Hook Me Up

I'm not much of a TV person and it wasn't until I met my wife that I became anything close to a moviephile, but a good TV series (say, The Walking Dead) or a good movie (28 Days Later) can reel me in (Heh! Get it? "Reel me in." Movie reel. Okay, onward).

But finding good shows or movies to watch can be hard because there's just so much crap out there. Too often, the trailers for the movies or shows contain all the good stuff and the rest is just filler, and bad filler at that. Worse, a director can do really good things with a movie, but gets stuck in how to get out of the box he's created and so comes up with a lame ending. A lot of times I'm left feeling there's a lot of film that's been left on the cutting room floor.

However, lately I've become addicted to a resource that's at least leading me in the right direction to really good cinema: Hook's Haunted Hollow.

I'm not sure how I found his blog, but I started tuning in lately and I've found it's just a wealth of movie and TV show trailers and links for stuff that's coming out that looks like it's going to be awesome. For example, there's an indie movie that just came out called The Tunnel, about an Australian news crew doing a story on an abandoned subway system in Sydney. Thinking it was more a story about homeless people going missing, they find there's a lot more going on beneath their feet than anyone could imagine.

I had seen a trailer for the movie and thought it looked really cool, but then Hook's blog posted the filmmakers were offering a free, legal download of the movie -- in high-def even. I immediately downloaded and watched it yesterday and it was every bit as good as I thought it was going to be. I wouldn't have known about the free download had it not been for Hook's post.



Then there's the regular updates about the coming movie Super 8, several new TV shows coming out this year that look very cool -- The River, Awake, and Person of Interest -- and more. The man's got way too much time on his hands to be finding and posting all these links, trailers, and updates, but I'm glad he does. I'm pretty much a couch potato as it is (though my laptop is usually in hand rather than the TV remote), but I may never have a reason to get up with all the cool stuff he's finding.

If you're the least bit interested at all in horror, thriller, and even sci-fi-ish stuff (he's got Green Lantern updates, X-Men, and Transformers too) you must check out and follow Hook's Haunted Hollow. Really, it's simply a convenient way to stay on top of the best these genres have coming out. It's definitely on my daily, must-read list.

A Critical Eye

I received an email the other day from the producer of an indie film called "All God's Creatures," which apparently is an official selection of the 2011 Hoboken International Film Festival. The movie's world premiere is being held in Teaneck on June 4, and they've invited me to a screening of the show. Seeing as it's in my hometown, I can't pass up the chance.

From the email, the movie is "a dark love story about a young serial killer, Jon Smith, and a young prostitute, Delia Maitlin, who unintentionally and unexpectedly find love; a very dangerous love." Interesting premise.

It was shot on a budget of $25,000 but the trailers seem to have some good production values to them. In the site's main trailer (sorry, they don't have an embed code) the first clip is accompanied by one of the movie's signature soundtracks, "Ted Bundy Was a Lady's Man" by Des Roar, and it's actually pretty catchy. 

While I've accepted the invitation, I haven't as yet heard back from them so maybe they've decided against it. We'll see, but I'd be interested in seeing the movie. So long as they don't expect rave reviews simply for inviting me. I can't be bought (yeah right!). If I hear back from them I'll do a complete review.

A Pinch of Arsenic

One of my favorite movies of all time is Arsenic & Old Lace. I first saw it when I was around 13 years old, staying up late and watching some TV around 2 a.m. (remember, before they played the National Anthem and the test pattern would come on...whenever I'd find my Dad asleep in the chair with the TV on he'd tell me that was his favorite show).


I recall thinking the movie was the funniest show I'd seen and it's stayed with me through the years as I enjoyed catching it occasionally on TV. I rented it from Netflix the other day, and was surprised to see it was actually a Halloween movie; it's even mentioned in the opening graphics and kids come by trick-or-treating. I had never noticed that about the movie before, but then again I wasn't into Halloween as much as I am these days.

Of course, I'd wonder about houses that give out entire jack-o-lanterns as treat, but maybe that's what they did back then. There are few movies I can watch over and over again, particularly black-and-white ones (it's heresy, I tell you, what Ted Turner's doing to old movies by colorizing them!) but Arsenic & Old Lace happens to be one of them. I mean, who wouldn't want to be Teddy Roosevelt and charge up San Juan Hill every time you had to go upstairs?

