Reviews

22 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
10/10
Zombie Horror at it's Best
31 March 2007
"Dawn Of The Dead" is an acknowledged high watermark of late 70's horror movies in general and of zombie cinema in particular. All but the most contrarian fan-boys agree that this may very well be George Romero's masterpiece, and I am inclined to agree. The atmosphere of Dread (with a capital "D") descends immediately as we are introduced to the main characters in two initial segments. An ultimately over-matched SWAT team invades an inner city building and comes face to face with the living dead, most memorably in the basement, where a veritable pig pen of corpses are coming to life. A TV station struggles to stay on the air as more and more news piles in reporting that the dead are rising up and devouring the living. Without reservation, I can say that the film makes me feel like I am right there, threatened with harm which is right outside the door. When the main characters escape in the helicopter, searching for somewhere to start over again and escape the zombie plague, I feel relief and hope right along with them. The synthesized music also is very atmospheric and lends its own air of menace. Apparently Romero is acknowledged as a top notch editor who was notorious for using his own hands, a knife, and a roll of movie tape to cut his films. Well, it works great because the editing is energetic and the pacing very well suited to each scene. The action and gore scenes are visually "wonderful" (read; putrid, gross, perfect) and intermittently humorous, while bearing the unmistakable stamp of the great Tom Savini. I would highly recommend reading about the background of the making of this movie, or watching the well regarded extras documentaries in the expanded DVD editions. The story of the dedicated personalities and circumstances behind the making of this awesome movie makes it all the more enjoyable to experience. This is one horror movie that delivers in every respect, fires on all cylinders, grabs and holds your attention, and is worthy of all the praise that has been heaped on it over the years. Belongs in every horror fan's library without a doubt.
2 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Strangely, one of my favorites...
31 March 2007
We selected "Manhattan Baby" from the movie library last night, and I realized that it was to be probably the 7th time I have watched this rather uncelebrated Fulci offering in the past 5 years. Yes, this movie is a bit formulaic, and yes, it does move a bit slow in parts. But there is something undeniably menacing in this movie, an atmosphere of claustrophobia, the tightness of the endless close-ups of people's faces, that I enjoy and (obviously) come back to again and again. No, this is not a gory movie, which no doubt comes as a surprise (disappointment?) to fans of Fulci's other (mostly excellent) films. Even the death scenes, of which there are only 3 or 4, have minimal blood compared to something like "The Beyond", not that I would recommend this as hearty family fare by any means. But if you enjoy the uniquely "European" dreamlike atmosphere created by a combination of cheesy effects, plot holes, wooden acting, bad dubbing, and inexplicable motivations of characters, this may be one you revisit again, and again and again... you get the idea.
10 out of 11 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Body Parts (1991)
Part-ially Hilarious!
30 June 2002
Warning: Spoilers
I saw this movie in college and forgot almost everything about it except for the car chase scene with the handcuffs, so when I saw it again recently, I was pretty much waiting to see if it was as cool as I had remembered. It was, and there were other scenes that induced a chuckle in this cheesy entry. Jeff Fahey, who looks like a poor man's Ray Liotta with better skin and not as much acting ability, plays a nurturing criminal psychologist who spends his days dealing with crazy criminals who say f*ck a lot. After studying a dangerously wobbling wheel on the car in front of him during his commute to work in the morning, he is actually surprised when it snaps off and he gets creamed by an 18 wheeler. Maybe I was in a weird mood, but the sight of him flying through the windshield was unintentionally hilarious. After he gets the killer's arm sewn onto his stump, he begins to act strangely. He starts to cut himself and curse while shaving with the killer's hand. He cracks his kid in the side of the head while wrestling in the family room. He tries to choke out his wife while she's asleep. I found all of this to be really, really funny for some reason. I just couldn't take Fahey's performance seriously. What can I say? It just made me think of the Simpson's episode where Homer gets the hair transplant from Snake the convict. The gore effects where decent, and the sound effects, unusually enough , were very well done, especially the "flesh ripping" sounds that come into play later in the movie. I dare you to keep a straight face when the killer comes back in a neck brace and tries to get his arm back. He is silent except for his mugging face and gurgling sounds as he "takes back what's his". Yeah this movie is "bad", but if that is a good thing to you like it is to me, it's worth seeing. Plus, if you are an unfortunate Blockbuster slave who can't get movies anywhere else, I believe that this is one of the few horror movies they carry that was made before "Scream" and doesn't revolve around Freddy Prinze Jr. or star any Arquette family members. Whatever happened to the talented Mr. Fahey anyway?!
