Having never watched any of Rob Zombie's films, I eventually got round to watching "House Of 1000 Corpses". After sitting through it a feeling of deja vu and bland disinterest set in. I could imagine two schools of fans for this film, the younger gore fan who has just got into horror films, or the older fan who has watched the original 70's and 80's exploitation/gore movies and likes the genre. However, as a viewer who has seen a fair amount of these types of films, I really wished I had watched "Blood Sucking Freaks" again instead, and that really says a lot. This style of movie has been done to death (sorry), some mild gore, a bit of torture, the villains as the anti-heroes, etc. A bit of homage is fine, but to base your whole directing career on it, as Rob Zombie seems to be doing, is a bit rich. The trouble is the original films were fun, but weren't that great in the first place. If you are a younger viewer then definitely watch "House Of 1000 Corpses", I think it's a stage all horror fans must go through and makes you appreciate the finer things. These days give me some Asian or European horror any time. As a final note, Sherri Zombie is the most annoying and terrible "actress" imaginable.
Reviews
22 Reviews
Manhunter
(1986)
The Original and Best Lecter Movie
19 July 2007
"Manhunter" is the less well known relative of "Silence of the Lambs", and unsurprisingly due to the success of the Jodie Foster/Anthony Hopkins' film, has never had the recognition it deserves in my opinion. Silence of the Lambs is a very good film, with great performances and direction. I feel that Manhunter is the superior film for numerous reasons. The direction by Michael Mann is excellent, as is the superb cinematography by Dante Spinotti. The whole film has many beautiful touches, colour changes and moody schemes. Only in watching the documentary can you really appreciate the effort and thought that has gone into the film. The acting is brilliant throughout. William Peterson as the damaged FBI profiler is superb, he is on the edge throughout and the story focuses on his turmoil and profiling skills. Brian Cox is fantastic as Lecter. He comes across as extremely clever and manipulative, but is way more believable than Hopkins' Lecter, and as a result much more chilling. He is a true psychopath, rather than some superhuman monster. Tom Noonan as Dollarhyde is also excellent, after seeing him for the first time you cannot imagine anyone else playing the role. The film was one of, if not the first movie to really show the art of criminal profiling, and as a result is gripping to follow as the whole story comes into shape. The music is definitely stuck somewhere in the eighties, and does age the film to some extent. However this is not a problem, most of the music is good, and all is forgiven by the superb ending with Iron Butterfly's "In A Gadda Da Vida" pumping out through an incredible finale. Very highly recommended.
Solaris
(2002)
Minimilist, Hypnotic Sci-Fi
9 July 2007
Solaris is based on the Stanislaw Lem novel. Owning both the 1972 Tarkovsky movie and the Soderbergh version of Solaris, comparisons between the two films are inevitable. However, I think it is important to treat the two movies as individual films.
The plot is based around a space station orbiting around the planet Solaris, where the astronauts and a security team have either gone missing or are not very coherent. One of the astronauts aboard the space station contacts psychiatrist Chris Kelvin (Clooney) who flies off to investigate. He soon discovers some amazing developments that offer him a second chance, and questions how far anyone will go to grab that chance.
I feel that Soderbergh really couldn't win however he made this film. This may be deserved to a degree as remakes are notoriously easy to criticise, and very rarely a good idea. This is one remake that may have some justification, the original film is nearly three hours long, and the shorter version may encourage some viewers to seek out the Tarkovsky version as a result of watching, which has to be a good thing. This version could be viewed as a companion piece or an introduction of sorts to the Tarkovsky version, although it is a fine film in it's own right.
Solaris is criticised at the same time for being boring, too short, too complicated, and too simplified. It is also derided for having two very good looking leading actors. At 90 minutes it never has time to become boring, and while the pace is never fast, the viewer must have a very short attention span to get even close to boredom. The character development is achieved by flashback, which in the important dream sequences makes perfect sense, and releases information slowly but very interestingly. Solaris needs to be watched closely to piece together all the threads of the plot, but is not overly complicated. Some information is kept to a minimum, the viewer has to make some assumptions and use some imagination, which may be a bridge to far for some. Clooney and Natascha McElhone make excellent leads in my opinion, and anyone who says that Clooney can't act should watch more of his films.