Review: Devil

When I first heard M. Night Shyamalan was coming out with a new movie, my first reaction was...yawn! I haven't liked a movie of his since The Sixth Sense, and even then I was underwhelmed. At the time I didn't realize what the problem was but having been punished enough by sitting through a few of his films, I've found he has good ideas for movies, he just doesn't have the talent to complete them.

I actually had no intention of seeing Devil, at least not paying full price for it (and FWIW, I didn't pay this time either; Optimum's Triple Play gives you free movie tickets on Tuesday nights). Yet I heard that Shyamalan really had nothing to do with this film other than the concept. Cool! That's just what I could go for: a decent concept with a director who could pull it together.

As you've probably seen from the trailers, five people are stranded in an elevator one of whom is apparently the devil. It's a pretty good movie, not great, as it kept me entertained trying to guess who was who and why they were in the elevator.

There was a 2007 movie called Blackout, which wasn't a horror movie (more of a thriller) about three people stuck in an elevator and it's ultimately revealed one of them is actually a murderer. Told mostly in flashback that movie was actually a better film than Devil, but I enjoyed Devil nonetheless for the most part.

Like Blackout, however, you start off wondering how they're going to sustain a film for an hour and a half with everyone just stuck in an elevator, but they created enough suspense to keep you watching. I'm always left wondering though why these supernatural beings go through the process of killing everyone one at a time when they could just as easily taken the whole bunch out. And why does a malevolent spirit need to be creative in the way s/he kills a person? Can't they do it the same way each time? Of course, you wouldn't have a movie if that was the case, but it always jars me out of my willing suspension of disbelief.

In Devil there were no real scares. Only when the Evil One was ultimately revealed did anyone in the theater scream, but I'm actually not sure why. The ending of the film veered very close to the edge of a Shymalan buzz kill but managed to keep itself from going over. If you can't get to the movies, don't sweat it, you won't be missing all that much and renting it for $1 at Redbox is better than paying full price for it. It's an okay movie, just not a great one.

A Movie of Monster Proportions

Unlike some reviewers (I'm looking at you Johnny Thunder!) I'm not so opposed to the "found footage" style of movie making, though I'll readily agree that too many movies are using the technique and not always to good effect. Like 3-D or the endless parade of remakes, it is being overdone.

Yet when a movie like Cloverfield or Rec (and I actually preferred the Spanish version; even though I couldn't understand a word of what was said, I knew what was happening) comes out, I thoroughly enjoy the films. While the Blair Witch Project is the granddaddy of them all, I found the ending unsatisfying. We didn't need to see whatever it was necessarily, but it definitely needed more closure. That's why I feel Cloverfield and Rec were excellent examples of what a director can do with the found footage technique. It gave viewers at least an ending.

I recall from one of my creative writing classes my professor admonishing me because I took the lazy way out with the ending of the story. It was something along the lines of "I guess we'll never really know what happened." She was right. It was a B.S. maneuver because it saved me from having to think about how to end the story and diminished whatever else came before it.

All too often these days it seems directors don't know how to end their movies and they do some slapdash closing that ruins the rest of the film that preceded it, no matter how much you were into it. And with ticket prices being what they are, Hollywood needs to respect their audience a little more than they do. It's why I try at all costs to avoid going to the theater and prefer renting my movies from Redbox (and I'd never, ever think of watching a bootleg movie!).

All of this ranting is coming about because of a new movie that's due out next month called "Monsters." Supposedly made for something on the order of $15,000, it's not exactly a "found footage" style, but it has that flavor to it. Nevertheless, the trailers have a lush feel to them and according to one review I read, it is something of "Cloverfield meets The African Queen" (hopefully you do know what The African Queen is).

I have to thank Patrick Nottingham of The Raven's Barrow for cluing me into this movie. He posted a trailer of the movie and it looked so good to me that I went off on a hunt for other information. I found another trailer, as well as a small clip, and this movie looks like one I'm going to like.

