Regardless of whether they support or oppose U.S. Intervention in Syria, those who believe in the rule of law and limited government were awarded a stunning victory when president Obama announced that he would seek authorization from congress to use force against Syria. Obama should be commended for not turning his back on a major campaign promise, and for respecting congress' constitutionally mandated power to declare war, something that many of his predecessors have unfortunately neglected over the past half century. One may even wonder why Obama himself did not seek congressional approval for limited airstrikes against the regime of Muhmmar Gaddafi in Libya during the early stages of the Arab Spring. Much like Syria, this was a United States lead intervention in which the the goal is punitive airstrikes with no expectation of “boots on the ground.” So why the sudden decision to seek approval from congress?
Obama made it clear during his Rose Garden speech that his decision was not based on any legal requirement “I believe I have the authority to carry out this military action without specific congressional authorization.” Instead he submitted a more pragmatic political reason for passing authority to congress, stating “I know that the country will be stronger if we take this course, and our actions will be even more effective. We should have this debate, because the issues are too big for business as usual.” It is interesting that Obama seems to think the country would benefit from this debate before going to war now, and not two years ago in Libya. Obama neglects to mention another reason why he might think he needs congressional approval. The former secretary of defense Leon Panetta stated in congressional hearings that if the there was a UN or NATO resolution to use force against a country then the administration believed that was sufficient authorization of force. In the case of Libya there was a U.N. Resolution, but today with Syria there is not.
Perhaps another reason for seeking congressional approval now, is that unlike Libya in 2011 Syria is not strategically isolated and has several allies that closely support it. Russia has not only given military support to Assad and spoken out against any potential use of United States force, but also has a naval base in Syria. Iran is also a close ally of Syria, and backs Hezbollah which could launch attacks against Israel in retaliations for any U.S. Strike. While somewhat remote the potential for a large scale regional war exists. Given the risks it is prudent for Obama to seek authorization from congress in order to share in and deflect responsibility if airstrikes cause a new Mideast conflagration.
Furthermore, Congressional authorization would establish better grounds for a protracted campaign of sustained airstrikes against Damascus. Given that a single volley of cruise missiles is likely to do little to change the strategic situation for the rebels on the ground, authorization from congress would be an upfront circumvention of the War Powers Resolution which limits Presidential use of force to a sixty day time period. While ostensibly, regime change is not on the table, the previous Secretary of State was on the record stating “Assad must go,” and Kerry himself has been at the forefront of pushing for war against the Assad regime. It seems that regime change is likely a ulterior motive for attacking Syria.
Saturday, August 31, 2013
Sunday, July 3, 2011
Green Lantern (2011)
Walking into the Green Lantern almost completely cold, I came to the conclusion that some super heroes will never translate well into live action form. The Green Lanterns are a group of galactic space cops who patrol the galaxy and defend its inhabitants from danger. Their primary weapons are a green ring that allows its users to forge almost anything their imagination can conceive out of pure green energy. If this sounds like ridiculous concept out of pulpy 1940s sci-fi you would be right on the money
The most interesting super hero films are the ones that are able to ground themselves in a plausible reality. Films like X-men and Batman are interesting because while their characters have extraordinary abilities, they exist in a world that is much like our own, and the conflicts are grounded in a reality. In Green Lantern, our hero must use his “will” to defeat a giant yellow tentacle space alien that is the embodiment of “fear.” It is so completely out there that it lacks any sense of tension, or reality to get me invested. Of course, Green Lantern doesn’t really take itself too seriously. It is DC’s attempt at an Iron Man, and instead of wise cracking Robert Downey Jr. we have a wise cracking Ryan Reynolds as Hal
Jordan, a test pilot who is recruited into the lanterns after discovering the ring.
From here we get the usual sequence of super hero origin story. He learns to harness the power of the ring, overcome his fears, and takes on evil. Along the way he has to deal with love interest Blake Lively , in scenes that only serve to slow down the movie without adding much character depth.
The villain Hector Hammond (Peter Saarsgard) is a scientist infected by the alien menace. Aside from looking pretty creepy, he really doesn’t have much to do in this film aside from walk around brooding and scheming… to kill all the humans on Earth… or something. He is a far cry from Heath Ledger’s Joker or even Michael Fastbender’s Magneto from this summers X-Men: First Class.
The brightest spot of the film is the colorful visuals of the movie. The home world of the Green Lanterns looks great and is populated by a myriad of bizarre aliens. You get a Episode IV Mos Eisley Cantina vibe from these scenes.
I am sure there is much more to the character of The Green Lantern that doesn’t come across in the movie, but that’s why the movie failed. It doesn’t make the character interesting or appealing to someone who isn’t familiar with the comics
The most interesting super hero films are the ones that are able to ground themselves in a plausible reality. Films like X-men and Batman are interesting because while their characters have extraordinary abilities, they exist in a world that is much like our own, and the conflicts are grounded in a reality. In Green Lantern, our hero must use his “will” to defeat a giant yellow tentacle space alien that is the embodiment of “fear.” It is so completely out there that it lacks any sense of tension, or reality to get me invested. Of course, Green Lantern doesn’t really take itself too seriously. It is DC’s attempt at an Iron Man, and instead of wise cracking Robert Downey Jr. we have a wise cracking Ryan Reynolds as Hal
Jordan, a test pilot who is recruited into the lanterns after discovering the ring.
From here we get the usual sequence of super hero origin story. He learns to harness the power of the ring, overcome his fears, and takes on evil. Along the way he has to deal with love interest Blake Lively , in scenes that only serve to slow down the movie without adding much character depth.
The villain Hector Hammond (Peter Saarsgard) is a scientist infected by the alien menace. Aside from looking pretty creepy, he really doesn’t have much to do in this film aside from walk around brooding and scheming… to kill all the humans on Earth… or something. He is a far cry from Heath Ledger’s Joker or even Michael Fastbender’s Magneto from this summers X-Men: First Class.
The brightest spot of the film is the colorful visuals of the movie. The home world of the Green Lanterns looks great and is populated by a myriad of bizarre aliens. You get a Episode IV Mos Eisley Cantina vibe from these scenes.
I am sure there is much more to the character of The Green Lantern that doesn’t come across in the movie, but that’s why the movie failed. It doesn’t make the character interesting or appealing to someone who isn’t familiar with the comics
Wednesday, March 16, 2011
Battle: Los Angeles (2011)
About halfway through Battle: Los Angeles we are treated to a news report of scientists who are speculating on why the aliens are attacking Earth. Apparently, the aliens are draining the earth’s oceans, and from this the scientists conclude that they must be after our water. After all, Earth is the only planet with liquid water near its surface according to one scientist. Now, I am not an expert on these things, but I find it hard to believe that these aliens who have traveled across the galaxy to invade another planet could not have collected some ice from comets, or simply just synthesize water from hydrogen and oxygen. It is a very nitpicky point, but when you are faced with a movie as dull and lifeless as Battle: Los Angeles these small points become hard to ignore.
The film begins with a series of meteor showers near major populations centers around the world. It turns out the meteors are actually a part of a large scale invasion force to conquer Earth. In Los Angeles, a group of U.S. Marines is deployed to evacuate civilians and defend against the alien onslaught. This is essentially Black Hawk Down with aliens, and we spend the whole time with this squad of marines giving the viewer the feeling of an “embedded” journalist following a group of soldiers.
Aarron Eckhart plays the leader of the squad, and his performance makes the film much more bearable. He looks, and acts well in the role of a strong and gung-ho Marine leader who is also dealing with the regret of losing men under his command. His character spouts a lot of clichés throughout the film, but Eckhart does a great job of making them sound convincing and a bit inspiring.
The rest of the characters are a parade of clichés, and there is no emotional or visual impact as they are picked off over the course of the film. In fact I can barley say who died and who survived in this film since all the deaths are quick and bloodless to fit the PG-13 rating. The action in Battle is also poorly done. With too much shaky cam, and a lack of engaging action set pieces, the firefights are confusing and ultimately pretty boring.