5 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Sadly overrated; Fulci's better!
29 June 2002
I was stoked to get the DVD of "The Living Dead At Manchester Morgue" from Anchor Bay and I couldn't wait to check out this movie of many titles. I gave it a lot of chances... watched it once, then I watched it again a week or so later, then I waited about a year to watch it a third time. It doesn't live up to the hype and is nothing more than a quaint entry in the undead catalogue of films. Where is the gore in "Manchester Morgue"? There's hardly any. Fulci has been criticized for treating gore clinically and in harsh close-up, but Grau seems to treat gore as if he was shooting a soap opera. Actually, I thought I was watching an old episode of "Dark Shadows" more than once. Some of the vaunted scenes such as the nurse getting slaughtered in the hospital were a big let down. Her shirt gets ripped open and a fakey-looking breast gets exposed and mutilated. Big deal! You can barely tell what's going on and then it's over. I can imagine the pre-production meeting; "We're making a horror movie, so maybe we should actually have some gore!" Yeah well maybe you should have had some more. The zombies seem pretty secondary for a lot of the movie. It's more of a "brooding meditation on environmental catastrophe" or a "brooding meditation on the generation gap between a crusty old police detective and a long-haired, art dealing hipster". If that sounds like your kind of thing, by all means check it out. If you are looking for a "real" zombie movie, "The Beyond", "City of the Living Dead", "Dawn of the Dead", "Zombie", even "City of the Walking Dead" are much more exciting, packed with more gore, and don't spend so much time on worthless character development.

More power to this movie and it's supporters, but if I want to watch a soap opera story about a rakish long haired rebel and a cute co-ed, I am pretty sure that "The Young and the Restless" is still on weekdays.
5 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Best Wes so far...
3 January 2002
I have been waiting patiently for director Anderson's follow-up to the brilliant and subtle "Rushmore", and the wait for "The Royal Tenenbaums" has been well worth it. In short, everything that made "Rushmore" such a classic is seen in a different and yet wholly familiar form here in the new movie, and to an incredible effect. Gene Hackman displays wonderful comic timing and brings a very sly, sometimes understated take to the paternal character of Royal that is brilliant. Owen Wilson and Luke Wilson also both shine in their respective roles, with Luke getting to flesh out a larger part then he has had in many of his more recent roles since "Bottlerocket". He brings a very likable air to his tormented character, as does his brother. The scenes between the two of them are priceless nuggets of humor. "Rushmore" fans will also be happy to see Mr. Littlejeans, Max's math professor, and, of course, Bill Murray, who may have been a little under-utilized this time. Max's dad also makes an appearance, and he finally gets to be a doctor, sort of. From a technical standpoint, Anderson brings along many great ideas used in "Rushmore" including extended expository sequences, montages, and unique transitional mechanisms (in this case treating the movie as chapters in a book with Anderson's own illustrations at the beginning of each), and expanded them across a broad canvas, inhabited by the wonderful Tenenbaum family. The editing of this movie was also exceptional. If you liked "Rushmore", this is a must-see movie, but then again you were probably going to see it anyway. Rest assured that it expands on Anderson's unique visual vocabulary and infectious good humor, even while it explores many of the same painful subjects that his other films have, all to wonderful effect. I really do think this could be a masterpiece, but since we are so lucky to have many years of Wes Anderson ahead of us, it would be foolish to be in any hurry to call it such at this point. You just have to see it.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Macabre (1980)
He ain't his Pappy, but he ain't half bad...
