October Extras # 24 - Saw (2004)

OCTOBER 24, 2007

GENRE: SERIAL KILLER, SURVIVAL
SOURCE: DVD (OWN COLLECTION)
LAST SEEN: NOVEMBER 2004 (THEATRICAL)

Like being green, it’s not easy to review a film like Saw. On one hand, it’s a clever, well-written, mostly original horror movie with a truly great villain (even if we never really see him in this one) that helped bring “hardcore” horror back, paving the way for Hostel, the Hills remake, etc, not to mention stateside releases of UK films like The Descent and High Tension. On the other hand, it contains some truly bad editing and some of the worst acting ever seen in a theatrical film.

Let’s get the bad out of the way, since the good luckily outweighs it. Cary Elwes and Leigh Whannell start off OK enough (the first 15 minutes are the best in the film, as they solve some simple puzzles, working together. It’s a great opening), but their final few scenes are jaw-droppingly atrocious. I don’t know what it is, the rest of the actors are fine (I’ve even warmed to Danny Glover’s over the top performance), so it’s not that James Wan is like George Lucas, incapable of getting good performances out of otherwise dependable actors. And while I can’t speak for Whannell, I know Elwes (who resembles John Morghen himself in this film) will never win an Oscar, but he’s at least usually believable. Maybe he was too busy thinking about how he was going to sue them over his salary. If anything, they should sue him for nearly killing their film.

There’s also some questionable ramped up editing segments (particularly the ‘car chase’ near the end) that do not work at all. Amanda’s flashback is OK enough, but the guy crawling around the broken glass covered in flammable gel looks like something out of Tool’s "Sober" video. Luckily, this style was more or less weeded out in the sequels.

I also remain puzzled as to how 2001 and missile defense systems fit into Jigsaw’s plans:

Otherwise it’s solid. Whannell’s script is quite clever and pretty unique, and it’s pretty unfair that some dismiss the film as “torture porn” when it A. has a pretty complex story, where the kills DO in fact serve the narrative, and B. has only about 5 minutes of violence in the entire film (most of it self-inflicted, to a degree). I also enjoy how they play with the audience’s understanding of time (something the 2nd film was more or less built upon). Besides, I can’t recall another movie “Killer” whose motive was trying to get folks to appreciate their life (though I do have a vague memory of someone pointing out a predecessor in this category – anyone? Or am I confusing it with someone else?). Also, the way the film is layered is equally impressive, giving earlier scenes another meaning when watching the film a 2nd time (an effect somewhat diminished by all the flashbacks to them, but still). And Charlie Clouser’s score is incredible (as are his scores for Wan’s subsequent films, in particular Death Sentence).

Also, it’s been so long since I saw the film that I had forgotten (well, actually, never “knew”) that Ben Linus/Henry Gale himself plays the red herring killer! Oh Lost, when the fuck will you come back (editor - February).

I have the two-disc DVD, and haven’t gone through any of the extras (other than the short film, which Wan edited himself, which I wish he did on the feature). As I am watching all 3 films to prepare for the 4th, I think I’ll be pretty “Saw”ed out, but if anyone has suggestions for the rest of the extras (i.e. NOT the cast and crew sitting around talking about how much they love working with one another) let me know, I’ll try to find time. Otherwise, it’ll probably be years before I revisit it again. Damn time and my constant lack of it! Maybe next year I’ll do “Horror Movie DVD Extras A Day”

What say you?

PLEASE, GO ON...

Someone's Watching Me!

OCTOBER 24, 2007

GENRE: SERIAL KILLER, WEIRD
SOURCE: DVD (OWN COLLECTION)

Despite being my favorite filmmaker, I’ve never gotten around to seeing either of John Carpenter’s TV movies. Elvis is still not available on DVD and bootleg copies are said to be atrocious in quality, so that’s OK, but I even owned Somebody’s Watching Me! on a bootleg for a while, and STILL never watched it until today (on the newly released DVD, which came with the Twisted Terror Collection). As it turns out, I really wasn’t missing much.

Granted a TV movie doesn’t hold much promise, but Wes Craven’s Invitation To Hell was a lot of fun, and since Halloween only had to lose some nudity in order to be fit for national broadcast, there was no reason to believe that this couldn’t at least be a good, if not great, effort from the days when Carpenter actually gave a shit.

But it’s mostly a bore. There aren’t many characters, and since we know Lauren Hutton will survive, it doesn’t really give the film much to do until the climax. So instead we get lots of not very interesting phone calls, Hutton palling around with Adrienne Barbeau (playing a lesbian, which I think had to have been pretty rare on national TV in the 70s), developing a relationship with a guy we know isn’t the killer, etc. In addition to Barbeau, Charles Cyphers shows up, giving the film some much needed additional true Carpenter feel (the film isn’t even shot 2.35:1, which is pretty much standard for Carpenter; even the additional scenes he shot for the TV broadcast of Halloween were shot in Panavision), but it’s not enough to elevate this above any generic Lifetime movie.

That is, with the exception of the borderline mentally unstable actions that Hutton commits during the film, particularly in her introduction. Her dialogue, and her character in general, is mind-bogglingly awkward. Upon looking to rent an apartment, she makes up a story involving her mother dating an aluminum siding salesman (?); when she meets a guy she tells him that she’s afraid of being raped by dwarves (??); plus she has a habit of talking/singing to herself at all times, often making puzzling comments throughout these monologues as well (calling her TV “Cyclops”, daydreaming about her new boss being 80 years old and hitting on her...). It’s just fucking weird, to the point of being genuinely upsetting. Shouldn’t this woman be getting some help, instead of building telescopes and getting her friends killed??

Yes, poor Barbeau gets murdered when trying to help Hutton discover the identity of her stalker. It would be sad anyway, but Barbeau’s character was offered a job in another state earlier in the film, and Hutton talked her out of it. What the hell kind of friend is so selfish that they would put their own insecurities over their friends’ financial and career wellbeing? Even if she DIDN’T get killed, Hutton should be ashamed of herself!

One thing I dug about the film – its Hammer style ending. Like a lot of Hammer films, the movie ends exactly when the killer dies. We don’t need a wrapup, we don’t need to see her moving into a new building, or anything like that. Killer’s dead, movie’s over. It’s even more refreshing being from Carpenter, who ended nearly all his films on an ambiguous note (ironically frustrating, given his hatred of sequels).

It’s certainly not a bad movie, but you gotta wonder why, AFTER Halloween, Carpenter would bother with this sort of thing. Nowadays it wouldn’t seem strange, but back then he was truly a master of horror/suspense, and this certainly doesn’t have any evidence to support it.

What say you?

PLEASE, GO ON...