The aliens themselves are also a disappointment. We pretty much learn nothing about them, and their design is pretty uninspired and basic looking. The film builds to a pretty predictable conclusion as the squad assault the alien mother ship in LA.
All in all I don’t have many good things to say about Battle. It is pretty much a paint by numbers war film which features aliens, and a whole bunch of gunfire and explosions, but not a lot of depth or great dialogue. With all the alien invasion movies out there to choose from it wont be hard to find something better.
4/10
The film begins with a series of meteor showers near major populations centers around the world. It turns out the meteors are actually a part of a large scale invasion force to conquer Earth. In Los Angeles, a group of U.S. Marines is deployed to evacuate civilians and defend against the alien onslaught. This is essentially Black Hawk Down with aliens, and we spend the whole time with this squad of marines giving the viewer the feeling of an “embedded” journalist following a group of soldiers.
Aarron Eckhart plays the leader of the squad, and his performance makes the film much more bearable. He looks, and acts well in the role of a strong and gung-ho Marine leader who is also dealing with the regret of losing men under his command. His character spouts a lot of clichés throughout the film, but Eckhart does a great job of making them sound convincing and a bit inspiring.
The rest of the characters are a parade of clichés, and there is no emotional or visual impact as they are picked off over the course of the film. In fact I can barley say who died and who survived in this film since all the deaths are quick and bloodless to fit the PG-13 rating. The action in Battle is also poorly done. With too much shaky cam, and a lack of engaging action set pieces, the firefights are confusing and ultimately pretty boring.
The aliens themselves are also a disappointment. We pretty much learn nothing about them, and their design is pretty uninspired and basic looking. The film builds to a pretty predictable conclusion as the squad assault the alien mother ship in LA.
All in all I don’t have many good things to say about Battle. It is pretty much a paint by numbers war film which features aliens, and a whole bunch of gunfire and explosions, but not a lot of depth or great dialogue. With all the alien invasion movies out there to choose from it wont be hard to find something better.
4/10
Saturday, February 5, 2011
Monsters (2010)
Life goes on, even after an alien invasion. That seems to be the basic message of the 2010 film Monsters. In the film, a space probe returning to earth crashes in
The monsters in the film are always in the background, and we more often see the indirect effects of their existence through increased security, destroyed military hardware, and the distant roar or jet fighters and explosions. Most alien invasion movies depict the invasion as a momentous life changing event for the characters, but Monsters much like 2009’s District 9 focuses more on the day to day grind of having to live your life in a world where aliens are here, and are simply just another fact of life.
Monsters is a film that deals with two people meeting in a strange and alien environment, and developing a fleeting relationship. In this way it is not much different than Lost in Translation, but with
The film District 9 had a direct parallel to South African apartheid, and some have claimed Monsters is an obvious commentary on Mexican-American relations and immigration. The comparison is pretty apt as the Mexicans and Americans in the film are jointly working together to combat the aliens, while the United States is desperately trying to keep the chaos and violence from crossing the border to the north. All you have to do is substitute aliens for drug cartels and you pretty have much have the current state of affairs on the border today. But, the allegory of Monsters is even broader in scope.
While watching Monsters I kept feeling like all the visuals and sights the characters witness on their travels were pretty much things you would commonly see on any news report about a third world country. The fighting and conflicts over the last two decades in the Balkans, Middle East, and
Monsters is a pretty boring movie. But, it has a nice relaxing, soothing boring that I enjoyed. I feel like I could almost watch the movie on mute and enjoy it just as much as if it had sound. It is an odd movie.
7/10
Wednesday, January 26, 2011
Darkon (2006)
A group of average suburban youths live out a medieval fantasy by engaging in Live Action Roleplaying or "Larping" in the 2006 documentary film Darkon.
Darkon is a fantasy game where competing tribes battle it out for supremacy. What makes it different from your average D&D session is that the participants actually act out the battles using padded swords and shields, and throwing nerf dodge balls to cast magic spells. The fate of the nations are played out on the battlefields of state parks, and community soccer fields.
A documentary with such an especially nerdy subject is bound to have some hilarious moments, and Darkon does provide a bunch of these. It is hard not to laugh when the film makers show us one of these players practicing his swordsmanship in his backyard, and explaining how participating in Darkon is going to give him the confidence to talk to girls.
But it seems as if there is almost too much seriousness in what should be quirky subject. While a movie such as King of Kong explored a nerdy sub-culture with an interesting mix of humor and drama, Darkon is a film that seems far too concerned with making its subjects seem deep and relevant in order to justify itself. A lot of time is devoted to exploring the psychology of the participants, and what motivates them to engage in such a strange hobby that is bound to get them ridiculed. The film tries to provide answers ranging from the need to escape the drudgery of suburban life, to the longing for respect and comradarie, or the simple fact that we all need to "roleplay" in some aspects of or life.
Some of these themes are interesting, and even may be true to an extent, but they all feel like an attempt to give "larping" a profoundness that I am not sure really exists. One particularly silly scene has members of one of the warring factions making battle plans in their living rooms while a tv set plays a news report about the battle fallujah. The implication being that larping and the war in Iraq are somehow deeply connected, which is an idea that had me rolling my eyes.
Darkon does have a couple interesting human stories, and it is interesting to watch these people play out this complex and interesting game, but I still wish the movie would have just a bit more fun with its subject matter.
6/10
A documentary with such an especially nerdy subject is bound to have some hilarious moments, and Darkon does provide a bunch of these. It is hard not to laugh when the film makers show us one of these players practicing his swordsmanship in his backyard, and explaining how participating in Darkon is going to give him the confidence to talk to girls.
But it seems as if there is almost too much seriousness in what should be quirky subject. While a movie such as King of Kong explored a nerdy sub-culture with an interesting mix of humor and drama, Darkon is a film that seems far too concerned with making its subjects seem deep and relevant in order to justify itself. A lot of time is devoted to exploring the psychology of the participants, and what motivates them to engage in such a strange hobby that is bound to get them ridiculed. The film tries to provide answers ranging from the need to escape the drudgery of suburban life, to the longing for respect and comradarie, or the simple fact that we all need to "roleplay" in some aspects of or life.
Some of these themes are interesting, and even may be true to an extent, but they all feel like an attempt to give "larping" a profoundness that I am not sure really exists. One particularly silly scene has members of one of the warring factions making battle plans in their living rooms while a tv set plays a news report about the battle fallujah. The implication being that larping and the war in Iraq are somehow deeply connected, which is an idea that had me rolling my eyes.
Darkon does have a couple interesting human stories, and it is interesting to watch these people play out this complex and interesting game, but I still wish the movie would have just a bit more fun with its subject matter.
6/10
Tuesday, January 18, 2011
Survival of the Dead (2009)
It must be a mixed blessing to make a movie that helps to start an entire subgenre of horror. It is probably even worse when your follow up to that film is widely considered one of the best horror movies of all time. Those are pretty big legacies to live up to. So it is no real surprise that over forty years after creating Night of the Living Dead, George A. Romero’s latest zombie films have been a disappointment. His latest entry, Survival of the Dead, is probably his worst Dead film yet, and is probably enough to convince even the most strident of Romero’s fans that the aging director should probably throw in the towel.
As with all the Dead films, Survival takes place in a world in which the dead have risen and have begun feeding on the living. Society has been destroyed, and the last remnants of humanity are attempting to hold out against the undead. The film follows a group of AWOL soldiers who are looking for a safe place to ride out the apocalypse. When their leader, sarge learns of a possible safe island off the coast of Delaware the group sets out for the island. But when they arrive, they find that the small island has been embroiled in conflict between two feuding families. It seems that the O’flannigans want to kill off all the undead, while the Muldoons want to keep the undead alive, and hope to find a cure to the outbreak. Sarge and his men quickly become drawn into the conflict.