9 July 2001
Warning: Spoilers
I saw this video under the title of "Frozen Terror", and I actually liked it, but it started so slowly that I was having some serious reservations for the first half. We start off with a very intense woman in New Orleans abandoning her children at home while she goes off to a love nest to have loud sex with a mustache-romeo. Things go downhill from there as her intense, evil-doing daughter commits a heinous crime against her own flesh and blood. In a rush to get home, Moms bed-buddy gets his just deserts courtesy of a protruding guardrail and she is put in a mental ward for 5 years. This Mother was one screwed up chick, and now she's even worse off, worshipping a makeshift altar to her dead lover and having, you guessed it, loud sex with... well I hate to be the spoiler here. As far as the other characters go, the daughter is totally wicked with a mean sadistic streak like she would be at home plucking the wings off flies or driving her parents insane. The blind guy with the nice eyes does a good job too, but I found myself wondering why the hell he would be so darn nosey?! If you couldn't see, would you be into poking around an apartment, sniffing for clues, while the off-her-nut occupant was right in the next room? This did make for some nervous moments. The ending was a shock, but seconds later was obviously very silly when you think about it. Yes there are plenty of plot holes but hey, this is Italian giallo cinema and some of us like our plots perforated, thank you. As far as production values go, the colors of the movie were kind of bland to me, especially in comparison to a movie like "Bay of Blood" by Pappa Bava. The clothes and interiors were shades of beige and brown.. who knows maybe I had an older transfer and the DVD is awesome? Lamberto makes some stabs at giving us a feel for the sleazy city of New Orleans, and is sometimes successful, such as when the "heroine" is wandering through the streets and is accosted by young street urchins, who give her the old "soft shoe" for good measure. Anyway, this movie has some cool parts and is somewhat entertaining, but the dragging portions weigh it down enough to make it probably a "one-time viewer" for genre fans.
3 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Dark Star (1974)
Poorly lit, lots of flashing buttons, lots of fun!
7 July 2001
I thought this was a cool little 70's movie that showed real talent in acting, direction, and production, in spite of the low budget. Like the best low budget flicks, the story is kept nice and simple, but the setting allows for plenty of entertaining situations. A lot of the elements "borrowed" from other movies, such as 2001, enhanced Dark Star in little ways. The transmission from earth, the cryogenic freezing of Captain Powell, the talking computers with "personality"; all of these aspects were represented previously in Kubricks masterpiece and are used to cool effect here. I enjoyed the discussion between Talbot and Doolittle where the latter "waxes" nostalgic about surfing back on earth, the stars spread all around and their faces lit by red computer screens. This type of atmosphere created throughout the ship by the large colored buttons, detailed computer screens, and harshly lit "stainless steel" walkways was very pleasant to experience. I thought the models were great! I also thought the acting was pretty darn good as well, regardless of what others may think. In conclusion, this is a fun film, not too long ( I like the shorter version), good story, and a fun trip back to the space of the 70's.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Butchered "Virgin..." Version is Horrendous!
30 June 2001
I picked up on this movie in a lot auction on Ebay (have you noticed no one actually LOOKS to buy this movie specifically?). I read the reviews and watched it with the intent of seeing if I also had a heavily edited copy of this Jess Franco film. Well, I sure do. I could tell at the beginning when a cheesy computer generated title, "Zombie 4", was inserted between the credits. I must admit that the music was actually quite cool at this point, and the photography not too bad either. Anyway, a yellow box on the front of the video box proclaimed,"This film contains violence, nudity, and sexual situations." As I watched further, I saw that this was not the case. The zombies were pitiful, with green paint on the face and black stuff in the teeth. And they don't do anything but grimace! Unimpressive to say the least. Also, no one pointed this out yet, but the "nude" scenes ARE in the edited version! Too bad they are blacked out with a computer except for the faces of the actresses! Didn't anyone wonder why the actresses look like they are acting with a spotlight on their face while they are sitting, bare-shouldered, in bed?! Truly ridiculous. The box does indeed have nasty looking Fulci-esque zombies on the front and back, and they make no appearance in the movie. I do not recommend picking up this movie under any circumstances. The overpowering feeling of not seeing an actual movie, but rather a cut-up mess, will make you feel more cheated than anything. Glad it was cheap!
1 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Somewhat slow to start, and overrated from then on...