October Extras # 23 - Horrors Of Spider Island

OCTOBER 23, 2007

GENRE: MONSTER
SOURCE: DVD (BUDGET PACK!!!)
LAST SEEN: 2004 (MST3K)

Like Track of the Moon Beast, today’s October Extra is one I have both seen several times and never at all. Horrors Of Spider Island was one of the last episodes in the 10th (final) season of Mystery Science Theater, and it was a particular gem. With some exceptions, the monster movies always seemed to be funnier than the crime dramas and such that a lot of episodes featured (the one with Angel’s Revenge is a completely unfunny episode, as is the 10th season’s odd German version of Hamlet).

Of course, again, this one’s funny even without Mike, Servo, and Crow riffing along with the film. But it also contains several important lessons/tidbits that any living man, woman, or child should know:

• If you need to foreshadow a plane’s engine burning out, cut to a giant wave.
• The quickest way to Singapore from Los Angeles is through New York.
• When bitten by a giant spider, men will turn into hairier men.
• If a plane catches fire and loses radio contact, there is “no reason to fear the worst”.
• Excessive heat will cause men to cheat on their girlfriends.
• Whistling can keep women from being afraid.
• Models have to be told when to sleep and drink.

Actually that last one might really be true.

What say you?

PLEASE, GO ON...

Dementia 13

OCTOBER 23, 2007

GENRE: PSYCHOLOGICAL
SOURCE: DVD (BUDGET PACK 2!!!)

I was going to start my Dementia 13 review by quoting MST3k: “Smokey says, only YOU can prevent Roger Corman!”, but then I got déjà vu, so I checked and sure enough, I already began a review with that (for Bucket of Blood). I guess I am running out of ideas. Or MST3k quotes.

This movie is memorable for two things. One: it’s Francis Ford Coppola’s first movie, and possibly his only genuine horror movie with the exception of Jack (Dracula is more a costume design/art direction showcase with occasional blood splatter). Two: It has a prologue with a psychiatrist testing you to see if your mental health is strong enough to see the film. Well that part isn’t on this DVD, of course (this IS Mill Creek after all). But I assume I would have passed the test; it wasn’t very frightening and I’m a good guesser. However, perhaps AFTER watching the film I would be found insane, unless there’s a better clinical term for “Sick of watching movies about people pretending that loved ones are coming back to life in order to scam them out of an inheritance”.

Christ, how many goddamn movies in the 1960s had this scenario? It seems like I’ve watched like 5 of them already this year (The Ghost, Paranoiac, to name a two). It wasn’t very interesting the first time, and it’s not interesting now. This one also rips from Psycho, particularly in killing the assumed lead halfway through. In fact, the movie is pretty gory for its time (1963), so I will give it that, but it doesn’t really make the film any more interesting.

As you may have noticed, this one comes from Budget Pack 2 (aka 50 Horror Classics), as I am just about done with my beloved Chilling Classics set. Looking at the descriptions, I notice that they put a lot more effort into these little plot summaries than they did on the Chilling set. But on the flipside, the running times are not included, which is a bummer as I often choose my movie based on how much time I have to watch it at work. Since they are all old (some of them date back to the 20s), I can assume there wont be many of more than 90 minutes (this one was like 75), but if any of my fellow budget pack enthusiasts know of any really short ones off hand, please provide the titles. Those are key for busy days when I am finding it difficult to make time for my daily horror movie.

Also, the audio balance on this movie was skewed way to the right. When I watch a Corman film, I want the absolute best possible presentation!!!

What say you?

PLEASE, GO ON...

October Extras #22 - Severance

OCTOBER 22, 2007

GENRE: BREAKDOWN, BRITISH, COMEDIC, SLASHER, SURVIVAL
SOURCE: DVD (OWN COLLECTION)
LAST SEEN: JANUARY 2007 (PRESS SCREENING)

Man, I love Severance, and I am really bummed it didn’t open wider. It’s a perfectly enjoyable comedy/horror movie, and I think it would have gone over well with American audiences, despite its British origins.

Also, Laura Harris is nonsensically cute.

This movie had a lot of laugh out loud moments for me, though the horror scenes are done just as well. I wasn’t a huge fan of Christopher Smith’s previous film, Creep, but I could see he had talent as a director. Which is probably why this one, which was written by James Moran (with additional writing from Smith), turned out so much better. I don’t know who wrote the funniest lines (“You found a pie?”) but whoever it was deserves an award for some of this stuff. There’s a scene where everyone is understandably panicked due to seeing a masked man outside their window, and one character says “OK, you and Jill go up the hill...”, at which point he stops and giggles to himself about his unintentional reference. Stuff like that kills me, and there are plenty of similar dry jokes throughout the film.

One of my favorite things on South Park is when they introduce a ridiculous concept that everyone assumes to be one of Cartman’s lies, and it turns out to be true. For example: when he is convinced Kyle carries a key around his neck that unlocks a chest full of “Jew Gold”, or when he tells Token that he can play bass simply because he is black. Well Severance has a few of these as well (non-racist ones in fact!), and they were just as funny the 2nd time around (the bear!!!). I’m not sure if there’s a particular name for this type of joke, but damned if I don’t wish there was a lot more of it in movies/TV. Some of the humor goes a little too far into broad territory (particularly during the dinner scene where everyone offers a theory as to the history of the lodge they are staying in), but luckily it’s usually restrained and thus funnier.

As for the horror (and action – the last 20 minutes of the film are more Rambo than Eye See You), the film is just as well done. Smith stages some terrific gore gags (not always mixed with comedy), and even elicits a genuine scare or two in these sequences. My only real concern was the sheer AMOUNT of bad guys that are introduced near the end. It seemed a bit much, though luckily the film has earned so much goodwill at that point that it was easy to forgive.

This hit DVD last week or so, and I didn’t even know about it. Like its theatrical run, it had very little promotion, which is a damn shame. I urge you all to check it out at your earliest convenience, as it’s a rare horror-comedy that works in both categories.

Also, again, Laura Harris is ridiculously cute.

What say you?

PLEASE, GO ON...

Anacondas: The Hunt For The Blood Orchid (2004)

OCTOBER 22, 2007

GENRE: PREDATOR
SOURCE: DVD (ONLINE RENTAL)

A long running joke among me and myself concerns the inane number of (credited) writers on Halloween 4 (four of them), a movie that really has no story at all (“Michael returns to Haddonfield and kills some folks”). That film, which I love, was directed by Dwight Little, which is the only reason I bothered with his Anacondas: The Hunt For The Blood Orchid. So imagine my surprise to see SEVEN credited writers on it, a movie that is basically “Some folks get eaten by some snakes”. What the hell is with you, Little?