Survival is heavily influenced by the western genre, and with its premise tries to set itself apart from other zombie movies, but I found many of the films elements to be wildly out of place and shoehorned into the plot. I found it curious that this small island off the coast of Delaware was home to cowboy hat wearing Irish Ranchers. The fact that the Muldoons want to save the undead is equally baffling. There is no indication of why they think the undead are salvageable, and their entire plan seems to hinge around trying to train the zombies to eat horses, rabbits, and pigs which doesn’t really mean the zombies will become functioning members of society, or stop eating humans along with farm animals. It is even hard for me to see how a small island inhabitanted by two families would even have very many zombies on it.
One could argue this could just be more of Romero’s often talked about “social commentary,” and that may be true, but the problem is that Survival spends far too much time on this poorly developed family feud, and the zombies simply take a back seat as simple plot devices rather than central antagonists. In Night and Dawn, the zombies were true forces to be reckoned with always trying to close in on the survivors. In Survival, the zombies are simply there, never really posing a threat or creating any tension. Romero’s direction doesn’t help things much. The film jumps around a lot, and often times things just happen for no apparent reason. The film is plagued by terrible cgi gore that looks like it came straight from a syfy channel original movie.
Survival of the Dead is not even a movie that is enjoyable on a basic level. The film is poorly plotted, unscary, and amateurish. Perhaps this is not completely Romero’s fault. It is clear to me that the budget for this movie was not huge, but neither was the budget for the three original dead films. What we have here is a film maker who seems to have gone of the rails, and is content with putting out second rate, mediocre films.
1/10
As with all the Dead films, Survival takes place in a world in which the dead have risen and have begun feeding on the living. Society has been destroyed, and the last remnants of humanity are attempting to hold out against the undead. The film follows a group of AWOL soldiers who are looking for a safe place to ride out the apocalypse. When their leader, sarge learns of a possible safe island off the coast of Delaware the group sets out for the island. But when they arrive, they find that the small island has been embroiled in conflict between two feuding families. It seems that the O’flannigans want to kill off all the undead, while the Muldoons want to keep the undead alive, and hope to find a cure to the outbreak. Sarge and his men quickly become drawn into the conflict.
Survival is heavily influenced by the western genre, and with its premise tries to set itself apart from other zombie movies, but I found many of the films elements to be wildly out of place and shoehorned into the plot. I found it curious that this small island off the coast of Delaware was home to cowboy hat wearing Irish Ranchers. The fact that the Muldoons want to save the undead is equally baffling. There is no indication of why they think the undead are salvageable, and their entire plan seems to hinge around trying to train the zombies to eat horses, rabbits, and pigs which doesn’t really mean the zombies will become functioning members of society, or stop eating humans along with farm animals. It is even hard for me to see how a small island inhabitanted by two families would even have very many zombies on it.
One could argue this could just be more of Romero’s often talked about “social commentary,” and that may be true, but the problem is that Survival spends far too much time on this poorly developed family feud, and the zombies simply take a back seat as simple plot devices rather than central antagonists. In Night and Dawn, the zombies were true forces to be reckoned with always trying to close in on the survivors. In Survival, the zombies are simply there, never really posing a threat or creating any tension. Romero’s direction doesn’t help things much. The film jumps around a lot, and often times things just happen for no apparent reason. The film is plagued by terrible cgi gore that looks like it came straight from a syfy channel original movie.
Survival of the Dead is not even a movie that is enjoyable on a basic level. The film is poorly plotted, unscary, and amateurish. Perhaps this is not completely Romero’s fault. It is clear to me that the budget for this movie was not huge, but neither was the budget for the three original dead films. What we have here is a film maker who seems to have gone of the rails, and is content with putting out second rate, mediocre films.
1/10
Sunday, January 16, 2011
Feast (2005)
A group of strangers become trapped in an isolated hole in the wall desert bar by a group of bizarre killer monsters in Feast, a gross out horror film that seems to love showering its main characters in torrents of blood, slime, and monster ejaculate. Feast appears to be produced by Ben Affleck and is apparently the product of his reality TV show, Project Green Light. I haven’t seen the show, so I will just focus on the finished product itself.
Feast is a film that wastes no time on characters and even less time on plot. You never really learn what the heck is after these people, and none of the characters of the film are even named. Instead each character gets a quick title card freeze frame laying out their name (the hero, the drifter, the bartender etc), an interesting fact about them, and their life expectancy. This is a strange, quirky way to start out the film, and makes you feel like you will be in for something different and unique. However, Feast is a fairly typical creature feature, with a huge body count and lots of gore. The cast is an assortment of silly horror clinches, the best of which is a motivational speaker who tries his best to keep the groups spirits up, with humorous effects. They all pretty much exist though to be killed in brutal ways, and are quickly thinned out over the course of the movie.
One thing I will say about Feast is the monster attacks are fast and frantic with plenty of people getting killed in mid sentence, and the monsters usually strike in a chaotic blur of blood and claws. In fact, I don’t think there is a single character that sees their death coming in this movie. It does a good job of keeping you on the edge of your seat.
The monsters themselves are pretty creepy looking, and have an interesting twist. They seem to have hyper active sex drives, and reproduce very quickly. Yes, this film contains a monster sex scene, a monster penis, and monster ejaculation. Another great aspect is the fact that most of the monster effects are done using conventional effects with a few cgi shots here and there. Overall, the monsters are pretty well realized, even though the viewer doesn’t really learn much about them.
Apparently there are two sequels to Feast, and I will probably check them out as the film just ends and leaves you wanting a bit more both because of confusion and because you really never figure out where these monsters came from. Overall the first Feast is a slightly above average horror film that could have used a bit more story and plot to make it something truly special.
6/10
Feast is a film that wastes no time on characters and even less time on plot. You never really learn what the heck is after these people, and none of the characters of the film are even named. Instead each character gets a quick title card freeze frame laying out their name (the hero, the drifter, the bartender etc), an interesting fact about them, and their life expectancy. This is a strange, quirky way to start out the film, and makes you feel like you will be in for something different and unique. However, Feast is a fairly typical creature feature, with a huge body count and lots of gore. The cast is an assortment of silly horror clinches, the best of which is a motivational speaker who tries his best to keep the groups spirits up, with humorous effects. They all pretty much exist though to be killed in brutal ways, and are quickly thinned out over the course of the movie.
One thing I will say about Feast is the monster attacks are fast and frantic with plenty of people getting killed in mid sentence, and the monsters usually strike in a chaotic blur of blood and claws. In fact, I don’t think there is a single character that sees their death coming in this movie. It does a good job of keeping you on the edge of your seat.
The monsters themselves are pretty creepy looking, and have an interesting twist. They seem to have hyper active sex drives, and reproduce very quickly. Yes, this film contains a monster sex scene, a monster penis, and monster ejaculation. Another great aspect is the fact that most of the monster effects are done using conventional effects with a few cgi shots here and there. Overall, the monsters are pretty well realized, even though the viewer doesn’t really learn much about them.
Apparently there are two sequels to Feast, and I will probably check them out as the film just ends and leaves you wanting a bit more both because of confusion and because you really never figure out where these monsters came from. Overall the first Feast is a slightly above average horror film that could have used a bit more story and plot to make it something truly special.
6/10
Saturday, January 15, 2011
Night of the Comet (1984)
1984’s Night of the Comet is a campy post-apocalyptic horror film set after a comet pass
es close to earth irradiating everyone into a red dust and turning other survivors into intelligent zombies, except for a chosen few who are immune to the comet’s effects. Regina and Samantha are two of these survivors, and are left wandering a abandoned California battling the undead and a group of evil scientists who want to harvest their blood and manufacture a cure. Of course since Regina and Samantha’s father is a trained special forces operative fighting the commies in Honduras (thanks Reagan!) the girls are expertly trained in combat and the use of firearms. One character puts it humorously “The Mac-10 was practically designed for housewives.” Night of the Comet is essentially a female’s take on the apocalypse as the two sisters get to indulge in responsibility free shopping sprees at the mall, fight over the only remaining male hunk, and fight the occasional zombie.
