absolutetravist Reviews

Hush (I) (2016)

A Deft Approach To The Slasher Genre

[6 July 2016]

If an original horror film can achieve any chance of standing out in the genre, it needs to be, well, original. A unique premise or story-telling device to hook genre fans and non alike in. Hush delivers the torment and endurance through the perspective of a deaf-mute but mars them in an entertaining if fairly underwhelming home invasion formula.

Entirely competent best describes the success of Hush. The expectancy to be so intrigued by the heroine's condition as to be distracted from the uneventful generic narrative is barely there, however. Writer and director Mike Flannigan had the opportunity to milk the concept dry and yet barely scratches the surface of her plight. The inability to hear and speak seems abundant in horror potential and yet sound and visual design is sparingly directed around it.

Compare the Haneke's direction in both Funny Games, the extended scenes of pure silence are profuse in tangible tension. There are the expected cat-and-mouse hide-and-seek games found here but none of them are memorably distinct from any other slasher. The rare moments of directorial flourish are welcome such when the struggling thriller writer visualizes her methods of escape but only contrast with the bare realism of the overall tone. This is even more disappointing when Flannigan's Oculus engaged the story from every angle that wonderfully played on the suspense-fueled curiosity.

A couple of reviews 'warned' not to expect a story and hopes were expecting another minimalist raw experience similar to Funny Games. The truth of the warnings were more so not to expect a notable story to be found in such an interesting hook. There's just little engagement to be found in both cat and mouse.

That's not to critique the few actors present, lead Siegel delivers a great performance that does invoke both sympathy for inherent vulnerability and excitement in eventual bravado in survival. Opposite her, Gallagher Jr. does his best with a progressively underwhelming antagonist. Given we learn nothing of his character, it seems needless for him to be so chatty and casual when the premise naturally invites the silent stalker archetype of Myers and Voorhees. The initial introduction is strong but the film's intention to humanize him present his sieges as pathetic and then uninteresting.

Going in blind to Hush was a satisfying surprise, a tense and enjoyable ride. Unfortunately, I didn't really go in blind as I had just recently seen another home invasion horror with a crossbow wielding masked maniac which overshadows this in aesthetic and pacing tremendously. Now it does seem unfair to compare films like this when they should stand on their own merits and with that, give Hush a watch sometime. It's good... but just don't watch You're Next around the same time.

Insidious: Chapter 2 (2013)

The Back To The Future 2 of Horror

[6 July 2016]

Tobe Hooper made the often-cited scariest movie ever made, The Texas Chainsaw Massacre. For twelve years, fans demanded more but how could Hooper top what was claimed perfection? A balls to the wall parody of the original was the only way to find new insanity.

Horror tag team Wan and Whannell struck the same success, almost 100 times profit on their budget. Insidious 2 was a no-brainer and although they don't go for broke like Hooper, this sequel possesses the formula of the original with entirely bizarre new life. Constantly teasing those similar moments of cleverness found in the first Saw, Insidious 2 addresses the first and instills new meaning behind some of the scares.

Much like the first, there is an even more apparent mix of warm familiarity and strange originality. Working with classic conventions of haunted houses and possessions, the Insidious films have an old school feeling. Not just reminiscent of the similar Poltergeist but even further back to Méliès and Wiene surreal theatrics of silent horrors. Even if you aren't part of the masses who jump at every piercing stinger of the dilapidated score, there are plenty of kooky visuals that make exploring the afterlife fun.

As for the story, this is where the sequel falls short of the initial success in less is more. If you were critical on that third act turn to more Beetlejuice-esque antics, then this one delivers that in spades. With multiple stories all interweaving through time and worlds, the intense engagement of the first is diminished noticeably. While unabashedly fun, it becomes harder to relate to the continued hauntings of the Lamberts.

Patrick Wilson is delightfully hammy, genuinely performing as if he were a spirit excited to torment people once again in the living world. Unfortunately, his standout delivery leaves the always wonderful Rose Byrne and the rest of the cast looking clueless as to his not-so- secret condition.

The elegant subtitle of Chapter 2 perfectly encapsulates the film. Very much a straight-forward continuation of the first Insidious, but building on fresh and entertaining elements only introduced late into Chapter 1.

Mindhunters (2004)

This Season of Survivor is All FBI, All Action, All Idiots

[6 July 2016]

Director Renny Harlin is very much a paracinematic man, and his particular brand of style fits perfectly in the early 2000s aesthetic of excess. High concept thrillers such as Speed rely on an exponentially thrilling pace. Moving the plot along faster than the viewer brain can comprehend the inherent silliness of the core concept.

Since Fincher's Se7en, thrillers have taken the macabre turn in the crime genre. Reaching the point of Wan's Saw set within one of those trials of torture. Mindhunters similarly attempts the same zenith, upping Se7en's police duo with a ragtag team of FBI agents, racing to solve an ongoing test of intelligence and insanity. Despite the blatant exposition and character development, none of these people seem smarter than Pitt's hardheaded detective.

