So it has been ages since I wrote a review of a movie, but after watching the 8th installment to the Saw franchise, I was compelled. Why? Because it was so close to being something good. So very close. If you're a fan, go ahead and give it a watch. It's not for the newb. Spoilers ahead cause I'm giving it all away.
This movie occurs ten years after John Kramer's (aka Jigsaw) death. It appears to follow a copycat killer who is dispatching victims in the same somewhat creative ways that jigsaw did years before, and they're trying to track him down. The central storyline is pretty standard in that the selectees of the game mostly yell at each other and ignore the very plain instructions despite the fact that they are shown to keep them alive. As a result, people generally die unnecessarily, but that's how these things go.
Where it goes into frustration-land is the ending. The ending of any story is the frame on which you hang all your hopes, and this was so freaking close to working. So close I could taste it. Dang, I'm mad about this one. The twist was perfect. It worked really, really well. I smiled.
This is your last chance. I'm about to spoil it all.
Consider yourself warned.
The twist was that the guy running the game in the present was one of the victims in the game we're actually watching throughout the film. You see, the core game we're watching was one of Jigsaw's first years ago, and those victims are long gone and deceased. The victims in the present are from a copycat of that original, although the guy in charge says that he only used three victims instead of five, and somehow they ended up in the same way. Don't think too hard about that cause it doesn't actually make sense unless he just outright killed them.
But then we get to the ending. The setup is magnificent. The guy running the show successfully framed the detective in charge, and he went to painstaking methods to do it. There is no way the guy is getting off. I mean, the detective is not a nice guy. We got a confession at the end. He deserves a comeuppance. Then, the movie ruins it.
Being framed for a bunch of murders would be a horrible way to go for a lawman, but instead of letting that punishment stand, the killer monologues him and us to death and then kills the detective anyway. Was it creative? Sure. Did the special effects team really want that in there? Clearly. Did it work? No. It completely ruined the entire framing plan. Why go to all that work and then not let it play out? Now instead of a framing, the detective is yet another victim and will die a martyr. Nothing bad will happen to him for his sins. He just dies which in this world is basically getting away with it.
All they had to do was let him live and wonder who was really behind it all. The movie could have told us who did it for the sake of the big reveal and twist, but left the character in the dark. If they had done that, the movie would have been elevated to diabolical.
What these writers need to understand is that torturing someone only works as long as they're alive. Once someone is dead, they're free. It would have been a great ending, but they screwed it up for the sake of a cool effect. Good job. Gruesome effects work, guys. Too bad the movie is now so mediocre that no one will care.
Showing posts with label Mystery. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Mystery. Show all posts
Monday, June 10, 2019
Sunday, February 1, 2009
The Ring Two -- 2005 -- PG-13
I watched the Unrated Edition. As a sequel this poor film has to stand up to the sheer creepiness of the original and when compared, it pales. However, when considered as its own film, its actually pretty good. It does what so few sequels do, and that is take the old plot on a new ride. It handles the characters from the original and allows them continued development. It creates a really creepy atmosphere, and has its own share of scares and chills. It has good momentum throughout the movie, good development, and enough intrigue to keep you wondering without being annoyed that you don't know what is going on for most of the film.
It has some weak points, though. One is this elaborate deer attack that once you know what is going on (and watch the making of video that explains it) makes sense, but in the context of the film, really loses you. They explain that the deer react to Samara's presence, and any setup for this (even a barking dog beforehand) would have helped. A similar issue occurred in the Ring with a horse going crazy, so it works, but it never gets a sufficient explanation in this film.
The other problem is what I call Forced Conflict. This usually occurs with characters who like asking lots of questions, like detectives or doctors. This film has a psychiatrist who asked perfectly reasonable questions that the character could have simply answered to avoid all ramifications. Instead, the character clams up and refuses to answer even the simplest question: "Did you hit your son?" Why not answer this with a truthful resounding no? What does she say? "I want you to leave." To make this forced conflict even worse, the psychiatrist locks the character in her office to detain her for a moment while she gets coffee. The psychiatrist returns moments later to find the character escaped out the window. Can anyone say "You just incriminated yourself"?
This aside, it is a passable film when allowed to stand on its own. When placed aside the original, it doesn't measure up and feels like a sequel.
It has some weak points, though. One is this elaborate deer attack that once you know what is going on (and watch the making of video that explains it) makes sense, but in the context of the film, really loses you. They explain that the deer react to Samara's presence, and any setup for this (even a barking dog beforehand) would have helped. A similar issue occurred in the Ring with a horse going crazy, so it works, but it never gets a sufficient explanation in this film.
The other problem is what I call Forced Conflict. This usually occurs with characters who like asking lots of questions, like detectives or doctors. This film has a psychiatrist who asked perfectly reasonable questions that the character could have simply answered to avoid all ramifications. Instead, the character clams up and refuses to answer even the simplest question: "Did you hit your son?" Why not answer this with a truthful resounding no? What does she say? "I want you to leave."
This aside, it is a passable film when allowed to stand on its own. When placed aside the original, it doesn't measure up and feels like a sequel.
Final Destination -- 2000 -- R
This film has probably one of the cleverest premises in recent history for a horror movie. It was actually original. What if you had a premonition of your own death and avoided it? The answer plays out in this film where death does not like to be interrupted in his plan and the survivors of a horrific plane crash are summarily killed in a variety of "accidental" ways.
The boy who saw the accident which should have killed them is ushered off a plane when he declares that it will explode on takeoff. He and several others are in the waiting area when the plane actually does explode killing everyone on board and traumatizing those remaining. Just when they think it's all over, the survivors begin to die as well.
The death sequences (not to be morbid) are extremely inventive. Since we are not dealing with a physical force, but one that is supposed to be supernatural and controlling the fates of everyone, the potential for creative sequences is very much there. Every once of these things could be well labeled a freak accident, since the chances of most of these actually happening in real life is slim to none.
One of the more creative: a woman is drying her hands and lays the cloth on a knife block. She is boiling water for tea and pours the water into a mug. She flips out whe she realizes the saying on mug has emotional impact. She dumps the hot water and grabs vodka from the freezer. Well, this causes the mug to crack and the vodka to leak out. She walks across the room with the mug in hand and adjusts something behind a computer monitor (I forget what this was, but it made sense). The vodka trickles out of the mug and down into the computer monitor. She continues fooling with whatever next to the monitor for awhile. Well, the vodka gets into the electronics, creates a short circuit, and the monitor explodes. She is cut by the flying glass. Then, the flames from the exploding monitor ignites the vodka trail on the floor leading into the kitchen. Now the stove is on fire. She makes her way into the kitchen to put out the fire and collapses from the blood loss. She looks up and sees a cloth to help stop the flow of blood. What's the cloth on? The knife block. Tug on the cloth. Knife block comes down and thunk! Knife in chest. But wait, she's still alive. Our boy comes to help her. The stove blows up and knocks a dining room chair over to push the knife in. Now she's dead.
While not all of the deaths show that level of creativity, there are many that do, and the final showdown is not to be missed since it doesn't get more unlikely than that, and yet well within the rules of the film.
Definitely a recommended one for its creativity, originality, and even rewatchability.
The boy who saw the accident which should have killed them is ushered off a plane when he declares that it will explode on takeoff. He and several others are in the waiting area when the plane actually does explode killing everyone on board and traumatizing those remaining. Just when they think it's all over, the survivors begin to die as well.
The death sequences (not to be morbid) are extremely inventive. Since we are not dealing with a physical force, but one that is supposed to be supernatural and controlling the fates of everyone, the potential for creative sequences is very much there. Every once of these things could be well labeled a freak accident, since the chances of most of these actually happening in real life is slim to none.
One of the more creative: a woman is drying her hands and lays the cloth on a knife block. She is boiling water for tea and pours the water into a mug. She flips out whe she realizes the saying on mug has emotional impact. She dumps the hot water and grabs vodka from the freezer. Well, this causes the mug to crack and the vodka to leak out. She walks across the room with the mug in hand and adjusts something behind a computer monitor (I forget what this was, but it made sense). The vodka trickles out of the mug and down into the computer monitor. She continues fooling with whatever next to the monitor for awhile. Well, the vodka gets into the electronics, creates a short circuit, and the monitor explodes. She is cut by the flying glass. Then, the flames from the exploding monitor ignites the vodka trail on the floor leading into the kitchen. Now the stove is on fire. She makes her way into the kitchen to put out the fire and collapses from the blood loss. She looks up and sees a cloth to help stop the flow of blood. What's the cloth on? The knife block. Tug on the cloth. Knife block comes down and thunk! Knife in chest. But wait, she's still alive. Our boy comes to help her. The stove blows up and knocks a dining room chair over to push the knife in. Now she's dead.
While not all of the deaths show that level of creativity, there are many that do, and the final showdown is not to be missed since it doesn't get more unlikely than that, and yet well within the rules of the film.
Definitely a recommended one for its creativity, originality, and even rewatchability.
Skeleton Key -- 2005 -- PG-13
Dissenters aside, I thought this movie worked pretty well for what it was. Most of it occurred in one house with some pretty decent character development, though the main character could have been rounded out a little better. We got a feel for her outlook, but not much of her past life or future desires.
I thought the basic plot was pretty good and the twists were well thought out and tied together, along with a very sinister revelation near the end. That really helped this film a lot, but it still suffered from underdeveloped characters. While I will grant that there was a reason they appeared the way they were, it still would have helped if there was more substance to them.
Some of the sequences did not make a lot of sense. Why continue to go up to the attic just to explore the forbidden room? Especially after what it was doing earlier? Why defy the homeowners so much? Why, when threatened as she was, with the knowledge she had, did she stand directly in the path of danger? Why not run to her room where she had already protected herself? She seemed to willingly welcome the fate she ended with. In quite a few instances, the plot moved the characters instead of the other way around as it should be. This movie also has the distinction of being the only film I know of where a vehicle is unable to break through a lock on a fence. Kinda weird.
Everything else was well-explained, clever for the most part, and tied up neatly complete with a bizarre question mark of an ending for a minor character. So overall, not bad, it just lacked in a lot of other areas. I think a little more thought into the screenplay would have helped a lot.
I thought the basic plot was pretty good and the twists were well thought out and tied together, along with a very sinister revelation near the end. That really helped this film a lot, but it still suffered from underdeveloped characters. While I will grant that there was a reason they appeared the way they were, it still would have helped if there was more substance to them.