30 June 2001
If I had seen it when I was younger, perhaps I would feel the desire now to drop nostalgic accolades on this slow, trite movie. Unfortunately, I am seeing it for the first time as an adult and it holds very little wonderment for me. I realize the flick is aping the classic Hammer horror movies of the 60's and 70's, as the film is so busy giggling into it's own shirtsleeves it is impossible to miss. The plot is incredibly thin, even by Hammer standards, but unlike the Hammer movies, it takes forever for any action to take place. The first half of the film is almost entirely silent, with Polanski playing the part of a retarded man-child to a daft, Einsteinian vampire killer who looks like Mark Twain on acid. Few words are spoken as the two find an inn in which to spend the night and get to know the locals in an interminable sequence that goes nowhere. When there is dialogue, it is garbled and histrionic in it's delivery by the mugging actors who portray the local Transylvanian scumbags and it contributes little to the flow of the film. Sharon Tate is, by all means, quite beautiful as the inn-keepers daughter, but it's a shame she is treated like meat in a series of pathetic "Benny Hill"-esque sex gags that may have still been fresh at the time of filming, but I doubt it. Polanksi seems to think his blank-faced portrayal channels Buster Keaton, and therefore gives himself considerable screen time, but I found myself maddened by his character's ineptness and buffoonery, to the point that I wished death upon him and the other annoying characters. There were some high points, including the music, which stood out as creepy and very original. The snow scenes and sets with the sleigh chases, etc. were also well filmed and very pretty to look at. In this regard I am sure the fact that I was not watching a widescreen version was to my detriment. Aside from these bright spots, however, I must disagree with the majority of the reviewers and give a thumbs down to a dated, predictable, un-funny little movie.
3 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Zombie 3 (1988)
Reminds me of Miami Vice with Zombies, kinda...
12 June 2001
It may have something to do with the suave, evenly tanned heroes who seem to have the inside track with all the hot chicks. Perhaps it was the lush tropical setting, hot cars, and funky music. Whatever the reason, "Zombie 3" reminded me of Miami Vice with zombies. By this point, most folks know that Fulci only had a passing association with this movie, and supposedly didn't actually direct most of it. That can easily be believed, since the direction is pretty schlocky and I didn't see much in the way of Fulci's atmospheric trademarks. Government workers in white coats, which makes them scientists, I think, develop an insanely dangerous strain of dry ice that melts body parts before turning people into disfigured zombies. Of course this stuff falls into the wrong hands, the vanity case it is carried in cracks, and "the world", or at least a woodsy Phillipines chunk of it, becomes infected. There were some great moments: I love fakey science like "the virus is killed by oxygen, but by burning it, it was mutated and now it can infect birds.." or, when trying to discover an antidote, "If we put these two molecules together...". Great stuff. Aside from the obvious criticisms of poor direction, idiotic characters, silly situations, and a lame, cliched ending, I have one specific problem with the zombies themselves. They cannot decide what type of zombies they are to begin with! Are they the fast moving, weapon wielding zombies of "City of the Walking Dead"? Are they talking zombies like in "Return of the Living Dead"? They certainly have alot of crap on their faces like "City of the Walking Dead" and "Nights of Terror". Anyway, slapdash as it may be, this movie is still entertaining and I have seen much worse zombie fare, such as "Nights of Terror" and "Dr. Butcher". I am also unashamed to report that I had a nightmare about the flying zombie head in the refrigerator, although I admit I had been drinking that night. Still a "should-see" for the enthusiast of hearty zombie fare.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
The slasher pic that launched a thousand rip-offs...