The agents muster a fun mix of "oh, they've come a long way since" and "oh... who?" Notable entertainers here are Johnny Lee Miller sporting his best Blanche DuBois, Christian Slater and Val Kilmer competing in their natural friendly-yet-suspicious-yet-bored acting styles, and LL Cool J acting as if he was John McClane in yet another preposterous scenario.

Attempting to outdo predecessors with 'bigger is better', the story takes place on an isolated island complete with an entire city simulation for a training exercise. According to their teacher, representative of "the mind of a sociopath", presumably not meaning laughably inane and ridiculously convenient for the killer's grand scheme. The film, of course, never slows down to let you question how the entire plot hinges of this arbitrary setting.

The script of Mindhunters is definitely where entertainment hinges on as Harlin desperately races ahead of logic and common sense. For such a complex and convoluted mystery build, there are a remarkable number of legitimate plant and pay-offs. Many of them are obvious enough to predict despite the suspension of disbelief being thoroughly tested. Much how Jigsaw relies on sheer chance amidst his philosophical soliloquies, a great number of set-pieces and foreshadowing relies on pure coincidence.

The script is constantly testing whether these characters are supposed geniuses outmatched or merely idiots outwitted by another idiot. One particular if insignificant moment of clumsy writing is the repeated mantra of a situation only being secure "on the drive home", the heroes of course proving this right... when boarding a helicopter to safety. Could've easily been fixed for "on the way home" but it doesn't affect the story.

In a world of post-modern, meta-narrative ironies, Harlin is successful in his sheer earnestness for pure, dumb, entertainment. For a film about investigative geniuses battling a criminal mastermind, it's best to leave your brain at the door.

Turbo Kid (2015)

An Apple a Day Keeps the Boredom Away

[6 July 2016]

Like Kung Fury and Hobo With a Shotgun before it, Simard, Whissell, and Whissell have adapted the aesthetic and nostalgia of bygone cinematic eras to deliver their own passionate stories from the heart.

With such cartoon vibrancy Turbo Kid could almost be mistaken for a family film. Only making the playful and inventive bloodshed more shocking in a fun blend of Tarantino slickness and Romero creativity. The resourceful cinematography squeezes the most out of sparse locations with a purposefully minimalist post-apocalypse. The particularly lo-fi design distinguishes itself from any pretense to emulate the excessive dystopias of Mad Max and Escape From New York. If anything the reliance of melee combat and pedal bicycles seems hilariously realistic given how difficult vehicle and weapon maintenance would be in such harsh wastelands.

Performances are lighthearted and sincere to the script, which relies less on parody and more focused on simply telling a warming story with fun characters. Ironside lends name recognition and given his career of low-rent bad guys, brings a good deal of genuine charisma to the theatrical villainy.

It would be a disservice to not detail the film's most entertaining element being Laurence Leboeuf's supporting role of Apple. Incessantly plucky and yet hypnotically delightful, it's a disservice she's even the supporting role for such a standout performance. Leboeuf's enchanting portrayal is the defining example of the cast raising the generic parodies above stereotypes into charming and watchable characters.

That being said, Turbo Kid does falter in a common screen writing trap that can plague these passion projects. In such a weird and wonderful world, why is it that the titular Turbo Kid is the dullest character in the film? Chambers is a decent amiable actor for sure but follows the same predictable hero journey we've seen a hundred times.

A fun-filled romp with enjoyable visual flair, by far not the first or last of it's kind, I could only recommend and hope that more of these films shine the spotlight on their own wonderful Apples in the future of 1997.

Scary Movie 2 (2001)

The joke is that it's not scary, the sad part is it's just barely a movie.

[2/10 · 6 July 2016]

Much like Scream 2, the original was a huge success (if only financial) and everyone knew the inevitable sequel had to be bigger, bolder, and even better. In both cases they failed though Scream 2 is a decent follow-up and Scary Movie 2 is not decent. At all, really.

Parody and satire are two forms of comedy that overlap well. Parody to be making fun of a particular film while satire targets an institution or ideal. The first Scream satirized the horror genre and the audience's awareness of formulaic conventions of cinema. Scream 2 to a lesser extent satirized the necessity of sequels while Scream 3 became a parody of itself. Scary Movie 2 attempts neither and, as Scary Movie 1 did with Scream, popularized the trend of referential humour. Do you remember this scene from that movie? Well here it is but dumber, no real punchline or set-up, just try and find the laughter yourself.

The film is slower, looser, and plain meanders through what coherent plot there is. Whereas the adopted structure of Scream gave a natural flowing pace, the new targeted genre of the Old Dark House is so poorly accomplished. The two biggest strengths of films such as The Haunting and the House on Haunted Hill being suspense and atmosphere. Unless a complete absence of those two counts for parody then the writers are left with resorting to arbitrary current pop culture nods from Charlie's Angels to Nike commercials with little to no connective tissue between scenes.