The special effects are beautiful, but not overused. The sets and locations are very sparse and futuristic while still being recognisable and possible. The music by Cliff Martinez is excellent and captures the mood brilliantly.
Overall Solaris is a very moody, almost hypnotic film that requires some effort. The acting and plot development grab you and means that you keep watching to see how things develop if someone is given a second chance, and the implications that it brings.
The plot is based around a space station orbiting around the planet Solaris, where the astronauts and a security team have either gone missing or are not very coherent. One of the astronauts aboard the space station contacts psychiatrist Chris Kelvin (Clooney) who flies off to investigate. He soon discovers some amazing developments that offer him a second chance, and questions how far anyone will go to grab that chance.
I feel that Soderbergh really couldn't win however he made this film. This may be deserved to a degree as remakes are notoriously easy to criticise, and very rarely a good idea. This is one remake that may have some justification, the original film is nearly three hours long, and the shorter version may encourage some viewers to seek out the Tarkovsky version as a result of watching, which has to be a good thing. This version could be viewed as a companion piece or an introduction of sorts to the Tarkovsky version, although it is a fine film in it's own right.
Solaris is criticised at the same time for being boring, too short, too complicated, and too simplified. It is also derided for having two very good looking leading actors. At 90 minutes it never has time to become boring, and while the pace is never fast, the viewer must have a very short attention span to get even close to boredom. The character development is achieved by flashback, which in the important dream sequences makes perfect sense, and releases information slowly but very interestingly. Solaris needs to be watched closely to piece together all the threads of the plot, but is not overly complicated. Some information is kept to a minimum, the viewer has to make some assumptions and use some imagination, which may be a bridge to far for some. Clooney and Natascha McElhone make excellent leads in my opinion, and anyone who says that Clooney can't act should watch more of his films.
The special effects are beautiful, but not overused. The sets and locations are very sparse and futuristic while still being recognisable and possible. The music by Cliff Martinez is excellent and captures the mood brilliantly.
Overall Solaris is a very moody, almost hypnotic film that requires some effort. The acting and plot development grab you and means that you keep watching to see how things develop if someone is given a second chance, and the implications that it brings.
The Innocents
(1961)
Good Classic Horror Film, with Certain Reservations
26 February 2007
"The Innocents" is a beautifully shot film. Freddie Francis' work on this film is great throughout. As much as I enjoyed the film I must admit I had a few major problems, which I will go into later. Firstly the good points. Alongside the cinematography, the acting is very good. Deborah Kerr is excellent as you would expect, showing extreme paranoia and unease throughout. The two children (one of which, Pamela Franklin, would go on some years later to star in The Legend of Hell House) are fine, they are both very believable and do a great job. There are also loads of subtle references throughout the film, which are mentioned in other reviews. There are some "scares", mostly the two "ghosts", but as in most of these films it is the constant atmosphere of unease that should make it work. Now comes the hard part. To begin with I could not see beyond Deborah Kerrs' character as anything but crazy. She seems to add all the clues together far too easily regarding the link between the two dead servants and the children. Also, unless she had experience in such matters how she comes to the conclusion that if the children say the names of the "ghosts" they will be OK is very strange and a little abrupt. She is a ministers' daughter, but unless he was an exorcist I can't see it helping. This isn't a major problem but one sequence with a tear (or water droplet) later on seems to change the whole plot. Ambiguous plots and red herrings are great, but I found this a little hard to digest. The film seemed at times more of a melodrama than a spine tingler, and having watched it a second time I must admit I enjoyed it less. Excellent direction and cinematography are not enough I'm afraid. Once my mind was made up on the insane plot angle, the ghostly apparitions had little effect, and I felt anyway these were done without too much subtlety. In these films personally I feel that once the ghosts are shown I find much of the mystery is lost. A good film and recommended, but in my eyes nowhere near as sharp as "The Haunting" (1963), "The Changeling" or even "The Legend of Hell House".
The Legend of Hell House
(1973)
One of the Best Haunted House Films
26 February 2007
"The Legend of Hell House" easily makes it into my personal top few haunted house film list. It doesn't quite top "The Haunting" (1963 version), but it runs it pretty close.