Now, I have never seen the original. J Lo AND Ice Cube in one movie? Christ. I caught some of it on TNT one day (apparently they lost their Shawshank Redemption DVD and had to put SOMETHING on) and it didn’t exactly compel me. If it wasn’t for Little being the director, I wouldn’t have bothered with this one either. Luckily, I had no trouble following the labyrinthine plot despite coming in blind to the dense mythology of the Anaconda franchise.

Actually, and surprisingly, the movie isn’t too bad. Sure, it’s junk, and the CG snakes are terrible 90% of the time, but there’s some semblance of effort to be seen, and it certainly moves along nicely enough. I “called” two characters certain deaths when they turned out to survive, always a plus (though no other characters take their place inside a snake’s belly – there’s eight people in the movie and four live!).

And come on, this shot is fucking cool:

The strange thing about the movie is that the resident “Bad guy” human was actually the one you want to see survive. Sure he’s a bit of a dick, but all he wanted to do, besides get rich, was bring back a rare orchid that could save the lives of millions. The “good guy” people more or less try to stop him so they can just go home (rendering the deaths of their friends wholly pointless)? One character even seems vehemently OPPOSED to the entire attempt, even before the snakes show up. “No, I want cancer to keep on killing”? Strange. The movie doesn’t even make clear if the surviving characters bother bringing any of the damn things home with them.

There’s also a hilarious moment where a boat capsizes, likely ruining all their high tech gear. This is emphasized, poorly, when a guy picks up a CD-ROM drive (even though they were all using laptops) and says “Hard drive’s ruined!”. So? What about the CD-ROM drive??? Will it at least read at the visibly promised 52x speed?

I remember seeing that this film would be released in theaters (where it actually made some decent money) and being amazed. Come on, a name-only sequel to a 7 year old movie no one really liked to begin with? Why did this movie even exist, let alone get a wide release? But hey, I remain relatively surprised with how un-awful it was. It reminds me of that classic Onion story: “Catwoman praised for not being as awful as expected”. The subtitle alone (who the fuck cares why they are there? Especially since the movie itself doesn’t seem to) is grounds for straight to Sci-Fi channel land, but kudos to Little and all 85916902 of his writers for pulling off a decent movie out of what had to have been initially conceived as a tax write-off.

What say you?

PLEASE, GO ON...

Spiral (2007)

OCTOBER 21, 2007

GENRE: PSYCHOLOGICAL
SOURCE: THEATRICAL (HOLLYWOOD FILM FEST)

I don’t think I need to remind everyone how much I loved Adam Green’s Hatchet, but suffice to say I was very curious what his follow up would be. Luckily, he chose to go as far from Hatchet as possible with Spiral, which can barely even be considered a horror movie. Many of the new horror directors followed up with either a sequel to their first film (hell, Bousman made THREE Saw films in a row before finally leaving Jigsaw behind), or continue exploring the same themes (Rob Zombie’s Haddonfield seems to be populated with extras from Devil’s Rejects), or just ignored the genre all together (Zack Snyder, though I understand he may actually make another zombie film after Watchmen, but that'll be years!).

But Green (who actually co-directed with Joel Moore, who also wrote and produced the film) retains nothing from Hatchet, other than appearing in another brief cameo as a guy who glares at Moore’s character. Instead, Spiral tells the story of Mason (Moore), a guy who is clearly suffering from a mental problem or two, not to mention extreme asthma. He only has one friend (Chuck’s Zachary Levi – in a surprisingly great performance), and his daily bagged lunch is seemingly stolen from a 4th grader (is it even possible to get those little cardboard milk cartons anywhere besides a middle school?). Then a really hot girl (Amber Tamblyn) comes along....

Of course, the movie isn’t out yet (January theatrical limited release from Anchor Bay, DVD soon after), so I don’t want to spoil too much about it at this time. But let’s just say that if you think you have figured out the movie’s ending halfway through (as I did), you will most likely be wrong. Moore and co-writer Jeremy Boreing did a great job constructing the film, and the twist (or twists, I guess) holds up when you think about what came before (but it doesn’t come completely out of left field and ruin the entire movie either, like High Tension).

One thing about the film that may turn some folks off is that Moore’s character is SO strange, it might become difficult for them to deal with, especially since he is in just about every frame of the film (about 10 minutes before the film ends, Moore leaves a scene and we stay with Levi’s character, and you realize that it’s the first time in the film we have been in a scene that wasn’t from his perspective). You might also wonder why Tamblyn would be interested in him at all; at the Q&A Green and Boreing said that her character was possibly just as lonely/messed up as Moore’s, but this idea wasn’t sold enough.

Still, minor flaws in an otherwise really good and unique movie. It proves Green can make something besides funny slasher movies, and the performances from all three leads (all cast against type) are the best in their careers. It won’t be for everyone (especially those expecting another Hatchet), but those who enjoy a character based thriller should really dig it when it comes out.

And hurrah! This ends a week+ of almost nothing but festival movies! I can go back to watching things other people may have actually seen!

What say you?

PLEASE, GO ON...

October Extras #21 - Dawn of the Dead (2004)

OCTOBER 21, 2007

GENRE: REMAKE, ZOMBIE
SOURCE: DVD (OWN COLLECTION)
LAST SEEN: DECEMBER 2006 (DVD)

Ah, yes. The Dawn of the Dead remake. A.K.A. the movie that made me remove my foot from my mouth and apologize (not to anyone in particular), not to mention automatically give every remake since an “I’ll wait till I see it until I pass judgment” stance. See, the original Dawn is my 2nd favorite horror movie, after Halloween, and the very thought of a remake appalled me. “Fuck you, guy who wrote Scooby Doo and guy who may one day direct the most blatantly homoerotic movie of all time” I was quoted as saying.

But then I went to see the film. And within 15 minutes, I was not only willing to accept it as a remake of a classic, but I was genuinely enjoying it, a lot. I can’t recall for sure, but I’d go so far as to say that it eventually became my favorite horror movie of the year (I can barely even recall another 2004 horror movie though. The Grudge?).

A big part of the film’s success goes to James Gunn’s brilliant decision to just retain the concept (“Zombies in a mall”) and NOTHING ELSE from the original. He understood what Rob Zombie and so many others have not – the only way your remake of a classic, beloved film will work is if you allow the audience to get lost in YOUR film. How can I get into the Halloween remake if every 5 minutes or so I am seeing a copy of a scene from the original? That’s not a concern here. Literally nothing is repeated in terms of scenes or events, only the occasional line or two (“When there’s no more room in hell...”).

Besides that, it’s also a genuinely good zombie movie. Ignoring the fast vs. slow zombie debate (For the record though, I find slow zombies scarier, sort of the same way that a dull knife is more dangerous than a sharp one), one cannot deny that the film has plenty of new ideas, and some great comedic moments. The scene in the elevator where Mekhi Pfifer has to keep hitting the door to keep it from closing is a perfect mix of tension and relief, and Andy (a character whose fate is truly sad) and Kenneth’s shooting game is a hoot. There’s also some great black comic stuff, in particular the chainsaw death near the end of the film that ranks as one of the best kills in all zombie movie history (and it doesn’t even involve zombies!).

