Dark Country (2009)

SEPTEMBER 22, 2009

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

“Flying in!”

That was Ryan Rotten’s text response at this past spring’s Fangoria convention when I alerted him to the awesomeness he was missing at the Mutant Chronicles panel featuring a quite "animated" Tom Jane. Since Rotten was there to chat directly with filmmakers in order to get scoops for his site, he wasn’t often sitting in the panels, but the power of Jane compelled him. Likewise, I’m pretty sure he jumped at the chance to talk to Jane for his new film Dark Country, as I did (which is why I got the DVD - I find it’s much easier to talk to talent about their films when you’ve actually seen them, which is part of why I hate interviewing people at Comic Con). Jane rules.

I’ve been a fan of the guy for over a decade now, and it bums me out that he never really hit it as a marquee star. I hope Hung is doing well (don’t have HBO), because the guy deserves more than starring in junk like, well, Mutant Chronicles, and seeing his ambitious efforts like Dark Country going direct to DVD.

Even worse, the film is supposed to be in 3D, and no one is likely to ever see it that way. The Sin City-esque green-screen visuals have a unique look to them (since 80% of the movie takes place in a moving car, it probably would have been shot green-screen anyway - might as well make it part of the visual motif), and I can’t help but wonder how cool it would have looked in 3D. And Sony has effectively buried this aspect of the production on the DVD, it’s not mentioned in the making of, and the commentary goes noticeably silent whenever the talk turns technical (most telling, Jane begins to say “Not only was I starring and directing, but- (30 seconds of obvious silence) - So we shot this in Albuquerque...” (they did miss one brief mention of the 3D camera though, and the end credits still list all of the various 3D wizards and companies whose work will never be seen).

As for the movie itself, well, it’s OK. Like most 3D movies that are DESIGNED for 3D, you’ll sort of feel like you’re missing something. Jane and Lauren German are a just married couple who accidentally hit a guy with their car, and the rest of the film deals with the consequences and bickering you’ve come to expect from any other “Uh oh we hit someone let’s cover it up” storyline. The requisite twist won’t blow your mind if you’re paying attention (or have seen any other twist movies in the past decade), but it’s well played all the same.

Jane is a surprisingly good director - his style and sensibilities elevate the fairly predictable script. It might take you a few minutes to get used to the noir style (especially with a pretty laughable voiceover starting things off), but it was a great choice, and even when you see the whole plot coming, the visuals will keep you interested. I only wish he hadn’t gone for the whole “let’s make everything look like it’s the 50s” thing - it’s been overplayed (and with a cell phone and modern police cars, it’s not even consistent) and probably takes time/money out of the production. Yeah, it’s fine to give your hero a cool 1950s (or 60s, I’m not very good at cars) automobile - but did they need to design/produce a retro looking soda and machine and have everyone wear fedoras?

The script definitely has highlights though. Apparently it was written a while ago (the film was shot in 2007), so I can forgive some of the familiarity anyway, but some of the dialogue snaps (when burying a body, Jane says “We need to make the hole longer.” German’s response is “Can’t we just make him shorter?”). I also love the bit where the pair clean each other of blood/dirt with a handful of rest stop napkins. And while I may be tired of this particular twist, it’s at least set up in a way that can make a 2nd viewing enjoyable, which is more than I can say for some of the others.

Also there’s a scene where Jane suspects German might have been taken and he stumbles upon a grave. Digging it up a bit, he discovers that it’s not her but another woman. Not only is this creepy, but it gave me a funny idea for a scene where a guy goes out to the desert to bury a body (a hooker he accidentally killed, or maybe his domineering mother), and after he digs the hole the mob comes out to bury some snitch, and offers our guy some money to use his hole so they can get back to town quicker. If you’re a screenwriter, please don’t steal my idea. It’s one of the only two good ones I’ve had recently.

They might have denied us the 3D, but Sony/Stage 6 at least gave us some extras instead of the usual barebones approach to long-delayed and eventually DTV movies. Unfortunately I’ve already mentioned them (the featurette and the commentary) so I don’t have much more to say on the matter. It is interesting that while Jane provides the commentary, he doesn’t appear in the making of, despite the presence of the other 2 principal actors, a few of the producers, the storyboard artist, etc. There is also a bonus feature of sorts on the DVD cover, which features some sort of robotic, green-eyed version of Tom Jane instead of anything resembling the real guy. Maybe it looks correct in 3D.

Oh, one final note. The box advertises Ron Perlman (and strangely lists him as being from Hellboy II, which Universal put out, instead of Hellboy I, which was Sony’s entry), but he’s only in the final 10 minutes or so. In fact, touting his appearance is sort of a spoiler (the film has no opening credits), so if you watch it, do so without looking at the DVD cover or reading this review.

What say you?

PLEASE, GO ON...

Live Animals (2008)

SEPTEMBER 21, 2009

GENRE: SURVIVAL
SOURCE: DVD (STORE RENTAL)

While it is there to attract people, I was wary of Live Animals’ DVD cover’s “Fans of ‘Saw’ and ‘Hostel’ Will Cheer!” blurb, because I suspected that meant that the film was a bunch of torture scenes. No one ever brings Saw to mind when they see a clever mystery, or Hostel when they see a legitimately suspenseful modern horror movie. Thanks to ignorant critics and ripoffs, the two films are forever burdened with inspiring a wave of films that copied their least interesting elements, and then (worse), being accused of being just as bad.

Luckily, Live Animals has a bit more going for it than the Keepsakes and Captivitys of the world. For starters, it actually starts out as a slasher movie, with a guy in a clown mask and everything. Not a particularly great slasher movie, mind you, but I’ll take it over the umpteenth xenophobic “Tourists run afoul of ____” setup, or having them wake up in a dungeon without any memory of how they got there. Interestingly, there’s about 20 minutes worth of deleted scenes on the DVD, and most of them take place in this “slasher” section of the film, building the characters a bit and adding more traditional slasher movie elements (hiding in closets and such). I can’t help but wonder if they were left intact if people would be duped into thinking they were watching a traditional slasher, and have the real meat of the story come as a surprise. Hell, it might even have worked on me since I never read the back of the DVDs anymore (just the runtime and if time is a factor, the number of bonus features); if the quote on the front was just “It’s a horror movie!” I would have picked it up anyway and gotten a surprise.

The Hostel-y stuff isn’t very original - folks are kidnapped, “broken” like animals, and then sold as presumably willing slaves/whores. I’m sure it’s not far from the truth of what really goes on in certain areas of the world, so to Americanize it feels a bit more chilling. Thanks to the movies I am now convinced that wherever I go in the world someone will kidnap me and take my organs, or torture me for the hell of it, but in America? I only fear running afoul of backwoods cannibals or the occasional Blair Witch. This is scary!

