Movies

Halloween (2007)

skyhawk — Fri, 31 Aug 2007 01:43:58 -0700

Rob Zombie's Halloween is everything you would expect from a Rob Zombie movie. Blood, gore, Sherri Moon, and grit. Lots of grit. If there is one thing that can be said of this Halloween is that the movie is as dirty as the mind of Michael Myers.

Zombie is on record as wanting this movie to explore more of Myers back-story, and there it succeeds. For the first half of the film, we are presented with Michael as a tormented child who has a rational for his crimes, at least at the beginning. His stripper single-mother and her abusive boyfriend almost push the opening moments of the film into a ridiculous parody of the cliche "rough childhood". Bullying leads to Michael initial step over the line, and instead of Carpenters evil for no-reason, we are presented with causes to his crimes. Edges of Michael's insanity are present here and there in the beginning, but Zombie has crafted this movie (at least the first part) in such a way to invoke the audiences sympathy. Michael is the most likable of all of his family, minus the baby Laurie.

As much as I didn't really connect with the first half of the movie, the second half almost makes up for it. The content of the original 90 minute movie are compressed into around 40 minutes, and the compression removes the bits of story that made the original slow in places. Make no mistake, this is Michael's movie. Laurie Strode, played now by Scout Taylor-Compton, is not the pivot point that Jamie Lee Curtis was in the 1978 original. Danielle Harris picks up the mantel of Annie Brackett, the Sheriffs daughter, and Laurie's best friend. Harris played Laurie's daughter in Halloween 4 and 5, adding a nod to the previous movies. No spoilers but - I am not sure I am pleased with Annie's ultimate fate in this movie. It did not fit with what we know of Michael.

As much as Michael is the focus of the first half, his transformation into The Shape for the second half wouldn't resonate as much without the scenes of Michael talking (!!!) to Loomis before his descent into muted madness. Zombie shows the audience Michael's humanity slip away until he only remains the shell of evil that we have become familiar with. One point Zombie has made about re-imagining this series, is that Freddy, Jason, and Michael are so familiar now that it is hard to be scared of them. He has succeeded in changing our perception of Michael, but it remains to be seen if it is a lasting change.

Purists will most likely have problems with this adaptation. Elements stay close enough to the original story to be frustrating at points. Some of the dialogue feels as if was written after watching the original once, and then making notes. Sequences are recreated (walking home, Michael outside the school, "ghost" Michael) well, but the homages feel forced in places. Unlikely as it is, Zombie could have gone farther if he retreated farther back from the source material in places. The one addition that was not needed was the "back-story" for Michael's mask. Part of the terror of Myers is the irrational, not the reason behind his props.

This is a 2007 horror movie. The psychopaths are sympathetic, the virginal heroine not so virginal, and the deaths move as far away from the bloodless 1978 Halloween as you can. This movie was not crafted to relaunch the franchise, but to put an end on it.

Blood and Chocolate

erisa — Tue, 27 Mar 2007 23:22:35 -0700

Blood and Chocolate; not necessarily a werewolf movie, not necessarily a romance, just a movie straddling the fence to appeal to as many people as possible. This never really works, but this movie had its moments.

The movie, originally a young adult novel written by Annette Curtis Klause, follows a young girl named Vivien (The Woods' Agnes Bruckner) who was born a shape-shifter into a tribe called the loup garoux. Ten years before, in the mountains of Colorado, Vivien witnessed the brutal murder of her family by a pack of hunters. She escaped, but for her future safety the loup garoux's pack leader, Gabriel (Taking Lives Olivier Martinez) relocated her to Bucharest to be with her "family".

Now Vivien is living amongst her pack in relative safety, following strict pack rule set up by Gabriel. One rule is that members of the pack must never hunt alone, a rule that Vivien's cousin Rafe (Bryan Dick), and next and line does not follow, and another rule, in order for the survival of the dwindling loup garoux clan, is that Gabriel takes on a new bride every seven years. Vivien is next. However, when her affections for a visiting American graphic novelist, Aiden, (Basic Instinct's Hugh Dancy) threatens to expose her family's secret society, she must choose between her love for a human and betraying the secret vows of her family.

