Thirteen -- 2003 -- R

Written by the movie's director and one of the stars based on some of her life experiences, Thirteen is a disturbing film showing the worst path a young person can take as she is manipulated by the most popular girl in school, and the agony of her mother watching her daughter fall apart before her eyes before she knows what happened. 

The popularity card is always a hot button, and it started there and ran with the story. R rating aside, even if this movie were PG, it is more of a parental movie than a teenager movie. Although the movie is about a teen on the surface, the real plot concerns the relationship between the girl and her mother. I doubt the young co-writer had much to do with this deep high concept.

I went into this film with low expectations and was shocked at how good it really was. It is still disturbing, especially wondering and watching just how far down the rabbit hole this girl will venture before she hits the bottom and has to climb out. Before we could hit the best ending, the girl and the mother both had to grow. Great film.

Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines -- 2003 -- R

This third installment of the every-ten-years-or-so Terminator franchise is the first without writer/director/creator James Cameron at the helm. The idea here is to blow up as much stuff as possible and cause as much destruction as possible. The TX terminator was clever, although it was a little disturbing to have Arnold beating up a girl less than half his size. We also have a rather ingenious serious of reversals to turn the story on its ear.

A hefty flaw is the rate of character development. We are introduced to the four main characters very quickly, and before we know it, stuff is happening to them. The trouble is we only care so far as these are people in a tight situation. The development comes slowly over the course of the film and we eventually get to know them well enough to care somewhat. 

Really the biggest problem has to do with the general Terminator universe and the conceivability of this film in conjunction with the previous two. In The Terminator, a man was sent back after Skynet sent a Terminator through time before it was destroyed. Terminator 2 bends this a bit by Skynet sending an upgraded model somehow only to be followed again by a member of the resistence, this time a reprogrammed Terminator. Terminator 3 continues this far fetched idea, but takes it a little further into the land of far-fetched-ness in that Skynet somehow learned from its mistakes with the T-1000, upgraded the model again, sent this model back in time to a point further in the future right before it is supposed to take over the world, another Teminator was captured and reprogrammed to remember what the previous Terminator was taught, even though John says he has to learn all over again, and then there's a bit of a twist that derails the whole thing.

If you can get around the paradoxical universe the Terminator creates, it's not a bad flick. You start asking why, and the whole thing falls apart.

The "Sgt Candy" scene from the special features, however, was priceless.

Time Bandits -- 1981 -- PG

A group of short robbers have stolen a map that allows them to travel through time and space via "holes" in the fabric of time. They want to use this to steal valuable things, but the Supreme Being is on their tail wanting the map back. They inadvertently kidnap a boy who helps them on their adventures.

This film was written by Monty Python alums Michael Palin and Terry Gilliam, and then directed by Terry Gilliam. The Python influence is extremely obvious throughout the film as each time serves as a tableau sketch in time-honored Python style. The film has some extremely funny moments, as could be expected, and other moments that are just silly, as could also be expected. A ton of classic Python moments carry over from their earlier films, notably their apparent love of medieval settings, people being hit for no apparent reason, and a character who blows up others by pointing (remember "Tim" from the Holy Grail?). They even brought in John Cleese to get half the Python team in this movie.

It flows well, has plenty of conflict between the theives and the boy as well as a fair amount of compassion and respect as they move along. 

While their travel to the dark tower is a little contrived as well as the conflict as they reach it a bit forced, the pace does keep up and the visuals are great for the time. The ending does leave something to be desired as it leaves us wanting for something, despite the idea of "no one listens to their kids" playing out graphically.

Overall, the picture is a good watch if you don't might the ridiculous and occasionally irreverent humor that the Monty Python crew is notorious for. It moves quickly and was written with kids in mind, so it works well also for those short attention spanned tykes too.

Touch of Evil -- 1958 -- PG-13/NR

I watched the restored (and rated) director's cut of this film.