That Nike reference becomes a perfect summary of the Movie franchise from here onward. The riff of The Changeling into the basketball commercial is an almost clever subversion and yet they expect audiences to laugh continuously through every single character performing dribbling and passing until you forget what movie you're even watching. Monotony leads to false expectations of a punchline but there is none bar a character getting hit in the nuts before just moving on with the next scene.

I give the original Scary Movie some credit. It is lazy in just taking Scream's formula almost scene for scene but at least moves with a steady pace and some sense of purpose. These sequels are the equivalent of a YouTube playlist of fan-made parodies of completely unrelated films.

Scary Movie (2000)

Just Slightly Smarter Than Scream 3

[4/10 · 6 July 2016]

Coming out in 2000, the Wayans and their parody entrepreneurs were up against another film stomping on the Scream license, that being Scream 3. One would end a franchise (for a while) that started with greatness and the other would start another franchise that wish it could be as clever as the other film however dumb it is.

Much how Craven revisited Woodsboro eleven years later, there was a morbid curiosity in seeing if sixteen years later Scary Movie ever deserved even one sequel. Almost guiltily the potential for a franchise is there in a lowbrow if decent enough comedy. Perhaps it's an ironic form of nostalgia having witnessed the desolate laugh vacuums that were the later entries such as Epic Movie or Disaster Movie but the original is not that bad at all.

It's biggest compliment being it actually resembles a film. In that it follows a basic three act structure, has a natural pace adopted from source material, and even characters that abide by basic archetypes while showing a smidgen of actor personality. These all seem a given however after enduring the quality of the latter films, the restrained assemblage of film parodies here all compliment each other well, tied together and flowing along with a sense of competency long gone now.

After complimenting the actual ability to parody horror films, this is also a Wayans film. It's not entirely unexpected that a fair 80% of the punchlines are basically "the joke is I'm black" with the other percent being "I'm gay". While the diet-homophobia is fairly tone deaf (the killer's motive simply being he's gay, oh wait, one of them just 'acts' gay... cue laughter) the Wayans do manage to land a solid amount of racial humour. One timeless if easy gag being the all black news team reporting they're "getting the f*** outta here!" before speeding off. It's also funny in an ever-so-slightly awkward way watching Scream afterwards the sheer complete absence of any PoC actors in that film, which seems to be intentionally and heavily corrected in the sequel.

It's this humour that seems to answer the age old debate of whether a bold and uncompromising comedy like Blazing Saddles could be made today. Let's be clear: the Wayans are no Mel Brooks. That being said, it's almost disappointing that after a first solid entry, the Scary Movie franchise could've improved over time and become almost respectable in skewering of the genre. Unfortunately it strayed from scary movies like Icarus attempting to tackle all of cinema and forgot what the word satire meant.

Halloween: Resurrection (2002)

With Almighty Irony Comes the Death of Halloween

[6 July 2016]

Like an old man trying to understand how to use their grandchild's tablet, Resurrection is an irony riddled attempt from a film in 2002 trying to defibrillate a franchise started in 1978. Given this is the eighth and last of the canon series, it seems fitting for the man that started it all returning to end it. Not Carpenter of course, but Rosenthal who directed the pleasantly fine second entry that helped popularize the killer that just refuses to kick the bucket.

Also returning is finish things is Jamie Lee Curtis who firmly ended her relationship with the franchise by dying in the prologue. Much like the prior film of comically beating Myers' butt, Jamie is ready for round eight but shockingly, and rather limply, loses in a scenario reminiscent of Halloween 2.

But here lies the problem, whether it be supernatural orders found in the dreadful and oft skipped 'Thorn trilogy' or simple cinematic storytelling, Michael Myers did it. He achieved his goal, his mission in life, his series story arc in murdering his entire family. In effect he has no meaning to exist, which cements him in the same position of Jason Voorhees and Freddy Krueger who were all having so much fun they forget why they even started.

Who do we have now? Who knows, I sure can't remember the forgettable cast of fodder this time around. Save for Tyra Banks in a small throwaway role and Busta "Trick or treat, motherf***er" Rhymes as the man to canonically take down the Shape for the last time. No real threat since Paul Rudd also accomplished that. Those two (Banks and Rhymes) working together on an online reality show exploring spooky tourist attractions leads to uninspired and poorly directed portable camera portions that resemble the found footage craze that boomed before and then after this film.

There also happens to be two characters that watch this at a Halloween party and aiding in the protagonist's survival, absurdly but entertainingly they wear Pulp Fiction costumes the entire film. As bizarre as it is to see a white guy try to act serious watching live murders while wearing an afro and goatee, it's pretty great to see recognizable costumes on screen.

Mentioning Jason and Freddy before, it's strange to witness the ends of these franchises. Even with reboots and rebirths, it's still morbidly curious to see just how confident and desperate studios were to maintain a franchise with no regard to quality or quantity. Fittingly the franchises end up resembling the icons themselves, disfigured and devolved yet still lurching onward. But more so, that it's the masks that instilled that magic, like the people embodying those killers, it's the directors, actors, producers, and studios that regularly rotate to wearing them. Copycat killers trying their best, or not, to score their name crudely alongside the originators by rekindling the legacy.