Horror Origins: Hellraiser

            It’s amazing what sort of misconceptions one can develop, even when you consider yourself an intelligent adult. 

            Take, for instance, my completely incorrect assumption that Clive Barker was once a prolific director.  I couldn’t have been more wrong.  In my defense, I think the ‘Clive Barker Presents’ films completely skewed my count.  In reality, he has only directed five movies, the last one being Lord of Illusions in 1995.

            Another reason I think I was a little off is because of how much writing he’s done.  He has 30 writing credits when you take video games and short films into account.  Throw in his producing credits, and you’ve got a guy who stayed pretty busy.  Oh yeah!  He’s also responsible for Candyman and the Hellraiser series.

            On to the review!

            I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again.  I always found the first Hellraiser film to be boring, so I wasn’t expecting my 3^rd (4^th?) viewing to be any different. Really, I wasn’t too far off the mark, it’s still kinda boring.  However, since I was already really familiar with the plot, I was able to notice a bit more of what made Clive Barker such a respected ‘Master of Horror’ all those years ago. 

The man knows how to instill every scene with just the right amount of dread, and his villains are hard to forget.  Add some truly disturbing special effects wizardry, and it’s easy to see why Hellraiser is still one of the most well-known horror classics, especially since it debuted so ‘recently.’  (It came out in 1987, nearly a decade after Halloween and 7 years after Friday the 13^th.)

            Combining the idea of a magical artifact (a-la Indiana Jones) with the ability to summon creatures from another plane of existence, Barker created an otherworldly device that allows him to make up the rules as he goes.  In this one, when someone ‘solves’ the puzzle cube it opens a doorway to hell.  Whether it’s intentional or not, this summons Pinhead and his Cenobites, setting them free to inflict whatever demonic tortures they wish up their newest victim.

            In the first Hellraiser, that victim is Frank (Sean Chapman), a sex-addicted asshole who claims to ‘know what he’s getting into.’  Once the opening scene proves him wrong, we’re transported into the lives of Frank’s brother Larry (Andrew Robinson), his kind-of-a-bitch wife Julia (Clare Higgins) and his peppy daughter Kirsty (Ashley Laurence).  Soon, we discover that Julia was totally boning Frank because they’re both terrible people, and Larry was never the wiser.

            Cut to about 15 minutes into the film, and Larry is dripping blood thanks to a rusty nail.  As we watch the blood fall, we see it being absorbed into the floorboards. 

            Surprise!  Frank used the blood to pull his way out of Cenobite hell and begin reincorporating his human form.  To fully accomplish this he needs more victims’ blood.  This is where Julia makes the perfect lackey: she’s still smitten with him and is willing to overlook the fact that a demon-man wants her to murder innocent men.

            What holds up 25 years later is just how creepy Frank’s ‘monster’ form is, played in lots of heavy makeup by Oliver Smith.  The ‘formation’ scene is genuinely disturbing, and Clive Barker seemed to have studied up on human anatomy, because he makes Frank’s skinless forms strange and creepy as he works towards a ‘complete’ body.  This, combined with the dry, dusty, creepy, filthy room where much of the action takes place, makes Hellraiser stand out.

            Oh yes, and don’t forget how incredibly kinky the Cenobites are.  Seriously.  Go back and check out those outfits.  Each one was supposed to represent someone receiving a twisted version of their greatest wish.  Those are some kinky, creepy wishes.

            So how is Hellraiser as a movie?  It’s fine, really.  It’s not as slow as I often make it out to be.  In fact, it has almost the same pacing as Nightmare on Elm Street and consistently delivers ‘the scares,’ as it were.  While Pinhead doesn’t really get fleshed out for a few more movies, he and his band of BDSM misfits make up for in grotesquery what they lack in imminent danger.

            Next week:  I bring some modernity by introducing the newest member of the fold:  Paranormal Activity.

Men in Black III

            One thing I can appreciate when I sit down to watch a long-not-awaited sequel is honesty.  When absolutely nobody was clamoring to see the continued adventures of So-and-So, it’s nice when the film acknowledges that.  Oh yeah, and you also need to write a decent script if you’re going to convince people it’s worth seeing.