24 May 2001
I have been really getting into italian horror movies, so I checked out Bava's "Bay of Blood", the first Bava film I have seen. It turned out to be better than many others I had seen and may be one of my new favorites. I had read a lot about Bava's cinematography and his magic with the camera, and it is no lie. From the first shot of the lonely, creepy bay in question to the final, jolting scene, you really feel like the director cares immensely about making you feel like you are there. This is evident in the killing scenes as well, where he uses angles and close-ups to bring you right into the splattery action. The killing scenes (and there are plenty) are often really imaginative and go beyond typical stabbing and the like. One scene in particular towards the end portrays an impaled gentleman attempting to slice at his attacker, even as the attacker has him pegged to a post. His flailing try to hack at his killer, even as he is himself dying, reminded me more than a little of a similar scene in "Apocolypse Now", where Willard finds himself in a similar situation on the boat. Actually, I found quite a few instances where this stylish slasher film evoked memories of other movies, most of them produced after "Bay of Blood"! I think this flick has had influence on other films and directors, and not just the obvious Euro-horror genre and awful "Friday" series. Even the music is chilly and groovy, like a lounge act with corpses. "Bay of Blood" is definitely a classic.
0 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Wayne Newton gets disembowled.. danke schone indeed..
6 May 2001
I was a victim of the "too many Zombie 3's" conspiracy. Like many other zombie enthusiasts, Fulci's "Zombie" or "Zombie 2" as it is sometimes called, for me is a high watermark of our precious little genre. Therefore, although I knew it lacked most of Fulci's touch, I searched out "Zombie 3" on Ebay and purchased it, uncut and letterboxed. Little did I know that, along with Fulci's ill-fated 1988 release, there is ANOTHER, earlier "Zombie 3", also known as "Burial Ground". Although Bianchi's film is not the one I was expecting to watch, I watched with an open mind and even drug my girlfriend (long suffering) along for the ride. Well, there is precious little here to recommend. A group of Euro-trash tourists visit an ancient castle and order the help around in a gruff manner, and then proceed to split off into pairs and fornicate, much to the chagrin of an extremely ugly child with a serious Oedipal complex, the son of one of the women. Soon enough they embark the next day to explore the grounds and are chased, beaten, choked, frightened by, and generally abused by a large group of zombies. The action moves back to the castle, where a "Night(s) of Terror" (another alternate title) is experienced, with much blood shed and many important organs lost from our protagonists. By way of positives, I have to point out that these are by far the wormiest zombies I have ever seen. Almost every one has either maggots or earthworms squirming out of their face in what appears to be an homage to Fulci's "Zombie" and it's wormy-eyed poster boy. These zombies are also very fast moving, sometimes, and seem to be well able to use simple tools such as scythes, poles, battering rams, and table saws. One of the tourists, to my mind, bears more than a passing resemblance to a euro-Wayne Newton, and it's kind of fun to see him meet his grisly demise while pleading for his life. The "child" actor mentioned previously has what appears to be a prosthetic head, and is the most annoying under-18 presence since that tow-headed brat from "House by the Cemetery". Aside from some hilarious dubbed dialogue, gratuitous breast shots, multiple maggots, and cheesy music, this movie has little to recommend it. If you are looking for "Zombie 3" that was partially directed by Fulci, look out for this slice of euro-cheese! You will probably be mildly entertained, but overall disappointed. As for my girlfriend? She thanked me quite loudly when the tape was finally over and I turned off the vcr, and pronounced "The Beyond" far superior. What a gal.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Human Highway (1982)
A whack slice of the 80's.. with DEVO!
27 March 2001
No doubt about it, most of these posts are on the money in describing this movie. When I slipped it into the VCR, I had no idea DEVO were in on the proceedings, but I was pleasantly surprised. These guys are so aggressively strange, anything they are in is worth watching at least once and this is no exception. The movie does ramble on and on with not much holding it together, and there are some weak romantic subplots, but I was looking forward enough to what came next so I kept watching. I loved "Booji Boy" and although the dream sequence with Young and DEVO seemed tacked on to give them an excuse to "Rok Out", Rok they do. And am I the only one to think Neil looks like he's on drugs? Plus, Dean Stockwell and Russ Tamblyn together at last and writing screenplays. Might David Lynch have given some advice on this one? It wouldn't be hard to believe, but he would have had better miniatures... This movie is easily whack enough to be worth seeing, especially if you are a DEVO or Young fan.
2 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Bad Taste (1987)
Heavy- metal enthusiasts spill blood for the Queen...