The marketing for this film, from the preview all the way down to the website, was touting Blood and Chocolate as a modern day love story resembling Romeo and Juliet, the world of the loup garoux, or werewolf, versus the world of the human. I think marketing it this way was a decision made early on, as Blood and Chocolate was produced by Lakeshore Entertainment, the same producers behind the very successful Underworld movies. Underworld truly did manage to capture the story of the star-crossed lovers trapped on opposing sides, but Blood and Chocolate did not. It never gave you the opportunity. You got to know the inner workings of the loup garoux pack on an intimate level, which were some of the best parts of the movie, but the few human characters shown are rather unlikable or one-demential. There's the red-dressed, vixen temptress who gets it in the beginning, and she totally deserved it. There's the drug dealer bailed out of jail only to be chased down and eaten because he was selling drugs to children. You didn't mind him dying either. Then there's Aiden the human love interest. You do like him, but he's a bad boy with a dark past. The movie even begins with Vivien's parents being gunned down by the hunters. With all of those examples, are we supposed to like humans at all? There is no equal ground between these two worlds. The humans are unruly because of their lack of order, something that the loup garoux spent 2,000 years perfecting, and Vivien is about to screw it all up.

Actually it wasn't that I wanted these two kids to be together because I felt that there really can be a just world with a place for all all types of love, but more because Gabriel and all of his followers kept telling Vivien that she couldn't be with a human. Then my anti-authority, "you can't tell her what to do" side of my personality got ruffled and wanted the lovers to piss on everyone's rules, and they do.

I've read online that some die hard werewolf fans couldn't be bothered with the way they presented the werewolves, much less the romance, but I quite liked it. Aiden, who I affectionately call "exposition man" lays it all out for us. The loup garoux aren't the werewolves that people know from literature. There is no curse or mark of the beast causing painful changes of the full moon creating dangerous creatures that can only be hunted down in order to save themselves and everyone around them. No, they are born werewolves, not made. They can change at will almost transcendentally, and they weren't all hunted down because they weren't dangerous, they were actually worshipped and adored. And with that, "exposition man" managed to piss off the majority of the audience, the werewolf fans who bought their tickets because they thought that they were going to see a werewolf movie worthy of a tormented Lon Chaney Jr.; but as I said before, I quite like the change.

I loved that Blood and Chocolate took a different approach with the werewolves, that they weren't the worst of wolves and the worst of humans, creating bloodthirsty killing machines, but that they were instead the best qualities of both, shape-shifting into something better, transcendental. I loved that pack order was thoroughly delved into showing the hierarchy and structure and the break down of structure, reminding me of furry version of the royal family. And I loved that they actually used real wolves in the changes. No masks or body suits here. The best part of the movie though, was where the director Katja von Garnier (Bandits) seemed to take the most time exploring, "the hunt". All of the loup garoux gather together in their sacred circle to hunt the wicked drug dealer mentioned earlier and to feast upon him if he can't reach the safe zone in time. This chase was absolutely beautiful. The drug dealer running for his life, plodded along clumsily, sweating, like an oaf, but the loup garoux chasing him seemed to float along effortlessly out of time, in a sort of ballet choreographed to a very interesting piece of music combining middle-eastern rhythms and instrumentation with a techno back-beat. They, like the music, were the perfect combination of old world and the new, wolf and human. Then they would change into a beautiful ball of silver light, coming out as wolves on the other side. It was hypnotic.

So, don't see this movie if you are expecting the greatest star-crossed lovers to ever appear on the screen, and don't see this movie if you are hoping to see a traditional, rip-your-throat-out werewolf movie. Do see this movie, however, if you would like to see a romance only worthy of the CW, taking place in a political world where to be a loup garoux is pretty kick ass, maybe even wonderful, if only the pack can keep the next generation in line.

The Number 23 Spoilers

erisa — Sun, 25 Mar 2007 19:20:13 -0700

I saw The Number 23 opening weekend. I was so excited to see this movie that I went on my own. I am a big Jim Carrey fan and not for his work as a comedic actor- In Living Color's Fire Marshal Bill or Ace Ventura- but for his later, more reflective work, like his roles in Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind and The Truman Show. I even liked him in The Majestic. I know The Majestic is not thought of as a great movie, or even a good movie, but I still enjoyed it. Jim Carrey brought an innocent, sweetness to the role that reminded me very much of Jimmy Stewart. Similarily to Jimmy Stewart, you really like Jim Carrey's characters, maybe even trust them. That is how The Number 23 screws you, completely taking advantage of the trusting relationship an audience has with Carrey, that he is such a good guy and will always be the good guy. Don't get me wrong, this was a brilliant move by Schumacher, creating an enjoyable third act that sadly, was a chore to get to. But I'm getting ahead of myself.