A poignant social commentary on the prejudicial climate of the United States/Mexican border in Texas. An influential businessman is murdered via car bomb; the bomb was set in Mexico, but blew up in the US. The detective in the Texas border town sets himself on the case to find the person who did it, and he's sure the person is a Mexican. A Mexican agent accompanies the investigation (not the detective, because he won't allow it). When the detective discovers dynamite in a place where the agent already looked, the agent becomes suspicious that the detective is planting evidence to win cases. 

While moving at a cerebral pace, this film is really interesting to watch and unfold. Even when the truth comes out, it stays interesting right up to its conclusion and even a bit of a thought and discussion provoking twist once the story is all over. Overall, a very good and worth watching film from the mastermind of Orson Welles, who plays the prejudicial detective along with Charleton Heston as the Mexican agent (?!).

To Kill A Mockingbird -- 1962 -- NR

This is a film which follows primarily two children during the great depression living their lives in a small Alabama town suffering greatly from the depression. Through them, we get also the development of their father, a lawyer, as he tries a case of a black man accused of raping a white woman.

While the film covers an oddly large amount of time from one summer to another, the movie centers around two primary topics. The one providing info about the black man and his crime; the other about a mysterious character named Boo Radley who we never see until near the end. These two characters provide almost perfect parallels to each other in the lives of the father and children respectively.

While most of the events ran to an inevitable conclusion, the film was very satisfying to watch, had some great plotting, a very well-paced and well setup courtroom scene (which is saying a lot), and some great characters running around town. A solid film.

The Tailor of Panama -- 2001 -- R

Andy Osnard is an MI-6 agent (MI-6 is the British Secret Service made famous by James Bond), played I'm sure not coincidentally by Pierce Brosnan, who got into trouble by blowing his cover and having an affair with a minister's wife. As a result he is sent to Panama to check around and see if anything is going on with the canal. There, he finds a tailor named Pendel who not only makes fine suits but spins elaborate yarns. 

His stories intrigue Osnard, who could care less about national security and is more interested in finding himself a large retirement nest egg. He takes Pendel's stories (which I think he knows are bogus) and runs with them with further embellishments and turns it into the secret service. This causes a chain reaction of events up to the potential invasion of Panama by the United States.

I think the movie, though crass and vulgar for no real reason, was well conceived and well written with a clever storyline of the tailor who lives within his web of stories. He hasn't even told his wife the truth about his past -- another thing, beyond a severe need for money, that Osnard holds over his head. The main characters are well rounded and their motives are understandable. Even though Osnard is a clear cut scoundral, he still has a need either for redemption and barring that, he'll take what he can get and get out.

The primary weakness has to do with the backstory of why Osnard is in Panama, something I never fully understood. He wasn't sent there to be out of the way; it's like he had a reason, but I never got it.

Beyond this, though, good film.

The Treasure of the Sierra Madre -- 1948 -- NR

This films follows the physical and subsequent psychological struggles of three men who prospect for gold in the mountains, find it, and then have to get it back without being robbed by bandits or each other. 

The three main characters are very well developed, and even the one who is only in a few scenes manages to get enough development to go from a scoundrel to a sympathetic character.

The final act is nothing short of absolute irony as all their worst fears play out, but not in the way they or we would expect. Humphrey Bogart is brilliant is showing the psychological downfall of a man overcome by unfounded paranoia.

This is another classic that goes to show that you can get away with a potentially mundane plot if you have some awesome characters. I will admit to boredom during the beginning of the film, but as the characters unfolded, that was far more interesting than some stupid gold-digging movie. Definitely worth watching.

And as a note of trivia, this is probably where the line "Badges? We ain't got no badges. We don't need no badges. I don't have to show you any stinking badges." spoken with a heavy Mexican accent originated.

The Ten Commandments -- 1956 -- G

Cecil B. DeMille's classic bible story in a 220 minute masterpiece. The story of Moses is vividly told in this really long movie that even has an intermission. We have rounded characters with histories, motivations, and purposes in the film. Each person contributes something to the story at hand and fulfilling every verse that the Bible gives for one of the Bible's greatest prophets. 