23 March 2001
Like a lot of other fans of his "early works", I am knocked over by the fact that Peter Jackson was tapped to direct the long awaited Rings trilogy of films. However, you can really see his creativity at work in "Bad Taste", one of his first movies. The plot is pretty straightforward, with some lumpy aliens planning a takeover of the earth or some such thing. Things really get started when a group of government agents arrive who are more like Jay and Silent Bob than James Bond. From a gore effects standpoint, this movie in particular has some very satisfying "Head-split-in-half-ear-to-ear" effects that look fantastic, and the craggy alien asses, while often exposed, must be seen to be believed. You really can't compare this movie to "Dead Alive (Brain Dead)" because the budget seems so much lower for this one, but Jackson wrings every bit of value from this film with a gory glee that just makes you smile. In a way Bad Taste is less over the top than Dead-Alive, but that makes it even more gruesome. Such as when the Director's own character collects various bits of brain to shove through a crack in the back of his head. It is so well done, even the most serious gorehound can feel the grey matter oozing between his or her fingers. I'm always amazed by what a gifted director can do with so little money. I'm glad he got his props from Hollywood, but it is too bad that gems like Bad Taste exist in territory he may never delve into again.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Let's see if I can fit my big business in these panties!
23 March 2001
I can definitely say this is one of my favorite movies. The characters and the script shine through as utterly hilarious and shockingly original. Mink Stole and her outrageous, shrieking portrayal of Peggy Gravel is one of the best performances in any of John Waters' movies. Seriously, when she accuses her (9 year old) children of having sex and then informs her husband that their daughter is now pregnant.. let me just say that clip was on my answering machine for at least a month. When Grizelda the alcoholic maid and Peggy make off after murdering Peggy's husband, they are pulled over in the woods by another great Waters character, Turkey Joe, the motorcycle cop who wears womens panties. You have not lived until you hear him moan in a thick Baltimore accent about fitting his "Big business" into Peggy's panties . The real fun begins in Mortville, however, where all the trash of Baltimore run to escape the law. Queen Carlotta, portrayed by the unbelievable Edith Massey, runs rampant over some seriously depraved subjects, and still finds time to have (unconvincingly simulated) disgusting sex with slimy leatherboys whom she instructs to bathe more regularly because there is a "most unpleasant odor about your BODY". I have read other posts that comment on the wonderful colors in this movie and I could not agree more. The sets and costumes are also excellent. Even though Divine is not in this one, some of the other Dreamlanders (Waters crack troop of actors from the early days) get a chance to shine. Mink Stole and Edie in particular give great performances. If you have to choose between this one and "Pink Flamingos", see this one first. It is truly a choice slice of vintage Waters from opening credits to the end. I want to go watch it right now!
4 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Slap Shot (1977)
Hansons don't disappoint, but the movie does...
20 March 2001
When forced to admit to my hockey-playing friends that I had never seen "Slap Shot", I was always greeted by a slapping of the forehead and the admonishment that I simply MUST go rent it and experience the best hockey movie ever. I did this, and I hate to admit that I was disappointed by a movie that so many people seem to love so much. Almost from the very beginning of the movie, I wasn't sure if I was watching a drama or a broad physical comedy, and this is a main beef I have with many of these 70's films. Too many of them would mix dramatics with humor in a way that is not satisfying to me. The story is very rambling until the Hansons arrive and I hungered to see them do funny things like beat people up in creative ways, but that is a long ways in the coming after their introduction. Paul Newman sees the "Boys" playing with their slot cars and comments that they "brought their TOYS with them!" on the road trip. This is funny and should have been explored more, but it isn't. As a matter of fact, the Hanson's and their background are not explored at all, and they have a small amount of total screen time. This is too bad because they are the best part of the movie. Paul Newman is a great actor and he plays a well-worn old player who is on the slide down in his career just as the steel town they play in is on a slide down with everyone becoming laid-off. But if you are like me and want to see cool hockey footage of guys playing without helmets, wacky stuff happening at the rink, the Hanson brothers doing their thing, etc. , there just isn't enough of it there. If this movie was made today, there would be less social commentary, less human interest, more Hansons, and more hockey. And, sadly, it would probably be a better movie because of it. See it so you know what it is to "put on the foil , Coach", and so your friends don't slap their foreheads when you say you haven't seen it.
