Lick Ness Monster
Dennis Stamp
From the eerie, eerie depths of Lake Okabena
Posts: 4,874
|
Post by Lick Ness Monster on Apr 7, 2015 8:32:59 GMT -5
Once again, I had a brain malfunction and deleted the notepad text that I usually copy these reviews from, so I'll just post the link. The review this week is for Lamberto Bava's Demons, a movie that plenty of people on this here thread have talked about in the past and that I finally got around to watching. The short version is this: I thought it was okay, and my enjoyment of it was hampered by its similarity to the countless zombie movies of today. Please click. licknessmonster.blogspot.com/2015/04/demons-1985.html
|
|
Lick Ness Monster
Dennis Stamp
From the eerie, eerie depths of Lake Okabena
Posts: 4,874
|
Post by Lick Ness Monster on Apr 14, 2015 8:21:38 GMT -5
New blog review time - part one of the "Psycho" sequel-a-thon. 1982 Directed by Richard Franklin Starring Anthony Perkins, Vera Miles, Meg Tilly, Robert Loggia and Dennis Franz Even more than the Friday the 13th franchise, the original Psycho and its sequels really did define my early horror fandom. I remember reading about the first book back when Roger Ebert still did those massive yearly video companions, piquing my curiosity thumbing through that thing by reading about every slasher flick in the book. Soon enough, USA Up All Night ran a marathon of the sequels, meaning that the Hitchcock original is actually the LAST movie in the series that I saw. Sacrilege, I know. Released in 1982, the movie in question today has to be considered nothing short of a total success on every level. It was made on a budget of $5 million and grossed almost seven times that much. Having a creative team consisting entirely of Hitchcock geeks (director Richard Franklin and screenwriter Tom Holland, respectfully, two guys who are pretty highly regarded in horror circles) also had its perks, as critical and fan response were by and large extremely positive. Just like the original movie, Psycho II has got this trademark suspenseful atmosphere. Having a cast that seems to actively give a f*** about it also helps. No further jabbering necessary. Let's get to it! Now, I will admit that the movie is based on a pretty far-flung crux. Norman Bates (still played by Anthony Perkins, amazingly enough, and he continues to be just as phenomenal and sympathetic as he was in the original film) has just been released from a mental institution and is summarily welcomed back into the community that he left with open arms. Yeah, I highly doubt it. Once you get past that faux pas, however, the movie introduces us to more than a few memorable characters. First and foremost is Dr. Raymond. He's played by Robert Loggia, one of my favorite character actors of all time, and this is the guy primarily responsible for getting Norman a "not guilty by reason of insanity" verdict and turning public support in his favor. In one of the better "what a fantastic idea" ideas in horror history, Norman returns to the Bates Motel and the creaky old house on the hill, the former of which is now lorded over by excellent supporting character #2 - Warren Toomey, with Dennis Franz lending all of his usual sleazy charm to the role of a guy who has turned Norman's business into a swinger's hotel. And then there is Mary Samuels (a name that is more than familiar to any hardcore fan of the original film), with the certifiably hot Meg Tilly as a young woman working in the diner with Norman who needs a place to stay. 'Cus what better place to stay than with an admitted murderer in a creepy old house? Logistical qualms aside, this movie does a very admirable job recreating the feel and locations of the original. There's no 30-minute red herring segment to start this film, and we spend a lot more time actually inside the Bates household this time. Director Franklin does fantastic giving the few locations we saw in Hitchcock's movie a slight facelift, including the cellar and Mother's room, while also recreating some iconic stuff like that legendary high-angle shot from the top of the second-floor steps. It's that atmosphere that gives this movie life when Mother begins to make her presence felt. Psycho II is a very plot heavy movie, and I won't delve into everything that it has to offer. The gist of it is this: With Mary in the house and a hotel to prepare for a re-opening, Norman begins actually seeing his mother again. In between this, there are also some sporadic (and very tense) murder sequences, with the bit involving the teenage couple in the cellar robbing me of some sleep during my grade school years. Said murders are also very blood-free, something that stood in stark contrast to the slasher flicks that were all the rage at the time. While I'm a huge fan of the slasher genre, this move is definitely for the better here. While none of the bodies or murders are discovered, Norman does confide in Dr. Raymond about the Mother sightings. It seems that someone is trying to convince Norman that his mother is still alive, and the clever script by Holland establishes that the killer absolutely CANNOT be Norman. Confused yet? Thought so. All that scatterbrained stuff above aside, Holland really did do a wonderful job balancing everything out here. The relationship between Norman and Mary gets plenty of ink, and it manages to come across as totally believable that Mary would come to see this guy as a protector and a friend. The various twists and turns that the movie throws our way also reveal themselves in a way that are both surprising and NOT annoying. The ending twist also absolutely floored me as an 11-year-old, and I suspect would also be quite surprising to first-time viewers these days. Oh, and the use of Vera Miles, co-star of the original movie? Absolutely perfect. *** 1/2 out of ****. It's got one or two minor quibbles in the form of the opening setup, but it quickly gives way to a suspenseful, very entertaining little flick that actually IS worthy of the Hitchcock stamp. Check this one out.