For all my jokes though, it works better than most. For one thing, it’s grim as fuck. You know my old complaint about these movies (“Why are THESE characters the first to escape when their captors have been at it for so long?”), so I was happy to see an ending that felt correct. I don’t want to spoil anything, but let’s just say it’s somewhere between the endings of the two Platinum Dunes versions of Texas Chainsaw.

I also like that screenwriter Jeremy Benson (who also directed) seems to have seen just as many of these things as I do, and while he isn’t really re-inventing the formula in any significant way, he is comfortable enough to play with certain elements of it. Again I don’t want to spoil (I’m really weird with what I will and won’t spoil, huh? Big studio movies that I see early - spoiled. DTV movies no one will see anyway - not spoiled), but if you are annoyed by the constant singing of the requisite “crazy prisoner”, there’s a nice little payoff to make up for it.

It’s also better than average on a technical level (and the music is quite good), but one thing bugged me - the 2.35:1 image. The movie was shot on HD and then downconverted to SD (if I am understanding the visual effects guy correctly), so the image itself isn’t the best (this could be the result of a poor DVD transfer too - Echo Bridge never really knocks anything out of the park in this department), but the “professional” scope image calls attention to it. At the 1.78 ratio, it wouldn’t even be noticeable - by now, I just accept that no one in the independent world uses film anymore and that the movies look lousy. But it seems they made the film 2.35 to give it that “bigger” feel, but all it does is make you realize how poor the image is in comparison to good ol’ fashioned film. Stick to your native HD aspect, leave ours alone!

The hour’s worth of bonus features are also worth a look. I already mentioned the deleted scenes (which are poorly edited - couldn’t they at least trim the cuts between shots so that we didn’t hear excess dialogue?), but the behind the scenes piece is interesting, as they discuss their no budget approach to certain plot elements (the “mask” that gets put on one of the characters was created out of random shit from Home Depot) and other matters. And I loved the approach for explaining the visual effects; the FX guy walks you through things like boom mic removal and green-screen compositing, showing us how each layer is broken down and how they fit together. It could have benefited from the usual sort of “here’s the entire shot as it was filmed, here’s how it looks before we fix anything, here’s how it looks in the final film” visual example at the end of the explanation, but it’s still a unique and far more educational approach to a standard DVD extra.

It’s actually a shame that because of companies like Echo Bridge and Lionsgate I will never run out of movies to watch. They release anything and everything, and movies like this that are actually worth a look and are made by people who possess some talent end up getting lumped in with shit like Dark Harvest and The Butcher. It may not have what it takes to compete with anything in theaters right now, but there should be some sort of in between arena for those films that aren’t good enough for multiplexes (in the general sense - this is better than Whiteout, but you know what I mean) but better than the usual piece of shit lining the shelves at Blockbuster. Ideally, there would be an independent multiplex that catered specifically to independent American narratives, instead of the usual imports and documentaries. That would be nice.

What say you?

PLEASE, GO ON...

Blood Creek (2009)

SEPTEMBER 20, 2009

GENRE: SUPERNATURAL
SOURCE: THEATRICAL (REGULAR SCREENING)

I try really hard to like Lionsgate, but their behavior is so goddamn appalling sometimes it’s a wonder I bother. Blood Creek (aka Creek, aka Town Creek) is the latest in their seemingly never-ending line of films that are dumped unceremoniously into budget theaters, sans any sort of marketing (is there even a poster for this goddamn thing?) or even notice to the press - it wasn’t until Friday that any of the sites were aware the film was even opening. When I told Mr. Disgusting that the film was pretty good, he was baffled how I even saw it at all.

No, it’s not going to make the Academy give a 2nd thought to how they treat horror films (which is identical to how Lionsgate treats them - i.e. like shit), but it’s an enjoyable, marginally original, and fast-paced tale, with a franchise-ready villain and some truly entertaining setpieces. Add to that a setup for a sequel that doesn’t feel shoe-horned in (and actually suggests a wider-reaching and potentially more interesting followup), and you have a film that deserves far better than the treatment it has received.

I mean Christ, the Norwalk theater that me and IconsOfFright’s RobG went to see it (one of only two within a 50 mile radius of Los Angeles that was playing it) was behind a closed store (which itself was behind a plaza), part of a shopping complex with the least user-friendly parking lot I have ever seen. The theater itself couldn’t even afford to keep the ticket booth open, instead you walk right by that (smashed) window to the concession stand to buy your tickets (in theory it’s actually a good idea - but if you get to the theater a few minutes late, you don’t want to be waiting behind the guy who can’t decide between Starburst and Sour Patch Kids). The tickets were only 2.75 - which is awesome if you have cash or a sweet tooth, but for me and Rob, we only had our debit cards and had just eaten, this meant one of us had to buy the other one’s ticket, due to the “5.00 minimum for debit/credit” rule (kind of hilarious that spending under 10 dollars would even be an issue at a Los Angeles-area movie theater). But the real evidence that we were in a slightly under-the-radar place came with the trailers. Lionsgate attached Saw VI of course, but the theater tossed in “upcoming” movies like Halloween II and Orphan (the Orphan trailer was so old it was actually missing chunks - but not the “An orphan will never be loved as much as a real child” line that was pulled from the trailer everywhere else in the world but this pathetic little theater). Surround sound? Forget it. I was amazed the seats actually had cupholders.

Again - the movie deserved better than this. It starts off a bit troublesome, with a frenetic pace that seemed to suggest studio re-editing, but as soon as the villain (an immortal Nazi who has been trapped in a family farm since World War II) is unleashed, it’s top notch entertainment. You get the legit scares and suspense (the villain can resurrect people and put them under his control) and laugh out loud nonsense (he can do the same for horses), but either way the film is entertaining; and the frenetic pace that was originally annoying plays to its benefit. Even during the obligatory exposition scenes, there is still an urgency to them - the film never really slows down.

This does cause some problems though. One is that we never really get to know Henry Cavill’s character, who drops everything instantly to aid his brother (Dominic Purcell - who is essentially playing his Prison Break character) who has escaped from the Nazi after two years and wants instant revenge. We know he feels a bit guilty, but that’s about the extent of his character development. Maybe BECAUSE of the similarities with Prison Break (one brother risking everything to help the other) it feels like we are getting short-changed. Purcell’s character was never as well-rounded as Wentworth Miller’s on Break, so I think I was expecting Cavill to similarly take charge.