            On to the review!

            Here’s your number: 10.  That would be ten as in years, also known as a decade.  This is how far you have to travel back in time in order to see Men in Black II.  That movie itself was a sequel to a film that had come out 5 years prior.  Expect MIB4 in 2027.

            Oh yeah, and speaking of travelling through time, guess what the third movie in this never-really-planned-for trilogy revolves around?  If you said ‘I don’t really care,’ then you’re in lockstep with most of America!  For a movie starring a well-liked an respected actor (Tommy Lee Jones, reprising his role as K) and a money-maker (Will Smith as J), there seemed to be almost no excitement built up for Men in Black III. 

            Fortunately for us everything turns out much, much better than MIBII did, and the addition of Josh Brolin as young K was a stroke of genius.  That they didn’t try to over-complicate things by adding any love interest for J and only super-super briefly alluding to a romance for K was also greatly appreciated.  What we got was a slim, action-packed movie that focused on a few agents saving the world from imminent alien destruction.

            Our film starts us off in the here-and-now, 14 years after J is recruited into the Men in Black, and we get to see just how little anything has changed.  K is still surly, J is still talkative, and they still get stuff done.  We’re reminded of just how emotionally lacking K is when he gives a speech at Z’s funeral.  While humorously short, it is also pretty damn terrible.  They then lock horns a few more times until we’re introduced to the new villain, Boris the Animal (Jermaine Clement).  This guy is so dangerous they went and built a prison just for him.  On the moon.

            So of course he escapes and sets into motion a plan to go back in time, kill K and destroy Earth.

Since this is movie land, J is the only person who notices K’s disappearance from the time stream and goes back to 1969 in an effort to save him.  There he’s aided by young K and a 5-dimensional being, Griffin (Michael Stuhlbarg), whose constantly bemused and bewildered character can see infinite possibilities and has to wait for the present to catch up to all the available futures.

As usual, the special effects are impeccable.  While the aliens have always been cartoonish in the MIB world, Boris is genuinely menacing and some of the thug aliens reveal good creepy qualities.  As usual, everything is well integrated and you don’t really notice any green-screen shenanigans.

Mix it all together and what we end up with is a light and fluffy summer film.  It’s certainly action-packed, but the nature of the blockbuster has passed it by.  There really isn’t enough world-shattering action to justify the title, but that’s okay.  Three movies in, Men in Black may have finally found its perfect niche: an action movie for people who find mindless summer films too thoughtful.

Horror Origins: Critters

            There’s something to be said about the fond memories of a movie you loved as a child.  There’s also something to be said about watching that movie a decade or two later.  Sometimes everything works out just fine.  The Stuff was still hilariously terrible twenty years after my preteen-self encountered it.  Then there’s stuff like Attack of the Killer Tomatoes, a film that I remember loving the shit out of when it came on TV in the early ‘90’s.  So of course, I hit up the ol’ Netflix and eagerly awaited the disc to come in, excitedly put it in the XBox about 35 seconds after the it arrived and…holy shit why is this movie so bad what evil hypnotist altered my memories into thinking this was a beloved classic? 

            I’ve already mentioned how subjective movies can be.  Like all art forms (especially video games) beauty is in the eye of the beholder.  But there seems to be a unique, singular feeling of disappointment that comes from ruining your own childhood memories.  Thinking something is awesome and then ruining those beliefs by foolishly trying to re-experience that excitement really sucks. 

            So where does Critters fit?

            On to the review!

            First, what the hell are ‘Critters?’  Are they mutants?  Escaped lab experiments?  Sentient furballs?  Gremlins rip-offs?  No, no, no, and maybe.

            In perfect mid-80’s fashion, they’re aliens.  You see, the mid-80’s had a hard-on for cheesy alien movies.  At the time, the original Star Wars trilogy was coming to a close and the studios absolutely had to capitalize on that.  Hence, the creation of The Last Starfighter, Flightof the Navigator, Critters, Mac and Me, and many, many more movies.  (I am in no way saying that any of these are bad movies.  I am saying that they’re very eighties movies.  Well, ok, Mac and Me was pretty damn horrible.)