|
|
Lick Ness Monster
Dennis Stamp
From the eerie, eerie depths of Lake Okabena
Posts: 4,874
|
Post by Lick Ness Monster on Apr 17, 2015 18:16:06 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by greenlantern2814 on Apr 19, 2015 19:49:36 GMT -5
Great review of Night School! I discovered at my old job one day when I was organizing our vhs horror section. The copy was pretty beat up but I was all about scary movies back then and decided to give it a go. I thought it was a bit above average but nothing to write home about.
|
|
Lick Ness Monster
Dennis Stamp
From the eerie, eerie depths of Lake Okabena
Posts: 4,874
|
Post by Lick Ness Monster on Apr 21, 2015 8:31:52 GMT -5
The "Psycho" sequelfest continues. This time with 100% more Jeff Fahey. 1986 Directed by Anthony Perkins Starring Perkins, Diana Scarwid, Jeff Fahey and Roberta Maxwell All personal biases aside, some of my favorite movies as a kid forgotten about, if someone had told me that Alfred Hitchcock's Psycho would have a series of sequels that would (a) keep the same damn main actor, and (b) actually manage to be pretty damn good in their own right, I would have said you're insane. Alas, that's what we continue to get with the third film in the franchise, with Anthony Perkins himself stepping in the director's chair and a bit more focus on dark stuff and a cast of people who actually take the material that they're presented seriously. This very easily could have been the high-end horror franchise of the '80s. Unfortunately, Psycho III was a bit of a flop. The second movie made its budget back seven times over, but this one struggled big time in that regard. Maybe it was that four-year gap between sequels; this was at a time when horror moved at light speed, with the big franchises pumping out new theatrical installments sometimes within ten months of each other, but this movie was expected to be a BIG DEAL. Hell, it even got a music video. Youtube it. FORTUNATELY, it's been released on DVD many times and can be appreciated today for its entertainment value and good performances, so let's get right to the aspect of these reviews that everyone just adores: the plot description. This whole review is going to be very spoilerish when it comes to the ending of Psycho II, so readers take heed. That movie ended with the kindly old Emma Spool revealing herself to be Norman's real mother, followed immediately by Norman whacking her over the head with a shovel and taking her upstairs to pick up right where he left off. Appropriately enough, this movie picks up almost immediately where THAT left off. What we've got in Psycho III is essentially an amped-up version of the first movie - the mystery aspect is gone, with frequent conversations between Norman and "Mother" peppered in between a few murder scenes, which, while graphic in nature, are again tame in comparison to the the many like-styled films of the era. Once again, we've also got a movie that is very heavy on atmosphere. The movie introduces us to its main anciliary character before we spend any time with Norman - disgraced nun Maureen Coyle, hitchhiking around the California desert after being kicked out of her convent in a suicide attempt gone horribly wrong. Diana Scarwid is fantastic as Coyle. Dare I say it, she's more empathetic than Janet Leigh in the original movie. She has a skeevy meeting with wannabe rock star Duane Duke (the always enjoyable Jeff Fahey) while out on the road, and in one of those movie coincidences that you just love, Duke later shows up at the Bates Motel looking to answer the "Help Wanted" sign. Maureen showing up at the hotel is the event that really kicks the movie into high gear. We get something resembling a romance between Norman and Maureen; it's occasionally awkward but also occasionally believable, and if that's not a ringing endorsement, I don't know what is. During this section of the movie, we get some conversations between Norman and Mother that used to creep the holy hell out of me as a 12-year-old. As you can imagine, Mother is none too thrilled about this new woman in Norman's life, and we get a couple "substitute" murders in the process - one of them being Juliette Cummins of Friday the 13th Part V relative fame. Our other principal character is reporter Tracy Venable (Roberta Maxwell), a somewhat dislikable shrew out to prove that Norman had something to do with the disappearance of Emma Spool. The script by Charles Edward Pogue does a decent job balancing out all of these various chess pieces in varying degrees of success. By and large, the acting isn't QUITE as strong this time around, with Maxwell standing out as the weak link in that core four, but it's a minor complaint. We've got some good horror stuff this time around - my favorite bits are Cummins' murder, Norman's showdown with Duke and the bit where the hapless town sheriff pops ice cubes into his mouth, not noticing that they're covered with the blood of a recent victim. Oh, and the final twist is one of those shockers that really does hit you in the gut like ONLY a good horror movie can. I'll just leave that up to the viewer to discover what that event is. Overall, Psycho III is a pretty damn good movie. The cast of characters this time around isn't quite as captivating as it was in the first two films, but it makes up for it with a bit more visceral quality in regards to the horror and the again superb performance by Anthony Perkins as Norman. He also shows a deft hand as a director, and it's a shame he didn't get to helm more horror films. *** out of ****. HIGHLY recommended for fans of the series and Norman Bates himself, and strongly recommended for horror fans at large.
|
|
|
Post by Kash Flagg on Apr 25, 2015 20:32:03 GMT -5
Watched Unfriended tonight. It's built on a gimmick (it all takes place during a skype chat) but it really works well. It's not something that can really be duplicated (but Lord knows people will try) but it's worth a watch. And I'm the guy who usually hates new horror films.