5 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
You will lose your mind, and possibly your lunch...
20 March 2001
Some say the Wizard of Gore is one of HG Lewis' weaker flicks, but I must disagree. Blood Feast may have been more ground-breaking and unintentionally hilarious, but W.O.G. stands up fine against that movie and any of his other gore films. There is a certain cheesy charm to Lewis movies, no matter if they are skin flicks, gore flicks, or even kiddie flicks. In this movie, the wonderfully hammy Ray Sager plays the Wizard and his main occupation seems to be delivering quasi-fascistic prattle to audiences with mutton chop sideburns, interspersed with running his fingers through the tomato-sauce covered animal organs that erupt from his victims, all to the audience's delight. There is some weak storyline involving an independent woman reporter and her well-tanned boyfriend, who try to solve the mystery of the Wizard, the fools. However, this is pretty much just window dressing for the 5-6 gory scenes of the Wizard doing his thing. In particular, there is an eyeball poking and manipulating scene that would have done Lucio Fulci proud. And please don't forget the awesome furniture and late 60's bourgeois home furnishings and polyester pantsuits that make all of these late 60's films look like "Barbarella" by todays standards. If anything, you have to love the fact that there was actually a time in this country where you could make a movie like this and it would be distributed. Thinking about the time period when Lewis was doing his thing and the way he was doing it is enough to blow your mind even more than his movies. If you haven't checked them out, you are doing yourself a disservice!
25 out of 33 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
The Cell (2000)
Don't believe the Cellular hype.
9 September 2000
When I heard that the director of this movie is good friends with Mark Romanek, famed director of boss music videos including nine inch nails, and that their sensibilities were very similar, I knew I would go see it. I will admit that for maybe 5-10 minutes TOTAL during the movie, my desire to view dark, twisted visuals was satiated. Otherwise, we are dealing with some pretty hollow filmmaking. Doe-eyed Lopez seemed to be on some sort of squishy crusade throughout the film to seem like the most nurturing child-shrink possible, even to the extent of doing a dead-on Mother Mary impression towards the end, complete with a "Pieta" with child victim in her arms. She never really seems up to any of the tasks she undertakes, such as entering a "deranged" killer's mind (I guess deranged means you have crooked teeth and poor diction nowadays) to deduce the whereabouts of a kidnapee. Only in the mind of said killer are there any interesting things going on, and even these seem lifted from various videos by this director and others. Vince Vaughn is laughably terrible in his fluff role as FBI cool guy. The script is so pedestrian that his deadpan delivery almost seems to mock the movie he is taking part in. There is no chemistry between the two leads, and I really couldn't find myself caring too much about anything that happened to them or anyone else in the film for that matter. It was fun to see the child molester father from "Happiness" in another part, but sort of off-putting that this film is so lame compared to his previous work. This is one hype-driven movie if I ever saw one. Don't go see it; rent it in a month and fast forward through all the schmaltz, stop at the mind-trip sequences, then put it back in the box and drop it off at Blockbuster. You won't be missing anything remotely worthwhile.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Typical Hollywood Throw - Away Pap.