Some of the sequences did not make a lot of sense. Why continue to go up to the attic just to explore the forbidden room? Especially after what it was doing earlier? Why defy the homeowners so much? Why, when threatened as she was, with the knowledge she had, did she stand directly in the path of danger? Why not run to her room where she had already protected herself? She seemed to willingly welcome the fate she ended with. In quite a few instances, the plot moved the characters instead of the other way around as it should be. This movie also has the distinction of being the only film I know of where a vehicle is unable to break through a lock on a fence. Kinda weird.
Everything else was well-explained, clever for the most part, and tied up neatly complete with a bizarre question mark of an ending for a minor character. So overall, not bad, it just lacked in a lot of other areas. I think a little more thought into the screenplay would have helped a lot.
Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire - 2005 - PG-13
The fourth film adapting the Harry Potter series continues the tradition laid down in the third of allowing Stephen Kloves to adapt the book properly instead of trying to film the book as the first two films did. The result is a film that, like the books, is darker and scarier than the one before it. While it was diappointing that John Williams did not compose the music to this one, it is still a great film and a great addition to the HP series.
This film moves fast. Kloves followed the standard of adaptation very well by retaining the essential plot points of the book while writing a screenplay around them. We thankfully do not include the Dursleys here allowing us to pick up right in the wizarding world with the Quidditch World Cup and all the things that went with it. From there, we jet right over to Hogwart's and get into the point of the movie: the Tri-Wizard Tournament, that underage Harry, of course, has to participate in.
It's been awhile since I read the book, but I remembered much of it as I watched the film meaning it followed the story pretty closely. I'm sure there were some things missed, but given the length of the book, that comes as no surprise. The essence of the story was captured, and we got ourselves a dark, fast film with some solid character moments for the lead trio and those around them.
A moment I am grateful was touched on is the budding love-hate between Hermione and Ron that is back and forth in the books. They were given a solid scene to play out the emotions and they did it very well. Be very cool to see how they continue to blossom this one.
So, overall, if you've liked the movies so far, this one will not disappoint.
This film moves fast. Kloves followed the standard of adaptation very well by retaining the essential plot points of the book while writing a screenplay around them. We thankfully do not include the Dursleys here allowing us to pick up right in the wizarding world with the Quidditch World Cup and all the things that went with it. From there, we jet right over to Hogwart's and get into the point of the movie: the Tri-Wizard Tournament, that underage Harry, of course, has to participate in.
It's been awhile since I read the book, but I remembered much of it as I watched the film meaning it followed the story pretty closely. I'm sure there were some things missed, but given the length of the book, that comes as no surprise. The essence of the story was captured, and we got ourselves a dark, fast film with some solid character moments for the lead trio and those around them.
A moment I am grateful was touched on is the budding love-hate between Hermione and Ron that is back and forth in the books. They were given a solid scene to play out the emotions and they did it very well. Be very cool to see how they continue to blossom this one.
So, overall, if you've liked the movies so far, this one will not disappoint.
Thursday, January 29, 2009
The Fog -- 2005 -- PG-13
This is a remake of the 1980 John Carpenter film that I have yet to see. We have a little island town with a dark past that finally comes back to haunt them in the form of a fog hiding the supernatural attackers.
Like many teen scream flicks, this one lacks in the character department first and foremost. The main male lead, whose name I don't even remember, has little to no development at all, even though he seems to be the main character. More time is given to the female lead, Elizabeth, but she up and does silly things that no one in their right mind would do (like hearing a noise and walking outside all the way down to the beach in her underwear). There are other characters, but what development they are granted is limited solely to the scenes they are in....if you're lucky.
One question I wanted to know waswhy these spirits chose this moment to return. There seemed to be a bigger backstory here that they never got into. The spirits seem to have a tie-in with the lead female, Elizabeth, but rather than explore this thread, the movie moves onward to another impressive, special effects-laden kill.
Elizabeth's final actions in the film save the day...but why does she do them? Nothing to this point indicated what needed to be done, and likewise when she did it, it occurred without reasoning or explanation. I thought I had a clue as to what was going on based on what I did know, but it didn't go that way and instead, did something that didn't make a lot of sense.
So while the pacing was decent, the characters were paper thin, and the plot had multiple pitfalls. I wanted to know why this started, or at least someone say there was nothing to trigger it. It might have been triggered by a bag of goodies that was torn open near the beginning, but that really doesn't make a lot of sense...however, it's all we have to go on.
Like many teen scream flicks, this one lacks in the character department first and foremost. The main male lead, whose name I don't even remember, has little to no development at all, even though he seems to be the main character. More time is given to the female lead, Elizabeth, but she up and does silly things that no one in their right mind would do (like hearing a noise and walking outside all the way down to the beach in her underwear). There are other characters, but what development they are granted is limited solely to the scenes they are in....if you're lucky.
One question I wanted to know waswhy these spirits chose this moment to return. There seemed to be a bigger backstory here that they never got into. The spirits seem to have a tie-in with the lead female, Elizabeth, but rather than explore this thread, the movie moves onward to another impressive, special effects-laden kill.