I do say occasional, because the zombies are a bit few and far between in this film. Most of the conflict of the film comes from a group of scientists attempting to harvest the girls, and a lot of the film is actually pretty slow as the characters explore an abandoned L.A. We seen most of this before in Romero’s films, and most of the attempts at humor do fall a bit flat. But, like Romero’s films there does seem to be a touch of social commentary and parody here, especially in the ending which seems to say that maybe civilization isn’t much better than the apocalypse.
All in all though, Night of the Comet is a bit on the forgettable side.
4/10
New World Order (2007)
New World Order is a documentary that explores the fascinating and strange sub-culture of conspiracy theory activists in the United States. In particular the idea that a global elite, composed of secret societies such as the bilderbergers and the freemasons are engaged in a plot to erode America’s sovereignty and establish a one world government or New World Order.
The film takes detached approach, by not arguing for or against the claims of these activists but exploring the daily lives and motivations of these figures. The film profiles everyone from a Christian who is attempting to establish an independent self governing community in Idaho, to young urban 9/11 truther, who weekly travels to ground zero to hand out flyers claiming that 9/11 was an inside job. However, the central figure of the film is the talk radio show host Alex Jones who runs a popular conspiracy website, and is viewed as the chief orator, intellectual father, and soul of the conspiracy movement.
The movie has some bizarre moments provided mainly by Jones, who travels the country trying to infiltrate bilderberg meetings, and believing that every step of the way he is being shadowed by the goons of a global conspiracy. The climax of the film also consists of Jones interrupting a live taping of the Geraldo Rivera show to expose what he claims are the main stream media’s cover up of 9/11.
However, far from being indictment of a loony fringe of Americans, New World Order explores the real passions and motivations of a group of people who believe in a cause, and determined to try to do something about it. Whether one accepts their theories or not, their beliefs reflect a very real frustration and distrust with government that has been growing in American politics since at least Watergate, and probably before, and in that sense the film shows its subjects in a more sympathetic light. Overall, New World Order is an entertaining and fascinating look at a group of people who are often written off as cranks.
9/10
The film takes detached approach, by not arguing for or against the claims of these activists but exploring the daily lives and motivations of these figures. The film profiles everyone from a Christian who is attempting to establish an independent self governing community in Idaho, to young urban 9/11 truther, who weekly travels to ground zero to hand out flyers claiming that 9/11 was an inside job. However, the central figure of the film is the talk radio show host Alex Jones who runs a popular conspiracy website, and is viewed as the chief orator, intellectual father, and soul of the conspiracy movement.
The movie has some bizarre moments provided mainly by Jones, who travels the country trying to infiltrate bilderberg meetings, and believing that every step of the way he is being shadowed by the goons of a global conspiracy. The climax of the film also consists of Jones interrupting a live taping of the Geraldo Rivera show to expose what he claims are the main stream media’s cover up of 9/11.
However, far from being indictment of a loony fringe of Americans, New World Order explores the real passions and motivations of a group of people who believe in a cause, and determined to try to do something about it. Whether one accepts their theories or not, their beliefs reflect a very real frustration and distrust with government that has been growing in American politics since at least Watergate, and probably before, and in that sense the film shows its subjects in a more sympathetic light. Overall, New World Order is an entertaining and fascinating look at a group of people who are often written off as cranks.
9/10
Saturday, December 11, 2010
The Girlfriend Experience (2009)
If you have ever wondered what the life of a high-class Manhattan call girl is like, then The Girlfriend Experience might be just up your alley. Steven Soderbergh’s film puts you in the shoes of a two-thousand dollar an hour prostitute named Chelsea, who is played by actress Sasha Grey, a famous porn star. The film follows Chelsea through five days of work, as she visits many of her wealthy clientele during the October of 2008, and uses a loosely mixed up narrative structure to tell its story. The film claims to be “experimental” but I didn’t find it too difficult to follow or have it use too many self indulgent techniques that the term “experimental” seemed to indicate.
The film does a great job at focuses on the trials and tribulations of the call girl profession. Chelsea has to be there for all her clients. Not simply physically but also emotionally and intellectually. As the film progresses we see that Chelsea finds things lacking in her own life and relationship with her personal trainer boyfriend. The difficulty of maintainin a long term relationship with a prostitute is explored quite well and provides most of the conflict in the film as Chelsea contemplates breaking up with her boyfriend.
The Girlfriend Experience is extremely low budget, and aside from a couple of the main characters, it uses mainly inexperienced amateur actors in many of the roles. This makes some of the acting seem a bit weak in some scenes as the actors are clearly improvising a lot of their lines and seem almost overacting a bit to appear casual. It works very well in other scenes like when Chelsea is interrupted by one of her johns on a date with her boyfriend and awkwardness ensues. I thought the casting of a porn star in the lead role was a little too obvious of a choice, but Shasa Grey worked well in this role. She was very believable and seemed to be a bit of an airhead but was very vulnerable too.
One of my favorite aspects of The Girlfriend Experience is the constant references to the economy and the 2008 presidential election that are made throughout the film. From Wall Street big shots betting on how many electoral votes Obama will take, to a Hassidic Jew client urging Chelsea to vote for McCain in order to save the state of Israel, these exchanges really give the movie a sense of time and place, and will make the movie even more enjoyable to watch ten or twenty years in the future.
The Girlfriend Experience doesn’t really go anywhere, attempt to tackle anything really big, try something different. It is a slow, quiet movie, that is entertaining enough while it lasts but you won’t be thinking about it much after it finishes. Much like a real prostitute.
7/10
The film does a great job at focuses on the trials and tribulations of the call girl profession. Chelsea has to be there for all her clients. Not simply physically but also emotionally and intellectually. As the film progresses we see that Chelsea finds things lacking in her own life and relationship with her personal trainer boyfriend. The difficulty of maintainin a long term relationship with a prostitute is explored quite well and provides most of the conflict in the film as Chelsea contemplates breaking up with her boyfriend.
The Girlfriend Experience is extremely low budget, and aside from a couple of the main characters, it uses mainly inexperienced amateur actors in many of the roles. This makes some of the acting seem a bit weak in some scenes as the actors are clearly improvising a lot of their lines and seem almost overacting a bit to appear casual. It works very well in other scenes like when Chelsea is interrupted by one of her johns on a date with her boyfriend and awkwardness ensues. I thought the casting of a porn star in the lead role was a little too obvious of a choice, but Shasa Grey worked well in this role. She was very believable and seemed to be a bit of an airhead but was very vulnerable too.
One of my favorite aspects of The Girlfriend Experience is the constant references to the economy and the 2008 presidential election that are made throughout the film. From Wall Street big shots betting on how many electoral votes Obama will take, to a Hassidic Jew client urging Chelsea to vote for McCain in order to save the state of Israel, these exchanges really give the movie a sense of time and place, and will make the movie even more enjoyable to watch ten or twenty years in the future.
The Girlfriend Experience doesn’t really go anywhere, attempt to tackle anything really big, try something different. It is a slow, quiet movie, that is entertaining enough while it lasts but you won’t be thinking about it much after it finishes. Much like a real prostitute.
7/10
Sunday, December 5, 2010
Troll 2 (1990)
Troll 2 is what happens when you try to set out to make a silly horror comedy without any good jokes or a cast that lacks any degree of comedic timing or talent on a shoestring budget. You get a movie that does end up being humorous, but for all the wrong reasons.
First, viewers should know that Troll 2 engages in a deceptive bit of false advertising. If you are thinking that a movie called Troll 2 should feature a Troll or maybe two Trolls, then you will be in for a grave disappointment. Because I will let you know up front that Troll 2 is about Goblins. Yes, that is right... Goblins. I have no idea why Troll 2 features Goblins, but I can only imagine that the script for this movie was simply tacked onto this project when the studio decided to make a sequel, and nobody either bothered or cared enough to make the changes necessary.