The other problem is with those exposition scenes. Our sympathetic female lead (Emma Booth) explains why the Nazi guy is trapped there, why they have been torturing people, etc - but she says it so fast (and while the place is under attack) that I actually missed some of what she was saying (the theater’s terrible sound system didn’t help). Because of that, you might find the movie full of plot holes, as this one line explains why she and her family have been feeding people to the guy, despite the fact that they are seemingly trying to destroy him. In short - pay attention, maybe use the subtitles or your rewind button to make sure you got everything.

I was surprised how dark the film was. The film was directed by Joel Schumacher, who managed to turn Burton’s version of Gotham into a glorified Las Vegas (he probably would have made Batman’s costume pink and green if he could). The whole movie takes place at night, but even the interior scenes (with source lighting) feel like they have been underexposed. Maybe he took all of the Batman criticism to heart and has decided to go in the complete opposite direction. Lighting aside, it’s a surprisingly low-key directorial effort from this once A-list, big budget/high concept director. It’s funny, earlier in the day Joe Lynch polled his twitter followers on what their favorite Schumacher films were, and I struggled to pick a 3rd after Falling Down and Lost Boys. I opened his IMDb page to see what I was forgetting (Flatliners) and was surprised to see how many of his films I thoroughly dislike (Phantom of the Opera, his Batman entries, 8MM, hell he even made Bad Company, one of the few Bruckheimer films I never wanted to re-watch). So it’s ironic that this, a film that’s release wasn’t even reported on BoxOfficeMojo, is actually one of his best films, doubly so when you consider that you’d probably never guess he had anything to do with it.

I’ve now watched two movies in the past week that reminded me of The Unborn. It! had the Jewish background stuff, and this also deals with Nazi experiments. Seems there are nine keystones that hold power (all of which were located in farms in or around Virginia), and Hitler sent out guys to investigate them. It’s not really Nazi heavy - all references to Hitler, Third Reich, etc are pretty much just limited to the first and final scenes, but it’s an interesting and unique backdrop for a horror movie, one I am surprised isn’t used more often. First of all, Hitler REALLY DID delve into the occult, which should lay the groundwork for a hundred movies. Secondly - what could be more terrifying than an immortal Nazi (especially this particular one, who is about seven feet tall, has superpowers, and looks like a Cenobite)? I can only assume that once you bring up Hitler, you have a “character” that people hate more than your actual villain, but that’s a weak excuse.

Interestingly, the character is played by Michael Fassbender, who is currently in far more and far better theaters as Archie in Tarantino’s Inglourious Basterds. Dude likes playing Nazis I guess.

I really wonder why Lionsgate didn’t at least put this into one of the slots for the After Dark festival. Maybe it’s not as marketable as Saw (now that Prison Break is off the air it can’t even boast a “star”), but it deserves at least some semblance of a real release, with an actual marketing campaign and such. But then again, maybe because of the way it was tossed out into the world, my expectations were far lower than they would be had it gotten a regular release (or if I had seen it prior to its dumping, as I did for Midnight Meat Train, Burrowers, and Repo). In the end, it’s a solid B-movie that will have to struggle to find its audience on DVD, where it will be lost among the hundreds of shitty horror movies that deserved their shared fate. But hey, look on the bright side - there will be 5 more Tyler Perry movies from now until the next one they dump (Daybreakers, perhaps?). Yay?

What say you?

PLEASE, GO ON...

Roadgames (1981)

SEPTEMBER 19, 2009

GENRE: SERIAL KILLER, THRILLER
SOURCE: THEATRICAL (REVIVAL SCREENING)

While I couldn’t make all five of the films for the New Beverly’s TRUCKATHON, I knew for sure I’d get there for Roadgames, which I’ve been meaning to see for years. Not only is it an early 80s Jamie Lee Curtis horror movie (the only one that hasn’t been remade... yet), but it’s also the type of road thriller that I often enjoy (Duel, Breakdown, etc). And having Richard Franklin at the helm is a pretty sure sign of quality - I have yet to see a film from him that I have disliked. Shit, I even like F/X2, which is the movie that he hated working on so much that he essentially quit Hollywood.

His Hitchcock influence is as evident as ever here - the film is essentially Rear Window 2: Rearview Mirror. 85% of the movie is simply Stacy Keach driving and talking to himself or one of the two women he picks up (Curtis being one - I’m actually surprised how relatively small her role is). But it’s not the similar plotting; the dialogue contains a bit of that Hitchcock dry humor, and certain shots feel like something out of his suspense thrillers. The final shot in particular, even though it’s a completely different subject, reminds me of the final shot of Psycho (the car being pulled from the swamp).

But equally important to the film’s success is Keach. I mainly know him from his TV work (Titus, Prison Break, and the short-lived Unsolved Mysteries wannabe Missing: Reward), but here he proves to be an able leading man. And I mean lead - apart from his dingo-dog, he’s usually by himself. But he doesn’t sit in silence; he occasionally has full blown conversations (even arguments) with himself, saying one line aloud and keeping the response in his head. Not only does it keep the film from being silent, but it also allows us to understand that the character may be suffering from a mental disorder (and in turn, that he may be the killer himself, but not in a way that prevents us from liking him.

I just wish it was edited a bit tighter. Some of the “getting to know you” stuff between Keach and Curtis could have been lost without any significance (it’s Curtis pre-gray hair and yogurt - we like her the second she appears, no need to spend excessive time getting us on her side). The movie is PG, so I wasn’t expecting any significant on-screen violence or a big body count (and I'm amazed at how many writeups refer to this movie as a slasher), but even keeping that in mind, I got a bit restless at times during the 2nd act. The end also feels a bit convenient - people who dislike Keach (for comical reasons) suddenly show up and accuse him of being the villain, and then he is just as quickly saved by someone’s say-so. I wouldn’t have minded a dark ending where he is framed for the crime with his own behavior acting as evidence (sort of like Arlington Road), but that sort of thing was rarely Hitchcock’s style, so it’s not a surprise everything ends rather cheerfully for our heroes.

I mentioned remakes before - I’m actually surprised this one hasn’t been fed to the remake machine yet. Not only is it an early 80s genre film, but it’s the rare one that owes as much to its lead role as it does the plot. With so many actors having their own production companies these days, I could easily see one of them putting a remake together in order to give themselves a nice vehicle (pun half-intended) that would put them front and center the whole time. Indeed, while I don’t think he’s that type of guy, I would love to see Nic Cage (who does have his own company) take on the role. Not only is he someone I could watch for 90 minutes straight, but his inherent craziness would actually sell the whole “is he the killer himself” idea even to those who had seen the original. “OK, this time maybe he IS the killer!” a fan might say whenever Cage went into full-blown “I could eat a peach for hours...” mode.