Elizabeth's final actions in the film save the day...but why does she do them? Nothing to this point indicated what needed to be done, and likewise when she did it, it occurred without reasoning or explanation. I thought I had a clue as to what was going on based on what I did know, but it didn't go that way and instead, did something that didn't make a lot of sense.
So while the pacing was decent, the characters were paper thin, and the plot had multiple pitfalls. I wanted to know why this started, or at least someone say there was nothing to trigger it. It might have been triggered by a bag of goodies that was torn open near the beginning, but that really doesn't make a lot of sense...however, it's all we have to go on.
Citizen Kane -- 1941 -- NR
This 1941 Best Picture winner definitely earned it. Most people are familiar with the infamous last word of Kane ("Rosebud"), and while I had an inkling I knew exactly what it was (thanks to a song from Animaniacs), I learned that unlike most films where knowing the goal spoils the movie, this word was not so much about Rosebud, but what Rosebud represented in Kane's life. Through the film, we learn all about Charles Foster Kane and his take on life and money and politics. We know what he likes and dislikes and wants and doesn't want. All of this was not to build to finding out what or who Rosebud is, but to explain why that was so important to him.
A modern film might spend 20 minutes at the end of the film explaining the meaning of Rosebud, but this film allows the audience to (gasp!) think for themselves and ponder just how deep the meaning goes outside the theatre. This is an amazing film for just that aspect; it was some amazing writing and ponders whather money (for Kane was the richest man in America) is really all it was cracked up to be. In fact, what Rosebud is is not known in the film until the last 30 seconds before the final fade out.
My only complaint was the old Jed Leland. When he as an old man chattered, I was bored to death. Fortunately, he wasn't allowed to talk for long and we got back into the history in short order.
This is an amazing film with an amazing script. I highly recommend it if you haven't seen it.
A modern film might spend 20 minutes at the end of the film explaining the meaning of Rosebud, but this film allows the audience to (gasp!) think for themselves and ponder just how deep the meaning goes outside the theatre. This is an amazing film for just that aspect; it was some amazing writing and ponders whather money (for Kane was the richest man in America) is really all it was cracked up to be. In fact, what Rosebud is is not known in the film until the last 30 seconds before the final fade out.
My only complaint was the old Jed Leland. When he as an old man chattered, I was bored to death. Fortunately, he wasn't allowed to talk for long and we got back into the history in short order.
This is an amazing film with an amazing script. I highly recommend it if you haven't seen it.
D.O.A. -- 1950 -- NR
This is a 1950 film noir movie that was remade several years later. It involves a man who was unknowingly poisoned giving him only a week to track down the guy who killed him. Like a lot of old thrillers, this was a fun ride. I think it skirted some believability when the main character (who is little more than a banker) was at home with a gun in his hand and chasing the unknown bad guy through an abandoned warehouse only to have him escape. He also as observant as Sherlock Holmes in nearly everything that went on. Some of this can be put down to the fact that he knows he's dying, so he has nothing to lose. This aside, like I said, it's a fun movie to watch, and kicks off real quick for the short attention spanners.
Chinatown -- 1974 -- R
Jack Nicholson leads the cast of this 1974 kickback to the noir films of the past. A private dick, Gittes, is assigned by a Mrs. Mulray to track her husband because she suspects him of an affair. As soon as Gittes turns the pictures over to Mrs. Mulray, they end up in the daily paper. That's when the REAL Mrs. Mulray shows up threatening to sue Gittes for taking the incriminating pics of her husband. Gittes sets out to discover who this fake Mrs. Mulray was and why she would want to destroy Mr. Mulray, and then Mr. Mulray ends up dead and the girlfriend disappears.
This movie gives away nothing as it curves through its clever storyline. The characters were believable and well written (you can tell that when you comment while viewing what a character will do because that's how he is). It's rare to find a film that takes you on an unpredictable ride as it unfolds instead of one where you know how it ends before it begins. Definitely a recommended watching.
Now, if only it had a better ending...
This movie gives away nothing as it curves through its clever storyline. The characters were believable and well written (you can tell that when you comment while viewing what a character will do because that's how he is). It's rare to find a film that takes you on an unpredictable ride as it unfolds instead of one where you know how it ends before it begins. Definitely a recommended watching.
Now, if only it had a better ending...
Audition -- 2002 -- NR
This was a Japanese film with English subtitles. Had it been reviewed by the MPAA, then it would have an R rating for violence and sexuality.
Seven years after a man loses his wife, both his son and best friend encourage him to try to marry again. His friend, who is a producer, stages an audition to help the guy find the perfect wife. He centers on one girl, and even though his friend says she is wrong for him, he goes for her anyway.
This whole film is a slow creepy build to the final scenes where the girl's true intentions become clear. This definitely qualifies as a psychological thriller as the man learns more and more about the girl's spotty and almost non-existant past and the horrors she leaves behind her. The characters were well rounded and believable, and it had a fair share of truly freakish moments to make your skin crawl. It really is a worthwhile viewing of a film, even though you have to deal with subtitles.
There are some odd points. One was when the guy wanted to know where the girl lived, but he had no address for her. He had her phone number, and his son was seen on the internet. What one thought popped into my head? Reverse phone number lookup. Did anyone mention it? No.