|
|
Lick Ness Monster
Dennis Stamp
From the eerie, eerie depths of Lake Okabena
Posts: 4,874
|
Post by Lick Ness Monster on Apr 28, 2015 8:35:21 GMT -5
I've heard a few people talk about Unfriended, and the feedback is almost universally positive. Might have to check that one out. The "Psycho"-thon concludes this week on the ol' blog in the rare prequel that manages to, you know, not suck. 1990 Directed by Mick Garris Starring Anthony Perkins, Henry Thomas, Olivia Hussey and C.C.H. Pounder So we're up to this - the first Psycho movie I ever saw, accompanied by skits involving Gilbert Gottfried attempting to find a videotape of the original movie in his mother's house that made 12-year-old me cackle with delight. Man, 1995 was a better, simpler time. Seeing this movie first, it's just occurred to me that I actually saw the events the way they unfolded in Norman Bates' life in - somewhat - chronological order, because what we've got here is a prequel. I know, uh oh. Well, there's no need for the 'uh oh' here, because this is the extremely rare example of a prequel that does NOT suck. It isn't great, but it manages to tell its past story with a great deal of flair while also having a present-day story that sucks you in. That final bit really is the key; a lot of movie series that delve into the past for an entry just start in ancient history and stay there. Joseph Stefano takes a different approach here and it paid off with a movie that, while not as good as the series at its peak (and I'm not even counting the Hitchcock original - that one is untouchable), still has a lot going for it. Especially in the acting department. That should about do the "background" phase of this review - let's get to the show. The script by Joseph Stefano (amazingly enough, the guy who penned the screenplay for the original film) has a pretty ingenious little setup. Radio talk show host Fran Ambrose (C.C.H. Pounder) is doing a show on the subject of matricide. It also brings back Dr. Richmond (Warren Frost), the psychologist from the original film who gives that long-winded explanation that pretty much every snooty film professor hates with a burning passion. Well, wouldn't you know it, Norman Bates himself listens to the Fran Ambrose Show and calls in to recount his own personal experience with matricide. As an added bonus, he also throws in the fact that he is about to kill somebody again. More on that later. While Norman hasn't given the show his identity yet, it becomes clear to Dr. Richmond as the story unfolds. The young version of Norman is played by Henry Thomas of E.T. fame, and I give him seventeen stars compared to that dude who played the young Hannibal Lecter. But the movie's real ace is Olivia Hussey. Simultaneously mean to the max and strangely sexy as Norma Bates, we go through the whole gamut of madness with this character. We see almost every key event that has only been hinted at during the series as mythology, starting with the funeral of Norman's father, various cruel jokes that mother plays on Norman, the introduction of the boyfriend that led to the murder...and the death of mother herself. The stuff with Norma's new beau is particularly powerful, with these two essentially ganging up to embarrass Norman at every turn. By the time that poisoned tea hits the stage, you REALLY want these two to get some comeuppance. These bits really are fascinating stuff. They give life to images that we've concocted in our minds throughout the three previous movies, and they actually manage to do this in a way that doesn't feel annoying or disappointing. There are also a couple out-of-sequence bits from the past involving Norman's two original murders before that fateful evening that Marion Crane showed up at the Bates Motel. In between all of this, we spend a LOT of time inside the creepy house, and I've got to hand it to the set designers here because they did a phenomenal job dressing up the inside of this building (built on the Universal Studios Theme Park lot, according to the ever-accurate Wikipedia). Mazel Tov to the past section of the film, because it was quite simply phenomanally done. What ISN'T so well done is the movie's present story. Once again out on parole, Norman is married now - to his psychiatrist in the institution, no less. It seems that she has gone against his wishes and gotten pregnant, and this is just simply unacceptable. So unacceptable that she has to DIE. I've never found the character of Connie Bates to be particularly likable, and the actress playing her doesn't do much more to make her stand out. So much that I can't even be bothered to look at Wikipedia to learn her name. All of this leads to a finale sequence in the modern-day version of the Bates Motel that starts off as a little eye-rolling but eventually redeems itself with a series of surprises. And that ending? Yikes. Chilling stuff. I was once involved in a debate with a fellow horror fan about the direct-to-TV/direct-to-video genre. This guy made the claim that there has NEVER been such a thing as a non-theatrical horror film, and I vehemently disagree. While they are pretty few and far between, they DO exist, and this is one of them, as Psycho IV bypassed theaters and saw the light of day on the Showtime Network. Again, the acting is what makes this stick out, with Perkins again being game for his signature role and C.C.H. Pounder acing it as the radio show host. But this really is a movie that belongs to Thomas and Hussey. They have the most screen time, and they deliver all the goods when asked. It's enough to bring the movie past its hokey third act and make it essential viewing for anyone who has followed this incredibly underrated series this far, and it's a fitting capper, as well, since everything that has come after is one of those newfangled, slick, overthought TV series that I have come to despise so much. Not that I'm biased or anything. *** out of ****. One of the best DTV/DTTV horror films ever made, and it's worth watching just for the acting alone. Check it out.