More Monsters Videos

The synopsis is that a U.S. space probe went looking for other life forms and apparently found them, but crash landed in Mexico with them aboard upon its return to Earth. Now northern Mexico is a quarantined zone. A photojournalist hired to capture shots of the devastation the aliens have wrought has to accompany his publisher's daughter back to the U.S. border, but their journey goes awry and they travel through the heart of the infected area.

Here's another clip from the movie:



From the reviews I read from people who viewed the film at various festivals, the movie is that good, all the more so because of its miniscule budget. And despite its title, there are actually very few shots of the aliens. "Monsters" turns out to be more of a road trip love story (egads!) than an actual blood-and-guts gorefest, but there is enough suspense, drama, and thrills built up along the way that it compensates for the lack of actual monsters appearing in the film.

I don't mind this really. Character and plot development count for a lot more with me than simply seeing monsters, blood, and terror (not that those are bad in and of themselves). But think of all the movies you've seen that have had plenty of the latter but little of the former -- and how much those movies sucked -- and you get the picture of why I'm looking for a director who invests time in his script.

From the looks of the trailers Monsters is a movie I'd actually pay money to go see (or maybe just use my Optimum Rewards card and go for free on a Tuesday). So long as the director doesn't shoot the pooch with a poor ending, I'm willing to go along for the ride.

Review: Deadgirl

Growing up is never easy when you're an outcast. School's a drag, the top jock dates the girl who at 12  gave you your first kiss, and your home life is ruled by a drunk leaching off your mom. Your only friends are losers just like you.

But what if you and your friends found something that could change all that? Where it didn't matter who you were or where you came from? What if you could have all your desires fulfilled? Would you grab at the chance?

That's the dilemma facing Rickie (Shiloh Fernandez) and JT (Noah Segan) in Deadgirl, a surprisingly well-made and well-acted "coming of age" film about two high school social misfits who decide to skip school and hang out inside an abandoned mental asylum. After being chased by a vicious dog into a basement room, they find what appears to be a dead girl chained completely nude to a gurney. Scared the killer is still nearby they're startled to see the girl breathe.

That sets up their first dilemma: do they free her and call the police, as Rickie wants to do, or do they use her for their own carnal pleasure, as JT argues they should? Rickie flees horrified as JT moves to act out his desires.


The next day JT persuades Rickie to return, that there's something he needs to see, that it can't be explained. As they approach the room, JT tells Rickie of his sexual exploits with the girl, but in a rage after she tried to bite him, he killed her. JT then takes a gun from Rickie and pumps three bullets into the girl. "I killed her three times," JT tells Rickie. The dead girl, it seems, is not dead at all. She's undead.

The movie slips into a bit of "zombie porn" (but it's tastefully done!) and there's definitely some humor to it. As I've mentioned in previous reviews, I don't like comedy in my horror movies; I want the subject matter treated with the respect it deserves. Deadgirl keeps the humor in line with the movie, and while there are certain cliche parts, as should be expected with any teen angst tale, it really took the zombie genre in a different direction.



Now before you rush out and rent it, you should be forewarned that if you're the least bit prudish you probably don't want to watch this. There is definitely deviant sexual behavior displayed, but in the scheme of the movie the necrophilia (or is that un-necrophilia?) is not gratuitous. The plot is original and the ending, while not predictable, is not much of a surprise either.

It is a story with moral implications about how far you are willing to take your friendship and stretch your own ethical code. It's not a movie for everyone, but for a movie with an apparently miniscule budget, the cinematographer did a heckuva job making it look good. It's controversial, as the bondage, physical and sexual assault, not to mention the necrophilia, will turn some (a lot of) people off. But then again, I liked Human Centipede, which also seemed to freak a lot of people out. This is an intelligent zombie movie and worth viewing if you're not to squeamish about immoral behavior.

Ahoy! Zombies Are Everywhere Now

I've already established my love of zombies, and now it appears they may be Disney-fied in the upcoming Pirates of the Caribbean 4 movie, On Stranger Tides.