The other point was a big one. This guy was never put forth to be psychic or anything else other than a normal guy. Yet as he explored, he got flashes of what went on in various places, and right before the climax, there was this long dream-ish sequence where the girl's backstory and life is almost completely filled in. He was even in the girl's house, a place he had never gone to. In a movie as strong as this was, this seemed like a cop-outish way to deliver a large amount of exposition in a short time frame, since it felt so clairvoyant in nature.
This aside, the flm was very good, and worth watching if you don't mind disturbing images. Some of the final scene even made my stomach turn.
Seven years after a man loses his wife, both his son and best friend encourage him to try to marry again. His friend, who is a producer, stages an audition to help the guy find the perfect wife. He centers on one girl, and even though his friend says she is wrong for him, he goes for her anyway.
This whole film is a slow creepy build to the final scenes where the girl's true intentions become clear. This definitely qualifies as a psychological thriller as the man learns more and more about the girl's spotty and almost non-existant past and the horrors she leaves behind her. The characters were well rounded and believable, and it had a fair share of truly freakish moments to make your skin crawl. It really is a worthwhile viewing of a film, even though you have to deal with subtitles.
There are some odd points. One was when the guy wanted to know where the girl lived, but he had no address for her. He had her phone number, and his son was seen on the internet. What one thought popped into my head? Reverse phone number lookup. Did anyone mention it? No.
The other point was a big one. This guy was never put forth to be psychic or anything else other than a normal guy. Yet as he explored, he got flashes of what went on in various places, and right before the climax, there was this long dream-ish sequence where the girl's backstory and life is almost completely filled in. He was even in the girl's house, a place he had never gone to. In a movie as strong as this was, this seemed like a cop-outish way to deliver a large amount of exposition in a short time frame, since it felt so clairvoyant in nature.
This aside, the flm was very good, and worth watching if you don't mind disturbing images. Some of the final scene even made my stomach turn.
The Forgotten -- 2004 -- PG-13
This thriller started out really well. It was bizarre and had a lot of question thrown out here with an even bigger question mark on how to find them. Then it got weird. It crossed over into soap opera land where characters refuse to ask the simplest and most logical of questions. A world where someone calls and gets interrupted with a whole other story, and then the person who interrupted never learns the reason the other person called, and it was probably important or they wouldn't have called. The characters did stupid things. Who in their right (or wrong) mind would sleep in someone's abandoned house? Especially if they're being followed? The characters' stupidity and lack of asking questions forced the movie to keep going since it left those loose ends untied. The problem I had was they could have been tied very easily, and it shouldn't be that easy.
This might be considered a spoiler so consider yourself warned.
About 45 minutes in, one of the characters made a vague suggestions about "someone other than the government" and "abducted." The word alien was never used, but I thought "Oh, this better not be an alien movie." Yeah, instead of a clever way for the government or even her husband to cover this up, it was alien involvement. Talk about a freakin' cop-out. It completely ruined all the wonderful things they started with. Grumble...
Had a happy ending and the extended original ending was better than the theatrical which was supposed to be frightening. I just can't get over that stupid alien bit.
This might be considered a spoiler so consider yourself warned.
About 45 minutes in, one of the characters made a vague suggestions about "someone other than the government" and "abducted." The word alien was never used, but I thought "Oh, this better not be an alien movie." Yeah, instead of a clever way for the government or even her husband to cover this up, it was alien involvement. Talk about a freakin' cop-out. It completely ruined all the wonderful things they started with. Grumble...
Had a happy ending and the extended original ending was better than the theatrical which was supposed to be frightening. I just can't get over that stupid alien bit.
The Fog -- 1980 -- R
The original version of The Fog was written and directed by John Carpenter, the guy who gave us Halloween. It follows a small town preparing for their centennial celebration only to find out that their founding fathers may not have been entirely scrupulous in their dealings to acquire the monies needed to build the town.
So we get a fog which rolls in and brings with it the zombie-ish people who want revenge on the town for their founding fathers. What follows is a handful of deaths and a small climax to wrap things up. It has a fair amount of chilling moments, and a very creepy atmosphere which helps, but beyond Carpenter's inherent film making strengths, there's really nothing to write home about.
We are introduced to a host of different characters, but Carpenter is more focused on his thrills and plot than developing these characters to anyone memorable, and if a character dies, we don't really miss them.
The basic plot is decent, and it has a solid backstory. If Carpenter had spent some time on his characters, we'd have a really memorable movie. As it is, it's another filmed filed under the slashers that could have been better.
So we get a fog which rolls in and brings with it the zombie-ish people who want revenge on the town for their founding fathers. What follows is a handful of deaths and a small climax to wrap things up. It has a fair amount of chilling moments, and a very creepy atmosphere which helps, but beyond Carpenter's inherent film making strengths, there's really nothing to write home about.
We are introduced to a host of different characters, but Carpenter is more focused on his thrills and plot than developing these characters to anyone memorable, and if a character dies, we don't really miss them.
The basic plot is decent, and it has a solid backstory. If Carpenter had spent some time on his characters, we'd have a really memorable movie. As it is, it's another filmed filed under the slashers that could have been better.
Final Destination -- 2000 -- R
This film has probably one of the cleverest premises in recent history for a horror movie. It was actually original. What if you had a premonition of your own death and avoided it? The answer plays out in this film where death does not like to be interrupted in his plan and the survivors of a horrific plane crash are summarily killed in a variety of "accidental" ways.