|
|
Lick Ness Monster
Dennis Stamp
From the eerie, eerie depths of Lake Okabena
Posts: 4,874
|
Post by Lick Ness Monster on May 5, 2015 8:29:04 GMT -5
New blog post in honor of 35 years of Friday the 13th. Slasher cinema FTW. Bleeding Green: The Five Best Friday the 13th Trailers May 9, 1980. For those of you unfamiliar with the significance of this date, it was on THIS DAY (shocking twist) some thirty-five years ago that the original Friday the 13th was released in theaters. Based upon nothing more than his own bravery/stupidity and the insane amount of buzz that its advertising campaign had created, Frank Mancuso Sr. decided to take a big gamble and unleash the movie with the stunning Variety ad, unknown cast and whole heaping of gore nationwide, giving it the treatment that only blockbuster movies got before it. How many sequels again? It's safe to say that move paid off. Yes, folks, Friday the 13th is 35 this week, and it all started as a huge gamble. That's not to say that the gamble was not a CALCULATED one, however, as the wizards at Paramount had done a phenomenal job selling this movie prior to that release. The magazine ad (bought by Sean Cunningham prior to filming) was only one part. The rest, from the TV campaign to the theatrical trailer, all focused on one aspect of the movie's plot and beat it down our throats. It was a device that had been hinted at in several previous horror films, but this was the one that took one very potent moral and decided to bring it to the forefront of slasher cinema. This movie featured lots of kids having sex. And you could bet your ass that the ones that did were about to get offed. Whether or not you agree with that as the idea that the marketing crew was going for doesn't matter. It's safe to say that it worked. Again, how many sequels? And we owe it all to a few ads and a big-time trailer. And that is what we're looking at this week - this holy week in horror history when the greatest slasher franchise of all time came to be. We're looking at the first impression that many people had of not only this movie, but almost every movie ever in existence. Well, from a certain date onward, anyway. I'm not looking up when trailers first became a thing, because I don't get paid by the hour for these write-ups. On with the countdown! 5. This trailer is a textbook example of light and shade. By this point, the series had established Jason's M.O. very well, and the opening shots remind us that he's dead. But not really. The voice gives us the awesome poster taglines...and then the trailer turns busy. Moreso than any movie in the original eight films (and really, those are the ones that count), The Final Chapter is the one with the most money scenes, and the editing here really does a good job promising us that some hardcore stuff was about to happen without giving us all the grisly details. Jason's Unlucky Day indeed. 4. This one is a choice at least partially inspired by anticipation. Folks, you have no clue just how much this movie was talked about in various online forums around the time I first DISCOVERED online forums. On horror fans' wishlist since the mid-'80s, this trailer did not disappoint when it came to promising us the main event between the two biggest icons of the modern era. It gives us virtually nothing in the way of plot, and that's just the way it should have been - that's Freddy and Jason up there on the screen together, and how it happens should be left for us to speculate. 3. The one that started it all. I've spoken to a few horror fans that find this trailer irreparably cheesy. They might have a point in some regards, but screw it, I'm still going with this one. I love the "countdown" aspect of the whole thing, peppered with promised deaths to be seen in this forbidden movie (some of which didn't even turn out to be actual deaths). It's also got plenty of teasing when it comes to that pesky premarital sex and this was one movie in question circa 1980 audiences were WAY into. Like, to the tune of "biggest non- Empirep box office gross of 1980" into. 2. And now we get to my personal favorite trailers in the entire series. Once again, it's time for some LESS IS MORE put on display. There's virtually nothing to this trailer, outside of the iconic Frank Sinatra song, the reveal of Jason, and plenty of screaming teens - and it's absolutely perfect. Jason's in New York, he's pissed, and s**t is about to go down. Of course, what actually wound up HAPPENING in the movie (as it might as well have been called Jason Takes The Ship) doesn't even matter, because had I seen this in cinemas in 1989 I would have been ridiculously stoked. 1. My personal favorite of all the F13 trailers is yet more LESS IS MORE. Audiences had just sat through the guilty pleasure but technically awful New Beginning featuring a killer paramedic disguising himself as the boy in blue. By and large, audiences just wanted Jason back. Would this happen? This trailer answered that question, complete with some admittedly VERY unnerving music, a rainstorm for added atmosphere, a lightning bolt, and that great shot of the casket popping out of the dirt. It all works, it's all perfect, and it piques your curiosity to see more. A+++. Looking deep into the history of this series, it immediately becomes apparent that Paramount somewhat resented its successful franchise. You would never guess it from looking at the trailers, as every single one of them (yes, even the ones not listed) seem to get the atmosphere, the fun and the basic moral storytelling that the series became famous for, all while remembering that moviemaking is a business and needs to sell tickets. As Friday the 13th turns 35, the videos above are evidence of all of that. Campfire scary stories are vital morality tales, they're marketable...oh yeah, and they can make loads of cash. Happy 35th, Jason!!