And in the end, the greatest thing about the movie is that it hasn’t aged (even things like “just call for help” would be explained by a “no service” plot device in any modern version of the story). The suspense hasn’t been diluted one iota from all of the road thrillers that have come since, and Keach’s performance is award-worthy to boot. Seek it out and enjoy.

What say you?

PLEASE, GO ON...

It! (1966)

SEPTEMBER 18, 2009

GENRE: HERO KILLER, SUPERNATURAL
SOURCE: DVD (ONLINE RENTAL)

While he’s known for his parodies, most of Weird Al’s best songs are just “thematic parodies” where he sort of copies the overall style of a particular artist but not one of their actual songs (“Dare To Be Stupid”, for example, is his Devo-type song). Similarly, It! can easily be mistaken for a very good Hammer movie, however it’s not a Hammer movie at all. But the only way you can tell is because it’s got Roddy McDowall instead of Peter Cushing, and it’s directed by Herbert J. Leder instead of Terence Fisher.

Also it has a prologue. I can’t recall any Hammer film having a pre-credit sequence, and since I actually thought this WAS a Hammer movie until I bothered to check (about halfway through - I was wondering why Cushing wasn’t around), I actually made a note of it. It’s nice to have a death so early in the movie, before we even know what it’s called. And since it has pretty much the worst title of all time (until Stephen King did it one better by dropping the exclamation point), it’s good that they put us in a good mood first.

And it continues to be a good movie. It has an unfortunate direct ripoff of Psycho that never really gels with the Golem parts of the movie, but I can forgive it that, because other Psycho ripoffs of the era tended to be about people being driven mad in order for someone else to steal their inheritance, so it’s nice to have someone ripping off another aspect of the story (in this case, the dead mother propped up and spoken to). It also allows for Roddy McDowall’s character to start the film off as a weirdo, instead of the usual nonsense of a good person who instantly becomes evil once this new element is introduced into their lives. The Roddy/Golem stuff has a bit of a Little Shop Of Horrors element to it, and by making him a kook right from the start, we are spared the usual sort of “No I can’t do this until something tragic happens and I change my mind in a fit of anger”.

I also liked that it was a Golem movie (the first for HMAD, I believe). I’ve always liked the concept of a monster that you can control, as long as you put something in its mouth. Freudian aspects aside, it’s also steeped in Jewish beliefs, an area that is also under-represented in horror films. I think The Unborn is the only major one in recent memory, and that movie is pretty unlikely to inspire a wave of anything. Despite the Little Shop/Psycho similarities, the film as a whole still feels largely original due to utilizing little-seen concepts.

The ending is a bit of a letdown though. McDowall sort of redeems himself, but the climax comes down to a few army guys 2 miles away blowing everything to hell. I like a little more up close and personal confrontation in my monster movies. If not for the closing shot (a bit of a sequel setup, but we never got It! 2 or Another It! or maybe It?) I would have hated it entirely. I was reminded a bit of End of Days, which originally ended with Arnold just blowing up the Devil, an idea that was deemed stupid (possibly by someone who watched It!).

The film also sports the first appearance of Ian McCulloch, who would go on to play a guy named Peter in several Italian zombie films. Love that guy.

Apparently this film was only recently released to DVD for the first time, which is kind of a surprise. Roddy, the fact that it was good, the relative lack of Golem movies... I would think there would be a bigger demand for it, yet it seemingly took over 10 years to hit the format (just as it was starting to be replaced by Blu-Ray). It’s packaged with something called The Shattered Room, which is apparently a Lovecraft adaptation with my favorite drunk, Oliver Reed. Should be amazing. I’ll get to that one in a few days, but even if it’s terrible, I think the disc is worth owning.

And for like the 5th time in the past week I can't find a trailer for the movie I watched. What the hell? From now on, whenever I can't find a trailer, I will embed a Meat Loaf video. Enjoy the incoherent video for his obscure non-hit "Razor's Edge".

What say you?

PLEASE, GO ON...

Zombieland (2009)

SEPTEMBER 17, 2009

GENRE: COMEDIC, ZOMBIE
SOURCE: THEATRICAL (PRESS SCREENING)

Another day, another big studio horror comedy with the focus shifted more toward comedy. Being a horror nut, this would normally bug me, and in Jennifer’s Body’s case it did, because the horror was not only brief, but half-assed. Luckily, that is not the case for Zombieland, which manages to breathe life into the zomcom sub-genre by playing to the strengths of its cast members (Woody Harrelson - crazy; Emma Stone - hot, etc) and largely ignoring traditional zombie movie (comic or not) trappings.

Such as the lack of evil humans in the 3rd act. Sure, Stone and her sister (Abigail Breslin) are introduced as “villains” in that they play possum and steal our heroes’ guns, but you know their antagonism will turn into an alliance before the half hour mark or so. And even before then, they are hardly the hateful types that crippled films like 28 Days Later. They’re just trying to get by without doing any work - they don’t physically harm the guys or trap them in a room with zombies or whatever. It’s the refreshingly light, breezy tone that allows the film to work as well as it does. Even in potentially dark moments (such as when Jesse Eisenberg’s character learns that his hometown has been leveled) are not dwelled on, and it’s not long before another laugh is delivered.

Speaking of Eisenberg, I only have two issues with the film, and his performance is one of them. Basically, he’s playing Michael Cera. I can’t fucking stand that kid, and I don’t need to be reminded of him in an otherwise enjoyable movie. He’s a likeable hero, and one I can definitely identify with (I too spent many a Friday playing video games and am afraid of clowns), but his Cera-ness approached high annoyance levels at times. Maybe this is just Eisenberg’s style; I’ve never seen him in anything else, but if he’s like this in Adventureland (what’s with the theme park movies, dude?) then I will know I was right to ignore everyone that has told me to watch it.

(Oh, he’s in Cursed too. Like I remember frame one of that pile of shit.)

And that ties into my other issue, which is the fact that there are long zombie-free stretches. I wouldn’t mind a little of his fumbling awkwardness if I knew a zombie was about to shut him up, but there are a couple 10-15 minute stretches in the film without a single zombie. Not a big problem for a two hour plus epic like Dawn of the Dead; a little moreso when your film is only about 85 minutes. Sure, they make em count when they do occur, but you almost start to feel like they’re not even an issue for the characters.