Captain Jack Sparrow(Johnny Depp) appeared in a short trailer at Comic-Con introducing what moviegoers were likely to see from the House of Mouse. It includes "zombies, cut throats, mermaids and the vicious, vivacious Penelope Cruz," all on a quest for the Fountain of Youth.

Pirates of the Caribbean 4 Trailer
Uploaded by teasertrailer. - Full seasons and entire episodes online.

With Disney's Haunted Mansion to also get film treatment, it should make for a handful of good, fun movies to enjoy.

Review: The Human Centipede

There have been some sick and twisted movies made (and I love 'em all!) but The Human Centipede might beat them all for its warped and demented distortion of the crazed doctor genre.

This is not Saw -- the original, and not its derivative sequels -- which provided at the time a unique twist on what you thought you were seeing, and which spawned a never-ending variety of ripoffs. It's not Hostel, which was also a unique vision of torture amped up to a higher plane. The Human Centipede simply ups the quotient of "Holy crap! Did they just do that?" to a new level and for fans of extreme horror (is it horror? I'm not even sure, but it doesn't matter), this is just one of those movies you must go watch by any means possible.

Two American girls on vacation in Germany break down in a deserted area. So far, mundane enough as plot builders go, and their salvation at the house of Dr. Heiter who lives far removed from civilization is a pretty well-worn, conventional plot device for horror film fare. Where the movie seeks to differentiate itself from other similar films is what it proposes to do.

Dr. Heiter, a renown surgeon specializing in the separating of Siamese twins (check out his living room art), now wants to join people together instead of taking them apart. We're not given a reason for his desire. There is no "why" for his ambitions. What we are given is fetishism revealed in a new light. Dr. Heiter's greatest desire is to conjoin humans mouth-to-anus with their digestive tracts combined. His patients knees are then removed to prevent them from standing up and their mobility is reduced to a hands-and-knees crawling existence, like a human centipede. Think of it as Frankenstein on steroids, using the human body to create a new, living thing.

">

When you consider the typical slasher horror movie, The Human Centipede is different. We're not witness to high body counts, buckets of blood, unstoppable killers, or gore. But if you were sickened by the video Two Girls, One Cup yet watched it anyway, then you can imagine what The Human Centipede descends too.

When the lead section of the centipede, a Japanese tourist kidnapped for the purpose of bringing the hideous creation to life, has to make a bowel movement, the terror on the girl's face in the middle as she realizes what's about to occur, is palpable. Dr. Heiter's comment, "Yes! Feed her,"is diabolically evil, every bit as much as Dr. Frankenstein's signature exclamation, "It's alive!" particularly because he has placed her in that exact middle position as punishment for her attempted escape.

The movie has its cliches: the near escape, the cops who almost discover the plot, the operating room-in -the-basement. But you manage to forget all that because the plot device itself is so monstrous. Even so, The Human Centipede is a well-made movie, with good acting and cinematography. Maybe that makes it worse. This is no shot-on-video schlock. It is definitely a worthy edition to the extreme horror genre, even if there is a certain element of sadomasochistic porn introduced, which to a certain extent, I guess, all such horror is. Yet, by all means possible, rent this today!

Rich

Review: The Crazies

You're in Iowa, not Mexico, but you still don't want to drink the water. After a plane carrying a new biological weapon called Trixie crashes in the Iowa bayous (yeah, I didn't realize Iowa had such swamps either), the residents of Ogden Marsh start acting downright, well, crazy.

Poor Rory, his house sits first in line to receive the drinking water that meanders from the swamps and he ends up showing up at a Little League game carrying a shotgun. Sheriff Dutton (Timothy Olyphant) is forced to shoot him when Rory pulls the shotgun on him, but that's only just the beginning of The Crazies.

After Bill burns down his house after locking his wife an young son in a hall closet, Dutton; his wife, the town doctor (Radha Mitchell); and Deputy Clark (Joe Anderson, in a bit of very good supporting acting) have a heckuva time trying to survive a town of murderous zombies and a government intent on containing the spread of the contamination.

I'd never seen the original 1973 George Romero movie of the same name, but I understand it's something of a cult classic. It wasn't necessary though, since director Breck Eisner did a capable job of setting a mood and creating enough suspense (and a few jumpy scares). To a certain extent The Crazies didn't tread much new ground here, but it was entertaining enough and the acting was actually very good that I didn't find myself wondering at any point when it was going to be over.