Also this:

And this:

What's to dislike?

Also, the character development is pretty good, especially considering a. how many characters are in the film and b. how fast it moves. Jake Weber’s Michael is a more well-rounded character than anyone in the original, and the early scenes with Sarah Polley and her boyfriend feel very natural. And CJ, who begins the film as a total jerk and ends up being our core group’s most useful ally, is another great character. Unlike the original, there are no “hero zombies” to speak of – they are pretty generic (made up for by the sheer amount of them).

The DVD (unrated) version is superior to the theatrical as well. Not because of the added gore, but because it adds a scene that explains what seems like a truly idiotic moment in the theatrical. When they first arrive at the mall, they go in out back, after a brief zombie attack scene. This scene was omitted from the theatrical, so it looked like they enter the mall by throwing a toilet through a store window from the outside. Why this scene would be cut is beyond me, but then again, this is the same studio (Universal) that tried to make The Return look like a generic ghost movie.

Many have decried the film for excluding any of the social commentary/satire of the original, but like The Hitcher, I don’t see why this is a problem. If you want commentary, watch the original. I don’t believe there’s any law that says a zombie film has to be a metaphor for some larger issue. Some have also put it down by claiming it’s just an action movie with zombies, but that’s, if anything, total hypocrisy – the original has a large shootout between gang members and cops, a car racing around the mall, a big stunt-filled finale with another gang, helicopter and truck sequences... it’s just as much an “action movie” as the 1978 one. Plus, look at all the good that came from this film’s success: Romero finally got the dough to make his own 4th Dead film, the game Dead Rising (the parking garage/tunnel areas of the game were obviously inspired by the scene shown above) is one of the best horror games ever, and Gunn and Snyder went on to make further contributions (Slither was one of 2006’s best films, and Dawn + 300 = Watchmen, finally) to the genre. Hell we even got a 4 disc release of the original.

This year I have met both Gunn and Snyder, and told them how they got right what so many others have gotten wrong (I actually called Snyder an asshole for making the film so good that it gave me hope for Halloween 2007 – a ‘compliment’ I’m not sure he understood, and I don’t blame him): they took someone else’s concept and title, sure, but they made their OWN film. It’s not necessarily better or worse than the original – it’s too different to make an accurate comparison. I think both are great for what they set out to be, and it’s a damn shame that Rob Zombie, John Moore, Neil LaBute, and Alexandra Aja (among others) failed to follow their lead.

What say you?

PLEASE, GO ON...

Timber Falls (2007)

OCTOBER 20, 2007

GENRE: SURVIVAL
SOURCE: THEATRICAL (SCREAMFEST LA)

On the surface (by surface I mean the capsule descriptions on the Screamfest website), it seemed Storm Warning and Timber Falls were the same movie. A couple on vacation runs afoul of deranged locals who put them through hell. But the difference is, Storm Warning was a lean, straightforward piece, this one was actually a bit of a slam on Catholic extremists, something I am always a fan of in movies (or in anything really).

Having gone to catholic school for 8 years, I became very weary of the teachings of the Catholic faith. Even at a young age, I began to see that a lot of it was just based on fear. Don’t do this, don’t do that, if you wish you had a bike like your neighbor’s you will burn in hell for eternity... just seemed a bit odd. So once I was no longer ‘forced’ to go to Church every week, I didn’t. Not that I don’t believe in God and all that, but I don’t think he’s really so much a dick that he’ll have some flaming demons poke me with spears for millions of years because I decided to sleep in on Sunday. I’m more of a “Be a good person, you’ll be fine” type guy.

Anyway, in the film, our villains are bible spouting extremists who are unable to have a child. So, they kidnap tourists and try to force them to conceive (as long as they are married), the plan being that when the child is born they can kill the parents and raise it as their own. The movie does a fantastic job of showing how the two of them see no hypocrisy in their actions, and like this year’s Joshua, will hopefully get at least a couple of devout Christians thinking a little about how baffling their ideology can be at times.

It’s also kind of funny how obvious it is that they are the true villains in the film. We meet them separately, and in between, our heroes are approached and somewhat terrorized by some standard movie rednecks. We are supposed to believe that they are the bad guys, but since both the other folks gave dirty looks to the protagonists when their faith/marriage status came into the conversation, we know right away that they are the ones we need to fear. In fact, the rednecks even try to play hero and save the couple near the end of the film, which I loved. However their attempts are pretty quickly dealt with, which is kind of a bummer; the film really would have benefited from a scene where the heroes realize that their prejudice and fear was totally misplaced (they never know the rednecks tried to help them).

The lead in the film is Josh Randall, who is from one of my all time favorite TV shows, Ed. He’s great in the film, pulling off the action heroics with as much ease as the “Wow, I’m a regular guy with a really hot girlfriend” scenes at the beginning of the film. The chick playing his girlfriend is quite good too, though she disappears for a while and thus doesn’t get as much to do.

Unlike Storm Warning, this film does take its time getting to the “horror” elements, but it’s far from boring in the meantime. Just a different way to tell the story, and I enjoyed it almost as much. However, there’s a dumb epilogue that you really don’t need to watch, gotta dock the movie a non-existent point for that. But I still recommend you check it out (it’s coming out in limited release this December... not sure about wider/DVD plans), as I’d like it to be a hit. We need more Josh Randall (and anyone from Ed, really).

What say you?

PLEASE, GO ON...

The Signal

OCTOBER 20, 2007

GENRE: INDEPENDENT, PSYCHOLOGICAL, TECHNOLOGY
SOURCE: THEATRICAL (SCREAMFEST LA)

All year I have been hearing about The Signal, most of it good (though one friend hated it, calling it “Horror for people who drink lattes”, which is hilarious even if I disagree). So expectations were high, but luckily they were met...

...for the first hour. The film is presented in 3 acts, or “transmissions”, and while I loved the first two, the third sort of fell apart, becoming repetitive and gimmicky.

Each part had a different director, and while it doesn’t really show in terms of shooting style, storywise they are admirably unique from one another. The first (also the best) is a straight up, “beginning of an apocalypse” style episode, as the signal (which comes from TV, not cell phones as some have reported in comparing it to Stephen King’s (inferior) novel titled "Cell") hits. The outbreak scenes are intense, and not without some humor. This is good, because the 2nd story is almost ALL humor. It’s a day later, and while some people are fully aware of what’s happening, others are oblivious, reflected by a new year’s eve party in which one character is so hell-bent on getting laid that he doesn’t seem to mind the fact that his friends are covered in blood from previous actions. There’s some great, dry comic touches throughout this part, plus more broad moments. Not much happens in terms of action in this part; if the first part was Night of the Living Dead, than this is more Shaun of the Dead.