Troll 2 begins as an innocent young family engages in a house switching program with a Amish family in the rural town of Nilbog. When they arrive at the community they soon discover that things are not normal in this community thanks in part to their psychic son Joshua. Joshua has a completely inexplicable ability to communicate with his dead grandpa Seth, who for some reason can appear to him through mirrors and warns Joshua that his family must leave the town of Nilbog as soon as possible.
Apparently Goblins have taken control of the small city and brainwashed its denizens by using a strange green vegetable slime implanted in their food. Joshua tries to warn his family of the Goblin danger by hilariously peeing on his families food before they can become poisoned. Of course, his family refuses to believe him and his claims about Goblins and contact with grandpa Seth. Most of the middle portion of the film consists of completely random scenes as the Waits family blindly stumbles into the goblins clutches while Joshua tries to warn them. Eventually, Joshua figures out that Nilbog is actually Goblin spelled backwards, but by then his family has been captured by goblins.
Troll 2 is simply a mess from start to finish. You can tell that director director Claudio Fargasso was trying to create a clever, but tense and creepy film somewhere along the line of a cross between Gremlins and the Ghoulies, but you can tell that the cast of this film is made almost completely of amateur actors, and the script feels almost unfinished as there is no internal logic to the film at all. Sometimes Granpa Seth can appear to Joshua and other times he can't. It is also never very clear what the Goblins goal is other than being Goblins and enslaving this family.
Which reminds me, the goblins and special effects for this movie look like complete shit. The goblins themselves are actually nothing more than guys in pajamas and cheap Halloween masks.
Troll 2 has become legendary for how bad it is, so keep this in mind when you are watching this and you might have a good time.
1/10
First, viewers should know that Troll 2 engages in a deceptive bit of false advertising. If you are thinking that a movie called Troll 2 should feature a Troll or maybe two Trolls, then you will be in for a grave disappointment. Because I will let you know up front that Troll 2 is about Goblins. Yes, that is right... Goblins. I have no idea why Troll 2 features Goblins, but I can only imagine that the script for this movie was simply tacked onto this project when the studio decided to make a sequel, and nobody either bothered or cared enough to make the changes necessary.
Troll 2 begins as an innocent young family engages in a house switching program with a Amish family in the rural town of Nilbog. When they arrive at the community they soon discover that things are not normal in this community thanks in part to their psychic son Joshua. Joshua has a completely inexplicable ability to communicate with his dead grandpa Seth, who for some reason can appear to him through mirrors and warns Joshua that his family must leave the town of Nilbog as soon as possible.
Apparently Goblins have taken control of the small city and brainwashed its denizens by using a strange green vegetable slime implanted in their food. Joshua tries to warn his family of the Goblin danger by hilariously peeing on his families food before they can become poisoned. Of course, his family refuses to believe him and his claims about Goblins and contact with grandpa Seth. Most of the middle portion of the film consists of completely random scenes as the Waits family blindly stumbles into the goblins clutches while Joshua tries to warn them. Eventually, Joshua figures out that Nilbog is actually Goblin spelled backwards, but by then his family has been captured by goblins.
Troll 2 is simply a mess from start to finish. You can tell that director director Claudio Fargasso was trying to create a clever, but tense and creepy film somewhere along the line of a cross between Gremlins and the Ghoulies, but you can tell that the cast of this film is made almost completely of amateur actors, and the script feels almost unfinished as there is no internal logic to the film at all. Sometimes Granpa Seth can appear to Joshua and other times he can't. It is also never very clear what the Goblins goal is other than being Goblins and enslaving this family.
Which reminds me, the goblins and special effects for this movie look like complete shit. The goblins themselves are actually nothing more than guys in pajamas and cheap Halloween masks.
Troll 2 has become legendary for how bad it is, so keep this in mind when you are watching this and you might have a good time.
1/10
Happy Holidays Everyone!
Hello, just checking in to wish everyone a happy holiday for december. Expect some new updates and reviews soon.
How can the back crawl?
How can the back crawl?
Friday, November 26, 2010
The Human Centipede: First Sequence (2009)
Ashylnn Yennie and Ashley C. Willams play two American tourists sightseeing in Germany when they get a flat tire on a rural highway. Seeking help, they approach a mysterious house inhabited by a reclusive German surgeon named Dr. Heiter. Heiter kidnaps the two girls and plans to use them to create his masterwork: a centipede made from three humans sowed together mouth to anus, and with their kneecaps removed to prevent them from standing straight up. It doesn’t ever really become evident why Heiter wants this centipede, other than the fact that he is completely insane, and seems to desire to keep his creation as a pet and enjoy watching it suffer.
Heiter is played in a brilliantly creepy fashion by actor Dieter Laser who does a great job playing a convincingly cold and calculating sociopath who would make Joseph Mengle look like Ronald Mcdonald. The two female leads of the movie are terrible actress, but you only have to put up with their ham handed delivery for the first twenty minutes or so until their faces are sewn onto a Japanese guys ass. From then on they deliver an excellent performance of muffled grunts, moans, and shrieks and giving wide eyed expressions of terror as they swallow feces, and are forced to be “trained” by the sadistic Heiter.
The concept of the Human Centipede is perhaps its greatest strength and weakness. Once the characters are finally fused together in the horrific creation, there is practically no hope for them to resist the wild machinations of their captor. This makes the last fifty minutes consist of watching a parade of pure abject suffering and human misery. This dehumanization of the main characters makes for great horror, and is really the central theme of the film, but also makes the film lack tension and drive as the characters are literally helpless passive actors in the films plot. This causes the climax of the movie to rely heavily on a series of somewhat goofy and very convenient plot coincidences. Despite this drawback, I found the final scene of the film to be pretty creative and actually pretty haunting and disturbing way to end the movie.
I’m hesitant to say I was entertained by The Human Centipede as I found parts of the film difficult to watch, and I think anyone who is too entertained by this movie probably needs some psychiatric help. However, the concept of the film is so bizarre and out there that I think anyone who can stomach horror films should at least check this movie out (as far as outright violence and gore goes it is actually fairly tame). It’s not something I will probably want to watch anytime soon, but I am glad I checked it out.
6/10
Heiter is played in a brilliantly creepy fashion by actor Dieter Laser who does a great job playing a convincingly cold and calculating sociopath who would make Joseph Mengle look like Ronald Mcdonald. The two female leads of the movie are terrible actress, but you only have to put up with their ham handed delivery for the first twenty minutes or so until their faces are sewn onto a Japanese guys ass. From then on they deliver an excellent performance of muffled grunts, moans, and shrieks and giving wide eyed expressions of terror as they swallow feces, and are forced to be “trained” by the sadistic Heiter.
The concept of the Human Centipede is perhaps its greatest strength and weakness. Once the characters are finally fused together in the horrific creation, there is practically no hope for them to resist the wild machinations of their captor. This makes the last fifty minutes consist of watching a parade of pure abject suffering and human misery. This dehumanization of the main characters makes for great horror, and is really the central theme of the film, but also makes the film lack tension and drive as the characters are literally helpless passive actors in the films plot. This causes the climax of the movie to rely heavily on a series of somewhat goofy and very convenient plot coincidences. Despite this drawback, I found the final scene of the film to be pretty creative and actually pretty haunting and disturbing way to end the movie.
I’m hesitant to say I was entertained by The Human Centipede as I found parts of the film difficult to watch, and I think anyone who is too entertained by this movie probably needs some psychiatric help. However, the concept of the film is so bizarre and out there that I think anyone who can stomach horror films should at least check this movie out (as far as outright violence and gore goes it is actually fairly tame). It’s not something I will probably want to watch anytime soon, but I am glad I checked it out.