            The aliens in Critters are Crites, 8 escaped convicts from a prison asteroid who seemingly exist only to eat.  They’re actually pretty dumb for sentient aliens that are capable of flying a space ship, but you can chalk that up to the fact that they are not only the horrific bad guys of this story, they’re also the humor.  The movie makes up for any actors taking themselves seriously by having the Crites take absolutely nothing seriously, having them provide most of the swear words and toilet humor (figuratively and literally).

            Starring almost nobody you’ve ever heard of, we focus on a family of four whose farmhouse is about to be terrorized by the Crites.  The action at home is broken up by the stoic antics of two outer space bounty hunters as they tear apart the town in search of their bounties.  That’s the whole of the plot, really: Crites try and eat everyone so they can grow big and strong, family must stay alive long enough to get saved by the bounty hunters.

            While there are a lot of people being attacked and even eaten by the savage aliens, there is very little gore.  This is a franchise that tried to extend its fan base by starting out as a PG-13 film, so while you get a lot of screaming and freaking out, much of it is off-screen.  What I still enjoy, even after all this time, is how ridiculous the whole thing is.  These guys are a foot tall.  Sure, they’ve got rows of teeth and paralyzing spikes that they can shoot like tiny darts, but it’s amazing that nothing short of explosives and shotguns can stop them.  They’re furry little bulldozers, and that’s hilarious.

            Critters is in no way a great horror film.  It’s barely manages to be scary, whether you are an adult or a preteen.  What it does manage to be is wildly inventive.  The Crites are the work of a special effects artist in a fever dream, and the way they act make them seem like hung-over frat boy stereotypes who just want a bite to eat, dude.  To think that we could be undone by the douchebags of the universe is knee-slappingly hilarious.

Despite all this, the film still manages to maintain a nice balance.  It never gets too serious, and the plot stays simple.  As far as the whole series goes, I could have done without the overarching story of Charlie (Don Opper) becoming an intergalactic bounty hunter, but everything else is perfectly okay.  (As far as everyone else goes, although Billy Zane was in the first one and Leonardo DiCaprio is in the 3^rd, there are no other recognizable persons aside from the odd character actor.)

            As a franchise, Critters gets no better, but seldom does it get worse.  It always stays true to itself. 

Next week: I have no idea, really.  The Howling or Leprechaun, hopefully.

Battleship

            If The Hunger Games was the start of the summer movie blockbuster season, this weekend is the start of the mindless, crappy, big, loud movie season.  Now, I don’t mind a movie that’s more spectacle than substance, but I need some substance.  Don’t serve me up a movie so full of plot holes that the entire film could have been resolved in 15 minutes if only one person in it had an IQ higher than 17.

            I think my wife said it best.  “I’m so glad Battleship is out so I don’t have to see the previews anymore.”

On to the review!

            There are so many things I want to say about Battleship, most all of them negative, that I keep forgetting some and can’t prioritize the rest.  This was an absolutely abysmal movie, both as a blockbuster and as a Navy recruitment film.  Will Smith and Bill Pullman made the Air Force look good in Independence Day.  The Army has several movies that portray them in a positive light.  The Marines absolutely cannot be messed with in real life or a fictional universe.  Sorry, Navy.  At least you still have Top Gun?

            The absolute worst part of Battleship is the fact that it actually starts well.  We’re introduced to two brothers, Stone and Alex Hopper (Alexander Skarsgard and Taylor Kitsch, respectively.)  Stone’s the respectable Navy officer and Alex is a 20-something screw-up.  They’re celebrating Alex’s birthday at a bar in Hawaii when a gorgeous woman (Brooklyn Decker, playing Samantha Shane) walks in.  One thing leads to another and Alex ends up getting tasered while trying to secure a chicken burrito for her.

            Then Alex is told he’s going to join the Navy, and things get really stupid from there on out.  On the plus side, he’s still got Samantha, right?  Well, you see, the fleet Admiral’s last name is Shane…oh shit!  The screw-up is dating the Admiral’s daughter!  And he’s Liam Neeson!  Oh snap son, you in trouble now! 

            Or at least, that’s what they were hoping you’d think.  I, instead, spent the whole movie waiting for Liam to make a broken bottle glove and punch an alien in the face.  Sadly enough, this never happened. 

            Instead, here’s what did happen:  We find a planet far away that looks compatible with human life and start send signals at it.  This is done in a hilariously terrible fashion, which had me pissed off roughly 80 seconds in to the film.  Then we get some hilariously blunt foreshadowing about the fact that any aliens who respond would probably wipe us out.  So, of course, a few years later, 5 ships enter our atmosphere.  One breaks up and crushes Hong Kong, the other 4 land in the ocean just off the Hawaiian Islands.

            Of course, since there are over a dozen countries participating in war games right there, they’re sent to investigate.  Then aliens happen, and a force field gets put up around Hawaii, trapping 3 destroyers (2 American, 1 Japanese) inside and the other 100+ Naval ships are stuck on the outside, unable to help.  This is when I lost what little interest I had, because it became so goddamn dumb.

            They kept cutting from the Pentagon to Admiral Shane and it’s absolutely clear that everyone knows what needs to be done, but NOBODY DOES ANYTHING.  The issue is that the aliens need our relays on the islands to beam locational directions up to our satellite.  That’s the only way they can communicate with the full invasion force.  They need to use our satellite.  Our satellite.  Our satellite that NASA built and controls that apparently cannot be in any way changed by NASA or destroyed by any means whatsoever.  Nope, our only hope is three destroyers.  No, wait, two…oops, no, one destroyer, now being led by a Lieutenant, because destroyers apparently have a crew of only 15 people.

            There’s my next problem.  Rather than respect the Navy and show just how much goes into running and maintaining a ship, they make it look like Raikes (Rhianna), Lynch (John Tui) and Alex can run almost every aspect of the ship, from repelling boarding action to running all weapon systems whilst simultaneously handling all the communications.  No, dude.  There’s a separate job for all of that, and while I can understand certain ‘all hands’ situations, you don’t send your damn missile control operator on a little PT boat to operate the forward-mounted minigun.  You keep her on the damn control console!

            Even worse, they do man a battleship at one point, and while I appreciate the genuinely touching tribute to our retired veterans, I really wish it had come within a better film.

            For those of you looking for Battleship: The Game references, they’re in there.  They even play a modified version of it where an officer is actually calling out grid coordinates, trying to destroy alien ships.  Unfortunately, nobody says “You sunk my battleship.”  Although, Liam Neeson does tell Peter MacNicol to basically go screw himself.  My disappointment came when Vigo failed to show up.

            I could go on and on for a few more pages, but I think you get the gist of it.  Battleship is a terrible movie, and I recommend you go see The Dictator this weekend.  It’s neither entertaining enough nor smart enough to join Independence Day, Top Gun, and Black Hawk Down as good movies sponsored by the U.S. Military.

Horror Origins: A Nightmare on Elm Street

What are some of the most iconic sounds and phrases from film?  I’m talking about a phrase or a tiny clip of music that instantly conjures an entire film to mind, filling you with nostalgia. There are the usual quotes from classic movies, such as “Frankly my dear, I don’t give a damn” and “STELLA!!!!”  Plus there are audio clips, like the Imperial March or the opening music to Star Trek.  Once you hear it, you can never forget its source material.

For me, it’s all about the horrors.  The theme to Friday the 13^th is great.  “Ch-ch-ch-ah-ah-ahh.”  Then there is the screeching noise in Psycho’s shower scene.  On top of all that,  my most memorable horror film audio clip is most definitely the little girls singing “One two Freddy’s coming for you…”

On to the review!

A Nightmare on Elm Street’s Freddy Kruger is quite possibly Wes Craven’s greatest creation.  As played by Robert Englund, Freddy was the perfect amount of creepy, disturbing and otherworldly.  The casting was also an important part of the film’s success.  Especially early in the franchise, you were never quite sure if the man behind the makeup was maybe a little too into his role.  On more than one occasion I caught myself wondering if this guy just really good at playing a crazed, dream-stalking killer, or did he actually relish the chance to ‘murder’ teenaged victims?

Like most horror films, A Nightmare on Elm Street eventually suffers from the dreaded law of diminishing returns.  Personally, I think it holds up as a franchise for longer than most, with Dream Warriors arguably the best in the series (and my personal favorite).  More importantly, the first Nightmare, unlike many other franchise starters, perfectly sets the tone that will carry through to most every sequel.  As much as people complain about too much slapstick and humor finding its way into later installments, there was already humor present in the first film.  From Freddy’s accordion arms to the striped roof implying that our murderous anti-hero is disguised as a sports car, there was always something playful about his insanity.

This sets it far apart from other movies like Friday the 13^th and Critters, films that didn’t find their voice until later, or completely changed their tone after just one or two films.  I like to argue that A Nightmare on Elm Street didn’t devolve into a humorous parody of itself so much as add a bit more humor in each installment.

As far as the original goes, it gets off to a perfect start.  The very first scene guarantees the audience knows that this movie is all about a crazed killer with a knife glove.  We start off in the middle of Nancy’s nightmare (played by Heather Langenkamp, who would later reprise her role in several sequels).  She’s being chased by a crazed guy in a tacky sweater, and he seems dead set on her demise.  When she discusses it with her high school friends and boyfriend, it turns out that they all dreamt about the same guy.  Later, when her two friends, Rod (Jsu Garcia) and Christina (Amanda Wyss) are separately slaughtered in their sleep, she and her boyfriend Glen (a very young Johnny Depp) try to stay awake as long as possible in an effort to avoid his nightmare realm.

What makes this film so much fun is its creative special effects.  I’ve mentioned Freddy’s accordion arms, which manage to be creepy as well as oddball, but the best parts of the film involve the revolving room.  Twice in the movie, a room is moved on its axis to give the impression of blood (or a person) flowing all over the walls and ceiling.  Despite improvements made in the special FX department in the last 20 years, it’s still a very simple way to imply a loss of sanity, and it still holds up well.

As far as franchise firsts go, I want to go on record as stating that A Nightmare on Elm Street is quite possibly the best in the horror genre.  It didn’t force huge, plot-changing twists into its sequels like Friday the 13^th did.  It didn’t immediately devolve into complete camp and comedy like Critters did.  It also avoided an incredibly boring beginning installment, unlike Hellraiser.  While not necessarily scary, it’s still creepy, and it will always be a testament to the creativity and genius of Wes Craven.

Next week:  Critters!  Hells yes!

Dark Shadows

As many of you are well aware, I despise misleading trailers.  I hate them enough to bring it up whenever the possibility arises, and I’m always cautioning others to wait and talk to someone who has seen a movie if you’re on the fence about it.  There is nothing worse than walking into a theater with expectations of A, but being served B.

            Why do I bring this up? 

            On to the review!

            Before I get into why I feel like I was lied to, we must first answer a question:  What exactly is Dark Shadows?  Well, it’s an adored gothic soap opera that ran for hundreds and hundreds of episodes in the 1960’s and ‘70’s, was briefly revived in the 1990’s and turned into a TV movie in 2005.  So, yeah, it’s kinda popular.  You can call it the Dr. Who of fantasy soaps, only without enough studio backing to bring it back to stay.  Fortunately for fans, there was one man with the perfect amount of vision, gothic sensibilities and quirky humor who also had the clout to make it happen again, for the fourth time. 

            But was it worth reviving?

           

            In short:  Ehhhhhh.  Sure.  A little.  Maybe?

            My biggest problem with Dark Shadows is how everyone but Johnny Depp plays the straight man.  Actually, Depp also plays the straight man (or vampire, as it were).  Once again Tim Burton asks him to fall into the role of a very strange, fish-out-of-water character.  This time he is Barnabas Collins, a great, beloved man, cursed to be an undead vampire for eternity.  The curse comes about because he spurned the advances of a witch, Angelique Bouchard (Eva Green) and she decided that if she couldn’t have him, he’d just have to suffer for all eternity, buried alive.  Or is that buried undead?

            Of course, two hundred years later, his coffin is disturbed and he’s free to return home to the now-dilapidated Collins estate, where he finds the sad, pitiful remains of his once-mighty descendants.  You see, it wasn’t enough for Angelique to torture him.  She decided to stick around and make every Collins descendent suffer.  That’s right.  She was so obsessed over Barnabas that she feels she must ensure the Collins family slowly, pitifully slides into a mockery of their once-great power.