|
|
Lick Ness Monster
Dennis Stamp
From the eerie, eerie depths of Lake Okabena
Posts: 4,874
|
Post by Lick Ness Monster on May 12, 2015 9:26:15 GMT -5
The blog is back with a certifed 3.5 star review. A movie that I've never seen and actually want to see again! High praise coming from this guy. 2005 Directed by Scott Derrickson Starring Laura Linney, Tom Wilkinson, Campbell Scott, Colm Feore and Jennifer Carpenter How did this movie escape my radar until now? If memory serves me correctly, I was in college in 2005, doing my best to concentrate on doing anything but going to class and spending a lot of that time catching almost every horror movie that hit the multiplexes. I remember the buzz about The Exorcism of Emily Rose at the time. More than a few people that I knew even TOLD me that I needed to see the movie. Yet here we are ten years later and I'm watching it on a rainy Friday morning. That really is a shame. This movie is pretty damn good; it's the kind of character-centric horror flick that I've come to appreciate like an aged wine over the years in the wake of so many movies these days that don't inspire an ounce of sympathy for anyone in it. Anymore, almost ALL characters in a given horror movie are vaguely hateable high-school kids/twenty-somethings, or they're just oblivious parents in the "ghost movies" that dot the landscape. They're not like the characters in this movie, three-dimensional people with MOTIVATIONS (gasp) and EMOTIONAL RESONANCE (more gasp). It's that aspect of the movie that actually kept me awake during my zombie state after getting off work at the glorious time of 8:00 a.m. That, and I'm a sucker for religious-themed horror movies, particularly ones that boast intermittent creepy moments like this one does. The framing device for The Exorcism of Emily Rose is fairly unique among horror movies. It starts with the death of the titular main character, a 19-year-old girl who believes herself to be possessed by demons. This revelation is followed up by the second revelation that the Priest who performed a recent exorcism may be complicit in her death. That's your setup, folks, as Father Moore (Wilkinson) finds himself locked behind bars with his own church pretty much disowning him so as to avoid the bad publicity that the death entails. Considering that she died of self-inflicted wounds combined with severe malnutrition, it seems like a sound move on paper. The movie's main character is lawyer Erin Bruener. Played by Laura Linney, an Oscar nominee and certifiable hottie if you've ever seen the otherwise godawful film Maze, she's a lawyer who finds herself defending Moore with the promise of a partner spot. I think you know where we're going from here, as the skeptical lawyer gradually finds herself believing more and more in the claims of possession. It's a plot device that isn't noted for its minty freshness (Lick Ness Monster cliche favorite phrase there, kids), but I've rarely seen it played out with as much emotion as it is here. The acting here by both Linney and Wilkinson is top notch. The relationship that they create starts out rocky, but by the time Erin's closing argument is heard, we buy every ounce of the emotion. And yes, folks, what we have in this movie is a courtroom procedural. I actually enjoyed this aspect of the movie a great deal, although this is where we get the movie's one flaw. The prosecuting attorney is pretty much a cartoon character, with Campbell Scott standing out as the weak link in the movie's fantastic cast. That bit of bitching aside, this is where we get the story of Emily Rose told in flashbacks. The entire history of her possession is laid out for us in this manner, with Scott delivering a douchy opening statement provided by his endless array of doctors who all testify to the belief that Emily was not possessed by demons but rather a victim of epilepsy. Because that diagnosis is always spot on in these movies. This is followed by Erin Bruener attempting to prove that Emily WAS possessed, with a key piece of audiotape evidence being the real shining star of this sequence. It also provides us with some of our best shock material. The horror of this movie comes in the form of snippets; we don't get the whole truth, and after watching two Exorcist prequels, it's a move that is much appreciated. Jennifer Carpenter is simply fantastic Emily, a young college student who is the perfect picture of innocence before a group of no less than SIX hellspawns make it their mission to mess the hell out of her world invade her body. According to the ever-accurate Wikipedia, she performed almost all of her bodily contortions herself. Get this woman a special Takako Fuji mention in the international horror hall of fame. With her suffering family looking on, this woman will unnerve you every time she appears onscreen from a certain point on. When the courtroom drama makes its way up to the eventual exorcism, she's evil incarnate buried underneath that innocent shell. Advance word of warning: this is a movie primarily concerned with spirituality, or lack thereof. As such, it might turn off some viewers. If it doesn't, however, I can't recommend a better way to spend a couple hours than with this flick. Linney and Carpenter are both great, and Wilkinson manages to put tons of genuine soul into Father Moore to the point that by the time that verdict comes in you're holding your breath. Correct use of the words "you're" and "your" FTW in that previous sentence. *** 1/2 out of ****. A great movie in a great horror subgenre, and Carpenter's performance is up there with the greats in any horror movie I've seen. Check it out.
