion (the titular spacecraft) has been and gone using a fancy new drive. A rescue ship that includes the original designer finds the ship after a determinate time (was it 4 or 7 years), to find all the crew dead or gone. Then, the strangeness breaks out.
At this point, I'd like to explore some of the points made in the previous post by Marvel Man as a way to discuss some of the plotting and storyline, which in my opinion is far better than given credit for thus far on the blog:
"It seems a touch slow for the horror side of things but sadly one suspects the filmmakers knew that" - the film was sold as a sci fi with horror elements - the sequence involving Weir at the beginning I thought was actually excellent at setting the tone, mood and introduction of the horror to come. Incidental stuff played a big part in this too (the music etc).
"William Weir is somehow receiving messages which could either be from his dead ex-partner or the ship he helped create. This psychic relationship and these more unusual aspects are not explored or expained at all." - this is explained - but only to a fashion. Weir is the creator of the drive and is implicated in the building of the whole of the Event Horizon. The ship has some sort of entity/intelligence on board and, much like the superior Solaris, this entity makes contact psychically. The ship and the lifeform/intelligence was intent on using Weir to survive, which explains his actions as seen by insane by everyone else on board. Weir would never destroy the ship as he's being manipulated by (the vision of) his dead wife.
"The great idea, touched upon then dropped, that there is no hell as such, everyone is merely seeing the darkness inherent in themselves and being tortured by bad acts and events from their past is so intriguing." - again, not the case. Hell (or chaos, as it's actually described twice in the dialogue) is where the ship has been. However, the intelligence that has returned with this ship has power to show the fears/act on the darkness within, or as stated the events from their past. Of course they're not only seeing, the force can persumably also bring to life these memories/characters, as the Captain (Fishburne's character) feels the heat from the fire.
"but to then feel the need to clarify it with gubbins about actually entering another dimension of chaos where the ship came to life (and don't get me started on how that makes no sense)." - as above, the intelligence belongs to the dimension, they "brought something back" - it's not the dimension itself. They are two different things.
"The ending gets progressively worse until we even end up with a hackneyed villain version of Weir, never explained or given any motivation, simply appearing, looking all scarred and cut just because it looks awesomely horrific and even somehow shape shifting, gaining a Lazarus complex and now haunting Joely Richardson (maybe having gained this transfered psychic ability from before." - I agree with the first part, in that the possessed Weir is a little odd. He has no eyes, seemingly superhuman strength and yet makes some incredibly stupid mistakes that see him being finished off. The final scare with Richardson was completely unnecessary though, but I read it as a nightmare - nothing more. In the same way that Ripley has a nightmare in Aliens.
"In conclusion a decent sci-fi, terrible horror that smothered a great concept for exploration of evil, human fears, psychosis or the unimaginable horrors of our cultural collective unconscious. But dude come on, it had exploding heads and people with no eyes and scenes that were just awesome. Personally this viewer would have preferred more awesome respect for his intelligence and fear tolerance and a decent plot, basic as it may seem, with a touch of coherency. And please stop clubbing me over the head with your ideas of freaky/scary/hellish; blood, bodies, scars and lacerations, exploding people, flame-consumed villains, it has all been done before. And better. Throwing them at me quickly and loudly is not big or clever and frankly I feel a little sick." - Re the first point of this final section - the true horror here was the vastness, the unknown of space and what could potentially lie out there in wait, beyond space and time. It's almost Lovecraftian and so is very worthy. Actually, the 'gore' I found to be quite watered down, especially in the tv edit. Clive Barker's Hellraiser it was not. W S Anderson is fond of the quick cutaway shots, so very rarely did we actually see anything that might raise the hairs on the back of your neck. Disappointing from a horror perspective.
Ultimately, I really enjoyed Event Horizon, though for different reasons I do agree with Marvel Man that the potential was there for something greater than it was. Nonetheless, a good addition the sci fi/horror subgenre and a worthy watch for all and sundry *** 3/5.
Overrated or not, it set out the stall for what we were to see in the future, and the impact of the film can still be seen today with the likes of Outlander (what a bizzare mix of genres that is!).