The boy who saw the accident which should have killed them is ushered off a plane when he declares that it will explode on takeoff. He and several others are in the waiting area when the plane actually does explode killing everyone on board and traumatizing those remaining. Just when they think it's all over, the survivors begin to die as well.
The death sequences (not to be morbid) are extremely inventive. Since we are not dealing with a physical force, but one that is supposed to be supernatural and controlling the fates of everyone, the potential for creative sequences is very much there. Every once of these things could be well labeled a freak accident, since the chances of most of these actually happening in real life is slim to none.
One of the more creative: a woman is drying her hands and lays the cloth on a knife block. She is boiling water for tea and pours the water into a mug. She flips out whe she realizes the saying on mug has emotional impact. She dumps the hot water and grabs vodka from the freezer. Well, this causes the mug to crack and the vodka to leak out. She walks across the room with the mug in hand and adjusts something behind a computer monitor (I forget what this was, but it made sense). The vodka trickles out of the mug and down into the computer monitor. She continues fooling with whatever next to the monitor for awhile. Well, the vodka gets into the electronics, creates a short circuit, and the monitor explodes. She is cut by the flying glass. Then, the flames from the exploding monitor ignites the vodka trail on the floor leading into the kitchen. Now the stove is on fire. She makes her way into the kitchen to put out the fire and collapses from the blood loss. She looks up and sees a cloth to help stop the flow of blood. What's the cloth on? The knife block. Tug on the cloth. Knife block comes down and thunk! Knife in chest. But wait, she's still alive. Our boy comes to help her. The stove blows up and knocks a dining room chair over to push the knife in. Now she's dead.
While not all of the deaths show that level of creativity, there are many that do, and the final showdown is not to be missed since it doesn't get more unlikely than that, and yet well within the rules of the film.
Definitely a recommended one for its creativity, originality, and even rewatchability.
The boy who saw the accident which should have killed them is ushered off a plane when he declares that it will explode on takeoff. He and several others are in the waiting area when the plane actually does explode killing everyone on board and traumatizing those remaining. Just when they think it's all over, the survivors begin to die as well.
The death sequences (not to be morbid) are extremely inventive. Since we are not dealing with a physical force, but one that is supposed to be supernatural and controlling the fates of everyone, the potential for creative sequences is very much there. Every once of these things could be well labeled a freak accident, since the chances of most of these actually happening in real life is slim to none.
One of the more creative: a woman is drying her hands and lays the cloth on a knife block. She is boiling water for tea and pours the water into a mug. She flips out whe she realizes the saying on mug has emotional impact. She dumps the hot water and grabs vodka from the freezer. Well, this causes the mug to crack and the vodka to leak out. She walks across the room with the mug in hand and adjusts something behind a computer monitor (I forget what this was, but it made sense). The vodka trickles out of the mug and down into the computer monitor. She continues fooling with whatever next to the monitor for awhile. Well, the vodka gets into the electronics, creates a short circuit, and the monitor explodes. She is cut by the flying glass. Then, the flames from the exploding monitor ignites the vodka trail on the floor leading into the kitchen. Now the stove is on fire. She makes her way into the kitchen to put out the fire and collapses from the blood loss. She looks up and sees a cloth to help stop the flow of blood. What's the cloth on? The knife block. Tug on the cloth. Knife block comes down and thunk! Knife in chest. But wait, she's still alive. Our boy comes to help her. The stove blows up and knocks a dining room chair over to push the knife in. Now she's dead.
While not all of the deaths show that level of creativity, there are many that do, and the final showdown is not to be missed since it doesn't get more unlikely than that, and yet well within the rules of the film.
Definitely a recommended one for its creativity, originality, and even rewatchability.
Final Destination 3 -- 2006 -- R
The latest installment of the FD franchise where death is the bad guy, and weird deaths are the bill of fare adds very little to the overall storyline. Basically, is you take the original Final Destination film and set it on a roller coaster without any adults, you have this film. The main difference is that one can conveniently look up the plot of the first film online and discover that people will die in the order they were supposed to be killed.
One thing this adds is that for some reason the leads play a minor role in nearly every death, usually by way of distraction or interference. In the first film, every death played out in an intricate series of apparent coincidences that caused the people to die. In FD3, the leads track down the next victim and seemingly inadvertently cause the person's death. It's not quite as cut and dry as the original was, and the deaths are not nearly as creative. There is one incredibly clever sequence in a hardware store, but most of the deaths are quickly done. There is usually a decent setup, but nothing that comes close to some of those in the original film.
In the end, it was a good movie, and did not shame the Final Destination franchise. It also had some good pacing, decent characters (for a horror flick), and a sensible plot. On the down side, it's strength was also its weakness in that it basically rehashed the first film with a slightly different scenario and different characters. The photographs were a nice addition, but really, it wasn't enough to distinguish itself.
Haunted Mansion -- 2003 -- PG
Haunted house movies are notorious for wanting to be creepy but rarely succeeding to any degree (Poltergeist and Amityville Horror being notable exceptions). Disney's contribution to this genre works very well, because they take away the character of the house and make it silly showing as I've always suspected that haunted house movies tend to be silly rather than scary. I was grateful for the silly departure from the norm, and they played with it well.