6 November 1999
Loving movies as I do, I will steer clear of most slick, formulaic Hollywood "product" that seems to exist solely so some actors and production people can have some reason to get up in the morning for a few months. Every now and then, I choose to forgo my gut instinct and see some fluffy trash because my friends are interested. As the lights go down, I try to withold judgment but know I will be vindicated. This is another one of those instances and another one of those movies. This movie has nothing new to say or show. Plotting, camerawork, and SFX are workmanlike, but show no flair or energy whatsoever. As far as the gripping storyline I have read about in some other posts, I found myself checking the old watch on more than one occasion. By far, however, the worst elements can be traced to the alarmingly flat, cliched and tired cast of characters. Was "Birth of A Nation" the first American film to feature the outrageously overbearing and pointlessly Jacka**ed police Chief, bent on stifling the heroic underdogs in his employ? "Oh if only they would leave Denzel and Angelina alone to do their jobs; they'd catch that killer in no time! Darn that Mean ol' Police Chief!" Of course that isn't all. You also get a slice of "Trash talkin', tell - it - like - it - is nurse", Queen Latifah, to lend that "You go, girl" aspect to the proceedings. Please don't forget the "Tough As Nails, Former Model, now Cop" character portrayed by Angelina Jolie and her humongous set of lips. The only qualification this stick thin, whiskey drinking waif seems to have for being in the NYPD is that New York inflection she seems to have picked up from her Dad. And yet that is not enough! She is also somehow qualified to be a forensics investigator because she can snap a few pictures with a disposable Kodak. ( Did You Know; There are ACTUAL COPS in New York City whose JOB it is to take pictures of crime scenes? Were they all busy getting chewed out by the Police Chief at the time? ) Pointless deaths and joyless gore ( not nearly as extreme as has been claimed ) hang like trashy window dressing the director threw up on the screen. Denzel alternately wallows in, and then auto - pilots his way through this mush, perhaps giving some indication every now and then as to his actual flair and talent. HOW can people readily compare this movie to "Silence of the Lambs" and "Seven"? Because it's raining in some parts? Some say they don't want to spoil the ending of this movie or give away too much; I say that's no problem because believe me; if you have seen one garbage-y, throw away, slick production in the past 10 years, you've already seen this all before. Stop Making Movies Like This!
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Fight Club (1999)
A Major film event...
18 October 1999
I saw this movie in a crappy, prefab, 1970's circa theatre with bad sound, small screen, and seats full of Brad Pitt fans. I was worried when I heard "I'm just here to see Brad. If it sucks, I'm leaving." more than once. I was concerned there would be talking during this movie that would be distracting. I was worried it would be ruined for me somehow. Needless to say, it was not. This movie grabbed the audience by the throat, drug it willingly through broken glass, screaming, and threw it out the door, reeling, when the 2 plus hours were up. Seemless, perfect computer generated effects. Rapid, exciting and original dialogue. Visually a feast worth seeing more than once to get all the details and to savor the passages that stick with you for days afterwards. Beyond your expectations and a must see for the end of the millenium, this movie is TRULY out of hand in every sense of the word, and I definitely mean this in a good way. David Fincher has come into his own as one of the most original and important voices in American film today, as this film easily oustrips "Seven" in maturity, technique, subject matter and execution. Norton is dependable and watchable as ever, and Pitt CONTINUES to surprise me. Way to go Brad, way to go David. GO SEE THIS MOVIE!
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
What a Geek!
4 September 1999
One thing I can say about this movie; it delves into the twisted psyche of a carnival performer like no movie since "Sante Sangre". Mid-grade slasher pic is elevated to another level by some instances of really mediocre acting and interiors that look like your living room. HOWEVER, the truly SATANIC performance by the Geek in question will blow you away. This guy actually seems to enjoy his job with finger-lickin' relish. Outside the realm of a normal slasher flick, and well worth seeing if you are into this sort of thing. Cockadoodle dooooo!
2 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Lolita (1962)
One of His best.
4 September 1999
I won't waste your time by extolling the virtues of one of the finest directors and film editors of all time. I will, however, propose this is one of his best. Peter Sellers, in his prime as the devious Clare Quilty, is a bookend for a movie that seems too short despite it's considerable length. At times manic and at times the portrait of a quiet deviousness, Sellers is the embodiment of the film itself. From sixties small town sock-hops to statutory rape implied through a toenail painting session, Kubrick plies his trade in one scene after another. Each scene is juicy in it's own right and each fits together in a film that will have you laughing into your hat and cringing in empathy at the same time.Shelley Winters gives an over the top performance with a touch of real sadness and humanity. Sue Lyons portrays the flirty Lolita with innocence and an undeniable sexy charm at the same time. James Mason struggles to hold it all together as Humbert Humbert, who has gotten in way over his head just as he gets what he thinks he wants. For me, however, the real star is Sellers, who pulls it all together and acts behind the scenes as the true instigator of misery. This film is a classic in every sense, and right up there with "Clockwork","The Shining" and "Strangelove" as among The Master's best.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed