(Originally from Facebook – July 25, 2013)
Forgot to post last night’s entry. This was remade as an American effort (Nightwatch) with Ewan McGregor. It’s been a while since I’ve seen that one, but even knowing the ending, I feel like this one was a little better. A good old-fashioned suspense/thriller. I’d put it in the 6-6.5 range. IMDB gives it a 7.3. I think we both score this one higher than the remake, though, so see this one first, if you can. (running time 1:47)
(Originally from Facebook – July 30, 2013)
I really, really wanted to like this, once I heard the premise. Imagine “Scooby Doo, Where Are You?” done in a real-life, real-horror version. So much potential. I was imagining something along the lines of Tucker and Dale vs. Evil, which I thought was brilliant. Unfortunately, this film took itself too seriously. Other than the fact that you’ve got four kids (properly stereotyped), a van, and a dog, there’s little direct connection to the Scoobies, for copyright reasons, I’m sure. They tried, though, even including a version of the “hallway-door-opening” scene made famous by the cartoons. But all the jokes fell flat. There’s no Old Man So-and-So behind the haunting of the old carnival here, either. The horror is much more disturbing than that, but they’re hardly original baddies. The performances (all by unknowns) weren’t too bad, considering, but they just weren’t enough.
If you’ve always wanted to know what Fred and Daphne do when no one else is around, or wondered why the cops never caught Shaggy with any drugs, then maybe it’s worth a watch for you. I found it to be terribly sad that they wasted a great premise with kind of a dull film. IMDB says 4.7, which is probably about right, but I’m giving it a 4, just for getting my hopes up. (running time 1:23)
(originally from Facebook – July 27, 2013)
Two films tonight, and both of them were scored nearly the same by IMDB, but I’m scoring them quite differently. The first one was another mindless action film. It had potential, but there just wasn’t much beyond the action itself. I expected a little better from Renner and Arterton, but I realized at the end of the film that these parts could have been played by just about anyone, and very little would have changed, so maybe it isn’t their faults, but the writing. I think viewers with shorter attention spans might like this, but even with my own short attention span, I can only muster a 4.5. IMDB fans gave it a 6.1. (running time 1:28)
(originally from Facebook – July 27. 2013)
The second film could have been one of the scariest films in recent years, if not for some dragging in the second act. And even then, I found the hair on the back of my neck rising more than once. It’s one of those “slow-burn” films, where everything just builds and builds. It could have been better in spots, for sure, but c’mon–Kerri Russell! Decent performances, and good use of sound. It’s heavy on the atmosphere, and light on the special effects. If this kind of movie creeps you out, and you don’t mind the pacing, definitely watch this one. IMDB gives it a 6.2, but I’d give it a 6.5, and even be persuaded to go to a 7 if you told me you’re freaked out by…well, I better not ruin anything. (running time 1:37)
I’m sure that there are people out there who are going to like this film. I’m going to tell you right up front that I’m not one of them. It’s not that I dislike the gore (and there is PLENTY of gore). I don’t have a problem with that. It’s not that the performances weren’t good. (You’ll recognize most of the major character faces, even if you don’t know their names.) They weren’t spectacular, but the actors did the best with what they had to work with. Nope, the sin here, what really soured me on the film, was its complete and utter lack of originality. Continue reading
I’m sure that the makers of this film really wanted to make the best film that they could. But they really ought to be ashamed for asking people to pay money to see this. It feels like a student film, and not really from a good student, either. IMDB gets this one right at 2.2. (running time 1:25)
Holy fuck. Sorry about the profanity, but that just about sums up my feelings after finishing The Autopsy of Jane Doe. You should know that I generally don’t get scared at films, but this one…this one scared the crap out of me. This is how I expected to feel after watching It Follows, but never quite did. In retrospect, I know this wasn’t all that original, but boy, it sure felt like it at the time. Director André Øvredal (2010’s excellent and underappreciated Trollhunter)pulls out all the stops here to keep us holding our breath on the edges of our seats. The premise is simple: a half-buried, naked woman (Olwn Kelly) is found in the basement at a bloody crime scene. Why is she there, how did she die, and what—if any—connection does she have with the events of the floors above? Continue reading
I’m a big fan of good horror films, and there have been quite a few good ones in the last few years. This one belongs on the list. I’m sure those who disagree with me will complain “nothing happens!” Even if this were true (it isn’t), “Seinfeld” showed us that there can be success in entertainment about “nothing.” Of course, what they really mean is there wasn’t a lot of maiming and slashing and gore and…you get the idea. No, this is much more of a psychological film. It blurs the line between reality and illusion just as it blurs the line between past and present. Continue reading
This is the second film by writer/director Mickey Keating I’ve watched this summer. After watching Darling, which I liked very much (review pending), I had high hopes for this one. Where Darling was a tribute to the psychological horror films of the Sixties (think Hitchcock and Polanski, especially Repulsion), Carnage Park is meant to be an homage to the grindhouse survivor-horror films of the Seventies (think The Hills Have Eyes and Punishment Park, both of which have heavy influences here). Or it might be more nearly correct to say it’s meant to be an homage to Quentin Tarantino because unfortunately, the film comes across as less tribute and more rip-off. (And yes, I know one could make the argument that QT himself ripped off 70s’ grindhouse.) Continue reading
This is a good, old-fashioned horror film. Or, perhaps more properly, a terror film. (Horror generally contains an element of disgust, which differentiates it from terror) It’s done, like a number of horror films (Creepshow, VHS), as a series of vignettes, bookended and held together by a larger (and often contrived) plot point. Here, the bookend is the story of an architect who is hired to come to a house, and who seems to have a familiarity not only with the house, but with the people gathered there. He explains that he has dreamt of this day, and that something terrible will happen before it is over. Continue reading
Who Cares What You Think? 