The big kudos go to the writers of this film, since the Bible gives very little info on the goings on around Moses that shaped his world and pushed him to where he ended up, so it was up to the writers to create much of what goes on in this mvie and make it works to the story's benefit -- something that it does very, very well.

The story of Moses includes some vivid effects and the Ten Commandments delivers. A pillar of fire blocks Pharoah's path to the Israelites while they escape across the land beneath the Red Sea that has been parted for them by God. It's a wonderful effect to see played out. We also get the stick transforming into a snake, the water turns to blood before our eyes, the mist of the Angel of Death covers the ground, and the finger of God writes the Ten Commandments.

Not only a great viewing for one who believes the Bible, but it stands as a must see classic in the annals of film history.

The Third Man -- 1949 -- NR

A man goes to visit his friend in war-torn Vienna, but when he gets there, he learns his friend died in an automobile accident. As he asks around, he is initially told that two men carried his friend's body off the road, but upon talking to a porter who saw what happened, he learns there was a third man on the scene. 

The movie flows like a classic noir thriller until the identity of the Third Man is revealed. From there, it answers a bunch of whys and then a big chase to the end. I liked the build to the reveal, but for me the second half couldn't measure up to the first. It did have an exciting underground chase scene and the final showdown was well-conceived. Also, the characters are good, the plot is solid, and it has some great pacing, but the ending has got to be better than the beginning, and that didn't happen here.

Tomb Raider -- 2001 -- PG-13

This is a film that was frustrating in how much didn't work, but how easy it would have been to fix its shortcomings. I probably could have done it in an afternoon. It had a final run time of 1 hour, 40 minutes. In a 2 hour movie world, they could have added another twenty minutes to take this film up to a much better level.

I was worried from the opening scene, which should give us an idea of what we're in for. So we have what amounts to our "tomb raider" fighting a robot in a tomb. Huh? It appears the robot is guarding a treasure of some kind, but that makes no sense in ancient architecture. When its explanation was revealed, it made sense in context, but didn't make sense dramatically. She isn't tomb raiding at all...but why not? Why aren't we seeing her in action instead of in a farce? To make things worse for this opener, nothing in this opening scene returns anywhere else in the film, meaning that you could cut this scene entirely and lose nothing. That's bad.

Then, there was the star. Not the actress, who did fine, but the character. In a movie like this one, you have a choice: either make her a person with depth and a past, or make her like Bond, with no past, but a lot of character. They chose to do neither. She's a woman with half a past, sort of a fatal flaw that really doesn't play into anything, and very little development. The development she does have is barely setup and not explained. She needed to be either filled out to the point where she had some kind of growth during the film, or made a static character with a Bond or Indiana Jone-like respect to her.

The other characters were almost completely flat. Her counterpart, Alex West, was given a meager past with her that is never delved into nor expounded upon, nor even utilized. His stand on what's going on is thin to none. Somewhere near the end, we get a half-baked idea that there might be a love interest or something there, but it was neither setup nor really used either. This relationship between him and Lara could have been used for a lot of development and growth between them, however, I guess in the interest of moving along, nothing was done with it, and his very presence is questionable.

The villain also fell flat primarily due to minimal setup. No character moments were really given to him. He delegated most of the action to other characters only taking center stage at the end, which is really too late to show off the villain's abilities. His motivation is ill-explained, and although he gets a pay-off, how his help acts at the end makes little sense except to bring the film to a close.

The plot had its own problems, primarily due to some major plot points being thrust at us with very little reason. The first plot point was stumbled upon due to a dream or something, and Lara continued to have this almost psychic tendency to get herself going in the right direction. Now this is fine if it is setup properly, but without that setup, it falters badly and just feels like bad storytelling. Then came the bigger question: why is she continuing on with the plot? She was given a basic mission and she accomplished it for the most part before we hit the one hour point. Some hinting was done at a possible reason for her to go on, but no reason was given as to why that reason was so important to her, especially since the reason goes against her fulfilling the mission.