            Compared to the original soaps, the whole plot is fine, really. Well, except for one thing.  You see, every single damn trailer for Dark Shadows promised me a gothic comedy.  Every second of every trailer was jam-packed with quirky characters, oddball situations and general fantastical silliness that sold me on a goofy, gently mocking take on the original.

            What was delivered ended up being a dark, depressing film that only delivers its humor via Barnabas’s observations and poorly timed comments.  On top of that, the humor falls flat after the first half-dozen ‘oh goodness look at this crazy technology, are you sure it isn’t Satan?’ jokes.  To be brutally honest, the jokes are one-note and cease to be in any way humorous after about 45 minutes.  That leaves almost 75 minutes of humorless, colorless movie.  Even worse, most of the truly clever jokes were in the trailer.

            I’m not saying that this film is bad.  I’m saying that it’s absolutely not what you may have been looking for.  It’s misleading, and that’s a shame.  I don’t think I would have gone out of my way to watch it if the trailers were honest, but I like to think that Burton and Depp would have delivered a better product if the studio had put more pressure on them, rather than just making a misleading trailer.

            As for everyone else in the movie, they’re pretty much single-note characters.  Eva Green isn’t impressive as the bad guy.  In fact, the camera makes her cleavage more important than her emotions. Michelle Pfeiffer is fine as the matron of the Collins family, but she’s not given much to work with.  Helena Bonham Carter and Chloe Grace Moretz are completely wasted in their roles; Moretz especially is creepy as an over-sexualized teenager, delivering all her lines with a constant sneer.  It’s unsettling, and not in a cinematically impressive way.

            Nobody else stands out, just as nothing in Dark Shadows stands out.  It’s blandly predictable, and I really think Tim Burton needs to take a break from filmmaking for a while or try something radically different.  Maybe a buddy cop comedy or a war movie?

            What I’m trying to say is, go see The Avengers again.  If you really like Dark Shadows, you’ll be fine with this version.  Same goes for those of you that really like Johnny Depp in white face paint.  For everyone else, this movie won’t make you a fan of the series, and it may even deter you from checking out the weird, oddly entertaining originals that I used to watch on SciFi during my summer vacations.

Horror Origins: Friday the 13th

     I went into Friday the 13th thinking that I hadn't seen it before.  Well, I was wrong.  I had seen it recently, because most of the plot and many of the deaths were still familiar.  What does that say about a film that I can watch it twice in the same year and not remember doing so?
     Hell, I'm already forgetting last night's viewing.  Is that a good thing?  Is this some sort of weird, cursed film that everyone is destined to forget, thus forcing them to watch it again and again, over and over, because nobody can remember what the hell happened?  Or is it just not that good?

On to the review!