There was enough gore to slake my thirst for it -- the school principal plunging the pitchfork into the chests of several patients tied down on gurneys was perhaps the most graphic part -- yet it was handled well and worked within the confines of the movie's "reality."

The ending was by no means happy, but it leaves open the possibility for a sequel. And from what I understand, one is being planned, particularly in light of the strong box office the movie enjoyed on its opening weekend and the good reviews it has gotten.

When you sit back and think about the movie, it's as I said, not particularly new ground being dug up. What makes it a good movie memorable is the acting. Timothy Olyphant and Joe Anderson turn in excellent performances, completely believable, particularly as you wonder whether Deputy Clark is infected. Since there's a 48-hour incubation period and Clark's actions at times seem erratic, though perfectly understandable given the circumstances, the crescendo builds throughout.

Surprisingly, these are characters you end up caring about, which apparently is a very difficult thing to achieve in horror films these days. All too often the characters are cardboard archetypes and you know almost exactly the order everyone will be killed, and why. Not so with The Crazies. These are distinct personalities with depth that you want to survive, but know in the end not everyone will.

As a result, I give the movie 4 tombstones out of 5.

Review: The Wolfman

I'm sure I'll be chided by The Wolfman fans everywhere, but I thought this latest edition to the genre lacked teeth.

The story is well-known enough by now: Benicio Del Toro as Lawrence Talbot returns to England as an accomplished actor after having been sent away to America as a child following the horror of having witnessed his mother's tragic death. Apparently, he spent some time in an insane asylum too prior to his journey across the pond.

Upon his return, he learns of the ghastly murder of his brother, either at the hands of a madman or the claws of a beast. Seeking to learn more, Del Toro is attacked and wounded by the hell-hound thus setting up his own transformation, which was well done without the theatrics of "An American Werewolf in London." It seemed a convincing transformation and my own fingers felt stiff watching Del Toro's hand wrack into those of a wolf.

The subsequent hunt for the beast and the denouement were all rather predictable, even the plot twist, considering it wasn't much of a twist at all.

It wasn't due to a lack of an adequate set design that the movie failed for me, as Victorian England is most palpable in movie, and I almost expected to see Jeremy Brett as Sherlock Holmes come striding through the fog in his deerstalker. But Hugo Weaving as the Scotland Yard detective Abberline was a sufficient stand in and Anthony Hopkins turned in a fine performance as Sir John Talbot, though sometimes I felt he was acting in a different movie altogether. I think my favorite performance was actually given by Art Malik who played Talbot's manservant Singh.

The movie just felt wooden and while I thought Del Toro's performance as Talbot was credible, as has been expressed in several reviews, it was so understated as to have left the character devoid of emotion after he is marked the curse.

There were predictable scares and jumps, and while many have noted the movie's gore, I really didn't think it was overdone. In fact, considering what was attacking people and the level of decay suffered by Talbot's brother at the outset, I would have expected more (maybe I was secretly hoping for more).

I wanted to like the movie, and I did, I just didn't love it. It was good, not great. My wife, though, enjoyed it more than I did, though I'd also say she wasn't wowed by the experience either. It's probably worthwhile to go see the movie, though I'm glad I was able to see it for free through my Optimum Triple Play Rewards membership. Otherwise I'd recommend waiting for it to hit your Netflix (NFLX) queue or the local Redbox kiosk and rent it for just $1.00.

It gets 3 out of 5 tombstones.

Rich

Review: Mutants

There's nothing like a good zombie flick to bring you closer together with your special someone the night before Valentine's Day, so my wife and I settled onto the couch to watch the French zombie film Mutants. Conveniently it comes with English subtitles.

More and more I'm finding foreign horror films to be just so much better than their American-made counterparts and Mutants did not disappoint. For three quarters or so of the movie, anyway.