But man, are the zombie scenes great. Woody’s shooting spree throughout the theme park is one of the all time best zombie sequences - shooting as he rides a roller coaster, hanging from an elevated tilt-a-whirl type ride and shooting as he spins round and round, etc. And the opening credits, set to Metallica’s “For Whom The Bell Tolls” (you know the movie is kind of special when Metallica allows one of their songs to be used - you’d probably be surprised how rare this actually is) is applause-worthy. Not only is it gory and epic (it’s sort of showing the overall scope of the zombie outbreak), but it features the best use of slo-mo in recent memory.

It also brings back the idea of “featured” zombies, something that has been sorely missing from several of the newer zombie films. It’s still not exactly up to the levels of “Hare Krishna Zombie” or whatever, but still: Clown zombie, Fat Ethan Suplee-looking Zombie, and even Chaplin Zombie leave an imprint. Speaking of Chaplin, there’s a scene where our heroes drive through Hollywood, and it actually kind of creeped me out, seeing it all deserted and showing signs of an apocalypse (crashed cars, trash blowing around, etc). Having just been there the night before, it was an eerie sight.

Another thing about Chaplin zombie (I would have loved if the entire Mann’s Costume crew attacked) is that it’s not only a hilarious sight, but it also helps ground the film in reality a bit. And that just paves the way for what will undoubtedly be the highlight of the film for its fans. Now that they are in Hollywood, director Ruben Fleischer and screenwriters Rhett Reese & Paul Wernick address something that is almost always overlooked in post-apoc movies: what happens to our celebrities? Woody’s character decides he knows just the place to hole up, and I thought for sure that they were going to reveal that his character was in fact Woody Harrelson (none of them are given real names - they go by their hometowns); that he was playing a caricature of himself a la Neil Patrick Harris in the Harold & Kumar movies. But the residence belongs to someone far more hilarious and “holy shit!” worthy, and I really hope it’s not spoiled for you before you see the movie.

Like Cut, the film also benefits from a wide-reaching soundtrack. Metallica, Willie Nelson, Velvet Underground, Van Halen, The Raconteurs, and Hank Williams all in one movie? Awesome. Some of these tunes are heard during what was my favorite non-zombie part of the movie, a driving/bonding montage where the four characters (constantly changing their seating arrangement; even the 12 year old Breslin takes a turn at the wheel) bicker and play the “You’ve never heard of _____?” game of identifying the difference in generations between characters.

This scene has a few pop-culture references, as does the entire film, so it’s nice that I saw it back to back with Jennifer’s Body. Zombieland has just as many references - but they are used as references, not in the place of other words, which means that they a. are funny and b. make sense. When Stone’s character talks about going to see her first R rated movie, she says “We saw Anaconda.” If the film was written by Diablo Cody, she would say “We saw a pirate-approved movie where Papa Jolie got Crunch’n’Munched by Sir-Mix-A-Lot’s dick.” (or something overly stupid like that - have fun deciphering it). By using movies, music, etc as actual movies, music, etc, it works even if you aren’t familiar with the material. If you take someone’s name and use it as a verb (as people in Body do), then you won’t understand the point of the line if you aren’t familiar with the person. And again, it just helps ground the film in reality - even if you haven’t seen Anaconda (and I haven’t, actually), you probably recognize it as a real world movie.

I know I’ve talked more about the humor and characters than the zombie stuff, but that’s just how the movie plays out (and plays well). And even during the zombie scenes, they never lose the humorous approach. Comparisons to Shaun Of The Dead are going to be numerous, and that’s fine (though I think Dance Of The Dead is closer in tone - and Zombieland is far superior to boot), but in Shaun they sort of forgot about the comedy during the finale in the Winchester, and that’s not the case here. It’s a damn fun film from start to finish, and will almost certainly rank among my top 5 horror films of the year. Kudos to all involved!

What say you?

PLEASE, GO ON...

Jennifer's Body (2009)

SEPTEMBER 16, 2009

GENRE: COMEDIC, SUPERNATURAL
SOURCE: THEATRICAL (PREMIERE)

For a movie that was written by Diablo Cody, whose Oscar win for Juno (over “lesser” films like Michael Clayton - OK, Academy) remains the 2nd most appalling moment in Oscar history (after a tie for every award Crash won two years before), and stars Adam Brody, whom I’ve wanted to smack in the face since the first spot for The OC aired on TV, and Megan Fox, a pretty but completely annoying woman who recently compared my boy to Hitler, it’s a wonder I was able to even sit through Jennifer’s Body, let alone mostly enjoy it. It just proves once and for all that a little Raimi-style gore and mean-spirited humor can improve even the direst of situations.

And dire it is at times, particularly in the lackluster finale. The next two paragraphs contain minor spoilers, so skip them if you want to be surprised while you’re being underwhelmed.

See, the whole movie is really about Needy, Jennifer’s best friend (played by Amanda Seyfried, who unlike Fox manages to make Cody’s pop-laced dialogue work most of the time). The film starts off with her in an institution for unknown crimes, but once we find out what she did, it’s not only a weak reveal but it also lacks any sort of thematic payoff for what the film is really about, which is their strained friendship. In fact the ending as a whole lacks any sort of real panache; there is a threat that Jennifer is going to go apeshit at the school dance, but she never even gets there. They even have the band show up at the dance, presumably to either try their sacrifice again and/or allow Jennifer to get revenge on them, but they are brought up on stage and then never mentioned again during the evening. I won’t spoil everything, but everything about the final 10 minutes feels largely incomplete; like the script had to be 90 pages and Cody realized at page 85 that she had to wrap things up. And certain events further hammer home a notion that I had for most of the film, which is that Fox’s top billing had more to do with enticing horny young men into the theaters than it did screen-time or even character importance. Seyfried is front and center for nearly every scene, and the film is told entirely through her eyes.

Also, there is this nonsensical subplot about how the town has a waterfall where the water seemingly disappears into a black hole. We see scientists studying it and throwing orange balls (presumably with some sort of tracking device?) into it. Yet, it just washes out to the side of the road somewhere nearby. Not only does this feel completely stupid (scientists never bothered to check a large drainage ditch?) but it’s also just a really lazy way for Needy to find an important item later. It’s so half-assed that I actually considered whether it was a parody of deus ex machinas. Similarly, most of the finale takes place in an abandoned pool that has become overgrown with trees and various other greenery. which is certainly an interesting visual, but it simply makes no sense (and doesn’t have any sort of setup, not even a throwaway line explaining its current state. It just IS, for some reason). For a Oscar-winning screenwriter’s followup, it’s a shockingly lackluster script.