Firstly the plot is great. Like The Haunting, a group of paranormal investigators are paid to stay in the Belasco House, the "Mount Everest" of haunted houses. Belasco was a pervert and general deviant in many ways, and his spirit lives on in the house. The cast is also universally excellent, Roddy Mcdowell is very good as the only survivor of a previous stay in the house, Pamela Franklin is also great as the young medium.
The Legend of Hell House almost has too much action. It lays the ghostly sightings and other paranormal activity on very thick, with one scare after another and very few lulls. This is great because it keeps the atmosphere going at all times, I can't think of another film that has so much content from start to finish. Also we know from early on that the house is very much haunted, no ambiguous insanity option in this film.
The Legend of Hell House is a very well made film, the house looks excellent, the cast is very good, the atmosphere is nice and dark, the plot meanders around well and there is a really unexpected finish. To top it all there is also a possessed cat, you can't ask for much more than that. Highly recommended.
Firstly the plot is great. Like The Haunting, a group of paranormal investigators are paid to stay in the Belasco House, the "Mount Everest" of haunted houses. Belasco was a pervert and general deviant in many ways, and his spirit lives on in the house. The cast is also universally excellent, Roddy Mcdowell is very good as the only survivor of a previous stay in the house, Pamela Franklin is also great as the young medium.
The Legend of Hell House almost has too much action. It lays the ghostly sightings and other paranormal activity on very thick, with one scare after another and very few lulls. This is great because it keeps the atmosphere going at all times, I can't think of another film that has so much content from start to finish. Also we know from early on that the house is very much haunted, no ambiguous insanity option in this film.
The Legend of Hell House is a very well made film, the house looks excellent, the cast is very good, the atmosphere is nice and dark, the plot meanders around well and there is a really unexpected finish. To top it all there is also a possessed cat, you can't ask for much more than that. Highly recommended.
The Haunting
(1963)
A Classic Ghost Story That Has Aged Very Well
7 January 2007
"The Haunting", an adaptation of a Shirley Jackson novel, was first shown in 1963, therefore is over 40 years old. As a horror fan for years it is interesting to view a classic film that either you haven't seen before, or to revisit it and see if it still has the impact years later. The Haunting has a classic haunted house plot, Hill House has a terrible history of murders and suicides and is being investigated as part of a scientific study into the paranormal. Four people makeup the study party and we are told the story through the eyes of Eleanor Lance, perfectly played by Julie Harris. The other members are the leader Dr. Markway, the ESP specialist and possible lesbian Theodora, and the playboy relation who hopes to inherit Hill House and rent it out, but soon discovers that this may not work very well.... The atmosphere is built up steadily, in the way a great story should be, we are introduced to all the characters although there is little character development apart from Eleanor. Once the scares begin the atmosphere of dread and something being very wrong is laid on thickly, although we are never quite sure if it is really happening or part of Eleanor's imagination. There are some really good scares which I won't mention so as to not spoil them, the acting is great all round and Robert Wise direction is spot on. The actual house looks really menacing and the interiors are shot with lot of imagination. So, a great ghost story, perfectly directed and acted, lots of suspense and some good scares. There is no gore, no blood, only one person dies (apart from in the introduction), so it may not appeal to everyone. I personally really enjoyed it and would thoroughly recommend "The Haunting" to all film fans, not just horror buffs. Like they say, they don't make 'em like this anymore.
Wolf Creek
(2005)
Another Torture Movie - Watch TCM instead.
24 December 2006
Apparently "Wolf Creek" is based on a true story of Australian Outback killer, Ivan Milat. Well, very loosely based is more accurate and I watch the news, so no extra marks for that.
The first half of the film is very slow. I appreciate character build up, but I am not sure it works that well in this case. Obviously the idea to completely contrast the slow first hour or so to the nasty last half hour could work, providing you really care about the characters.
As mentioned in other reviews there are plot holes, red herrings and parts that seem slightly stupid. The alien idea with all electrical things stopping is quite clever to through us off the scent. One of the biggest problems is the killer. He is the usual superhuman monster, even though he is an out of shape old man, who doesn't even tie the victims' hands round their backs. He can get shot with little ill effect, obviously has ESP, is a brilliant marksman, is super strong, all the usual stuff. The pretty stupid victims who won't finish off the killer and spend an eternity trying to escape have constant bad luck. Without giving too much away the killings are pretty brutal and nasty, but we have seen it all before.