We start off in a winter scene where a woman watches as her companion is attacked by zombies before she flees through the woods. She makes it to the roadway where she's met by an ambulance on its way to take a wounded soldier for help. It quickly becomes apparent the soldier is about to "turn" and he's dragged out of the back so his partner -- a woman with the manliest voice I ever heard (actually, my wife and I were debating whether the soldier was a man or woman for a good 5 minutes before the subtitles told us the answer) -- shot him dead.

In need of gas, the ambulance stops at a roadside station and the suspense begins to build. In the end, the ambulance driver, a character named Sonia Duprey (no, that's not why I liked the movie) and her husband/boyfriend Marco make it to this big-ass building in the mountains. Inside it looks something like a hospital but it could be a hotel (some of the outside shots seem to show what look like balconies, but it's got a heckuva lot of medical supplies on hand) where it's revealed Marco has been bitten.

There's a lot of good suspense as you can hear the zombies howl in the wild and the tension builds as Marco pleads to be killed while Sonia wants to save him. After locking him away for his and her own good, the movie falls apart a little.

There's another band or survivors that breaks into the hospital/hotel/refuge and some typical post-apocalyptic characters emerge: the domineering guy who or some reason doesn't think they'll be better off if they help each other to survive; the fawning girlfriend who finds a need to go down on him in the middle of it all; the "crazy" loner; etc.

I found the ending a little predictable, even if it was a little hard to follow the plot development at one point. I'm thinking something got left on the editing room floor that might have explained things a little better. Regardless, considering much of the dreck that's out there these days from American directors, I thought Mutants was a worthwhile effort. Even having to read the subtitles wasn't a distraction from watching the movie.

I'd give it 3 tombstones out of 5.

Rich

Of Monsters and Other Scary Things

Time was I loved the old monster movies. Frankenstein. Dracula. Even Creature from the Black Lagoon. Those black-and-white classics used to terrify me when I was a kid, but I loved watching them. Chiller Theater with its creepy, six-fingered hand creeped me out to no end. Even later on I'd watch Kolchak chase ghosts and The Twilight Zone (Rod Serling's, not that current crap) would hold my attention.

I'd like to say that it was this early fascination with monsters that ripened into my current obsession with all things Halloween, but that would be rewriting history. I didn't really get into the holiday until I got remarried and my wife wanted to decorate for it. She was the one into it. I kind of just tagged along, but now I'm off running with it.

Yet the monsters were a cherished part of my youth. I remember building a plastic Frankenstein model with my dad and displaying it in my room. I think I even did a Wolfman too. But those days faded and were largely forgotten until I saw that they're making a remake of The Wolfman.

There looks to be a lot to like in the trailer -- and the second one, too -- but I'm worried about some of the CG effects I see. I dislike a lot of CG in my movies, and in something like this you're going to have to have it during the transformation. But I see signs of it cropping up elsewhere and too often that turns a movie into a cartoon.

Unlike some, though, I like remakes of original movies. I like the more lavish sets, the greater attention to detail and effects (even as I hate CG). A good retelling can be just that. Yes, a lot of times they fall short, but even in their failings they can look better than the original. I've watched a lot of movies I had remembered liking as a child and thinking, "WTF? This was good?" Yeah, I'm not a movie purist; I don't care about the devotion to the craft that was achieved back then. I want a good looking movie, but it's gotta have a story too.

I think that's my problem these days with the old movies. They had the story, but no "look." Today, too many movies have "the look" but no story. It's the rare film that does have both.

I'm not expecting The Wolfman to be one of those films (I thought Trick 'R Treat did, however) but it looks like it will be entertaining, and sadly, that's about as high as my expectations get these days.

Rich

All Treats in "Trick 'r Treat"

How did "Trick 'r Treat" not get released in theaters and receive broad distribution? The buzz around the film certainly warranted such support, yet it apparently went almost directly to DVD. Well, it's the studios' loss, but our gain since we still get to see it even if it's on the flat-screen TVs in our living rooms. So grab your candy bags and munch on your chocolates, this is definitely a film worth watch...several times!

Four stories are interwined with excellent acting, good storylines, several twists, and dollops of humor. Not over the top, not slasher-gore (sorry if that's your thing), but plenty of suspense make Trick 'r Treat a worthy addition to the Halloween horror genre.

Rich