|
|
Lick Ness Monster
Dennis Stamp
From the eerie, eerie depths of Lake Okabena
Posts: 4,874
|
Post by Lick Ness Monster on May 18, 2015 19:13:16 GMT -5
This week in the blog, it's time for one of Wes Craven's recent OTHER (interpret that however you want) flicks. And it kinda sucks. 2005 Directed by Wes Craven Starring Christina Ricci, Joshua Jackson, Jesse Eisenberg and Judy Greer Oh, Wes Craven, what happened to you, man? I really dug Red Eye, his 2005 effort that came a little bit after this flick and seemed to be a good departure into more mainstream thriler fare. But then came the insanely insipid My Soul to Take. And don't even get me started on the snake-eating-itself metaphor that was Scream 4. Even at his BEST, Craven always was maddeningly inconsistent, but the amazing dip that the dude has taken over the past decade really is something to behold. Which brings me back to Cursed. It starts a bizarre mix of "just past their peak of fame" actors and up-and-coming stars, but it's the movie's STORY that is truly befuddling. Scripted by Kevin Williamson, it offers us the usual "Diablo Cody before Diablo Cody" teen dialogue, and it's got more than a few truly out-there plot twists that I admittedly didn't see coming. But not in the "oh, that's so cool and unexpected" way. More in a "what the f**k is this?" kind of way. As refreshing as I found Williamson's style in 1997, I've now come to the realization that this tone is something that instantly turns me off in movies - the way-too-out-there snarkiness and the overly clever-for-the-sake-of-being clever characterizations are like the cinematic equivalent of nails on a chalkboard, and it's an attitude that invades this movie and infects it like the CGI wolves that dot the landscape. No more stalling. Time to get to it. Your star characters for the film are, refreshingly enough, a brother and sister. Christina Ricci and Jesse Eisenburg star as Ellie and Jimmy, respectively, and all bit of bullshit removed are decent enough in their roles. Ricci in particular is something of a mystery for me; this lady was RIGHT there around the turn of the century as far as hitting the major major leagues, but she never made it there for whatever reason. Probably because every pervy director in the country wanted to get her naked and she wouldn't wilt on that until her star had already faded. But I digress. Ellie is essentially in charge of Jimmy after the death of their parents, and Jimmy is having all kinds of difficulty with school bullies. The lead bully is also played by Milo Ventimiglia, who starred in Heroes and got to bang Hayden Panettiere for a while. Yeah. And now you know. Within ten minutes of the opening credits, Ellie and Jimmy are involved in a car accident and are summarily attacked by a huge beast afterwards. In addition to that, a floozy played by Shannen Elizabeth is killed in this same sequence. Don't say that this movie doesn't pack on the cameos. For those keeping score, it also has R&B singer Mya (boner), Portia de Rossi, Lance Bass, Craig Kilborn, and SCOTT BAIO, but enough about that. Jimmy begins researching the creature that bit them after their horrific car accident, and believes that he and his sister are about to become werewolves. From here, we get the requisite "character switch" portion of the movie. The normally reserved and professional Ellie starts dressing moderately slutty at work and exhibiting a lot more confidence with her jock-ass boyfriend Jake (Joshua Jackson, another guy who slipped through the cracks of stardom around this time). We also get sweet retribution for Jimmy as he gets to beat up on his bullies and impress the girl that he's been pining for. Now, I like the "nerd revenge" plot device, but I've grown to really hate that "meek guy loves the nice girl who has a douchebag boyfriend" plot device. It doesn't make characters any more heroic, it just makes them emo, and it's just as annoying here. While all of this is going on, Ellie and Jimmy become aware of a series of murders taking place across Los Angeles, with Jimmy now fully convinced that the rampage is connected to them in some way. Spoiler alert: it is. We don't get much in the way of scares here. The movie's best sequence belongs to Mya, who gets ripped to pieces by a werewolf in a pretty nifty parking garage chase sequence. Unfortunately, said sequence falls apart once we get our first full-body glimpse of the wolf. It looks fantastic in close-up, with the creature effects by Rick Baker taking center stage. And man, if this movie isn't a metaphor for modern-day special effects and why I can't get into almost any mega-budget action movie anymore, because the CGI is just terrible. Handmade effects, at times, actually do look real. CGI just looks like cartoon bullshit, and this movie is the proof of that statement. It takes me right out of the movie almost any time I see it, and it's never been any more apparent than in Cursed. Thus, the movie fails pretty handily to scare audiences - both because of its incredibly slow middle section and because of how ridiculous the creature effects look. It doesn't even have the benefit of jump scares; it's just one unimaginative stalking sequence after another. Once the actual IDENTITY of the werewolves becomes known, it turns even more ridiculous, with Williamson's script turning in one-liners and sight gags at the worst moments. That is actually the tragedy of this movie - with a more serious approach, and with this cast, this actually could have been a really nifty werewolf movie with a sibling duo fighting like hell to escape the death warrant that they have inadvertently found themselves under. As it unfolds, we're left with just another faux clever meta-humor infused joke factory "horror" flick, and I've just seen one too many of those. The movie actually does have a saving grace - the aforementioned cast. Both Ricci and Eisenburg put tons of emotion and heart into their performances, and we actually do care about these characters by the time the final credits tick by. Some of the cameos are also a treat, with Baio's bit in particular being good for a couple chuckles. It's a shame that the script doesn't do them any favors. * 1/2 out of ****. Sadly not recommended, and it's another MISFIRE in the strange "memorable hit" to "miss" ratio in the career of Wes Craven.
|
|
|
Post by GuyOfOwnage on May 21, 2015 10:17:29 GMT -5
Craven's greatest triumphs were in the 70s and 80s. Once the 90s hit, with the exception of New Nightmare and the first Scream, he just seemed to be plain out of ideas. And movies like this one make it painfully obvious.