The possible ending that Ben did kill his friends (a la Switchblade Romance) and got away with it is an alternative finish, but who knows (or really cares). I also think the digital camera is a look that has been done to death.
Really if you have to watch a torture/chase film you may as well watch the original Texas Chainsaw Massacre. I am not a huge fan of these films as they seem to rely on violence for the sake of it, with no style or panache. Wolf Creek is not really a film that I enjoyed much on any level and I must admit I am tiring of horror films of this genre particularly, and twenty minutes of patchy violence does not make a good film.
The first half of the film is very slow. I appreciate character build up, but I am not sure it works that well in this case. Obviously the idea to completely contrast the slow first hour or so to the nasty last half hour could work, providing you really care about the characters.
As mentioned in other reviews there are plot holes, red herrings and parts that seem slightly stupid. The alien idea with all electrical things stopping is quite clever to through us off the scent. One of the biggest problems is the killer. He is the usual superhuman monster, even though he is an out of shape old man, who doesn't even tie the victims' hands round their backs. He can get shot with little ill effect, obviously has ESP, is a brilliant marksman, is super strong, all the usual stuff. The pretty stupid victims who won't finish off the killer and spend an eternity trying to escape have constant bad luck. Without giving too much away the killings are pretty brutal and nasty, but we have seen it all before.
The possible ending that Ben did kill his friends (a la Switchblade Romance) and got away with it is an alternative finish, but who knows (or really cares). I also think the digital camera is a look that has been done to death.
Really if you have to watch a torture/chase film you may as well watch the original Texas Chainsaw Massacre. I am not a huge fan of these films as they seem to rely on violence for the sake of it, with no style or panache. Wolf Creek is not really a film that I enjoyed much on any level and I must admit I am tiring of horror films of this genre particularly, and twenty minutes of patchy violence does not make a good film.
Rocky
(1976)
What's not to like about Rocky?
13 November 2006
Rocky is one of those films that I can watch every time it is shown on TV and recently watched in full again due to buying the Anniversay Special Edition. It has the sort of story that would work in any situation, but particularly in sports. Everyone loves an underdog.
The film, as everyone must know, revolves around a 30 year old two-bit boxer who earns cash as muscle for a loan shark. He is seen smoking and boozing and obviously has let himself get out of peak shape. Rocky has also just lost his locker at the gym to a younger boxer and he is also having trouble asking out ultra shy pet store assistant Adrianne. The main crux of the film is after reigning champion Apollo Creed offers him a crack at the title as part of a 4th of July promotion when his leading contender pulls out, Rocky has to get in shape, shake off his doubts and prove to himself he isn't the loser he always thought he was.
What is so great about Rocky? There are various reasons, the storyline is a great part, underdog comes good against all odds, the acting is excellent (Stallone surely deserved an Oscar), the cinematography is perfect, the music is also absolutely spot on. The actual boxing is only a very small part of the film, it's the journey there that makes the film work.
Most people who don't appreciate Rocky forget the other parts of the film apart from the fighting. There is so much more that makes it the film it is. Baring in mind it beat Taxi Driver to best picture that year, Rocky must be something special. It may not be the best film ever made but for entertainment value it is up there somewhere.
An all time classic that has aged superbly, a must see. Hopes are high for Rocky Balboa next year....
The film, as everyone must know, revolves around a 30 year old two-bit boxer who earns cash as muscle for a loan shark. He is seen smoking and boozing and obviously has let himself get out of peak shape. Rocky has also just lost his locker at the gym to a younger boxer and he is also having trouble asking out ultra shy pet store assistant Adrianne. The main crux of the film is after reigning champion Apollo Creed offers him a crack at the title as part of a 4th of July promotion when his leading contender pulls out, Rocky has to get in shape, shake off his doubts and prove to himself he isn't the loser he always thought he was.
What is so great about Rocky? There are various reasons, the storyline is a great part, underdog comes good against all odds, the acting is excellent (Stallone surely deserved an Oscar), the cinematography is perfect, the music is also absolutely spot on. The actual boxing is only a very small part of the film, it's the journey there that makes the film work.