6/10
Monday, October 18, 2010
October Movie Marathon Part 4: House of the Devil (2009)
House of the Devil is a movie that is completely unashamed of what it is. It is also uncompromisingly straightforward in its premise. In fact just knowing the title of this movie will give you a pretty good idea about what is going to happen in this film. However, despite this, or maybe because of it, House of the Devil is a fantastically frightening and fun film to watch.
Immediately one will notice when watching House of the Devil that director Tai West has made a conscious decision to set this film in the 80s in a homage to many of the classic horror and slasher flicks of the era. While some movies such as Machete or Planet Terror utilize the grind house aesthetic in a tongue and cheek manor, House of the Devil plays it much more straight by setting the movie in an era that evokes the feel of older horror movies without trying to engage in parody.
The film begins with a college student, Samantha, attempting to get a side job as a baby sitter so that she can move out into apartment and escape her obnoxious room mate. She lands a gig at an isolated mansion deep on the outskirts of town. Her job is to baby sit a mysterious man’s elder mother. The movie follows the events over the course of the night as Samantha finds more than she bargained for at the house.
This is a movie based on slow tension and anticipation on what will happen next. Samantha is a likely character played excellently by Jocelin Donahue. This great, since a large portion of this movie is nothing but long shots of her alone in the mansion, as she explores and begins to unravel what is going on in the house. As the movie progresses your really start to feel some apprehension for what is going to happen to this girl. However, when everything goes to hell at the end of this movie (literally), it is like a punch in the gut, all leading up to a masterfully executed abrupt ending that is classic horror.
House of the Devil is one of the best horror films I have seen from 2009. Some may criticize this film for being too uneventful or lacking substance, but this movie does everything it sets out to do, and does it with a slick retro style. It is definitely a movie worth seeking out and is great for Halloween.
9/10
Immediately one will notice when watching House of the Devil that director Tai West has made a conscious decision to set this film in the 80s in a homage to many of the classic horror and slasher flicks of the era. While some movies such as Machete or Planet Terror utilize the grind house aesthetic in a tongue and cheek manor, House of the Devil plays it much more straight by setting the movie in an era that evokes the feel of older horror movies without trying to engage in parody.
The film begins with a college student, Samantha, attempting to get a side job as a baby sitter so that she can move out into apartment and escape her obnoxious room mate. She lands a gig at an isolated mansion deep on the outskirts of town. Her job is to baby sit a mysterious man’s elder mother. The movie follows the events over the course of the night as Samantha finds more than she bargained for at the house.
This is a movie based on slow tension and anticipation on what will happen next. Samantha is a likely character played excellently by Jocelin Donahue. This great, since a large portion of this movie is nothing but long shots of her alone in the mansion, as she explores and begins to unravel what is going on in the house. As the movie progresses your really start to feel some apprehension for what is going to happen to this girl. However, when everything goes to hell at the end of this movie (literally), it is like a punch in the gut, all leading up to a masterfully executed abrupt ending that is classic horror.
House of the Devil is one of the best horror films I have seen from 2009. Some may criticize this film for being too uneventful or lacking substance, but this movie does everything it sets out to do, and does it with a slick retro style. It is definitely a movie worth seeking out and is great for Halloween.
9/10
October movie Marathon Part 3: Dead Snow (2009)
Nazi Germany was one of the most brutal and terrifying regimes of the 20th century. The Nazis have made for menacing foes in plenty of movies over the years, from Indiana Jones to Schindler’s List. So how do you make Nazis an even more dangerous threat? You make them into Zombies! The Norwegian horror film Dead Snow does just that.
The film is set in the mountains of Norway as a bunch of medical students head out to an isolated cabin for a fun weekend full of drinking and snowmobiling. However, once in the cabin, they encounter a mysterious hiker who recounts a tale of German soldiers who occupied the area during the war, and subjected to the local population to unspeakable atrocities. Apparently, as the war ended these soldiers were murdered by the local population who rebelled, when the soldiers attempted to steal their precious gold. The man claims an unspeakable evil lurks in the mountains, and pretty soon the students face a horde of undead zombies who are out to reclaim their lost gold.
Dead Snow plays almost like a remake of Evil Dead set in Norway, and the movie pays direct homage to other classic horror films like Dead-Alive. You can expect the same kind of horror action that straddles the line between goofy and gross that was found in those movies. I felt like the movie was maybe a little too aware of this by going to the lengths of including a nerdy film buff character who constantly references movies. At a point in the movie I started to feel “Yeah we get it, you like old horror movies.”
However, Dead Snow does have some great gore and action scenes toward the end of the movie as the characters engage in all out battle with the Nazi Zombies. There are plenty of decapitations, disembowelment, and characters being ripped limb from limb in this film, and a lot of this happens in broad daylight, so don’t expect too much suspense or scares in this movie. The characters decide not to run from the zombies, but face them head on. This leads to the movies best scenes, including a character mounting a German MG-42 machine gun to his snowmobile and mowing down dozens of Nazis. The movie tries to give the characters Bruce Campbell style one liners thought the film, but most of these fall kind of flat, partly because of the subtitles and partly because they are just plain bad.
Perhaps, the most surprising problem with Dead Snow, is just the lack of creativity. I never really felt that the movie took complete advantage of the excellent premise of having Nazi zombies. There is plenty of rich lore and stories about the Nazis associations with the occult and black magic, or their experiments with eugenics and fringe science. Either of these could have been exploited, and made for a rich and compelling plot. Instead the explanation for the zombies is vague and generic. The film seems too comfortable walking the same well trodden ground of other horror films, and I would have liked for it to try to be its on thing.
Dead Snow isn’t the best zombie film ever, and probably isn’t even the best Nazi zombie film ever. Check it out if you like the Evil Dead films, but keep in mind you won’t be seeing much new here.
5/10
The film is set in the mountains of Norway as a bunch of medical students head out to an isolated cabin for a fun weekend full of drinking and snowmobiling. However, once in the cabin, they encounter a mysterious hiker who recounts a tale of German soldiers who occupied the area during the war, and subjected to the local population to unspeakable atrocities. Apparently, as the war ended these soldiers were murdered by the local population who rebelled, when the soldiers attempted to steal their precious gold. The man claims an unspeakable evil lurks in the mountains, and pretty soon the students face a horde of undead zombies who are out to reclaim their lost gold.
Dead Snow plays almost like a remake of Evil Dead set in Norway, and the movie pays direct homage to other classic horror films like Dead-Alive. You can expect the same kind of horror action that straddles the line between goofy and gross that was found in those movies. I felt like the movie was maybe a little too aware of this by going to the lengths of including a nerdy film buff character who constantly references movies. At a point in the movie I started to feel “Yeah we get it, you like old horror movies.”
However, Dead Snow does have some great gore and action scenes toward the end of the movie as the characters engage in all out battle with the Nazi Zombies. There are plenty of decapitations, disembowelment, and characters being ripped limb from limb in this film, and a lot of this happens in broad daylight, so don’t expect too much suspense or scares in this movie. The characters decide not to run from the zombies, but face them head on. This leads to the movies best scenes, including a character mounting a German MG-42 machine gun to his snowmobile and mowing down dozens of Nazis. The movie tries to give the characters Bruce Campbell style one liners thought the film, but most of these fall kind of flat, partly because of the subtitles and partly because they are just plain bad.
Perhaps, the most surprising problem with Dead Snow, is just the lack of creativity. I never really felt that the movie took complete advantage of the excellent premise of having Nazi zombies. There is plenty of rich lore and stories about the Nazis associations with the occult and black magic, or their experiments with eugenics and fringe science. Either of these could have been exploited, and made for a rich and compelling plot. Instead the explanation for the zombies is vague and generic. The film seems too comfortable walking the same well trodden ground of other horror films, and I would have liked for it to try to be its on thing.
Dead Snow isn’t the best zombie film ever, and probably isn’t even the best Nazi zombie film ever. Check it out if you like the Evil Dead films, but keep in mind you won’t be seeing much new here.