The movie begins pretty well. I had familiarized myself with the mystery of the number 23 a little bit before I sat down in the theatre, so when the opening credits began to roll with bloodstained type revealing some of the facts that I had read that day, I was intrigued. The opening credits paired with the techno score was really good. It made everyone in the theatre on equal ground with information about the number.

After the credits we open on the date, February 3, and a mild mannered Jim Carrey, or Walter Sparrow, is sitting in his Animal Control van awaiting the end of his shift. In a voice-over, which reveals we are witnessing a flash-back, Walter tells us it's his birthday. Through the next 15 minutes or so, you learn all about Walter's life as a family man; a loving father with a wonderful relationship with his teenage son, with a beautiful wife, played by Virginia Madsen from Sideways, and a job that he adores.It all starts to go a little wonky when he is delayed meeting his wife because of a sad faced dog terrorizing a Chinese Resteraunt. When Walter and Agatha finally meet up in a book store, one dog bite later, she hands him the book she was flipping through, The Number 23. Walter is not much of a reader, but he decides to give it a shot and we finally get to the plot and the narrative device of the movie. We now have two narratives; the real world and the world of the novel. This is where the movie starts to lose it for me.

Besides the Incredibly Shrinking Woman and the Lost Boys, which I really do like, probably for the nostalgia more then anything else, I am not a fan of Joel Schumacher's work. I feel he tends to sacrifice substance for style, and this movie is no exception. The novel begins, as read extremely affectedly by Jim Carrey, "My name is Fingerling." Fingerling is a detective and the tone of the novel is that of a film noir. Schumacher uses this as a launching pad and pumps up that style using an extremely digitally enhanced monochromatic setting with splotches of color here and there, like the color of blood, etc. It was as if Schumacher saw Sin City and tried to use the style but just didn't have the grit to back it up. Despite the subject matter, suicide, obsession and murder, the "novel" portions just seemed too clean. I also couldn't take any of it seriously. The acting, which was farily good in the real world narrative was sub-par in the novel. The "Suicide Blonde" played by Lynn Collins is the first to come to my mind. She is extremely important to the story as she is the one who reveals the mystery of 23, but she only made me laugh, flailing about, delivering her lines like a distraught valley girl on the OC. I'll give her the benefit of the doubt. Maybe she was out of her element as a Julliard graduate and Shakespeare actress. Actually ALL of the actors playing dual roles in both story lines seem out of their element. Since it is Sparrow reading the book, Sparrow is the one miscasting all of the characters with the people he knows. Love him to pieces, but Jim Carrey as a badass, tattooed, detective with an attraction to death and a penchant for jazz saxophone just came off as humerous, as did nurturing, Virginia Madsen as a black widow name Fabrizia.

I am knit-picking because the novel portion is only part of the movie. It just seems like we spend way too much time there, mostly because Sparrow is a slow reader, REALLY slow. The book looks as if it's 100 pages tops, and it takes him days to get through it literally driving him obsessively mad in the process. It is interesting that the number isn't truly the reason for Sparrows paranoia, but rather that the person who wrote the book must be someone who knows him on an intimate level as it seems the story was based on his life, all but the fact that he had never killed anyone. This is the true mystery. Who wrote the book, and why in the world does that dog with the comically sad face keep showing up? This marks the third act where the movie finally got interesting, and where as I said before, Schumacher screws you.

Who wrote the book? Was it the crazy man with no address who independently published it? Was it Sparrow's wife's best friend, the professor, who seems to know all about the number? Was it Sparrow's wife? NO! A hundred times no! It was friggin' Sparrow, Jim Carrey! The man you will always trust because of his honest face, and he was so good with his teenage son too.

I have to say, I am usually pretty aware of the smoking guns in movies shooting holes into plots, and I thought about Sparrow being behind it all for a split second, but I tossed it off. No way would loveable, Jim Carrey be able to pull off murder, but he does, and they got me, and they get him in a way that is truly rewarding. It almost made it worth sitting through the rest of the crap to get there, almost.

Snakes On A Plane Review

Reel Horror — Fri, 18 Aug 2006 08:54:13 -0700

When I first heard about a movie called "Snakes on a Plane" starring Samuel L. Jackson, my first thought was "Jackson will do any crap they throw his way." Soon after, the internet became a buzz with Snakes. Everyone was talking about it. Samuel L. himself came out and said how he agreed to the project upon seeing the title alone. Then the word spread about re-shoots just to get Sam to say Mother Fucker a few times. They came the blogs, the trailers and then probably one of the greatest marketing tools I have ever seen....Sam will call you himself and tell you to see his mother fucking movie. After all that, I began to soften to the idea of a slockfest in the sky.