But despite all of that, it’s passable entertainment for sure. The biggest surprise is Brody. As I said earlier, I’m no fan of the guy, but he’s probably the best part of the movie. His Brandon Flowers-esque appearance alone is worth a few chuckles, as are a few of his off-the-cuff remarks (he bemoans that the only way an indie rock band can make it these days is to land a song on some shitty soundtrack - a line that took on extra hilarious meaning today due to the fact that an appearance by Panic! At The Disco seemed to be drawing in more fans than anyone involved with the film proper). I also loved the cameo turn by JK Simmons (with hair!) as a whacked out teacher who mistakes the school jock’s death screams as tears of sorrow. There’s also a most appreciated cameo by a genre veteran at the end of the film that I rightfully applauded. And while the referential dialogue is as grating as ever, there’s a mean streak to some of it that made up for it, such as when Brody and his band sing an impromptu rendition of “Jenny” before sacrificing a crying Jennifer to Satan. And Seyfried’s boyfriend (Johnny Simmons) is a charming little bastard, playing the voice of reason throughout the film and getting most of the traditional laughs (“You HAVE to go to the dance, I bought you a corsage and it was like 12 dollars!”).

Speaking of the laughs, I think the film plays better as a comedy than a horror film. The horror angle is not only poorly executed (for an R rated “horror” movie, it sure is short on on-screen carnage and kills - Prom Night (2008) boasts a higher body count) but largely unoriginal - enjoy your flashbacks to The Faculty, Carrie, Slither, and (big time) Ginger Snaps. But the comedy only rarely falls flat, and I laughed out loud several times, as did the audience, which ran the gamut from “passholes” to press to studio folk to teenyboppers. Ironically, the only big joke dud I can recall is the “not high school evil” line, which FOX (the studio - is this the only film where the film’s star shares a name with the distributor?) seems to be making their entire ad campaign around; I don’t think a single person laughed.

Oh and there’s a brief lesbian makeout between Fox and Seyfried. With tongue. Hey, I’m not COMPLETELY impervious to audience pandering.

As for Fox, well, what does it matter? She can’t act, but no one seems to mind in the Transformers movies, so why should it matter here? She’s actually a bit better here than in those films, probably because an insecure object of desire is a bit closer to her comfort zone. She struggles with Cody’s “witty” dialogue at times, as if she doesn’t understand the references that she is making (nor do I, at times - so I can forgive her some). But I am curious how the film would have fared with a better actress in the role, one who could not only deliver the dialogue, but also find a way to make the audience feel sympathetic for her character. Her public persona overshadows her limited acting skills, and her public persona is that of a stuck-up primadonna. Likewise, I’m also curious if the film would have been made at all if they couldn’t land Fox or an equally marketable actress; there is nothing in the film that convinces me that the movie was made for any other reason than the “dream team” of “Oscar-winner writer” and “superbabe star”.

Basically, it’s the type of movie I wish I saw when I was 14. Still a virgin, still watching films without paying much attention to things like plot holes and undeveloped character dynamics (the movie never bothers to explain why Jennifer “needs” Needy), and without the exposure to great horror-comedy blends (such as American Werewolf, which also deals with a friendship strained by one of them turning into a monster), I’d have loved it then and been defending it now due to my nostalgia. For the 14 year olds today, let’s hope they have a theater with a lax policy on letting them into R rated movies (by the way - it’s mostly for language; there’s no real nudity and half of the kills are off-screen, the other half no more graphic than Drag Me To Hell), because other than those who blindly love anything with Fox in it, they are likely to enjoy the film the most. Everyone else, I think as long as you go in expecting a comedy (which I did) you will probably have fun but also forget everything about it in a few days.

What say you?

PLEASE, GO ON...

Cut (2000)

SEPTEMBER 15, 2009

GENRE: SLASHER, SUPERNATURAL
SOURCE: DVD (ONLINE RENTAL)

Hey, I got this great idea for a movie. There’s this group of young folks, maybe just out of or still in film school, and they are making a horror movie. BUT! Here’s the twist - a REAL killer shows up and picks them off one by one! How awesome is- what’s that? It’s been done? Several dozen times? Shit. And you say one of them was called Cut and starred Molly Ringwald? Well then. How bout a movie about Prefontaine?

To be fair, this one came before a bunch of the others, including Skeleton Crew, which I just watched last week. But it also came out the same goddamn year as Scream 3 and Urban Legend 2 (the same year there were like three Mars movies! What the hell was up with 2000?), and it lacks UL2s earnest goofiness and Scream 3s.. uh... Neve Campbell, I guess. And the backstory about a cursed, unfinished film was used to greater effect in this years Hills Run Red, so in short: the movie’s kind of lacking any real use. Everything it does was already done or has been since done better, rendering it little more than a passable curiosity.

Lets start with what I liked. The soundtrack, while probably awful on CD, is the rare kind that seems like songs one would naturally hear over the course of three days. I never got why some movies had wall to wall songs of a particular subgenre, regardless of the characters (Office Space is a good example - do ALL of these nerdy white guys listen to hardcore rap?). The movie kicks off with Split Enz’ “I Got You” (NICE), then we get some alt/grunge stuff, a bit of pop, a ballad... it’s a nice, realistic blend.

I also dug the killer’s look, because it reminded me of Decker from Nightbreed. Not enough people reference Nightbreed directly, as far as I’m concerned, so I will settle for possible homage. But one thing I DON’T like is that the killer is a supernatural force, something that is not revealed until later in the film. It’s fine when things start off that way (Freddy, for example), but it seems a bit deus ex machina-y to me. Plus it spoils the fun of a masked slasher movie, which is trying to figure out who the killer is. Spoiler: he’s some otherworldly thing that literally melts when the film print does (a sweet effect, I must admit).

I don’t get why so many of these movie-movie slashers have supernatural elements behind them. Midnight Movie suffered from the same problem (even worse there, since it was so muddled in its execution - at least I know what this guy’s limitations are), and Popcorn had some of this stuff too. And Skeleton Crew had all of the possession and scenes of people watching themselves in a film called Skeleton Crew. Scream 3 may suck, but at least the killer was a human guy, not a re-incarnated Billy Loomis. That said, I do kind of like the idea of a killer that is literally living film. What with everyone shooting on DV nowadays, it’s possible that in 20 years people won’t even understand the finale.

And maybe in Cut 2, some folks making a sequel to this film will shoot it on digital and the killer will simply disappear when someone accidentally drops the hard drive on the floor. (This is my non-too-subtle dig at how dumb the idea of everything going digital is to me.)