|
|
Lick Ness Monster
Dennis Stamp
From the eerie, eerie depths of Lake Okabena
Posts: 4,874
|
Post by Lick Ness Monster on May 24, 2015 16:09:36 GMT -5
Craven's greatest triumphs were in the 70s and 80s. Once the 90s hit, with the exception of New Nightmare and the first Scream, he just seemed to be plain out of ideas. And movies like this one make it painfully obvious. Yeah, I'm inclined to agree. Once everyone else started copying the meta-humor aspects of those two movies, it essentially zapped out Craven's originality, and almost everything that has come since has been pretty painful. Earlier than usual, it's time for another blog review. 2011 Directed by James Wan Starring Patrick Wilson, Rose Byrne and Barbara Hershey I'm on record with my like of "evil ghost" movies. They've done an admirable job reinvigorating the horror genre in recent years, dragging it out of the muck that was the nonstop barrage of remakes that peppered the landscape throughout much of the '00s and the intermittent "atritionary torture" films in the Saw/Hostel vein. Having said that, I also think that they've more or less run their course by now and, much like Owen Hart, it's time for a change. That's not to say that there haven't been some very quality flicks in this subgenre. The one in question today is a good starting point. James Wan is the guy behind the director's chair for many of the ghost movies, and Insidious has actually turned into an honest-to-goodness franchise before anyone has even realized it. I have yet to check out the sequels, mainly due to the maddening ending in this movie, but I'm told that they're also a good, fun time in theaters that don't require you to think too much. A description that fits much, much better than, say, The Avengers: Age of Ultron. Having checked out this movie for the first time since I saw it in a packed movie house, I actually found it to be a bit better than I remembered, and it's as good of a starting point as any into the realm of Creepy Demon movies. Bare essentials time: you've seen this movie a bunch of times before. It's all in the execution, and fortunately James Wan knows how to execute. A new family moves into a creepy house. There's father Josh (Wilson), mother Renai (Byrne), sons Dalton and Foster and infant daughter Cali. Throughout the first act, we get intermittent incidents that tell us something is NOT RIGHT with this house (cue dreadful dreary music). Fortunately, the story doesn't waste much time with this conceit as one of the sons promptly falls out of the attic and soon falls into something else...a coma. It's a plot device that I haven't seen before in this kind of film, and it works really well. After months of treatment without result, Josh and Renai begin to notice with increasing voracity that, yes, indeed, something is NOT QUITE RIGHT with this house. That's the last time I make that lame joke, I promise. There is actually one jump scare that did a number on me in the theater involving the dark figure that Renai sees in their daughter's room, and the scripting of this portion of the movie is done very well, building a sense of dread while giving the audience a good inkling of what the family is going through in a way that is only periodically melodramatic. So +2 points to the movie there. Once the spiritual brigade gets involved, however, the movie really cranks it up the 11. As the incidents pile up, Josh and Renai call in the best set of paranormal investigators this side of Poltergeist. How good? One of them is played by Lin Shaye. So eat it. Shaye is the leader of this team, a psychic who can immediately tell that there is an otherworldly presence in the house and explains that Dalton - a kid with the ability to travel to "The Astral Plane" - has traveled too far into something that she calls the "Further" and is in essence stuck in limbo. Only Dalton has brought back a demon. The final third of the movie consists of the usual seance/exorcism sequences that films like this bank on. The script shows some creativity by making Josh into this movie's JoBeth Williams, as he connects these incidents to a series of creepy happenings from his own childhood involving an old woman that he used to be tormented by as a child. The only way to save Dalton is for him to venture into the Further himself, and that's our confrontation. There are a few unintentional laughs in this sequence in regards to the way that the demon actually LOOKS, but thankfully we only get fleeting glimpses of him. An then we get the wholly depressing, completely devoid of any hope ending that no doubt set up the sequel, the prequel, and the seventeen films that will no doubt be forthcoming. Ending aside, Insidious has a lot going for it. Wilson is excellent as the rare MALE who gets the strong hero role in a movie of this nature, while Byrne does decent enough as the concerned, worrying mother. Wan's directing style is one that does depend on jump scares, but they're jump scares that are based on things that actually WOULD scare us if they were around. As opposed to, you know, bullshit like dogs or cats jumping out of shadows. The movie loses some steam when the paranormal investigators become involved, because we've seen that part of the movie many times before. That momentum is regained in the finale in a big way, and while this is a good movie, I can't help but think that this story was one that could have been wrapped up just fine and been an all-time great in the ghost genre as a single film. If not for that ending. Man. *** out of ****. Highly recommended if you're a fan of the evil ghost subgenre. For everyone else, it's worth a rental. Check it out.
|
|
|
Post by GuyOfOwnage on May 25, 2015 6:31:32 GMT -5
You know, I must admit, for all the hype this thing received when it came out a few years back, I've still yet to see it. I guess I saw James Wan attached to it and thought it would immediately suffer from jump-scare-itis, an overused device in the past 15 or so years that has come to annoy the piss out of me. It's the same reason I've been hesitant to check out The Conjuring. There's a reason they call them horror films, not mildly-startled films. But if the notoriously picky TR gives it such high regards, I'm going to have to give it a look. For what it's worth, I'd be quite interested to see what you think of the sequel.