So, when I heard my theater was going to have advanced screenings the night before it opened I rushed out (well, I just ordered them online) and got tickets.

I sat in awe as the most eclectic group of people came out to see what quite possibly could be a horrible movie. Mothers, fathers, senior citizens, punk kids, internet geeks and die hard fans waving stuffed and rubber snakes. The lights dim and the audience went nuts.

But how was the mother fucking movie already???

It's hard to tell if the film is so bad it's good or if it really was that self aware that it knew to make it as cheesy as possible. It had action, suspense, comedy, and some of the best/worst one liners and speeches by the man called Sam.

We all know the plot but if you really need details here goes....

Sam is an FBI Agent who must transport a murder witness from Hawaii to Los Angeles. When Eddie Kim (the over acting bad guy) tries in unsuccessfully to kill the witness he left with no other choice (his words, not mine) to put a hundred deadly snakes on the plane. The snakes get free and all hell breaks loose. That's the plot. I really could have said well the movie is about Snakes on a Plane!

In a movie like this it's pointless to delve into the script, the directing or even the acting. Everyone plays their role seriously for the most part. If they didn't it would have made a so good it's bad just bad.

Don't get me wrong I enjoyed the movie completely. I thought it was a great two hours of senseless entertainment. But I can't help wondering if they set out to make a serious movie but realized at some point during filming they had a very bad serious movie or a very cool camp classic.

There are scenes that were written so perfectly bad that I can't believe someone wasn't really trying to make a serious action flick.

See it for yourselves but see it!

House of the Dead

The Blood King — Fri, 25 Feb 2005 08:34:25 -0800

House of the Dead directed by Uwe Boll is an overblown cheese fest. The Only
thing missing from this film is the Harlem Globetrotters and Cloris
Leachman. Do we not learn from previous video game movies? I am still
reeling from Street Fighter the movie when the Good guys arrived in rubber
boats that couldn’t be sunk, but that’s a whole different review. House of
the Dead starts out with a bunch of 20 something kids trying to get to a
rave on a deserted Island, but of course they missed the boat along with the
script. The girls in the film are as usual extremely pretty and the guys are
dumb as driftwood. Simon (Tyron Leitso) the “Male Model” who throws his cash
around and charters a boat from Capt. Victor Kirk (Jurgen Prochnow) and yes
the jokes are in the movie so don’t think your so clever. The boat crew is a
creepy 2nd mate Salish (Clint Howard). Salish thinks its bad karma for the
boat to go to the island. But when the gun running cigar smoking Captain
Kirk is given a lot of money of course he goes. Is this making any sense
yet?
After 15 minutes of aerial shots the boat heading for the Island, and the
US Coast Guard chasing Captain Kirk from miles behind. The death and
hilarity ensue. Quick shots of the 14 people rave and yes I repeat 14
people. I have been to raves and they have more than a basketball team
attending. The kids arrive to the island and when they get to the party
destination it is clear that all the attendees have come to a gruesome
demise. Will that stop Greg (Will Sanderson) from getting it one with his
girl Cynthia (Sonya Salomaa) of course not. Before every becomes a zombie we
are given our fare share of gratuitous nudity. This maybe the best part in
the film. Oh and did I mention that clips of the video game are
inter-spliced with what is going on in the movie, yet for the most part the
video clips having nothing to do with the action on screen. More and more
people begin to die and they now have to team up with the Coast Guard
Officer Casper (Ellie Cornell) whose been chasing Kirk for hours. She and
Captain. Kirk put off there troubles because if they don’t the undead party
hoppers will pounce on them like a fat girl at a smell contest.
One scene in the movie actually enjoyable, when the last few survivors head
towards a creepy house they have there own cool Matrix-style scenes. The
scene is a bit long because the thousands of zombies are attacking from all
directions. Watch Liberty (Kira Clavell) she is super hot and kicks major
ass. After Captain Kirk is bitten it is clear his end is near and they must
leave their trusted friend to die a horrible death. I wish Zombies bit me so
I could forget this film. As the film progresses the last few people are in
the house. Know I know this film is actually supposed to lead up to the
video game but the house is as big as a Hollywood bungalow. Isn’t this House
of the dead not a small few room cabin. Oh and I forgot to spoil the end of
the film. The reason the people become Zombies is because of some 16th
Century Spanish Conquistador evil doctor, yes that is what I said. And stay
for the brilliant swashbuckling end scene with Alicia (Ona Grauer) and
Castillo (David Palffy) you’d wish they’d remake Zorro, the gay Blade.
The film is full of inside jokes to other people films and a not so subtle
reference to the Dead Trilogies. Shame on them! You want to watch a great
Zombie movie watch the new Dawn of the Dead. The few scenes that are
somewhat entertaining can’t make up for the poor storyline. This could have
been something as good as Resident Evil but it just wasn’t. I hope Alone in
the Dark is going to be a much better film.