The basic plot is actually fine. If it had been more action oriented and the characters better drawn, this film would have been a sight to behold. The actions sequences were actually pretty cool, and the concept, while a little hard to swallow, is fairly well explained. Many of the sequence are in line with what a video game adaptation would be in that they are a little over the top in scale, but that works for the idea.

Where this movie falls apart is in the execution of the idea. The writers and filmmakers took too many shortcuts in the conception of the storyline. They cut out character for action, and character driven plot for unexplained psychic phenomena-driven plot. With some very short scenes, this film could have been much, much better, but as is, it remains mediocre.

THX 1138 -- 1971 -- R

George Lucas's first feature film bears little resemblance to his later works, and bears a storyline that cannot be helped but feel like a variation of 1984.

We follow a worker who has been given the name THX 1138 through his world where they are components of a society. Sex and love are forbidden in this world, and THX engages in both with his roommate, leaving her pregnant. They plan on escaping the city, but are instead captured.

It's a weird little story and the ending is just as strange. On the one hand, our hero completes his mission, but on the other hand, it leaves you wanting more. What primarily came out of this film was giving Lucas the open doors to make American Graffiti and then Star Wars. The film's title finds its way into other Lucas films as well as the now standard theatre sound system, THX, which Lucas co-developed. 

Robert Duvall, who played THX, would be in the Godfather the following year, and Donald Pleasance, who played THX's sort-of nemesis SEN, would be most unfortunately best known for his role in 1978's Halloween as Dr. Loomis.

It makes for an interesting insight into the early creativity of George Lucas when he has vision, style, and a darker outlook on life, but as a basic film, it's not at the top of any list of favorites of mine.

Electronic Labyrinth THX 1138 4EB -- 1967 -- NR

This is George Lucas' short film that he did in college that was seen by Francis Ford Coppola that enabled him to make THX 1138 and then American Graffiti and then Star Wars. The one that started it all, you might say.

It's a short with a run time of 15 minutes, so it has a single plot thread: THX 1138 4EB escapes. He is followed electronically until lost. It paints a strange picture of the future in its images. We know 1138's mate did not acknowledge being in love, and at the end, a "we're sorry, he died" announcement was played (as THX 1138 4EB escaped into the sunlight) advising 1138's mate that she could pick up another mate, male or female -- select preference, by going down to such and such a place.

Pacing wasn't bad, and it was edited fairly well. There wasn't a lot of character deveopment to be had, since the backbone of the story was 1138 escaping. It worked well to show off Lucas' directing ability, but had little in the way of story. Good to see where the guy came from, though.

The Texas Chain Saw Massacre -- 1974 -- R

One of Entertainment Weekly's 25 scariest movies of all time fell rather flat in my opinion. I watch movies fo substance, character, plot, and other things beyond just the visuals. This film had a paper thin plot, which is fine, since the suspense was the point of the film, anyway. 

When it comes to the characters, they were mostly cardboard cutouts, none of which showing any real character beyond their purpose in the film: get killed. They performed my number one horror pet peeve: knocking senselessly on a door asking if someone is home and then just walking in when no one answers and the door is open. Seriously, who does this? This film features no less than three of these imbecils, and being Texas, they were all killed, probably for breaking and entering. I barely knew their names, much less enough about them to care that they just got hacked to death. I know it's supposed to be the human element, and I will grant the suspense in these sections was done very well, but I already booed it because they didn't belong in that house to begin with.

The final third of the film featured the heroine and only survivor screaming in a chair she was tied to at the dining room table. I know she was sitting on a corpse, but she screamed pretty randomly, so I wasn't sure if there was something going on behind her or not. Maybe she was just screaming because of the bizarre and disturbing situation.

The draw of this film for the gore hounds of the world comes down to its severely disturbing images. When it comes to just freaky bizarre stuff, this movie has it by the truckload. Just dead things everywhere and disturbing practices by the villains, one which included "grandpa" sucking blood ou of the girl's finger. What was that all about? The fear in the last third rested around these guys being completely out of their minds and not knowing what they're going to do next.

The director did a fine job in building suspense because this film has a load of highly suspenseful sections that would rank it highly in the field of scares, but the characters were so unbelievable that it was hard to accept what was going on which served to ruin, at least for me, the wonderful suspense the director was setting up.

Tomb Raider: Cradle of Life - 2003 - PG-13

This sequel to the film based on the video game is about as contrived as movies come. Every cliche was operating is full effect in this archaelogical action film about the shapely Lara Croft who tries to be Indiana Jones, but doesn't make the cut on her brains, exactly.

The film opens with the annoyingly cliche "everybody's looking for the same thing at the same time" routine, something that is near impossible in the real world, since stuff that's been buried for 3000 years tends to remain undisturbed until one person finds it. If more than one person is looking, it helps to know why. This one seemed random.

She is promised all the manpower in England, and she wants a convict. The best way to protect against this weapon they're looking for is to not find it, and yet they look for it anyway. It turns out to not even be accessible without the orb thing she found in the beginning, hence staying home would have helped immensely here. Some good effects and scary creatures in the forestal area just outside the Cradle though.

Characters are decent but relatively thin as usual. The final scene between Lara and Terry had little impact. Perhaps if they'd left more of the chemistry in, it would have helped. The villain was a "just cause" kind of guy. That's why he was evil.

So this installment fell short of being much more than an action film whose action wasn't even that interesting.

A Trip to the Moon -- 1902

If you've seen a space documentary, you've probably seen a clip from this film. This is the one where a group of astronomers get in an oversized bullet and is shot to the moon (which has a face) and lands in the moon's eye. Once there, they run across the natives (who explode when hit), manage to piss them off, and run home by way of pushing the bullet to a ledge and one guy pulling the bullet off the ledge and back to earth.

The whole thing was very whimsically done, and it is considered the first sci-fi movie. The special effects were very clever and creative, and definitely a step up from what was seen to that point since those things did not exist in the real world. It also played out the action in sets made for the presentation.

The story was rather corny and hard to accept, but we also have a better understanding today of what's out there. However, the effects here are cutting edge for the time, and really showed what a clever guy with a camera could get away with.

To add to this, at the time, movies were silent since they hadn't figured out how to incorpate sound yet. This film had a narrative intended to be read at the film's showing, so we had a voiceover going through the whole thing. Rather clever way of getting around that sound problem in my opinion.

The Tooth Fairy -- 2006 -- NR

Got me a kind of graphic horror flick this time that is a twist on the traditional tooth fairy mythology. This time, the tooth fairy is a witch who longs for your last baby tooth, and once she takes it, she kills you rather brutally with an axe. She keeps the tooth which traps the soul of the child in limbo between heaven and hell.

Another kicker here is she lived in the house purchased by our main characters with the intention of turning it into a bed & breakfast. So we have kind of a Friday the 13th idea going on in that we not only have the little girl who has, of course, lost her last baby tooth, but the witch's spirit has been brought back due to all the wonderful renovations to her house. You'd think she'd be thrilled with the boost to the property value.

So one by one, the people who are staying in the house get hacked in graphic and disgusting ways dumping blood everywhere. Things are complicated by a weird hate relationship between the new owner and some guys in town who were squatting on the property. It's a weird kind of relationship, and seems thrown in only to add to the screen time, since their existence adds very little to the overall plot and doesn't forward the story really. I'm sure if the core story were over 90 minutes, these guys wouldn't even be here.