     As you are most likely aware of, Friday the 13th is one of the many horror franchises that has suffered through a recent reboot attempt.  2009 marked the failed attempt of this poor little guy, though it arguably should have happened well before Jason X.  Though not a pure reboot since they changed the plot, it was still an attempt to resuscitate a beleaguered franchise.  Fortunately for us, I do believe it failed.
     But enough of my ramblings.  You want to know what I think of the original 1980 version!  For starters, I think very highly of what they were trying to do.  Most of the big horror films of its time were still showing us the killer and making all the scares scenes of gore and violence.  There was little attempt to frighten us with an unknown killer.  At least, that's the case in the 'big' films of the time.  Texas Chainsaw Massacre, The Last House of the Left, and, later, A Nightmare on Elm Street all show us the villain, then spend the rest of their time trying to frighten us with depraved acts.
     Come to think of it, this is one of the few horror franchise starters that relies on the Scooby-Doo 'who-done-it' feeling of mystery to add to the fear.  I honestly can't think of another one.
     Though I'm relatively immune to the scares throughout a horror film done thirty-two years ago with relatively silly special effects, it doesn't mean I can't appreciate what it must have done to audiences in its day.  While the gore is relatively unimpressive, seeing the way our unknowing teenagers are picked off one-by-one is still effective.
     Additionally, the pacing is pretty good.  This is important, as pacing can absolutely destroy a horror movie.  Kill too many victims too quickly, and you now have to drag out the ending.  Kill too few people, and you're forced to throw in a spate of killings.  Sometimes that works out, but oftentimes there ends up being so much violence on the screen that nobody can really process it, much less appreciate your 'sweet death scene.'  To fix that, here's my patented mathematical solution that every filmmaker should use:  Take the number of your film's victims and divide it by the length of the movie (in minutes), minus ten.  (You have to take ten minutes off the movie to account for the final survivor's epic chase/fight/death scene.)
     For example, if you have 8 teenagers and the movie is 90 minutes long, it would be (90-10)/8, or 80/8.  This means that, roughly every ten minutes, someone should die.  Of course you want to swap that up at least once to keep audiences on their toes, but this way you'll never fully lose their interest.
     Anyways, back to Friday the 13th.  The actors are perfectly passable considering that they're mostly there just to die.  Kevin Bacon is in it, but I'm pretty sure he's been starring in films since 1932 and is, in fact, immortal.  The ladies to a fine job as well, considering two of them seem to have been cast purely for their screeching abilities.
     The biggest, most impressive (for its time) part of the film is its twist.  Even though Friday the 13th is known as 'that franchise that features Jason,' there is no Jason to be found, unless you count a fever dream (or was it?...dun-dun-duuun) at the end of the movie.  No, this has the sort of twist that Sleepaway Camp would later (sort of) imitate.  While I do like movies that give you a huge twist in the end, it's also mildly disingenuous to give us a nearly unpredictable twist, what with the whole complete lack of any foreshadowing at all.
     That being said, while Friday the 13th is certainly dated and can almost completely be ignored as a franchise starter, thanks to the absence of the franchise's biggest star, it still holds up as a clever, imaginative movie in the stalker-killer sub-genre.  I'd say it's still better than Black Christmas (1974) but not by much.

Next week:  A Nightmare on Elm Street, while I try to get my hands on some sweet, sweet Critters DVD's.

Best Avengers Review Ever

Okay, here’s the deal.  Almost everyone who wants to see The Avengers either has seen it or will see it soon.  Those who don’t want to see it either don’t care for comic book movies or dislike one or more of the actors in the film.  No big deal, I’m pretty sure this film is going to make so many ridiculous millions of dollars that they won’t notice.

            What I’m going to do is give the quickest, best review out there.

            *ahem*

            The Avengers stars all the returning heroes (except Bruce Banner/The Hulk, who is now played by Mark Ruffalo).  Thy must now ‘assemble’ to stave off the threat of Loki and his army.  They are also aided by S.H.I.E.L.D., Nick Fury (Samuel L. Jackson) and Hawkeye (Jeremy Renner).  Everyone gives a decent or above performance, with Scarlett Johansson giving the most awkward one based on my complete lack of knowledge of The Black Widow, and Tom Hiddleston steals every scene he’s in as Loki.

            Though other movies will quite probably be ‘better’ this summer, The Avengers has already won the award for Best Blockbuster Action Film of 2012.  While The Dark Knight Rises will be a more emotional, brutal superhero movie, it won’t come close to the sheer spectacle and action of this one.  In the other direction, I’m sure Battleship will have more action, but it won’t be anywhere near as well put together.

            Also, if you haven’t seen it yet and still plan on going, here’s your advice:  IT IS A FREAKING MARVEL MOVIE.  THERE IS ALWAYS SOMETHING AFTER THE CREDITS.  I mean it.  Even if there’s something in the middle of the credits (which there is), there will ALWAYS ALWAYS ALWAYS be something after the credits.

Done.

Horror Origins: Child's Play

Upon seeing all the most disturbing horror films I could get my hands on, I have thought long and hard about my next long term Wednesday series.  I’ve enjoyed my recent dabbling.  I’ve offered opinions on different genres, talked about a few individuals and even thrown in my first Notflix review.  Yet this urge to watch more silly/scary/stupid/horrific films hasn’t quite gone away. 