Most people who don't appreciate Rocky forget the other parts of the film apart from the fighting. There is so much more that makes it the film it is. Baring in mind it beat Taxi Driver to best picture that year, Rocky must be something special. It may not be the best film ever made but for entertainment value it is up there somewhere.
An all time classic that has aged superbly, a must see. Hopes are high for Rocky Balboa next year....
Phone
(2002)
Not Really a Horror Film, But OK None The Less
6 November 2006
Pon or Phone has all the elements that you would expect from the current range of Asian horror/thrillers, the long black hair, a really freaky child, lots of shocks and hinted at horrors and slight glimpses of things you don't want to see.
The biggest difference for me was that although there was some supernatural references and ideas, the film never really came across as a horror film, more a ghostly whodunit.
The main protagonist in Phone is a reporter who is exposing an underage sex racket. She has also donated some eggs to a couple who she knows to allow them to have a child. Whilst she is staying in the couples spare house, she starts to receive some nuisance phone calls we think from someone she is trying to expose or has exposed. Things escalate and after many plot twists the film comes to a pretty good conclusion which I must admit I didn't see coming.
The little girl in the film does a great job, she really is horrible and alarming,with pure evil written across her face. Phone uses a lot of musical cues, sharp effects whenever a shock is coming, which is unlike a lot of the earlier Asian horror films, more in keeping with Hollywood shockers that use telegraphed musical effects.
Overall a decent enough film, a bit derivative, it doesn't really add to the Asian horror film genre, not really a must see but generally entertaining.
The biggest difference for me was that although there was some supernatural references and ideas, the film never really came across as a horror film, more a ghostly whodunit.
The main protagonist in Phone is a reporter who is exposing an underage sex racket. She has also donated some eggs to a couple who she knows to allow them to have a child. Whilst she is staying in the couples spare house, she starts to receive some nuisance phone calls we think from someone she is trying to expose or has exposed. Things escalate and after many plot twists the film comes to a pretty good conclusion which I must admit I didn't see coming.
The little girl in the film does a great job, she really is horrible and alarming,with pure evil written across her face. Phone uses a lot of musical cues, sharp effects whenever a shock is coming, which is unlike a lot of the earlier Asian horror films, more in keeping with Hollywood shockers that use telegraphed musical effects.
Overall a decent enough film, a bit derivative, it doesn't really add to the Asian horror film genre, not really a must see but generally entertaining.
Fantastic Four
(I) (2005)
Surprisingly not too bad - a Fantastic 5 out of ten
5 November 2006
After not being overly impressed with X Men, Daredevil, The Punisher and other Marvel incarnations, I went into Fantastic Four with very low expectations. The reviews also were pretty poor, so I was pleasantly surprised to actually quite enjoy the film.
The film does take some liberties with the original story, but baring in mind, as in Spider-Man, the origins are 40 odd years old you can forgive the studios updating the stories slightly.
The special effects are pretty good, obviously some apparent CGI (what do you expect?), overall decent acting and characterisation makes an entertaining film. The one aspect I particularly liked was the fact that it used fairly low key actors and actresses and didn't take itself too seriously, unlike the X-Men films which I found hard work and tedious.
Overall a decent addition to the recent Marvel list of films, and I am actually quite looking forward to the sequel.
The film does take some liberties with the original story, but baring in mind, as in Spider-Man, the origins are 40 odd years old you can forgive the studios updating the stories slightly.
The special effects are pretty good, obviously some apparent CGI (what do you expect?), overall decent acting and characterisation makes an entertaining film. The one aspect I particularly liked was the fact that it used fairly low key actors and actresses and didn't take itself too seriously, unlike the X-Men films which I found hard work and tedious.
Overall a decent addition to the recent Marvel list of films, and I am actually quite looking forward to the sequel.
Opera
(1987)
Put Me Off Opera For Life, Definitely No Profondo Rosso
20 August 2006
Warning: Spoilers
How can an innovative director go from brilliance to overblown tripe? Ask Dario Argento and various other horror filmmakers.
I absolutely love Argento's early films; Bird with the Crystal Plumage, Cat o' Nine Tails, Profondo Rosso, Tenebrae and Suspiria rank among some of my favourite ever. There is a freshness, some really interesting ideas, great plot lines and twists that make fantastic movies. Unfortunately after these great efforts things took a dramatic downward turn, I have really tried to appreciate his later movies, but they just leave me cold. Getting on to "Terror at the Opera", the story unveils that an understudy actress in Macbeth gets her chance when the main singer mysteriously is hurt in a hit and run accident. A deranged fan then kills people in front of the understudy and without giving too much away things come to a fairly lame conclusion with a tepid plot twist in Switzerland for some reason. I have many problems with this film. The rock music soundtrack is massively annoying throughout. I can understand the complete opposite of this and the opera pieces, but I would rather have classical music, and I am no opera fan. Demons had the same effect on me, the soundtrack is awful. The plot is terrible, from "Betty" the understudy not reporting some of the murders to the police, the super intelligent ravens picking the killer in a theatre, some of the most idiotic murder victims ever and the really lame "twist" at the end. Betty then proceeds to release a lizard which is trapped and admits she is "different" for some reason! The dialogue at times tries to explain events and thoughts to the viewer as if we are complete idiots, although after sitting through the entire film that could be correct. Another major gripe is the identity of the murderer. There are so few possible characters who could be the killer that it is obvious, eventually I found myself wishing they would all just die... The final nail in the coffin for me was the dubbing in the version that I saw. It was obviously shot mainly in English, but the accents in the film were in the most plummy 1930's RADA English possible. I must admit the most enjoyment I had in the whole 100 minutes or so was laughing at the accents which make the Queen seem common. I hate to rubbish an Argento film, but he really has lost it, I hated Inferno, Demons, Trauma, and the Stendhal Syndrome is almost unwatchable. This about tops the lot. Very poor indeed.
I absolutely love Argento's early films; Bird with the Crystal Plumage, Cat o' Nine Tails, Profondo Rosso, Tenebrae and Suspiria rank among some of my favourite ever. There is a freshness, some really interesting ideas, great plot lines and twists that make fantastic movies. Unfortunately after these great efforts things took a dramatic downward turn, I have really tried to appreciate his later movies, but they just leave me cold. Getting on to "Terror at the Opera", the story unveils that an understudy actress in Macbeth gets her chance when the main singer mysteriously is hurt in a hit and run accident. A deranged fan then kills people in front of the understudy and without giving too much away things come to a fairly lame conclusion with a tepid plot twist in Switzerland for some reason. I have many problems with this film. The rock music soundtrack is massively annoying throughout. I can understand the complete opposite of this and the opera pieces, but I would rather have classical music, and I am no opera fan. Demons had the same effect on me, the soundtrack is awful. The plot is terrible, from "Betty" the understudy not reporting some of the murders to the police, the super intelligent ravens picking the killer in a theatre, some of the most idiotic murder victims ever and the really lame "twist" at the end. Betty then proceeds to release a lizard which is trapped and admits she is "different" for some reason! The dialogue at times tries to explain events and thoughts to the viewer as if we are complete idiots, although after sitting through the entire film that could be correct. Another major gripe is the identity of the murderer. There are so few possible characters who could be the killer that it is obvious, eventually I found myself wishing they would all just die... The final nail in the coffin for me was the dubbing in the version that I saw. It was obviously shot mainly in English, but the accents in the film were in the most plummy 1930's RADA English possible. I must admit the most enjoyment I had in the whole 100 minutes or so was laughing at the accents which make the Queen seem common. I hate to rubbish an Argento film, but he really has lost it, I hated Inferno, Demons, Trauma, and the Stendhal Syndrome is almost unwatchable. This about tops the lot. Very poor indeed.
Night of the Seagulls
(1975)
Return to form for the Blind Dead - on dry ground again
1 August 2006
The fourth and unfortunately last instalment in the Blind Dead saga marks a return to form after the slack "Ghost Galleon". In this exploitation zombie/vampire movie a young doctor and his wife move to a god forsaken coastal village with very uncooperative townsfolk. The house that the doctor inherits is a real dive and definitely not Blind Dead proof. Soon it becomes apparent that every seven years seven local girls are led to a cliff top to be taken by the evil Templars. The fact that the girls are led up to the cliff by a pack of the ugliest crones imaginable does not help. The new doctor steps in to lend a hand and the usual Blind Dead schenanagans ensue. This is a much better film than "Ghost Galleon" and has some nice tense and gory moments. A good ending marks the end of the series of films, entertaining even when the quality dropped slightly. What is the chance of a remake or even better allow the Templars to ride again in a new instalment? Here's hoping.