Anyway, coming back to the film in question, Event Horizon actually poses an interesting question. Were we to somehow develop technology that could bend space, exactly where would we end up? There are allusions to hell in the film, as well as 'chaos', which I think is probably a more apt description of where the Event Horizion (the titular spacecraft) has been and gone using a fancy new drive. A rescue ship that includes the original designer finds the ship after a determinate time (was it 4 or 7 years), to find all the crew dead or gone. Then, the strangeness breaks out.
At this point, I'd like to explore some of the points made in the previous post by Marvel Man as a way to discuss some of the plotting and storyline, which in my opinion is far better than given credit for thus far on the blog:
"It seems a touch slow for the horror side of things but sadly one suspects the filmmakers knew that" - the film was sold as a sci fi with horror elements - the sequence involving Weir at the beginning I thought was actually excellent at setting the tone, mood and introduction of the horror to come. Incidental stuff played a big part in this too (the music etc).
"William Weir is somehow receiving messages which could either be from his dead ex-partner or the ship he helped create. This psychic relationship and these more unusual aspects are not explored or expained at all." - this is explained - but only to a fashion. Weir is the creator of the drive and is implicated in the building of the whole of the Event Horizon. The ship has some sort of entity/intelligence on board and, much like the superior Solaris, this entity makes contact psychically. The ship and the lifeform/intelligence was intent on using Weir to survive, which explains his actions as seen by insane by everyone else on board. Weir would never destroy the ship as he's being manipulated by (the vision of) his dead wife.
"The great idea, touched upon then dropped, that there is no hell as such, everyone is merely seeing the darkness inherent in themselves and being tortured by bad acts and events from their past is so intriguing." - again, not the case. Hell (or chaos, as it's actually described twice in the dialogue) is where the ship has been. However, the intelligence that has returned with this ship has power to show the fears/act on the darkness within, or as stated the events from their past. Of course they're not only seeing, the force can persumably also bring to life these memories/characters, as the Captain (Fishburne's character) feels the heat from the fire.
"but to then feel the need to clarify it with gubbins about actually entering another dimension of chaos where the ship came to life (and don't get me started on how that makes no sense)." - as above, the intelligence belongs to the dimension, they "brought something back" - it's not the dimension itself. They are two different things.
"The ending gets progressively worse until we even end up with a hackneyed villain version of Weir, never explained or given any motivation, simply appearing, looking all scarred and cut just because it looks awesomely horrific and even somehow shape shifting, gaining a Lazarus complex and now haunting Joely Richardson (maybe having gained this transfered psychic ability from before." - I agree with the first part, in that the possessed Weir is a little odd. He has no eyes, seemingly superhuman strength and yet makes some incredibly stupid mistakes that see him being finished off. The final scare with Richardson was completely unnecessary though, but I read it as a nightmare - nothing more. In the same way that Ripley has a nightmare in Aliens.
"In conclusion a decent sci-fi, terrible horror that smothered a great concept for exploration of evil, human fears, psychosis or the unimaginable horrors of our cultural collective unconscious. But dude come on, it had exploding heads and people with no eyes and scenes that were just awesome. Personally this viewer would have preferred more awesome respect for his intelligence and fear tolerance and a decent plot, basic as it may seem, with a touch of coherency. And please stop clubbing me over the head with your ideas of freaky/scary/hellish; blood, bodies, scars and lacerations, exploding people, flame-consumed villains, it has all been done before. And better. Throwing them at me quickly and loudly is not big or clever and frankly I feel a little sick." - Re the first point of this final section - the true horror here was the vastness, the unknown of space and what could potentially lie out there in wait, beyond space and time. It's almost Lovecraftian and so is very worthy. Actually, the 'gore' I found to be quite watered down, especially in the tv edit. Clive Barker's Hellraiser it was not. W S Anderson is fond of the quick cutaway shots, so very rarely did we actually see anything that might raise the hairs on the back of your neck. Disappointing from a horror perspective.
Ultimately, I really enjoyed Event Horizon, though for different reasons I do agree with Marvel Man that the potential was there for something greater than it was. Nonetheless, a good addition the sci fi/horror subgenre and a worthy watch for all and sundry *** 3/5.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)