That leaves the 3rd part, which is, I dunno, Not Very Good Movie of the Dead. While not a disaster, it just doesn’t offer any new characters or situations. Also, one side effect from the signal is that the affected person will confuse people in reality (so for example, one character “sees” his wife when the person is really a stranger), a gimmick that is overused and fairly obnoxious in this section; the film reaches a point where people are claiming to be other people to further add to the confusion. It would be fine had they DONE something with the concept, but it’s merely smoke and mirrors; serving only to provide the film with a more “exciting” climax.

Still, it’s not enough to totally derail the film, and it’s astounding how good the film looks considering how little it was shot for. Atlanta is a vastly underused shooting location, especially in horror, so that helped give the film a different look (rather than the umpteenth cinematic end of the world via Los Angeles). The acting is also quite good across the board, all unknowns.

The film is being released by Magnolia, who also released 2 of the year’s most interesting horror movies – The Host and Severance (and also the not-really-horror Right At Your Door, an apocalypse film set in... Los Angeles). Hopefully they won’t become another Lion’s Gate (a studio that is rapidly becoming another Dimension), because so far they are 4 for 4 this year.

What say you?

PLEASE, GO ON...

Headless Horseman (2007)

OCTOBER 20, 2007

GENRE: BREAKDOWN, SLASHER, SUPERNATURAL
SOURCE: THEATRICAL (SCREAMFEST LA)

One story I’ve never shined to is Sleepy Hollow/Headless Horseman. Didn’t care for the book much as a kid, or any of the various cartoons/after school special Halloween episode type things about it, or even the Burton film. Like the Phantom of the Opera story, I just don’t find it particularly compelling or exciting. A guy without a head riding a horse is just too dumb for me I guess. So I’ll stick to Shocker.

That said, this is at least an enjoyable time-killer for the most part. Two hot girls (including Trish Coren, aka the hot one from Boo, which was also directed by Anthony Ferrante) and some crowd-pleasing gore gags help immensely. Unfortunately, the “comic relief” character is the least funny person in the film, and his constant Deliverance/inbreed jokes grow incredibly tiresome, yet he manages to live quite a while. There’s also a town local gal who cannot act worth a shit, and since she gets a lot of exposition to deal out, this poses a problem for my being interested in the explanation scenes.

Like I said, the gore gags are great. Everyone gets beheaded, and Ferrante and co-writer Zachary Weintraub are smart enough to make them all different and visually interesting. One particular favorite was when a guy hiding in a trunk peeks his head out – the Horseman jumps on the lid, slamming the trunk shut as the guy’s head goes flying. Hahahaha nice. Also there’s a pretty brutal death to the film’s most engaging character. I think any body count film where you actually go “aww!” for one death is pretty successful, especially since it’s so rare you give a shit about anyone in these types of movies.

Also, there’s a great joke that flies over the heads (drum sting!) of the audience – after the guy in the trunk loses his head, the local girl goes “It’s Headless!” and the group’s resident airhead replies “Seth was not an ‘it’!” Hahahahaha. The same joke was in Hatchet but I don’t care, it’s still funny.

I should also point out how great Alan Howarth’s score is. The main theme is just as memorable as any big budget horror movie, and the rest is no slouch either. Most of my familiarity with Howarth is limited to the Halloween sequels and John Carpenter collaborations, so it’s nice to see him do something totally original and on his own. Really nice stuff here.

I saw the film at Screamfest, but I think it’s premiering on Sci-Fi (it was NOT made for Sci-Fi, which is probably why it’s not all that bad – the production value alone is vastly higher than anything I’ve ever seen from the network) this week before hitting DVD. I’ll probably never go out of my way to see the film again, but if it was on I’d more than likely leave it on. Hell, Coren alone is worth watching the film for.

What say you?

PLEASE, GO ON...

October Extras #20 - Halloween: Resurrection (2002)

OCTOBER 20, 2007

GENRE: SLASHER
SOURCE: DVD (OWN COLLECTION)
LAST SEEN: NOVEMBER 2002 (DVD)

For all the shit I give Halloween: Resurrection, it’s really not as horrible as I say it is. I once considered it to be the worst slasher film ever made, but I’ve seen many this year (many beginning with the word “Dark”) that are far worse. Where Resurrection fails is not as a slasher film, but as a Halloween film.

Offering the least amount of Halloween atmosphere in any of the films to date (even Zombie’s remake was more successful in this department) and forgetting its own goddamn history (the stuff Howard says at Smith’s Grove is almost entirely inaccurate) is almost forgivable, but the fact that the film is so far removed from what made the original film work is not. It’s even more insulting when you consider that, as far as Dimension is concerned, this is really Halloween 4, not 8 (since 4-6 are ignored and III is in another, well, dimension, entirely), and a direct sequel to one of only two films in the franchise that truly did try to live up to the standards John Carpenter’s film originally established.

Instead, this film is more or less a standard dumb kids slasher movie, complete with sexual hijinks in totally inappropriate situations, nonsensical deaths (there’s like 3 beheadings in this one), an almost total lack of suspense (though to be fair, they DO try a little near the end), and, ironically, a total lack of motive for Michael. Yes, he had no motive in the original and that’s part of what made it work. But that’s no longer the case. Now it is firmly established that he is just out to kill his family. So why, after killing Laurie in the film’s first (and best) 15 minutes, does he focus his attention on a group of college kids who are hosting what would otherwise be the world’s worst reality show in history? They are trespassing? Then why didn’t he kill the folks who spent so much time setting up fake skeletons in the basement and non-stale fennel (you got me) in the kitchen? Why wait until like 10 people were there? Was he just looking for a challenge?

Like all the sequels, there are some random elements from the other films in (mostly botched) attempts to tie it in thematically with the others. Our Final Girl talks about fate with her professor (played by Rick Rosenthal, who with this film became the first and likely last director to come back to direct another in the series); Howard wears a clown mask not totally dissimilar to the one Michael wore when he killed Judith; and the house actually does somewhat resemble the one in the original (a far cry from the gothic mansion in part 5). Well, B for effort I guess, but the rest of your movie still reeks of being written by a machine that read the Wiki entry for the original film.

And what the fuck is with the mask in this one? It looks it has makeup on. I guess it’s a step up from the one in H20, but otherwise, Christ. It’s funny how much people rag on the one in 4, it’s probably the 3rd best in the whole series.