The Ghost Galleon
(1974)
The Blind Dead take to the sea (bathtub)
1 August 2006
The third instalment of the Blind Dead, "Ghost Galleon", is definitely the weakest of the four. It seems as if the director had run out of money and maybe had a ship set handy to make the film, as well as probably the worst "special" effects ever seen on the silver screen! Having said that it is still entertaining and much fun can be had with the cast, terrible acting and strange plot. For some reason a group of people manage to get aboard a spectral galleon which just happens to be packed with the Blind Dead, those devil worshipping Templars in tea chests. I must admit I miss the bony fellas creeping out of their heavy stone tombs! The cast get picked off one by one, usually with a really drawn out slow chase, then the Blind Dead slowly drag their victim down below for a feed. The pace of the film and particularly the Templars is very slow, probably as the set is so small if they rushed about they would fall off the end. This brings up some of the most appalling effects ever, the "ship" looks like a 6 inch toy in a bath, the Blind Dead drop to the ocean floor in matchboxes, and the pyrotechnics are on such a small scale there is barely one flame over a whole galleon! The main man "Tucker" has such appalling dress sense, even for the seventies, with ball crushing trousers and a selection of terrible sweaters. The ending is actually quite good, with the nautical Templars navigating themselves to the beach to feast on the remaining heroes. Overall pretty dodgy, but you have to love those Templars!
Return of the Evil Dead
(1973)
The Templars return in a good sequel
1 August 2006
Those pervy devil worshipping Blind Dead Templar Knights return to ruin their own anniversary celebrations. As a follow up to the entertaining Tombs of the Blind Dead, the Return of the Blind Dead does a good job. The film has the usual mix of a deformed hunchback who kills a woman to bring back the Templars, a "hunky" hero who saves the day, an array of busty women for the Blind Dead to prey on, a little sex, and the usual villain who we don't mind being killed. Add into the mix a celebration in the village which soon gets overrun with Blind Dead, a comedy interlude with the mayor and his maid, a few chase scenes and a surprisingly good ending and you have a good concoction for 1970's horror. One of the greatest parts of these films is the use over and over again of the Templars rising from their coffins, women just managing to escape the Blind Dead, usually with one of their shoes stuck in a hole or ladder rung right up until the last second, and my personal favourite, a bony hand reaching through a hole or window. Classic Zombie/Vampire fun for all the family.
Batman Begins
(2005)
Great Effort -The Best Batman Film
29 July 2006
With the plethora of super-hero films currently being released and in production, and with most of them being generally poor, Batman Begins had a lot to prove. I was never a fan of any of the other recent Batman films, I found Tim Burton's effort too heavily weighted in favour of Jack Nicholson's Joker, who was just annoying and a bit over the top generally, too Hollywood for me. Joel Schumaker's efforts were pretty awful all round. Batman Begins has a great cast. Christian Bale is excellent, trouncing Keaton, Clooney and Kilmer by miles. He looks like he can handle 10 thugs, and has an edginess to him. Liam Neeson, Michael Caine, Katie Holmes, Gary Oldman, Morgan Freeman and Rutger Hauer make up the rest of the big hitters and they do not disappoint. The best side of this film is the origin and development of Batman, we are told at length how he came to be who he is, how he learnt to beat the crap out of thugs, how he acquired the gadgets, etc.. This makes the film more human and believable, which in a fantasy super hero film is a big achievement. Very highly recommended.
Tombs of the Blind Dead
(1972)
Spanish Zombie/Vampire exploitation classic !!