While the characters are well rounded, their weaknesses were rather cliche. Workaholic dad. Attitude laden teen daughter. Family values going down the tube. Of course, their individual problems are all worke dout in the end, but in the meantime, we get a decent little storyline of intrigue as we tour the haunted mansion. This isn't life changing cinema; this is the movie you go to the cinema for to forget life.
While the characters are well rounded, their weaknesses were rather cliche. Workaholic dad. Attitude laden teen daughter. Family values going down the tube. Of course, their individual problems are all worke dout in the end, but in the meantime, we get a decent little storyline of intrigue as we tour the haunted mansion. This isn't life changing cinema; this is the movie you go to the cinema for to forget life.
I, Robot -- 2004 -- PG-13
This sci-fi outing concerning the ancient plot of robots gone mad has a refreshing character element to it making it practically a high concept movie. Sure, we have lots of action sequences and impressive CG effects, but we also have the story of a man who must overcome his personal prejudices to solve a mystery. The casting of Will Smith as the prejudiced detective strikes an ironic note given his own race and its prejudiced past.
Overall, the movie was well-constructed and stayed right on track to the end with even a few zingers of twisted plot thrown in for good measure.
Overall, the movie was well-constructed and stayed right on track to the end with even a few zingers of twisted plot thrown in for good measure.
House of Wax -- 1953 -- NR
The plot of a wax museum curator using corpses as wax models is a plot going way back and is doubtless the result of the lifelike appearance of wax dummies.
This version of the tale from 1953 with Vincent Price in the lead role is a good take on this tale. When his partner decides to burn the museum down in order to take advantage of the insurance money, the owner, who has an unnatural attachment to his work, takes on apprentices to do his work for him. At the same time, there are a series of murders and the corpse disappears, baffling the police.
Only one person has seen this murderer and that is Sue Allen, but the cops don't believe her description of the assailant as he is badly burned. One might believe this to be the museum owner, but low and behold, when we see him, his face is not only normal, but he is in a wheelchair, and can't walk.
It tells a great tale in the style of a thriller approaching early slasher. The characters are decent and the only complaint I have in this one is the heroine getting herself into danger by going placs we know full well she shouldn't, though in this case, there is at least some measure of reasonable motivation.
Overall, the film works well as an old style horror tale with that macabre twist that is done so well in older films when they couldn't get much in the way of gore past the censors.
This version of the tale from 1953 with Vincent Price in the lead role is a good take on this tale. When his partner decides to burn the museum down in order to take advantage of the insurance money, the owner, who has an unnatural attachment to his work, takes on apprentices to do his work for him. At the same time, there are a series of murders and the corpse disappears, baffling the police.
Only one person has seen this murderer and that is Sue Allen, but the cops don't believe her description of the assailant as he is badly burned. One might believe this to be the museum owner, but low and behold, when we see him, his face is not only normal, but he is in a wheelchair, and can't walk.
It tells a great tale in the style of a thriller approaching early slasher. The characters are decent and the only complaint I have in this one is the heroine getting herself into danger by going placs we know full well she shouldn't, though in this case, there is at least some measure of reasonable motivation.
Overall, the film works well as an old style horror tale with that macabre twist that is done so well in older films when they couldn't get much in the way of gore past the censors.
The Grudge -- 2004 -- PG-13
Wow. This movie tops my list of creepy movies. It has now been several months since I've seen it and I still refuse to watch the Japanese version: Ju-On. It had a good range of scares, which in this case, were nearly always true scares (not the false ones we get a lot). The explanation of why this is going was good enough to suspend disbelief and roll with wht's going on. The scares are what drives the film constantly. The characters, while not really well rounded, serve their purposes decently.
When it comes to execution, I gauge how well it does by the numbers of times I feel like yelling at the movie based on its stupidity. This film does have two shortcomings in this category. In order to acheive the scares, it makes three rather unbelievable moves by its characters.
First, why can't anyone turn on a dang light? We've got characters going into rooms and halls and never once reaching for a light switch. Only in one room did a character reach for a switch and it not work. The others times when the light switch was flipped, let there be light. Granted this would spoil the whole "what's hiding in the dark" feeling, but it would have been better if the character tried to flip the switch and it not work instead of constantly wanting to go in blind.
The second has to do with people entering other people's houses without being invited. This film has to do with one house that has this grudge thing on it, and yet two characters entered this dwelling and felt free to look around at whatever they wanted to. One even rifled through pictures and read a diary.
The last one has a character entering the house to destroy it. He has gasoline and he's ready to torch the place. Does he do it? No. No, he hears some noise in the house and has to check it out. My thoughts while I was watching? You idiot! You're in what amounts to a haunted house, and you hear a noise and you want to check it out EVEN THOUGH YOU JUST SAID that the house kills everything it touches. How annoying.
These things aside, the creep factor was through the roof, and I jumped more than once at the scares it provided. It gave even some psychological creepiness and its form of telling the story was very good jumping from one person's story to another in order to tell the story in the best manner possible. It has enough positives to outweigh the irriations, so if you want to be completely freaked out, give it a viewing and leave some time afterward for a comedy.