Of course, no review of this film is complete without some making fun of Busta Rhymes. Well, he’s awful. Everyone knows that. He talks to himself constantly, making absolutely no sense half the time; he says mutha-fucka with just about every line (sometimes twice); and yes, at one point he even “pwns” Michael, in a scene so asschristingly idiotic I actually cheered it when I first saw the film in theaters (it remains the only midnight movie I ever attended in which I stayed awake for the entire thing – I was so aghast I could barely even blink), because I was amazed that anyone, even a goddamn soulless Dimension executive, allowed such trash to be shown to the public.

Of course, this movie was so bad that it literally ended the franchise as we know it, resulting in the remake. So you can either blame or thank Resurrection, depending on your feelings for Zombie’s film. Personally, I wish I could just forget that neither this nor the remake ever happened, and that the series ended on a relative high (or at least conclusive) note with H20, but I don’t have that bad of a memory. If Eternal Sunshine technology ever becomes a reality, you can guarantee that this thing will be 2nd or 3rd on my list of things to wipe.

(1st, of course, would be Dark Ride).

What say you?

PLEASE, GO ON...

The Rage (2007)

OCTOBER 19, 2007

GENRE: PREDATOR, COMEDIC, CRAP, MAD SCIENTIST
SOURCE: THEATRICAL (SCREAMEST LA)

A few months ago, I watched an advanced copy of The Rage, which was directed by Robert Kurtzman (the K in KNB). I didn’t like it at all, but I assumed the film was unfinished due to the terrible visual effects (the guy was one third of the greatest effects company of all time!), and it seemed the type of film that would benefit from a big crowd and maybe a few beers. So I gave it another chance at Screamfest, with crowd and said beers (well, one beer, before the movie. Close enough).

Sadly, it seemed even WORSE on the big screen. Not only did the film’s horrid acting and ridiculously overlong finale seem more troublesome, but the effects looked even WORSE on the big screen. What I saw WAS indeed finished; the effects just suck.

See, I can accept a bad CG effect or two in a film, but The Rage literally goes out of its way to make the filmmakers/VFX team look inept. A character dies via a pipe in the backside, and CG poop flies out of the pipe’s open end. Another character is beheaded, and excessive CG blood spews out of it for far longer than necessary. Why “add” to your effects when it just makes the movie look more amateurish? We know the guy is dead, why ruin the scene by adding in another, unnecessary visual gag? And why is the blood CG?

And it’s amazing how stunningly bad Erin Brown (aka Misty Mundae) is in this film. She turned in a great performance in the short In The Wall, which showed at the festival a few days before, but here she is simply atrocious. She constantly looks like she’s laughing when she’s supposed to be scared, and her delivery is awkward, making even simple “Come on!” type lines sound forced. Reggie Bannister fares no better in a small cameo, making a truly wretched Phantasm joke that no one laughed at.

The film also seemingly goes on forever. There’s a moment where you think it’s about to end, as the lab where the finale takes place catches fire, heading toward some oxygen tanks, but there’s at least another 10 minutes of additional banality before the damn lab explodes and we are allowed to go on our merry way.

Can’t say I didn’t give the movie a chance.

What say you?

PLEASE, GO ON...

Storm Warning (2007)

OCTOBER 19, 2007

GENRE: SURVIVAL
SOURCE: THEATRICAL (SCREAMFEST LA)

Urban Legend and Valentine are both well shot slasher movies with somewhat generic scripts (though UL is a lot of fun, and remains my favorite of all the post-Scream slashers). It’s a shame that it took so long for director Jamie Blanks to find himself at the helm of a film with a script that measured up to his skills as a director, but Storm Warning was almost worth the wait (come on man, SIX years?!?!?!).

Blanks (who also composed and edited the film) has made a really lean film here. There are no subplots, no padding, no superfluous characters or incidents... nothing. A couple rents a boat, they get lost, meet up with some bad folks, and shit goes down. No, the film is hardly original in the story department, but the refreshing DIRECTNESS of it all makes it stick out above many of its fellow survival horror movies.

It’s also interesting to see this type of film in which very little violence/torture is inflicted on the protagonists. Blanks and writer Everett De Roche do a great job making the trio of bad guys totally reprehensible simply through the way they deal with each other and what they say, so when the tables turn, it’s completely justified, and we are not yet numb to the sight of people inflicting violence on one another.

A note for male viewers – this movie makes a strong case for the importance of foreplay, as it quite nastily details what could happen if you try to “steal home” without “testing the waters” first, if you catch my drift. Ouch. Between this and Hostel 2, it’s just a bad year for would-be rapists’ cocks.

Sadly, this film is coming straight to DVD from Dimension, but don’t let that worry you - Dimension is just releasing the film, they had nothing to do with its production. Highly recommended, and let’s hope we see another film from Blanks sooner rather than later.

What say you?

PLEASE, GO ON...

October Extras #19 - The Hitcher (2007)

OCTOBER 19, 2007

GENRE: BREAKDOWN, SURVIVAL
SOURCE: DVD (OWN COLLECTION)
LAST SEEN: JANUARY 2007 (THEATRICAL)

Look, you know what? Fuck you. I like The Hitcher remake. Can you really blame Jake Wade Wall and Eric Bernt for dropping the homoerotic subtext of the original and replacing it with a female lead (especially one as mind bogglingly cute as Sophia Bush)? Look at what happens to any horror movie nowadays that includes a dose of subtlety or metaphor: They tank. Personally, I think catering to an audience is fine every now and then, as long as it’s enjoyable. Like the saying goes "Steak is better, but every now and then, you want a Big Mac."

Like McDonald's, the film is delicious even though you know it's crap. Besides, any moment Bush is onscreen, the film is more than simply watchable, and as it gets more and more ridiculous (where the hell does that dropped car come from?), it just gets more and more hilariously fun. I don’t think anyone involved thought to make any sort of realistic or thought provoking film, so why should it be dismissed because it isn’t? I don’t think I need to point out again that a film simply being a remake isn’t nearly enough of a reason to hate it. And come on, can anyone honestly say that The Hitcher II had more respect for the source material? At least this movie has the good sense to cast an actual actor in the role of the Hitcher, instead of the son of a guy whose real life persona is pretty much the model of such types of characters.

“Wilson!!!”

I’d like to dedicate the next paragraph to the movie’s “memorable” soundtrack. First off, Steve Jablonsky’s score is actually quite good (sadly unavailable on CD), which was a nice surprise since his work on The Island was god awful (one thing a Bay film will otherwise always have is a memorable, powerful score). But it’s almost obliterated by the licensed music peppered liberally throughout the film. We begin with what appears to be a 10 minute version of All American Rejects sing-along “Move Along”, and when it finally ends, we soon thereafter hear a radio DJ say “Here’s a classic from David Soul” (!!!) before “Don’t Give Up On Us Baby”. Then there’s some obscure David Gray/Matthews tunes, and finally the film’s raison d’etre – a laugh out loud action montage (one that’s already ridiculous enough) set to Nine Inch Nail’s “Closer”. Hilariously, at the first screening I went to (I saw this 3x in theaters!), director Dave Meyers told the crowd that they had just finished the film the day before. I asked what the last thing was, and he said it was securing the rights to use the song. Considering that it was the final straw for many of the people who saw (and ultimately disliked) the film, I found this to be some delightful trivia. And hey, there’s your homoerotic subtext – the “I want to fuck you like an animal!” line comes right as the Hitcher drives his car directly into a cop’s, PENETRATING him if you will. Happy now?