5/10
Thursday, October 14, 2010
October Movie Marathon Part 2: Frozen (2010)
On a weekend ski trip, three college students find themselves stranded on chairlift, and forgotten by the staff of the resort. With the resort closed for the next week and no hope of rescue the trio must figure a way out as a winter storm closes in.
Frozen may stretch the genre boundaries for my October movie marathon a bit. There are no supernatural elements, no monsters, and no serial killers. It might be considered more of a thriller than a horror film. However, I think the movie fits the bill of horror quite well if only for the sheer plausibility of concept. Like the film Open Water, Frozen excels at taking a common place experience, and attempting to show how it can quickly turn into a terrifying one. It is this juxtaposition that fills you with an intense feeling of dread and hopelessness, as the characters of this film are put in an increasingly more desperate position, and you find yourself imagining what you would do in that situation.
A good portion of the horror is psychological, as the characters movie must deal with their deteriorating physical condition and the deaths of their friends, and there is a surprisingly low body count and use of gore, but this only serves to heighten the visceral impact when violence does occur. This movie has plenty of cringe inducing moments. Director/writer Adam Greene does a great job setting up the characters and their relationships in the first twenty minutes, so that you really feel for them with things start falling apart, and they are thrust into life a life death situation. I don’t want to ruin the film, but I felt the climax of the film could have been a bit better thought out and constructed. You don’t really feel like the solution to the conflict in the film feels earned by the characters, but maybe that is just part of the realism that the movie tries to go for.
Frozen is a fun little film that is totally worth a watch. At just under 90 minutes, the length of the film is perfect, and although the concept is limited, the movie does not overstay its welcome. However, do the nature of the plot and action of the film I don’t see me rewatching it very often. If your looking for a horror movie that goes in a bit more realistic direction, then Frozen solid bet.
7/10
Frozen may stretch the genre boundaries for my October movie marathon a bit. There are no supernatural elements, no monsters, and no serial killers. It might be considered more of a thriller than a horror film. However, I think the movie fits the bill of horror quite well if only for the sheer plausibility of concept. Like the film Open Water, Frozen excels at taking a common place experience, and attempting to show how it can quickly turn into a terrifying one. It is this juxtaposition that fills you with an intense feeling of dread and hopelessness, as the characters of this film are put in an increasingly more desperate position, and you find yourself imagining what you would do in that situation.
A good portion of the horror is psychological, as the characters movie must deal with their deteriorating physical condition and the deaths of their friends, and there is a surprisingly low body count and use of gore, but this only serves to heighten the visceral impact when violence does occur. This movie has plenty of cringe inducing moments. Director/writer Adam Greene does a great job setting up the characters and their relationships in the first twenty minutes, so that you really feel for them with things start falling apart, and they are thrust into life a life death situation. I don’t want to ruin the film, but I felt the climax of the film could have been a bit better thought out and constructed. You don’t really feel like the solution to the conflict in the film feels earned by the characters, but maybe that is just part of the realism that the movie tries to go for.
Frozen is a fun little film that is totally worth a watch. At just under 90 minutes, the length of the film is perfect, and although the concept is limited, the movie does not overstay its welcome. However, do the nature of the plot and action of the film I don’t see me rewatching it very often. If your looking for a horror movie that goes in a bit more realistic direction, then Frozen solid bet.
7/10
Thursday, October 7, 2010
Horror Movie Review Marathon Part 1: Lets Scare Jessica To Death (1971)
1971’s Lets Scare Jessica to Death deals with a woman who is attempting against all odds to hold onto her sanity in the face of a supernatural horror.
The film begins with Jessica being released from an institution after suffering a mental breakdown. It seems that Jessica is plagued by strange voices and visions of a mysterious woman. In order to help rehabilitate her, her husband and a friend take her to a small backwater Connecticut town. There they purchase an isolated house, and apple orchard, and plan to work the land and hang out and play acoustic guitar. Oh, and they happen to drive a hearse… for some reason.
When they arrive at the house they are surprised to find Emily, a free spirited hippie squatter living on the grounds of the estate. The group inexplicably takes in Emily and allows her to stay on the farm, but soon strange things start to occur. Jessica’s strange voices start coming back in her head, and she gets a sneaking suspicion that Emily is having an affair with her husband. Jessica also discovers that things are not quite right in town, as the entire population seems to be comprised of middle aged men who are mysteriously bandaged. Then Jessica finds that a woman mysteriously drowned on the houses property decades earlier, and legend has it her spirit still haunts the area.
Due to the questionable psychological state of the main character, you never really have a lot of certainty as to what really happens in this movie. The movie has a strange dream like quality that is highlighted not only by the mysterious voices and visions that Jessica experiences, but also by the irrational and sometimes quite silly actions of the main characters. It seems like these characters take bizarre happenings in stride, and don’t seem to mind the series of inexplicable events that happen in the plot. This would be fine, but I wish that the film had taken some time to get to know the characters better.
We find out very little about the characters and their relationships in this movie behind the basic back story, and this makes it really hard to figure out what we are really supposed to take away from what is shown in this movie. If you don’t like ambiguity, then stay far away from this movie. Things are not helped here by what is also a very thin plot. There is basically an hour of slow build up followed by about 30 minutes of action, and to be quite honest I didn’t feel like the pay off of this movie justified the first hour.
I do have positive things to say about this movie. The music, directing, and cinematography add up to a very creepy experience. It is interesting to note, that I found most of the creepiest scenes were the ones that took place in broad daylight, such as when Jessica comes face to face with ghostly figure emerging from a lake. There is some great imagery in this film. Also, when things do pick up toward the end, the film is pretty well done and entertaining.
I can appreciate this films attempt at slow paced psychological horror, but I wish the film had a more unexpected pay off and better developed, interesting characters. It lacks both of these. If your’re looking for some eerie early 70s horror film making you might enjoy Lets Scare Jessica To Death, but I found myself wishing there was a bit more substance behind all the creepiness.
5/10
The film begins with Jessica being released from an institution after suffering a mental breakdown. It seems that Jessica is plagued by strange voices and visions of a mysterious woman. In order to help rehabilitate her, her husband and a friend take her to a small backwater Connecticut town. There they purchase an isolated house, and apple orchard, and plan to work the land and hang out and play acoustic guitar. Oh, and they happen to drive a hearse… for some reason.
When they arrive at the house they are surprised to find Emily, a free spirited hippie squatter living on the grounds of the estate. The group inexplicably takes in Emily and allows her to stay on the farm, but soon strange things start to occur. Jessica’s strange voices start coming back in her head, and she gets a sneaking suspicion that Emily is having an affair with her husband. Jessica also discovers that things are not quite right in town, as the entire population seems to be comprised of middle aged men who are mysteriously bandaged. Then Jessica finds that a woman mysteriously drowned on the houses property decades earlier, and legend has it her spirit still haunts the area.
Due to the questionable psychological state of the main character, you never really have a lot of certainty as to what really happens in this movie. The movie has a strange dream like quality that is highlighted not only by the mysterious voices and visions that Jessica experiences, but also by the irrational and sometimes quite silly actions of the main characters. It seems like these characters take bizarre happenings in stride, and don’t seem to mind the series of inexplicable events that happen in the plot. This would be fine, but I wish that the film had taken some time to get to know the characters better.
We find out very little about the characters and their relationships in this movie behind the basic back story, and this makes it really hard to figure out what we are really supposed to take away from what is shown in this movie. If you don’t like ambiguity, then stay far away from this movie. Things are not helped here by what is also a very thin plot. There is basically an hour of slow build up followed by about 30 minutes of action, and to be quite honest I didn’t feel like the pay off of this movie justified the first hour.
I do have positive things to say about this movie. The music, directing, and cinematography add up to a very creepy experience. It is interesting to note, that I found most of the creepiest scenes were the ones that took place in broad daylight, such as when Jessica comes face to face with ghostly figure emerging from a lake. There is some great imagery in this film. Also, when things do pick up toward the end, the film is pretty well done and entertaining.