|
|
Lick Ness Monster
Dennis Stamp
From the eerie, eerie depths of Lake Okabena
Posts: 4,874
|
Post by Lick Ness Monster on May 25, 2015 13:48:39 GMT -5
You know, I must admit, for all the hype this thing received when it came out a few years back, I've still yet to see it. I guess I saw James Wan attached to it and thought it would immediately suffer from jump-scare-itis, an overused device in the past 15 or so years that has come to annoy the piss out of me. It's the same reason I've been hesitant to check out The Conjuring. There's a reason they call them horror films, not mildly-startled films. But if the notoriously picky TR gives it such high regards, I'm going to have to give it a look. For what it's worth, I'd be quite interested to see what you think of the sequel. Eh, I wouldn't say that I LOVED Insidious or anything. But the best thing about it is that it really wasn't much of a jump scare movie. For the most part, it tries to go the creepy route rather than the "mildly startled" route. On a side note, it's good to see you back, Guy.
|
|
|
Post by GuyOfOwnage on May 29, 2015 10:51:02 GMT -5
You know, I must admit, for all the hype this thing received when it came out a few years back, I've still yet to see it. I guess I saw James Wan attached to it and thought it would immediately suffer from jump-scare-itis, an overused device in the past 15 or so years that has come to annoy the piss out of me. It's the same reason I've been hesitant to check out The Conjuring. There's a reason they call them horror films, not mildly-startled films. But if the notoriously picky TR gives it such high regards, I'm going to have to give it a look. For what it's worth, I'd be quite interested to see what you think of the sequel. Eh, I wouldn't say that I LOVED Insidious or anything. But the best thing about it is that it really wasn't much of a jump scare movie. For the most part, it tries to go the creepy route rather than the "mildly startled" route. On a side note, it's good to see you back, Guy. Yeah, it feels nice to be posting in here again. I had some personal matters to attend to these past few years that kept me away more often than not. So I came across a trailer for a new film called Unfriended the other day. The fact that it's endorsed by MTV has me a bit skeptical, but if nothing else, it's stylistically more unique than a lot of "found footage" films I've seen, what with the whole Skype thing going for it. I'd at least be willing to give it a try once it comes out on DVD/Blu-ray later this year. Also, has anyone here seen a film by the name of Frozen? No, not the obscenely popular Disney film, but rather, a 2010 horror film created by the people behind the Hatchet series. The trailer surprised me and actually made me want to hunt it down. Anyone here seen it?
|
|
Lick Ness Monster
Dennis Stamp
From the eerie, eerie depths of Lake Okabena
Posts: 4,874
|
Post by Lick Ness Monster on May 31, 2015 11:15:42 GMT -5
Seen both. Unfriended is pretty damn good - it's way more satisfying than any found footage movie I've seen since the original Paranormal Activity, damn clever and with a snappy ending to boot. I'd highly recommend it. And I actually liked Frozen better than Hatchet, which I found to be cool and visceral but very uninspired. Call it glandular. Anyway, I'd say check both flicks out.
|
|
Lick Ness Monster
Dennis Stamp
From the eerie, eerie depths of Lake Okabena
Posts: 4,874
|
Post by Lick Ness Monster on May 31, 2015 19:13:59 GMT -5
Well, damn, this news sucks to report. www.startribune.com/betsy-palmer-dies-was-killer-cook-in-friday-the-13th/305623511/I must say that this death hits me harder than any celebrity death...maybe ever. I met this lady at a horror convention once, and she was just the nicest, most personable human being you would ever run across. It doesn't matter that she thought the script was "s**t" (her exact words), or that she only took the role to pay for a new car. I completely bought her as a murderous, vengeful mother, then and now. For my money, she put forth one of the most iconic villain performances in any film, and the fact that the F13 franchise has gone 12 (and soon to be 13) feature films owes a huge debt to her. RIP, Ms. Palmer.
|
|
|
Post by DSR on May 31, 2015 20:41:52 GMT -5
"Kill her, mommy! Don't let her live." I won't, Jason!
Mrs. Voorhees is iconic. RIP Betsy Palmer.
|
|
|
Post by GuyOfOwnage on May 31, 2015 22:37:02 GMT -5
Man, I just...wow. I mean I knew she was getting up there, but she just seemed like one of those celebrities that (much like Mrs. Voorhees' baby boy) would just never die. I wish I'd gotten the chance to meet her, she seemed like such a sweet lady who appreciated the fans so much. RIP.
|
|
Lick Ness Monster
Dennis Stamp
From the eerie, eerie depths of Lake Okabena
Posts: 4,874
|
Post by Lick Ness Monster on Jun 1, 2015 20:48:34 GMT -5
Took a break from reviews this week on the ol' blog to say a few (more) words about Betsy Palmer. I'm not going to post the entire thing here, because it's more or less just an expanded version of everything I've already said in this thread. I'll just post the link. Check it out if you're so inclined. licknessmonster.blogspot.com/2015/06/betsy-palmer-memories.html
|
|