The movie is also occasionally intentionally hilarious. The gas station attendant is a particular highlight, and Neal McDonough’s colorful profanity (“You gotta be five finger fucking me!”) is always a delight. And there’s some nice black humor, such as the blood spattered children’s book titled “Will I Go To Heaven”. And the “I’m horny” line/response more than makes up for the film’s one major scene omission from the original (the diner scene).

If the film has one real flaw, it’s the guy playing Bush’s boyfriend. He’s not bad, but he’s very bland (sort of a 2nd date Jared Padalecki). If they wanted an average looking guy with messy hair to play a guy who drives a car and is in love with Sophia Bush, I can certainly think of at least one better, likely cheaper, option. Also, Bean doesn’t get to really chew the scenery as much as I would have liked – only in the film’s final 20 minutes (particularly in his interrogation scene) does his casting really pay off.

Also this. Seriously, how can you not like this movie?

The DVD is sans commentary, which bums me out as I enjoyed listening to Meyers talk at the screening/junket, and I think he’s definitely one of the better music video directors to come along in a while. Say what you will about the script, but you can’t tell me the film isn’t stylish and well made, nor is it hyper-edited or hand-cranked to the point of incoherency, like the films of many of his peers. Granted, it’s pretty difficult to NOT make the southwest US look beautiful, but his and DP James Hawkinson’s work here is still far above average. Instead, there are some alternate endings of no real difference, and some other fluff. Then again, since I like the film solely for being mindless fun, I guess I can’t complain that the DVD features aren’t exactly Shakespearean.

Like the Dawn of the Dead remake, some folks trash it simply for ignoring the subtext of the original, but here it seems more apparent since they are sticking so closely to the beats of the original film (so much that original writer Eric Red, who had nothing to do with the remake at all, is given screenwriting credit instead of the usual “Based on characters created by” or whatever credit). I can give it that, but really, that’s not the film they are making this time around. This is a popcorn “ride” of a film, stripped of all pretense, designed solely to entertain. And it does. For me, anyway. At least they didn’t spend half the film explaining why the Hitcher killed and then having him act in a manner that contradicted those reasons in the other half.

What say you?

PLEASE, GO ON...

Broken

OCTOBER 18, 2007

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

I love that just 24 hrs after watching one of the best “Survival” horror movies (that would be Inside) of all time, I found myself subjected to one of the worst. While not the worst film I’ve ever seen, I feel confident that Broken (from the new “Dimension Extreme!” label; the first sign of trouble) may be the most worthless film ever made.

Wrongly assuming that all you need to make an effective horror movie is to simply have a woman screaming and being tortured (and at one point, raped) for 85 minutes, without having to bother with things like character development, reason, suspense, etc., Broken is the exact type of film that gives horror, and in particular survival horror, a bad name. Hell, even Captivity, previous holder of “Worst film of the year”, at least had decent production value. Obviously, my full support of Inside, not to mention the Hostel films and a mild appreciation for the Saw films, is proof positive that I am not the type to hate a film just because it has torture sequences. But in all those other films, there was a genuine story, not to mention efforts to make sure you actually gave a shit about (most of) the people being hurt. This one introduces a woman on a date, she goes home and talks to the babysitter, and then she’s kidnapped. I don’t care about her at all, so after 45 minutes of watching her be psychologically and physically tortured, I’m not only tired of watching the same shit over and over, I also still don’t even care if the woman lives or not.

You know a movie is bad when the ugly
digital video is the least of my concerns.

Luckily the film is low on dialogue, especially considering how bad the dialogue is when they DO speak, but it’s all replaced with an almost endless stream of screaming and whimpering from the three female characters. The bad guy doesn’t say much either, instead he just walks around dressed like a cowboy, occasionally doing something stupid that allows for a break in the monotony as one of the women tries to escape, resulting in more pointless bloodshed.

Director/writers Adam Mason and Simon Boyes (another co-directing effort!) would like you to believe that there IS a heart to the film, via the primary victim’s uncertainty if the guy killed her daughter, and the only surprise in the entire film is that the kid IS still alive. Given the childish and idiotic nature of the rest of the film, I assumed they would kill the kid just to be more “edgy”. Instead, the mother finds the child alive, only to set off a trap that blinds the woman while the little girl watches. Oh... I get it... she’s blind to the human suffering of... uh... her. Or, it’s just a pointless ending to a pointless movie.

According to the DVD, this won the Audience Award at the Dead by Dawn film festival, tying with Blood Trails (another god awful piece of shit). At this point, I can only assume that the entire audience was made out of 15 year olds who judge a film on how “extreme” it is, rather than silly things like how well it’s made or whether the script was worth the paper it was printed on (especially considering that far superior films like Isolation and Hard Candy played the same festival). Well, grats for your “victory”.

Fuck this movie. And fuck Dimension for giving it a big promotion. Shit like this needs to be locked away from the types of folks who look for reasons to dismiss the genre as a whole. After watching Broken, I can almost see their reasoning.

What say you?

PLEASE, GO ON...

October Extras #18 - The Return

OCTOBER 18, 2007

GENRE: HORROR?, PSYCHOLOGICAL
SOURCE: DVD (OWN COLLECTION)
LAST SEEN: NOVEMBER 2006 (THEATRICAL)

Few things in this world piss me off more than people who don’t understand the “stay to the right if you’re going to just stand like a lazy fuck on the escalator” rule. But one of those things is the amount of hatred I see aimed toward The Return, one of last year’s best “horror” movies. Not so much that it tanked at the box office (it was a good movie, so that was to be expected), but that people actually call it the worst film of the year (or that they’ve ever seen), in a year that gave us Dark Ride, When A Stranger Calls, and Lady In The Water (and those are just the genre movies). Come on folks, let's get real here.

The Return is actually a character drama fused with a very basic murder mystery film, with some very light supernatural elements (sort of) thrown in for good measure. I always enjoy a film that features a character trying to put the pieces of a puzzle together (here: that would be child’s artwork, an image of a barn, etc.), and watching the film a second time, it’s interesting to see how well placed the necessary information is throughout the film. I do wish that the “killer” character was introduced a bit earlier, but since there are rumors of re-shoots and re-editing (otherwise non evident in the film itself), it’s a surprise how well made it is at all.