The characters themselves are pretty well drawn. We have a past and future for each of the main ones, and very quickly into the film, we actually hope for the best for them, which makes their deaths a bit of a bummer. The deaths themselves are hidden fairly well in the order they'll die. The first one (not the teaser, but after that one) is dead obvious not only who but how, but fortunately that telegraphing ended there (although an obvious weapon was setup kind of early).

As for the plot, it was decent. We had our share of dumb moves peculiar to the horror genre. The girl walks into a clearly abandoned shed, and still asks if anyone is there. Lots of "hello?"s here and there. People wandering into areas that no one in their right mind would wander into. People exploring strange noises even though they know there's a killer out there (seriously, people don't do this!). People getting left alone (often as more of a matter of convenience rather than need). One character was told that a certain item would slow down the tooth fairy. This item (which has unlimited use) was used once and for some reason discarded.

And let us not forget the cranky old person who knows the whole history of everything and visits once and is then visited later so we can learn all there is to know, including how to win. This person was the most underdeveloped, though without her, we'd've been confused.

The biggest downside is the suspense (or rather lack thereof). We are introduced to the danger when it comes up and kept abreast of what it is doing which (if you know anything about fear) does not inspire any kind of dread or suspense. It's a tad creepy at times, and there's a little dread when you know someone is going to be hacked, but when it comes to suspense, there is none. Once the tooth fairy picks someone, it is over pretty quick. No false scares. No wondering whether the person is in danger or not. Just there's the monster. There's the victim. Cut back and forth and whack! Game over, man. It's the weakest part of the whole thing, though suspense (strangely) is more a facet of thrillers than it is horrors, which focus primarily on the gore effects rather than the slow build of tension.

In the end, it was actually pretty good. We had a decent plot (though ripe with horror cliches), good characters, and some good action. For you horror buffs, there is lots of gore and yes, the required bare bosoms (can't get through a horror flick without 'em). So the film works better than most horror movies I've seen, and if you like horror, it's worth a look. Just don't look to be scared; only a bit creeped.

Taxi Driver -- 1976 -- R

In one of the top films of all time according to IMDB, Taxi Driver follows a well-meaning, and even naive, guy who drives a taxi. Simple as that. Along his travels, we run across a variety of different characters that serve to advance his own character, but really very little else. This is one of those movies that really exemplifies the importance of character over plot when it comes to great films.

Basically, we get this guy who comes to New York and decides to make ends meet (since he's up all night anyway), he'll drive a taxi. Along the way, he finds a girl he is attracted to, and though this situation was severly underused, it showed more of his naiveity in taking a girl to a movie -- a porn movie. He finds the young prostitute, Iris, and takes an interest in her as a person. He aquires some guns and such, but for reasons we are mostly unaware of, though likely protection.

His well-meaning nature shows through in nearly everything he does...except one. I do not, for the life of me, understand why he threatened the senator. I don't know if he was armed or not, but he looked threatening, and was chased off. It didn't make a lot of sense to me. Maybe I missed something.

Overall, it was an interesting character sketch of one guy and a slice of his life in a taxi. It's one of those that if they wanted to do a TV series, they probably could. Who knows, maybe the creator of the series "Taxi" that came out in 1978 was partly inspired by this film.

Tales From The Grudge -- 2006

Included on the Grudge 2 DVD were three interconnecting short films that illustrate a furthering of the Grudge mythology. If you haven't seen The Grudge 2 and don't want this little twist spoiled, then don't read past this point as the shorts use a piece of information from The Grudge 2 and are best watched following the viewing of that film. Consider yourself warned.

In the second film, the curse grows to the point of outgrowing the house and gaining the ability of either following characters or being passed from one character to another like a kind of disease. This short series of 3 films totaling maybe 8 minutes in all shows one way this could happen.

It begins with a guy who actually went into the house. He calls his girl and says he found nothing and he's coming home, but he sends her a picture on his cell phone. He dies shortly thereafter. The next piece begins with the call from the previous one. The girl hangs up and calls her friend about some party. She gets her man's picture and sees Kayako in the picture before she is taken. Finally, the third one begins with the call with the girl of the previous one. After a short game of hide and seek, the curse overtakes this one as well. Will it continue? Well, the phone rings at the end and the kid the friend was watching reaches for it.

It's a clever little series of shorts that was made to illustrate a point. They are so short that little info is given on these characters other than they are related to the house somehow. But since it is a short, this is forgivable since we get some tidbit on each of them to make them a little real. The point is the passing of the curse anyway.

So it's a nice addition to the DVD, and gives Grudge / Ju-On junkies a little more to drool over, but they're not the most fabulous things ever created.

The Texas Chainsaw Massacre: The Beginning -- 2006 -- R

I know there's an unrated version of this one, but I think I got the R rated version.

This is a prequel to the curiously popular Texas Chainsaw Massacre film; this prequel is actually specific to the 2003 remake as opposed to the 1974 -- sorry to say -- classic. What the original film had was lots of shock value, and while our shock receptors aren't on as high as they used to be, this one does have a good point or two about it in that it at least plays out better than the original.

It is subtitled "The Beginning" indicating that we learn about Leatherface (a.k.a. Tommy) and his family's killing spree prior to the original film, kind of tauting the "how we got there from here" idea. When it comes to this notion, we do get the beginning of Leatherface, but only in the form of his weird birth in a local slaughterhouse, his being dumped in a dumpster and then subsequently rescued. We get a series of photographs of him growing up and then we're about 3 years before the original film, and big surprise, he's working in the same slaughterhouse where he was born...I wonder if he knew this. The slaughterhouse is shut down by the health department and Tommy decides he's not going to be thrown out by the crass-talking so he kills the owner...and then leaves. We also get a rather stomach turning scene where Tommy's mask is replaced by his human-leather face.

Enter normal slasher-land where we meet four typical late-teens. We get the Army guy who's going back to Vietnam, his brother who is being drafted and doesn't want to go, and their girlfriends who are traveling down to Fort Something with them. Unlike the original where the group stops at a house and invades it before checking out the house next door and invading it too, this group is driving down the road only to be accosted by bikers and such, until one of them wants to rob them. Well, like a good stereotyped grunt, the kid pulls a gun out of the glove compartment and takes his eyes off the road long enough to run into a cow that he should have seen from a mile away on that long, flat stretch of road.

This causes a little accident and they're picked up by our feux sheriff of the bad guys' house of death (he knocked off the real sheriff earlier). So now they are all dragged into the house to die, instead of walking in there on their own. This section of the film creates a real feeling of hopelessness and plain unfir cruelty. What's the worst that could happen? Yeah, they get that part down pat. While character development is minimized, the things these characters endure creates that sympathy vote, since you don't want stuff like this happening to anyone. They actually try to escape at every opportunity instead of hanging out and waiting for the bad guys before trying to get away. The bad guys use every cruel method at their deposal to keep their prey trapped.

Compassion is, of course, the undoing of our characters as it is for a lot of horror movie characters, and to be honest, we wouldn't respect them if they didn't have this. Too often, they have escape in their grasp but feel the human need to save their comrades. Do their friends stand a chance at survival? Are they dead already? Is that a scream I hear? That basic human need to save someone else is at a constant high here and makes you wonder whether they shouldn't have just been selfish and deal with our contempt.

Beyond these improvements over the original storyline, they copy a great deal of it. The dinner table. The escape by jumping out a window. The general grotesque hopelessness of the whole ordeal, and of course, the multi-hundred-yard dash from Tommy and his trademark never-runs-out-of-gas chainsaw.

So this is a mixed bag of a film. It has some improvements over the original that make it a better viewing, but at the same time, it offers very little new material to make it unique. Sure, we get the backstory of the lesser horror icon of Leatherface, but is that enough to sustain the movie as a milestone? Not really. Despite its backstory, the movie isn't unique and uses a slew of horror standards to tell its tale. I'll give it props on a unique ending in the horror world, but for the most parts, it's just another slasher.