One pleasant surprise was how long Molly Ringwald survived. I’m not a big fan of the lass (I was more an Ally Sheedy kinda guy), but I figured she would be killed within a half hour or so in a Psycho-but-really-Scream kind of way. This allowed the few scenes where she was under attack to hold some suspense, because I actually thought she would die. Luckily, she didn’t have anywhere else to be, so she sticks around all the way through.

So like I said, it’s entertaining enough, but nothing special either. It’s technically sound and the cast is largely decent (I’m guessing Ringwald and Kylie Minogue ate up most of the budget - the DVD has no extras to solidify or dispute this theory), but the script is rather blah, and I’ve just seen too many versions of this story for it to really stick out in my mind. I won’t remember a thing about it in a week.

What say you?

PLEASE, GO ON...

DVD Review: Friday The 13th VIII: Jason Takes Manhattan

SEPTEMBER 15, 2009

GENRE: SLASHER
SOURCE: DVD (SCREENER)

I’ve already reviewed the film here, as well as put together a little summary/capsule thing for Bloody-D's 13 Days Of Jason retrospective series from this past February, so if you want my in-depth(ish) thoughts on the film, check those out by clicking the links above. In short - I don’t mind Jason Takes Manhattan as much as many others seem to. Yeah he’s on the boat too much, and yeah the leads are lame, but the supporting cast is fun (Wayne, Charles, and of course: JULIUS!) and a boat is still better than the umpteenth stalk through the woods and increasingly convoluted lake area (how many isolated houses are on this goddamn lake anyway?). It was a marked improvement over the previous entry, and as the final “Friday the 13th” entry (before New Line/the Jason title took over), it holds a bit of nostalgic value too. This review concerns the brand new special edition DVD and whether or not you should upgrade (spoiler: you should).

As with the others, Part VIII has been blessed with a 5.1 soundtrack, an upgrade from the previous release’s “Ultra Stereo” (which is still available). Paramount has also made the disc more foreign language friendly - French and Spanish dubs are included, so fans that speak those languages can now enjoy lines like “Toxic waste, son! The city floods out with the stuff every night at midnight!” (subs for all three languages, plus Portuguese, are also included). The picture quality, as with VII, is also a big improvement. Screen grabs are below (click to enlarge):

While not as striking as the difference between the transfers for New Blood, it’s still obvious just at a glance that the 2009 version is superior to the 2004 boxed set counterpart. The color seems a bit off (Jason’s mask seems yellow in the boat pic) at times, but the detail is vastly improved, with much clearer definition (look at the wood on the boat) and, again, the 2009 version restores previously cropped out visual information (look at the Olympus sign on the left side of the Times Sq. screenshot). This is just one of the many benefits of not squishing two films on the same side of a disc, as they did last time.

A more striking improvement is the amount of extras on the disc. Rob Hedden’s previous commentary has not been held over (why?), but there is a brand new one with Scott Reeves, Jensen Daggett, and Kane Hodder (who is recorded via conference call, as he was in Utah shooting Adam Green’s Frozen). It’s a surprisingly fun track, as the two leads mock their performances and clothes, and Kane provides a lot of interesting production info. Reeves could have taken the time to at least glance at the IMDb before leaving for the recording studio (he first asks Kane if he played Jason in any of the other films, then asks him if he has done any other horror films in general! Christ), but it’s a hell of a lot better than Hedden’s track, at any rate.

Of more interest, I am sure, are the “slashed scenes”. Gorehounds might be disappointed to see that only two or three of the kill scenes are extended (one of which is the aftermath of the long sought-after “dart” kill), but fans of the film will enjoy all of the little character beats and such that are presented here, as well as a minor subplot about how their graduating class was going to be the last, as the school was closing (I’m sure this tied into the notion that the film was intended as a series finale). A few more excised moments can be seen in the largely unfunny gag reel (only Peter Mark Richman’s goofs really amuse, as well as a prank Kane pulled on Tiffany Paulson in the opening sequence), so check that out for a few more. Rounding things out is the traditional 20 minute-ish retrospective piece on the film, with Hedden, Hodder, and a decent number of the cast, plus composer Fred Mollin and editor Steve Mirkovich (and his son, who played young Jason). By now you know how these things go, but as the film was always considered one of the weakest, it’s also been covered the least. Thus, you probably haven’t heard all of these stories a million times.

While a boxed set is still a rumor, Friday fans should be pretty pleased with these upgrades. Yeah, we’d all love uncut editions, but without the elements to do them properly, they’re probably never going to happen. And even if that one kill or that one cast member couldn’t be found, these discs are practically Lord Of The Rings-ian when compared to their 2004 counterparts, and for that every Friday fan owes Dan Farrands and his crew a giant debt of gratitude. It’s a shame he wasn’t involved with the releases of the first 3, but what’s important to realize is that even Paramount knew that the discs could be better and brought him on board to do 4-6 and kept him around for 7-8. Like the truly invaluable "Crystal Lake Memories" (which he edited), Farrands doesn’t play favorites with these films the way that David Grove did with his book - each film, good or bad, now has a respectable special edition that its supporters can relish and that its detractors can use to give it another chance.

Film score 6/10
DVD score 8/10

PLEASE, GO ON...

DVD Review: Friday the 13th VII: The New Blood

SEPTEMBER 15, 2009

GENRE: SLASHER
SOURCE: DVD (SCREENER)

I’ve already reviewed the film proper here, as well as put together a little summary/capsule thing for Bloody-D's 13 Days Of Jason retrospective series from this past February, so if you want my in-depth(ish) thoughts on the film, check those out by clicking the links above. In short - I don’t really like The New Blood much. Jason’s look is awesome and some of the kills are great, but the kids bore me to tears, the rushed production shows at every turn, and I never quite shined to the telekinesis plot, since it was obviously an attempt to compete with the (then more popular) Nightmare On Elm St movies, which had “superpowered” characters in its 3rd and 4th films. This review concerns the brand new special edition DVD and whether or not you should upgrade (spoiler: you should).

Regardless of how I feel about the movie, Paramount and Dan Farrands have put together a fine special edition for it. For some reason it was the only one of the films that had a 5.1 soundtrack on the previous releases, so nothing new to report there. But the video quality is practically night and day. Since no one sent me the other new discs (ahem!) in time for a worthwhile review, I never bothered to compare the video quality with the previous 2004 releases. Below are screenshots from the 2004 boxed set versions and their counterparts from these new 2009 releases (click to enlarge):

Not only is the color much improved, but I was shocked to see how much picture information the 2004 releases were missing. In the shot of Jason in the kitchen, notice the decoration on the left side of the frame that is completely missing from the identical frame on the old release. And in the forest shot, notice the sharper detail in the trees and on Jason’s ratty clothes (and again, far more picture information).