However, it was marketed as a Grudge style scarefest. I don’t know what is more depressing: that Universal couldn’t even market the film for what it actually was, or that people are so easily duped by false advertising that they would blame the film itself instead of the marketing department who sold them a different movie. And the film’s horrendous box office didn’t teach Universal any lessons – the DVD tries even HARDER to get you to believe it’s a spookfest, with all of the extras listed as “Too terrifying for theaters” and the like. The alternate ending is almost identical to the (non-horror) one in the theatrical, only with the addition of a baby being born. SHOCKING! TERRIFYING!!!!

Even if you just REALLY wanted to jump at the image of a ghostly Asian child every 5 minutes for no reason, you’d have to admit that, if nothing else, The Return offers some downright fantastic cinematography, resulting in one of the best LOOKING horror films of the year. Perfectly capturing the cold, dry look of Texas in the fall/winter, the look of the film alone elevates it above any of the films Universal tried to compare it to. Much like Friday Night Lights, the film cannot be mistaken for any other area in the US, and puts films/shows that try to fake Texas directly into shame. Oddly, just as I was thinking “I wonder if any of the crew from FNL worked on this”, a familiar face appeared on screen:

Buddy Garrity! Love that guy. I think I also spied one of the assistant coach guys in the film’s one “action” scene before the finale, in which a fake Josh Holloway beats up a fake Ashton Kutcher that tried to nail the actual Sarah Michelle Gellar (and can’t say I blame him – with her brunette hair, she looks better than ever in this movie, another reason why I am dumbfounded it went entirely ignored in theaters). Good ol Friday Night Lights.

Speaking of Gellar, the film’s most nonsensical moment comes not during the “either you buy into it or you don’t” ending, but when her age is said to be 25. Come on now. She looked 25 when she was supposed to be 20 on Buffy.

Another beauty in this film is Kate Beahan, who has the unfortunate distinction of being in two of the most idiotic films of all time – Flightplan and The Wicker Man remake. While Wicker was at least hilariously bad, with Cage’s all time most delirious performance (“How’d it get burned HOWDITGETBURNED?!?!?!?”), Flightplan is a shockingly bad bore of a film. Naturally, she finally gets a part (though a very brief one, her and Sam Shepard basically disappear from the film after about 20 minutes or so) in a good film, and no one sees it.

Well whatever, folks are always going to hate it because it doesn’t fake scare them. Their loss. I really dig the movie and it held up well on a 2nd viewing. If you haven’t seen it yet, I urge you to ignore the marketing and just watch it for what it is.

What say you?

PLEASE, GO ON...

Inside (aka À l'intérieur) (2007)

OCTOBER 17, 2007

GENRE: FRENCH, SURVIVAL
SOURCE: THEATRICAL (SCREAMFEST LA)

Goddamn, holy asschristing shit, FUCK this movie is great. Inside (aka À l'intérieur) concerns a pregnant woman going through some seriously violent and fucked up shit on Christmas Eve in her own home, which is a pretty disturbing scenario. And being that I am not a woman, or Arnold Schwarzenegger, I cannot even begin to comprehend how gut-wrenching this film must be for pregnant viewers.

Since it’s not out yet (and I think it’s going direct to video in the states, typical), I can’t expect folks to have seen it, so I won’t spoil anything in this review. It’s definitely a film that will exponentially improve in your eyes with regards to how much you know about it beforehand. Hell, I thought it was going to be some sort of Rosemary’s Baby/Shock type film, so I was certainly in for a surprise.

Right off the bat I knew this one was going to be something memorable – we see the impact of a car accident from inside the womb, and then a truly great visual gag – a broken, bloody, mangled windshield wiper still running after the impact. Creative, horrific visuals mixed with pitch black yet understated humor? Ah, the French! The rest of the film is more or less a cat and mouse game between two women, and with the exception of an occasionally overbearing score, the film is executed as brilliantly and flawlessly as any horror film I have seen in many a moon. Or sun for that matter. Writer-director Alexandre Bustillo and co-director Julien Maury (lot of co-directing in horror these days...) have made a debut that ranks with Texas Chain Saw or Last House On The Left as one of the all time great freshman efforts, and the announcement that they will be tackling the Hellraiser remake (a film I've never really loved anyway) is fantastic news, as I truly believe they can make something truly great with the story (as long as Dimension leaves them the fuck alone, which is of course, unlikely).

However, this IS a French film, which means something occurs near the very end that threatens to ruin the entire movie. Luckily, it’s nowhere near as crippling as High Tension’s twist (which gets easier to digest with subsequent viewings), and there is even meaning behind this brief scene (it involves a 3rd character, which is all I will say); but I just wish they had come up with a better way to get the point across. Still, the 80+ minutes before it are so great (better than High Tension was even before its twist), it’s easy to forgive.

This may also be one of the most gruesome films (not counting intentional splatterfests like Dead Alive) I have ever seen. The body count isn’t particularly high, but the amount of bloodshed that results from these deaths (not to mention the amount of injuries inflicted on the two leads) is insanely high, yet fairly grounded in reality, making it all the more disturbing. Again, this is NOT a movie you will applaud and cheer at during/after the kill scenes.

What’s really surprising is how many people loved the film. Walking out of the screening, I talked to many of my fellow horror fans and everyone was universally praising the film. For a movie this extreme and disturbing, you expect some would be totally turned off by it, plus the folks who just automatically dislike a movie other folks like just to be contrarian. A few others grumbled about the same thing I did (though I was alone in my criticism of the screeching score), but even that wasn’t a problem for a lot of the other guys. Two gents in particular, whom I almost NEVER agree with on horror movies (for examples, one liked the Halloween remake, another thinks The Roost is one of the scariest films ever made), both loved it as much as I do.

Hahahaha, how fucked up are we as human beings: Remake Halloween with rednecks, divide the horror community; but stab a pregnant woman in her belly button, and everyone unites!

There is some irony that this is currently tied with Hatchet as my favorite horror movie of the year: Before any screening of Hatchet that Adam Green was in attendance for, he pointed out that Hatchet was a fun horror movie; that seeing women being tortured and beaten was not fun and he didn’t want any part of it. Inside is exactly the type of movie Hatchet worked (and succeeded) to rebel against, yet it’s equally effective in the grand scheme of things. Sure there are occasional moments that serve to break the tension, but for the most part, Inside is most definitely NOT a fun film to watch. It’s brutal, intense, and graphic. And great. Do whatever you have to see this film.

I know I said in the FAQ that I don’t grade my write-ups because they aren’t really reviews, but I’ll make an exception here (especially after I was just accused of “hating” 30 Days of Night because I didn’t spend the whole review sucking the film off):

Inside: A.

What say you?

PLEASE, GO ON...