This Film Is Not Yet Rated -- 2006 -- NC-17 (Rating Surrendered)

This is a documentary about the MPAA and the ratings system. More specifically, it concerns how and why films are rated in an attempt to get to the bottom of why some films get an R while others get a PG-13 and while others get NC-17 when films that have the same scenes get an R. It also delves into the inner sanctum of the MPAA via guerilla filmmaking to find out who the mysteriouos film raters are. It makes for an interesting documentary, and it's very informative, so rather than comment on how the documentary is made (what's the point?), I'll kind of talk about some of its opinions.

One point it repeatedly tries to drive home is the idea that the MPAA equals censorship, and blames this organization for getting content cut from their films because they give it a high rating. It is a fact that NC-17 spells death for any film because of marketing and sales, but when you get right down to it, is that the fault of the MPAA? A brief point was made that was brushed off of the true culprits of censorship, and they aren't the MPAA.

The purpose of the MPAA which was stated in the midst of the documentary is that ratings are given to inform parents of the state of the film's content. The ratings are well known: G, PG, PG-13, R, and NC-17 (formerly X). They each have their place on films, and to those of us who are over the age of 17, these ratings mean nothing...absolutely nothing. We can watch anything we want. Some people use them as a means to decide whether they want the type of content the ratings imply, but at the end of the day, the purpose of the ratings are exactly the same: to allow the viewer a quick insight to the film's content as it relates to children.

Where does the censorship come in? They hit it in the doc. Marketing, sales, movie theatre owners, Wal-Mart, Blockbuster... They stated Wal-Mart and Blockbuster (who purchase 40% of the video sales collectively) will not buy or carry NC-17 films. You can't run trailers for R or NC-17 films on TV. So should we picketing for censorship? The MPAA only gives the ratings. It is those who are using those ratings for decision making that are practicing the censorship. 

Ironically, I got this from the public library. Since the film surrendered its NC-17 rating that it got from the MPAA, it is now Not Rated at all. I guess that means it can be purchased.

This is not to say that the MPAA is not without its problems and inconsistencies. I've seen R rated movies that confound me as to why they're R (PG-13 would make more sense). I've also seen PG or PG-13 movies that are better placed as R (Amityville 3-D immediately springs to mind as it has some rather sick scenes, yet it got a PG rating, getting rated just before the PG-13 rating came out; I suspect Poltergeist had something to do with that as Spielberg fought Poltergeist's R rating initially and got it a PG). They apparently don't provide any notes as to why a movie gets a rating to some people, but to others, they provide details as to which scenes and moments should be cut. It was really strange, and while I know the slant of the documentary was against the MPAA, they made some solid points to their problems.

Personally, I think the purpose of the MPAA is legit, but the information the MPAA provides has been abused by marketing, retailers, and others to practice the censorship that the MPAA was created to avoid. The point of the ratings system was to allow the filmmaker to make the film they want to and let the viewer know ahead of time what kind of film they were in for and whether the children should come. I do feel that films should receive equal treatment regardless of their ratings and the parents should be given the choice of whether kids could watch it or not. Unfortunately, some parents don't want to take any responsibility for anything causing retailers like Wal-Mart to think for them and censor films they don't think are family friendly based on the rating alone. But if these films can be cut down to R, aren't you getting the same thing without the 3 seconds of content that sent it over the fence? In fact, one film made a "neuter version" of their film so they could exhibit the original NC-17 version, and sell the film in some form through Wal-Mart.

If enough films got NC-17 ratings and pushed for their inclusion (apparently A LOT of films get NC-17 for a variety of reasons in their first go round through the MPAA; the Friday the 13th series, I hear, has gotten either X or NC-17 every single time it goes through the first time for violence), we'd get some changes to what gets censored. But since everyone feels victimized and folds to the system, the system maintains their stranglehold.