Boogeyman 2005

The Blood King — Fri, 25 Feb 2005 08:33:12 -0800

Directed by: Stephan T. Kay

What’s lurking in the closet? The Boogeyman, the basic premise for all horror films since the 1977 classic Halloween. Boogeyman produced by Sam Raimi and Ghost House Pictures, which recently produced The Grudge, delves into the darkest recesses of the monster under your bed saga. As a rule, any film released in January or February doesn't have much hope. But releasing them could be great suprise if the movie makes a profit.

The films starts out with a young Tim Jensen, maybe 8 years old trying to
go to sleep but is scared beyond belief about the creature lurking in the shadows. Their are the cliche of branches causing long creepy shadows on the wall, shapes in the dark and lots and lots of stuff hanging on the ceiling, like a crow for instance. The opening maybe the best part of the film, the young Tim sees what he thinks is the robe on his chair rise up and approach him. He quickly turns the lights on and the robe falls to the ground. What could have done that? Tim quickly rummages through his room and hides anything that might cause him harm. Tim's father walks into his room and tries to calm him down. He reassures Tim that he is safe. Tim’s father opens the door and as you guessed it Tim's father is sucked into the abyss of the closet forever. Thus beginning Tim’s anti-social behavior towards any and all closets. In typical horror fashion the move skips many years in to the future where Tim (Barry Watson) is now a grown man.

All evil must be dealt with and like in most horror films Tim’s family has been also troubled by the “disappearance” of his father. Conveniently, Tim is supposed to spend quality time with his girlfriend Katie (Robyn Malcolm) at her Wasp country club looking house to do the whole family meet and greet. Upon getting the third degree from Katie’s family Tim feels something is amiss. Tim falls asleep and is startled by his mother's ghost warning him to go home or eat his sprouts or something.

Tim’s mother (Lucy lawless) has died and Tim must go home for the funeral
;eaving Katie behind. Uncle Mike has been remodeling the house but it really looks like no one has taken care of the house for years. The house is on a countryside that may or may not be the Pennsylvania countryside. And what's worse is it seems the house creaks more than a wooden submarine dropping to the bottom of the sea. The audio special effects I felt were completely overdone. Everything in the house made an eerie noise. I get it “the Boogeyman” is here. OHHHHH! Tim has a brief encounter with an old friend Kate (Emily Deschanal) who knew of Tim’s fear of closets. If she was a real friend she should have suggested hooks for the wall but who am I to say. Kate and Tim have a nice moment to reminisce and than night falls and evil is sure to follow. Tim throws trash away and hears a noise and it leads him to the back shed. Upon entering he sees a little girl Franny (Skye McCole Bartusiak) who has a lot of knowledge on the Boogeyman, who is she? Why is she here? Later the girlfriend Katie comes to Tim’s childhood home for some reason probably for a quickie but their plans are dashed. Tim and Katie make a quick exit from the haunted house and stay in basically the Bates motel. But there too the plans are dashed. Katie disappears and now Tim must figure out how to finish off the boogeyman. Now, Tim knows and has seen the Boogeyman but of course no one believes him... why? Is he a pathological liar, is there a history of lying. No! Than why would people not take him at his word. Tim’s not disturbed it’s the audience member wondering what the hell the people are thinking.

The most interesting scenes in the film have mostly to do with the closet time bending, Tim enters the closet to face the Boogeyman and its him from place to place and he must figure out how to change or stop the Boogeyman. Did I mention the Monster is nearly all cg, so he’s even less scary. I’m not going to give you the ending but if you’ve seen any horror film in the last 30 years I’m sure you’ll now how to figure out if he survives or not. The movie is packed with tones of lurking shadows, creeping noises and figures moving across the screen with sound effects borrowed straight out of Halloween. It’s a basic horror movie but the only thing that is scarier coming out of the closet is Rip Taylor in drag. I give it a 2 out of five.

Cabin Fever

GreenDemon — Fri, 25 Feb 2005 08:08:31 -0800

I am not a professional writer. Nor have I reviewed a movie I didn't enjoy and I'm not going to start now.

The story in this movie is inspired by a real event that happened to writer/director Eli Roth. When he was younger he contracted some kind of skin irritation that freaked him out. His doctor told him it would clear up. It did go away, sort of. As a horror fan since childhood he took
this experience and turned it into a horror movie.

This movie has a lot of obvious influences from classics such as Night of the Living Dead and The Evil Dead. The way I see it though is he's paying homage to some of the films that molded his morbid creativity. I think the references are amusing to watch as they lend to the overall fun factor of this movie.

Cabin Fever starts with a group of young friends going to stay in a cabin in the woods. Once they arrive a member of the group goes into the woods and encounters a man with a disturbingly grotesque rash all over his skin. Eventually the group starts to become infected with this same
disease. Paranoia and lack of knowledge begin to take a toll on the friends as they become afraid for their lives. Mix this in with them being outsiders in a small rural community and they are in for some trouble.

Eli Roth makes a priceless cameo as "Grim" and Giuseppe Andrews as the deputy who loves to party is equally amusing. James DeBello who starred alongside Andrews in Detroit Rock City is hilarious in a Stifler-esque kind of way. Great moments of hilarity between these charcters
accentuate the element of comedy in this gory story. The cast is rounded out by Rider Strong, whom some would recognize from "Boy Meets World", and up-and-comers Jordan Ladd, Cerina Vincent and Joey Kern.

This film has received very mixed reviews and while I thoroughly enjoyed it I can see why some would think it is utter crap. Especially if they believed it was the second coming of Evil Dead. That kind of comparison can only hurt any movie. So if you want to check this one out just expect a very fun movie, full of blood and humor. How can you go wrong there? Or better yet expect nothing.

Zombie

GreenDemon — Fri, 25 Feb 2005 08:05:29 -0800

This Lucio Fulci film was made as an unofficial sequel of sorts to George Romero's Dawn of the Dead. Dawn of the Dead was titled simply Zombi overseas where Fulci's Zombie was known as Zombi 2 or Zombie Flesh Eaters or at least 4 other different titles. A number of Fulci's films boast too many different titles outside of North America but that's fine with me once I figure out what it's called in the west.

The story begins with an unmanned boat floating into New York City. The Coast Guard boards and looks for any members of the vessel's crew. What they find is a severed hand and a fat zombie who kills the unlucky fella who finds him below the deck. Fatty makes his way to the deck and receives a few bullets for his undesirable presence and falls into the water.

A local paper gets wind of this myserious boat and wants the scoop on it's arrival. Peter West is on the job. When he goes to the guarded boat at night he runs into a woman, Ann Bowles. She claims her father owned the boat and was across the Atlantic last she knew. Before being ousted from the boat by the cop guarding it, Mr. West and Miss Bowles find a letter from her father. It states that Ann's father was on an Island and had contracted some kind of disease. So off to find the island go Peter and Ann.

Once they cross the ocean our protagonists need a boat to reach the small island of Mattool. Luck finds them when they discover two other Americans in the area, Susan and Brian, with a boat, who would be willing to give them a ride. On their way to the island we are treated to an amazing scene where Susan goes topless scuba diving for pictures. But that's not the amazing part, while underwater she encounters a shark and then a zombie. Susan makes it back onto the boat and then the shark and the zombie have an underwater battle. The zombie takes a nice chunk or two out of the shark! I wonder how they filmed that scene, it was magnificent.

Once on the island the crew of the boat meet Dr. Menard who works at the dilapidated, filthy, excuse for a hospital. The Doc tells them he knew Ann's father and treated him, until he turned into a zombie and then Menard "took care of him" just like he did to the other patients with that same disease. Menard states that the local natives say Voodoo is behind the malady but Menard will have none of that non-scientific answer. Dr. Menard then asks the group if they will go check on his wife at the other end of the island. When the group get there they find Mrs. Menard being dinner for some flesh eating zombies. Now the dead start to rise from their shallow graves as the sick patients die and return to life. Zombies are taking over the island. This culminates in a showdown between the living and the dead.

Fulci gives us some exquisite gore scenes in this movie. The zombies are very decayed and dirty looking, giving the viewer a vivid image of the island's living dead in all their splendor. They truly are disgusting, which is one of the great things about this movie. The story itself is a little slow and boring at times but it is rescued by the great gore and effects. Considering this movie was banned in Finland and Norway you should get a fairly good idea of what kind of gore is in store.

Overall I enjoyed this movie. As I mentioned some parts were boring but not enough to actually detract from the value of the movie. It's just not an action filled movie. But there is ample amounts of conflict between the living and the dead. If you are a fan of foreign horror or zombies I'd highly recommend this one. If you are not a fan of that sort then you may want to skip this one. But it can't hurt to check it out anyway.

Assault on Precinct 13 (2005)

Reel Horror — Fri, 21 Jan 2005 03:21:01 -0800

Over 20 years ago, an unknown director named John Carpenter released his debut feature "Darkstar." Upon the release of the movie, Carpenter was approached by a group of investors confident in his ability. The backers gave Carpenter carte blanche to make any film he choose - something almost unheard of even today! Carpenter had his heart set on making a western. However, he knew full well the shoestring budget could never support a period piece and updated his ideas. Thus "Assault on Precinct 13" was born. The original is a modern (modern for the mid-70's) day western. An homage to Howard Hawks and his film Rio Bravo.

The original film revolves around a remote, police station on the eve of its last active night and the rookie officer, Ethan Bishop (Austin Stoker), assigned to the graveyard shift. When a murderous street gang declares war on the police station it's up to Bishop and rag tag group of criminal lead by the notorious Napoleon Wilson to fend them off.

Assault is not your average action film. It's an action driven, character study chock full of social commentary. Ethan Bishop and Napoleon Wilson (Darwin Joston) are both played by African American actors. This immediately changes the tone of the film. Instead of a film about racial relations, it's broken down to the barest form. Good vs Evil. Or rather the fact that life is not as black and white as "good and evil" everything is perspective.

Everything that made the original charming and thought provoking is thrown out of the remake. Sadly, nothing new or inventive is added. Jean-FranÃ§ois Richet's
redition of "Assault" plays out like every run of the mill action film.

Ethan Hawke plays Jake Roenick, an officer assigned to a remote Precinct 13 on it's last night in operation, which also happens to be New Year's Eve. Jake, having been injured 8 months earlier in a drug deal gone bad in which he also lost his two partners, hids behind a veil of fake responsiblity, alocohol and painkillers.

Enter Marion Bishop (Laurence Fishburne), a notorious criminal who seems to have his hands in everything. Upon being captured, Bishop is forced to spend two nights in county due to the holiday. But a blinding snowstorm hinders the transport and they are forced to pull over at Precinct 13 to wait out the storm. Now here comes the big change. The new concept that will set this film apart from the orginal....

Bishop has been working with a group of about 30 cops. Cops who now realize they cannot let him live. When a stealth strike on "13," lead by Gabriel Byrne fails. The dirty cops decide that the lives of the eight people trapped in the station are not worth lives of 30 officers. Now, Roenick (Hawke) and his skeleton crew must team up with a rag tag group of criminals lead by Bishop (Fishburne) to fend off the assaulting cops.

All character developement is replaced by horrible one liners and over the top action. By changing the race of the young officer in the station, we now have a racial divide that overshadows the original concept of the film. The casting of Gabriel Bynre as the leader of the dirty cops also detracts from the story. In the original "Assault" it was a faceless, nameless threat that ultimately made the film eerie and suspenseful. Now we have a recognizable face on the overly cliche threat of dirty cops.

Honestly, I hate to compare remakes and originals. I like to judge a film on it's own merits. However, the original is all this remake has going for it. This film brings nothing new to the screen.

Ethan Hawke is enjoyable as Jake Roenick, especially in the opening drug deal scene. He's enjoyable. Not memorable. Enjoyable. Fishburne is Fishburne. I don't now how else to describe him. He's smooth, cool and emotionless. But it's tired now. If I want to see Morpheus I will watch "The Matrix." The rest of the cast rounded out by Drea de Matteo, Ja Rule and John Leguizamo are easily forgettable. The only person who shines in this movie is Brian Dennehy. What? You didn't know he was in it? But I bet you knew Ja Rule was in it. That's the problem with Hollywood not the film. That's another rant.

Everything else about the film is average. Directing, writing, soundtrack. They all barely register. I firmly believe is the original did not have a cult following this film would never have been made.

My advice...Save your money and rent the original. This new "Assault" has lost all the charisma and social commentary that made the original a cult classic.

2001 Maniacs

Reel Horror — Thu, 13 Jan 2005 21:36:02 -0800

Last night I was one of the few people to see the very first public screening of Robert Englund's 2001 Maniacs, a remake of Herschell Gordon Lewis's 1964 film "Two Thousand Maniacs." Before delving into the film I would like to thank Fangoria and Ain't It Cool News for the screening.

2001 Maniacs follows the story of its predecessor almost exactly. The citizens of the sleepy, southern town of Pleasant Valley lure eight unsuspecting "Yankees", who are of course on there way to Spring Break, into there pro-south town for a time of feast and murder. At first the town seems to be one happy family. Everyone is eating, drinking, dancing and fornicating and happy to share all with there Northern visitors. But as most movies like this go, slowly the eight unsuspecting tourists learn that Southern hospitality comes with a deadly price.

I want to say I liked the movie. I really do. I hate ripping a film apart. I mean who am I? I'm some guy behind a computer. But as a fan it's my job to give an objective opinion. The movie while very entertaining at times is hugely flawed. A bad script and terrible acting (not including Englund who is fantastic) overshadow a great death scenes and a very ambitious production design.

My biggest complaint is the script. You have this awesome premise, I don't want to go into to detail for those who have not seen the orginal but stick around for the Twilight Zone twist. Why must you surround this great idea with generic, cliche, trite crap. Six of the eight "Yanks" lured into Pleasant Valley are on there way to Spring Break. And what do kids on Spring Break want to do.....Get drunk and get laid at all costs. Not one original character in the lot. Three horney college guys - the hero, the nerd and jokester. Two girls. One is the heroine so what must the other be, you guessed it the slutty friend. Now for diversity let's throw in the "I'm gay and pissed off about it" guy. And how about the "angry Black man" and his equally attitude filled Asian girlfriend. Already I am taken out of the film. I don't want to see anymore stupid teens who think with their dicks instead of their brains. The people of Pleasant Valley invite these tourist into their town for a huge celebration. They feed, cloth, and put them up for the night. And how do these people repay them? By mocking them to their faces. I mean literally grabbing food and drink from a table and then calling someone an inbred. Even after the blood starts flowing the survivors still continue to harass the town. One character, after his friends have "disappeared", actually tries to have sex with one of the evilest looking townspeople.

I'm sorry but if my friends have disappeared for a couple days and I suspect the town is full of psychos, I'm not banging anyone. You want to scare us? You want us to come back for more? Give us smart characters. Smart characters that inspite of everything can still be victims. That is what will get to us as an audience. That is what will scare us. Sorry. Back to the script.

The one liners! Oh the humanity! Stop the madness! Get my point. Some of the very worst one liners I have ever heard. Just a quick example. Our three sexually chanllenged college guys drive past a cow pasture and one of them can't help but say, "I love the smell of cow shit in the morning." Insert eyeroll and groan here. I understand the movie is suppose to be tongue-in-cheek. But when you have horrible actors speaking horrible one liners the audience is going to leave. Which is exactly what the couple in front of me did.

The brightest and only redeeming aspect of this film is the ever talented Rober Englund. Englund steals every scene as Mayor Buckman. He's charming, funny and menacing. I swear everytime he was off screen I prayed for him to return. Whether he is giving a rousing speech to his people or punishing those damn Yankees, all eyes are instantly drawn to him. I could go on and on about Mr. Englund's performance. It truly is the highlight of the film. Sadly for the movie, if not for Mr. Englund's involvement this movie would almost be unwatchable. "An eye for an eye, Mr. Lee." That line was echoing in my head all night.

The rest of the cast is easily forgettable. This is my biggest complaint with recent horror movies. Instead of trying to find good actors, it seems filmmakers go for barely passable actors who will take there clothes off. Hell, I like seeing naked women as much as the next guy but I don't go to the movies strictly to see it. I want to be entertained and it doesn't matter how great a writer or director you are if you actors are bad....your film is going to be bad.

I do have to mention Lin Shaye. She is a wonderful actress who has appeared in every Farrelly Bros. film. She is a smart and gifted actress who is vastly underused in the film.

The film's production was extremely well done for an independent flick. The sets and costumes were great. Never once did I question the authenticity of Pleasant Valley. Director Tim Sullivan does a good job of keeping the film moving. There were a few times when the movie could have dragged to a dead stop but Sullivan has a good eye for suspense and kept me invlovled the whole time. However, his cinematography ran flat. His stlye or lack thereof never changed.

Every fan who goes to a horror film looks for one thing...The Death Scenes. Well, 2001 Maniacs definetely delivered on them. Blood, guts, and gore galore. Yeehaw! That's a little quote from the movie. There are some very cool and pretty original death scenes. The guy next to me was jumping out of his seat.

Despite the poor acting and cliche plot devices I would still reccommend 2001 Maniacs for Englund's performance. If you are a fan of Robert Englund (as I am) then you will enjoy his performance but beware the rest of the film.