I can appreciate this films attempt at slow paced psychological horror, but I wish the film had a more unexpected pay off and better developed, interesting characters. It lacks both of these. If your’re looking for some eerie early 70s horror film making you might enjoy Lets Scare Jessica To Death, but I found myself wishing there was a bit more substance behind all the creepiness.
5/10
Horror film review marathon
In order to celebrate the month of october and halloween I plan on watching and reviewing thirty one horror films. One for each day of the month. Stay tuned for the first installment coming soon...
The White Ribbon (2009)
After thoroughly, enjoying his 2007 shot for shot English remake of his own film, Funny Games. I found myself eager to check out some other films in director Michael Henneke’s filmography. And what better film to start with than his recent Oscar nominated film The White Ribbon?
The White Ribbon provides snapshot into a small agricultural village in 1913 Austria on the eve of the First World War I. At first things seem idyllic, and perfect, but a series of nefarious occurrences start to occur revealing a dark underbelly to the town, exposing profoundly flawed society. First, the town’s doctor is injured when his horse trips on a wire stretched across the entrance to the town, then there occurs a tragic accident at the town’s saw mill, and town Baron’s son is found beaten. As suspicion and paranoia grow in the town, the town school teacher believes he may know the answer to who is causing these events.
I was a bit worried that I would not enjoy The White Ribbon, as it is more of a period piece and lacks some of the horror and thriller genre elements of Funny Games. But I was totally drawn into the mystery of what was happening in this town of right from the beginning. Henneke’s direction shows a lot of restraint, with a lot of deliberate long takes, and the black and white style gives the film a very ominous tone. The plot is also very deliberately paced, with the viewer slowly learning more and more about the characters in the village and their relationships. Certain things you take for granted or assume at the beginning of the film will be turned upside down by the end, making the film ripe for multiple viewings.
In a way The White Ribbon does to turn of the century German society what a film like American Beauty does to turn of the century American suburbia. Check out the White Ribbon if you are looking for a good foreign film.
9/10
The White Ribbon provides snapshot into a small agricultural village in 1913 Austria on the eve of the First World War I. At first things seem idyllic, and perfect, but a series of nefarious occurrences start to occur revealing a dark underbelly to the town, exposing profoundly flawed society. First, the town’s doctor is injured when his horse trips on a wire stretched across the entrance to the town, then there occurs a tragic accident at the town’s saw mill, and town Baron’s son is found beaten. As suspicion and paranoia grow in the town, the town school teacher believes he may know the answer to who is causing these events.
I was a bit worried that I would not enjoy The White Ribbon, as it is more of a period piece and lacks some of the horror and thriller genre elements of Funny Games. But I was totally drawn into the mystery of what was happening in this town of right from the beginning. Henneke’s direction shows a lot of restraint, with a lot of deliberate long takes, and the black and white style gives the film a very ominous tone. The plot is also very deliberately paced, with the viewer slowly learning more and more about the characters in the village and their relationships. Certain things you take for granted or assume at the beginning of the film will be turned upside down by the end, making the film ripe for multiple viewings.
In a way The White Ribbon does to turn of the century German society what a film like American Beauty does to turn of the century American suburbia. Check out the White Ribbon if you are looking for a good foreign film.
9/10
Thursday, September 30, 2010
Devil (2010)
After a series of critical failures such as Lady in the Water, The Happening, and The Last Airbender, writer/director M Night Shyamylan returns with his latest film, Devil. It is the first installment in a trilogy of films which are being called the “Night Chronicles.” This series of films will feature films and ideas coming from Shyamylan himself, but will be directed by someone else. Perhaps it is a good idea to reign in Shyamylan, by having a different person direct his screenplays. After all, I don’t think anyone could accuse Shyamylan of being uncreative, but some have definitely criticized his directorial style over the years. But if Devil is any indication, I don’t think Shyamylan will be bouncing back into good favor with critics anytime soon.
The concept behind Devil is simple. Five strangers are trapped in a stalled office building elevator. As rescuers race to open the elevator, they soon realize that one of the people trapped amongst them could be the Devil themselves. This is not the most original idea ever, but the concept of most of the film taking place in an elevator, could lead to some interesting possibilities. But the film doesn’t make use of this concept as well as it could have, and much of the film feels padded to meet the required running time. For instance, a good chunk of the film focuses on a detective character trying to figure out what is going on in the elevator as he tries to coordinate rescue efforts. He starts going through their backgrounds trying to figure out which one of them could be the murderer. However, by this time the audience pretty much knows that it is the devil that is killing people, and the detective’s efforts pretty much amount to red herring filler.
Devil’s problem lies in the fact that the film is simply not very scary or suspenseful. Left to the confines of the elevator, there is not much our characters can do except argue with each other (with some pretty unrealistic dialogue). Occasionally the lights go out, and some character will meet with a horrific fate at the hands of the devil. This happens so many times, that it becomes pretty banal by the time it happens to the third character. You will start to wonder why if this devil is so evil he just doesn’t break the elevator cable and return to Hades.
Which is another problem with Devil: the Devil doesn’t seem very devilish. Sure he murders several people throughout the film, and makes people’s toast fall jelly side down (I am not joking, this is used as evidence of the devil in the film), but he also seems to spare people who are willing to confess their sins to him. I’m not religious, but isn’t that more of God’s job? I’m sure Shyamylan was trying to incorporate a feel good redemptive aspect to the story similar to what he did in Signs, but while the ending of that movie came across as being genuinely touching, the ending of Devil just feels far too convenient and sloppy, as if Shyaymlan had to force things together in the last ten minutes to get the theme he wanted in the ending across.
Devil is the first of Shyamylan’s films that I just found boring. Sure, The Happening and Lady in the Water had huge flaws, but I can’t say I didn’t find them entertaining. Devil lacks the original concept of The Happening, the thrills and heart of Signs, or even the interesting twist of The Sixth Sense.
4/10
The concept behind Devil is simple. Five strangers are trapped in a stalled office building elevator. As rescuers race to open the elevator, they soon realize that one of the people trapped amongst them could be the Devil themselves. This is not the most original idea ever, but the concept of most of the film taking place in an elevator, could lead to some interesting possibilities. But the film doesn’t make use of this concept as well as it could have, and much of the film feels padded to meet the required running time. For instance, a good chunk of the film focuses on a detective character trying to figure out what is going on in the elevator as he tries to coordinate rescue efforts. He starts going through their backgrounds trying to figure out which one of them could be the murderer. However, by this time the audience pretty much knows that it is the devil that is killing people, and the detective’s efforts pretty much amount to red herring filler.
Devil’s problem lies in the fact that the film is simply not very scary or suspenseful. Left to the confines of the elevator, there is not much our characters can do except argue with each other (with some pretty unrealistic dialogue). Occasionally the lights go out, and some character will meet with a horrific fate at the hands of the devil. This happens so many times, that it becomes pretty banal by the time it happens to the third character. You will start to wonder why if this devil is so evil he just doesn’t break the elevator cable and return to Hades.
Which is another problem with Devil: the Devil doesn’t seem very devilish. Sure he murders several people throughout the film, and makes people’s toast fall jelly side down (I am not joking, this is used as evidence of the devil in the film), but he also seems to spare people who are willing to confess their sins to him. I’m not religious, but isn’t that more of God’s job? I’m sure Shyamylan was trying to incorporate a feel good redemptive aspect to the story similar to what he did in Signs, but while the ending of that movie came across as being genuinely touching, the ending of Devil just feels far too convenient and sloppy, as if Shyaymlan had to force things together in the last ten minutes to get the theme he wanted in the ending across.
Devil is the first of Shyamylan’s films that I just found boring. Sure, The Happening and Lady in the Water had huge flaws, but I can’t say I didn’t find them entertaining. Devil lacks the original concept of The Happening, the thrills and heart of Signs, or even the interesting twist of The Sixth Sense.
4/10
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