As for the extras, Kane Hodder and John Carl Buechler’s old commentary is gone, but the pair have recorded a new commentary, this time joined by (a separate) Lar Park Lincoln. It’s not a bad track; Hodder and Buechler repeat some of the stuff they said on the last one, but Lincoln’s thoughts are obviously new, and thankfully she takes up the bulk of the track (unless you haven’t listened to the old one, in which case you might want to hear more from the guys). And Buechler admits that the story isn’t up to par, which I don’t think he fessed up to on the last one.

We also get about 15 minutes’ worth of deleted footage. The footage isn’t in particularly good shape - it seems to be taken from a VHS tape with a bad tracking problem, and I wouldn’t be surprised if the damn cassette had been stored in someone’s flooded basement. It’s an even split between excised character stuff and kills, some of which were on the boxed set. Of most interest is a deleted epilogue in which Jason resurfaces from the water, which would have been nice to have (the theatrical cut of New Blood is one of the only films in the series that doesn’t end on a scare). Of course, we also get the usual retrospective with cast and crew, though it runs a bit shorter than usual and skimps over the more interesting things about the film’s production (such as its origin as Freddy vs. Jason). Then there is an interesting look at “real” telekinetic cases, as well as how realistic the film is at portraying this power (spoiler: it isn’t).

Of no use to anyone is a three minute fluff piece of actresses Diana Barrows and Elizabeth Kaitan going for a makeover, spurred by one of the film’s few memorable lines (“Need a little touch up my ass”). I could see maybe this thing having some merit had the girls at least talked about the movie a bit while they got their nails done and tried on new clothes, but nope. Even at three minutes, it’s a fucking waste of disc space, time, energy, and any other abstract object you can imagine. The only good thing I can say about it is that at least it’s not another episode of "Lost Tales From Camp Blood", which has finally been ‘cancelled’ (or maybe it just concluded its run - I stopped watching these worthless things after the 3rd entry).

In my opinion, it’s the weakest film of Paramount’s series, but like all of the others, it’s not without merit, and blood or not, is fun to watch with a bunch of friends and some beer. The extras aren’t quite as extensive as they are for Final Chapter or whatever, but if you’re a fan of the film there is no question you should be picking this version up. The fact that a proper special edition exists at all is a laudable achievement; after years of bitching, Paramount has finally tried to make amends for the previous releases - for the good films and the bad ones.

Film Score 4/10
DVD score 8/10

PLEASE, GO ON...

DVD Review: Grace

SEPTEMBER 15, 2009

GENRE: THRILLER
SOURCE: BLU-RAY (OWN COLLECTION)

After a (too) brief theatrical run, Grace is now hitting DVD and Blu-Ray from Anchor Bay. I won’t take time to review the film again, you can read my original review HERE and then come back for my thoughts on the DVD.

The great thing about Grace is that it surprisingly holds up on a second (and now third) viewing. It’s interesting to see all of the little moments, particularly in the early part of the film, that take on a new meaning when you have the information from the rest of the film (particularly those surrounding the Samantha Ferris character). And certain scenes never lose their punch; I still squirm at that opening dinner scene (and pretty much every scene/shot of someone or something eating - even the cat eating its cat food is a bit ugh-y). So if you are thinking “rental” - you might be surprised at how effective the film can be on repeat viewings.

And a rental time might not be enough to get through all of the extra features. Director Paul Solet appears on not one but two commentary tracks that are worth a listen. He is joined by Jordan Ladd on the first (this one is exclusive to Blu-Ray), and the track is largely centered on story and acting. For those who enjoy more nuts and bolts type stuff (and irreverent humor), Solet teams with producer Adam Green and DP Zoran Popovic on a second track, where they discuss some of the challenges dictated by the production’s small budget (and a shooting schedule that was cut from 24 to 17 days), shooting in Canada, and a few funny anecdotes for good measure (apparently, Canadians are polite enough to ask someone if they want to fight in a bar, unlike us Americans, who just smash a bottle over a guy’s head and see how the chips fall).

We also get over an hour’s worth of making of material, split up into six parts. The usual areas are covered - conception, casting, production (two on that), music, and then the film’s premiere at Sundance - but they are above average thanks to an unusually dedicated crew (I’ve never heard of a composer doing so much for the film itself) and an emphasis on what actually goes on instead of talking heads kissing everyone’s asses. My favorite bit is a night of shooting in which they have 6 minutes to set up and complete two necessary shots before they are forced to leave the location (someone’s house). A 24-like clock occasionally appears to remind us how much time is left, and damned if its not as suspenseful as the film itself, despite the fact that we know the shot is indeed in the film. The Sundance bit is also great. Not only is Solet sitting on the (now replaced) seats at my beloved New Beverly Cinema during his interview segments, but it shows how hard-working he is when it comes to promoting the film; at one point he stops reading a rave review from CNN (or something, one of the big news orgs though) to hand out a flier for the film’s 2nd Sundance screening.

Now, I watched all of this on the Blu-Ray, and while I usually love Anchor Bay’s work (Children Of The Corn's transfer, for example, is flawless) I think they dropped the ball a bit here when it comes to delivering the high def quality you are paying extra for. Not only are the extras not high def, but they’re not even anamorphic! No one watching a Blu-Ray is doing so on a 4:3 set, so this is just inexcusable. The pieces themselves are put together quite well, it’s a shame someone in charge couldn’t match that effort in the presentation. And the film itself, possibly by design (though shot on film, I’ve never actually seen a film print of it), is a bit soft, lacking the detail that most Blu-Rays offer. It’s not a BAD transfer by any means - color tones are correct, contrast ratio is good, etc - but I doubt anyone would seriously be able to stop the difference between it an a standard DVD (especially if your DVD upscales, which many of them do nowadays). So while you should buy Grace, it’s up to you whether you feel the extra commentary is worth the extra 5-10 bucks or not.

One final note that was pointed out by Icons Of Fright’s Rob G - the extra features as presented on the disc are out of order. On the disc they are listed in alphabetical order, but the ‘correct’ order is the way they are listed on the back cover, starting with Conception and ending with Sundance. That way will take you through Grace’s entire “birthing” process, and thus tells a story of sorts.

Film score 8/10 (Uniquely uncomfortable “real” horror film that holds up to repeat viewings)
DVD extras 9/10 (Above average look at a difficult but high-spirited production)
Presentation 6/10 (Extras are not high def or even anamorphic, film transfer lacks that Blu-Ray polish)

PLEASE, GO ON...