When it comes to execution, I gauge how well it does by the numbers of times I feel like yelling at the movie based on its stupidity. This film does have two shortcomings in this category. In order to acheive the scares, it makes three rather unbelievable moves by its characters.
First, why can't anyone turn on a dang light? We've got characters going into rooms and halls and never once reaching for a light switch. Only in one room did a character reach for a switch and it not work. The others times when the light switch was flipped, let there be light. Granted this would spoil the whole "what's hiding in the dark" feeling, but it would have been better if the character tried to flip the switch and it not work instead of constantly wanting to go in blind.
The second has to do with people entering other people's houses without being invited. This film has to do with one house that has this grudge thing on it, and yet two characters entered this dwelling and felt free to look around at whatever they wanted to. One even rifled through pictures and read a diary.
The last one has a character entering the house to destroy it. He has gasoline and he's ready to torch the place. Does he do it? No. No, he hears some noise in the house and has to check it out. My thoughts while I was watching? You idiot! You're in what amounts to a haunted house, and you hear a noise and you want to check it out EVEN THOUGH YOU JUST SAID that the house kills everything it touches. How annoying.
These things aside, the creep factor was through the roof, and I jumped more than once at the scares it provided. It gave even some psychological creepiness and its form of telling the story was very good jumping from one person's story to another in order to tell the story in the best manner possible. It has enough positives to outweigh the irriations, so if you want to be completely freaked out, give it a viewing and leave some time afterward for a comedy.
Ghost Ship -- 2002 -- R
A ghost story that attempts to explain why ships throughout history are discovered adrift without a crew or passengers. In this tale, a stranger entices a crew of ship salvagers to check out an ocean liner he discovered while flying over a particular area of the ocean. Once on board this desolate vessel, strange things begin happening suggesting what might have happened to the passengers and crew of the empty ship.
Not a bad ghost tale really. It has its share of scares and several moments of gore and disturbing images, the opening teaser especially. The ghosts start disturbing and pass from scary to downright interesting in some instances. The overall plot is rather tight and everything gets an explantion as to why it happened, and of course, we get the open end that all good scary movies have.
Where the film gets a little deficient is in the character department. This is, again, another propensity of horror flicks. Strangely, we do get some development though of a couple of characters. Katie, the ghost girl, gets decently rounded as well as one crew member, Greer. You can gauge how well a character has been developed by how you feel when they meet their untimely demise and I felt sorry for Greer. It's a horror flick; this means his dying at some point is really not a spoiler. And like most horror flicks, it's pretty predictable who will live through it.
The story has a good wrap up to it, so overall, it's a pretty good film. Definitely one of the better horror films that you'll find.
Not a bad ghost tale really. It has its share of scares and several moments of gore and disturbing images, the opening teaser especially. The ghosts start disturbing and pass from scary to downright interesting in some instances. The overall plot is rather tight and everything gets an explantion as to why it happened, and of course, we get the open end that all good scary movies have.
Where the film gets a little deficient is in the character department. This is, again, another propensity of horror flicks. Strangely, we do get some development though of a couple of characters. Katie, the ghost girl, gets decently rounded as well as one crew member, Greer. You can gauge how well a character has been developed by how you feel when they meet their untimely demise and I felt sorry for Greer. It's a horror flick; this means his dying at some point is really not a spoiler. And like most horror flicks, it's pretty predictable who will live through it.
The story has a good wrap up to it, so overall, it's a pretty good film. Definitely one of the better horror films that you'll find.
Wednesday, January 21, 2009
The Omen -- 1976 -- R
This quasi-religious horror movie succeeds on many levels. The movie asks the question: what if the Anti-Christ were living among us as a child? A woman gives birth and the baby dies. Another woman gives birth on the same night, but she dies. The priest attending asks the father of the dead baby if he would like to take the child of the dead mother and adopt it as his own, never telling his wife that her own child died. He agrees.
What follows is one bizarre series of events. The movie begs the question: are these events mere coincidence or is there a higher power at work here? Is the child causing these things to happen, or are we just convincing ourselves that he is? Is this child truly the son of Satan or is he just a little boy whose father lapsed into a paranoid fit and needs psychiatric evaluation?
In beautiful fashion, the movie never answers these questions, but leaves it ambiguous ending in the audience's hands.
SPOILER -- I HAVE TO DO THIS.
Happy ending or not? On the one hand, if the child is the antichrist, the father did not complete his mission and evil won. On the other hand, if the father had lost his mind in a paranoid scheme and tried to kill an innocent child, then he was duefully stopped and the child lives. Which is it? Only the sequels will tell.
What follows is one bizarre series of events. The movie begs the question: are these events mere coincidence or is there a higher power at work here? Is the child causing these things to happen, or are we just convincing ourselves that he is? Is this child truly the son of Satan or is he just a little boy whose father lapsed into a paranoid fit and needs psychiatric evaluation?
In beautiful fashion, the movie never answers these questions, but leaves it ambiguous ending in the audience's hands.
SPOILER -- I HAVE TO DO THIS.
Happy ending or not? On the one hand, if the child is the antichrist, the father did not complete his mission and evil won. On the other hand, if the father had lost his mind in a paranoid scheme and tried to kill an innocent child, then he was duefully stopped and the child lives. Which is it? Only the sequels will tell.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