            Therefore, it is my pleasure to announce a new series of writings dedicated to exploring horror origin films.  Over the next few months, I’m going to dedicate my Wednesdays to movies that ‘started it all.’  This means I get to watch the first Friday the 13^th, Critters, and Nightmare on Elm Street movies and talk about how effective they were as horrors.  Plus, I’ll offer my thoughts on how they hold up in light of their age and the filmmaking limitations of the time.

            First up?  Child’s Play.

            On to the review!

            Right off the bat you’ll notice that 1988 Brad Dourif looks like 2003 Tommy Wiseau.  Once that strange observation is complete, the next one was that this serial killer has a convenient escape route: die while pushing his soul into that of a good guy doll named Chucky.  Not only is it a good way to start a horror movie, but the doll in question is pretty dang creepy even before the later-film animatronics.  The unkempt red hair, the dull blue eyes and the half-smile all combine to make the perfect mockery of a child’s toy.  Even before the murders start, it’s obvious that the filmmakers have a little more up their sleeves than just ‘crazed killer becomes a doll and murders people.’

            Of course, once you’re suitably creeped out by the ‘normal’ Chucky doll, it then starts to murder people.  On the off chance that you haven’t seen any Child’s Play films, let me just point out that the killer never changes.  We won’t get an avenging mother or a copycat killer.  The ability to move your soul into inanimate objects is one that’s easily taken advantage of.

            While the later Child’s Play movies inevitably delved into a mockery of itself (see also A Nightmare on Elm Street 6 and Jason X) this one managed to offer up a perfect serving of the horrors of everyday items.  The only part of any other movie that comes would be the scene in Poltergeist when the clown comes to life.  You know exactly what I’m talking about.

            As far as the acting goes, I have to give it high praise.  For a film that nobody knew was going to become such a long-lasting (though not necessarily beloved) horror franchise, there was some genuinely good acting from everyone involved.  Karen Barclay (Catherine Hicks) is a single mom who can barely make ends meet but desperately wants to give her son some genuine joy and happiness in his life.  The kid, Andy (Alex Vincent) does a fantastic job of being...well, just a kid.  He actually pulls off the perfect amount of innocent, confused and horrified throughout the movie.  Especially compared to today’s standards, it’s rare to see the kid in a horror film play the innocent all the way through.

            Seeing Chris Sarandon play the cop, Mike Norris, threw me for a bit of a loop, because I’ll always remember him from The Princess Bride (something Cary Elwes also must deal with, but strangely enough not Mandy Patinkin.  Weird.)  Anyhow, he plays a cop.  He does a perfectly serviceable job, considering he’s only there for the action sequences.  Finally, and most importantly, Brad Dourif brings the perfect amount of psychopathy to the role of Chucky, adding genuine craziness, anger, and creepy to all of the doll’s lines.  He’s much better as Chucky than he is as Tommy…err…Charles Lee Ray.

            As far as the film itself goes, it’s pretty much all ‘80’s all the time.  The clothing and scenery all scream out the decade to anyone watching.  Everything about this film is dated, even the Chucky doll.  Sorry, but overalls and a long-sleeve shirt?  That’s, like, sooooo passé.

Considering other movies of its time, especially the wonderfully terrible glut of late-‘80’s teens-getting-killed-by-things glut of horror movies, the special effects put into Chucky are actually pretty dang good.  Sure, you can totally tell when it’s someone dressed in a suit.  But when the doll starts getting beat up towards the end of the movie, the mechanical guts are impressive.  (Ignoring, of course, the fact that the doll isn’t supposed to have mechanical guts.)  That they made such a damn creepy robot doll at all is cool, that they made a two-foot doll genuinely creepy and intimidating is a revelation.

            As a horror movie, I think Child’s Play definitely holds up, and it could still scare the shit out of a younger person who hasn’t seen a whole lot of horrors, or anyone who really hates those lifelike dolls.  It’s not the best ‘first film in a series’ by a long shot, but it’s certainly not the worst.  I doubt I’ll be going out of my way to watch it again anytime soon, but I think it’s a great starter film for this project.

            Next week I’ll check out Friday the 13^th, a movie I have actually NEVER SEEN.  I am excited.

P.S.  I miss the days when kid's toys were genuinely dangerous and could actually be used to cause harm.  Steel hammer for a 6 year old?  Sure!