14 July 2006
This film has it all! Pervy Templar Knights killed for dodgy acts return as the Blind Dead, who unsurprisingly hunt by sound. The best thing is that they can hear their victims' heart beating, so there is no escape. I am not sure whether the Blind Dead are really zombies or vampires, as they tend to suck their victims rather than eat them, but the victims come back to life to continue the good work. The Blind Dead have horses and swords, so they are very hard to escape from, however how they have the strength to ride or hold a sword with their withered, spindly arms is amazing! The film, as well as having some quite nice creepy scenes, has the obligatory 70s lesbian sequence which fits perfectly with the rest of the action. I suppose a film maker can only do his best to please all of his viewers. The Blind Dead are nicely made up, there is some gore, one of the characters, Pedro, has the sweatiest armpits in film history and makes the mistake of taking on a whole army of the Blind Dead with a small knife. The end sequence is really good, as the Zombie/Vampire Knights take on a train full of passengers, and literally suck the life out of them! Very highly recommended to 70s horror fans, but please don't answer any history exam questions with any of the films' plot. I intend to enjoy the next episode in the Blind Dead saga asap.
Blood for Dracula
(1974)
So very bad that it's good!
4 June 2006
This is a very difficult film to review. If you look at it from the usual perspective of acting skill, dialogue, plot etc., Blood for Dracula is probably one of the worst films you will ever watch. But you have to have a soft spot for such films, especially the sort you saw originally 25 years ago.
Andy Warhol as mentioned in other reviews had very little to do with the film, he was quoted when asked of his involvement that he went to the parties. There is some debate who the director/directors where, but that doesn't really matter.
As already mentioned the plot is actually OK, Dracula travels from Transylvania to Italy looking for virgin blood, as the stock in his own area has run out. He finds an Italian family with four daughters who he sets his sights on, gradually discovering that they have not been as virtuous as they have led on.
Firstly there is some good comedy, Draculas' coffin on top of his car is a great image. Unfortunately from that point on I doubt the laughs are intentional. Draculas' aide is probably the worst actor in film history, he seems like he has walked in from another movie. Udo Kier is actually not too bad, he looks ill enough for the role and has piercing eyes. There are some hilariously stupid parts, such as the 100 year old waitress in the hotel, the really stupid game that Polanski plays with Dracula's aide, the accents are all over the place and so varied it is like a UN meeting.
There are no special effects, apart from the ending with an hilarious dismemberment scene and dual staking. There is also a Marxist undertone from the gardener and general "hero" Mario, who is so heroic he has sex with the youngest daughter very quickly so that Dracula will not be interested in her! The sporadic nudity keeps the viewer interested throughout, as there are very long pieces of dialogue that go nowhere at all.
That's it really, not a very good film, but there are laughs to be had and it gives us all hope to become actors one day.
Andy Warhol as mentioned in other reviews had very little to do with the film, he was quoted when asked of his involvement that he went to the parties. There is some debate who the director/directors where, but that doesn't really matter.
As already mentioned the plot is actually OK, Dracula travels from Transylvania to Italy looking for virgin blood, as the stock in his own area has run out. He finds an Italian family with four daughters who he sets his sights on, gradually discovering that they have not been as virtuous as they have led on.
Firstly there is some good comedy, Draculas' coffin on top of his car is a great image. Unfortunately from that point on I doubt the laughs are intentional. Draculas' aide is probably the worst actor in film history, he seems like he has walked in from another movie. Udo Kier is actually not too bad, he looks ill enough for the role and has piercing eyes. There are some hilariously stupid parts, such as the 100 year old waitress in the hotel, the really stupid game that Polanski plays with Dracula's aide, the accents are all over the place and so varied it is like a UN meeting.
There are no special effects, apart from the ending with an hilarious dismemberment scene and dual staking. There is also a Marxist undertone from the gardener and general "hero" Mario, who is so heroic he has sex with the youngest daughter very quickly so that Dracula will not be interested in her! The sporadic nudity keeps the viewer interested throughout, as there are very long pieces of dialogue that go nowhere at all.
That's it really, not a very good film, but there are laughs to be had and it gives us all hope to become actors one day.
Zombie
(1979)
Classic Italian Gore from Fulci
15 April 2006
Now this is how a zombie film should be made! Whilst Lucio Fuci never had the creative genius of Dario Argento in Profondo Rosso, Tenebrae and Suspiria, he certainly knew how to make a good old fashioned zombie/gore movie. In Zombi 2 or Zombie Flesh Eaters (what a title!) as it was known in the UK, a ship drifts into New York with a very large, hungry zombie on board. This leads to two investigative journalists, including gore stalwart Ian McCulloch, with two holiday makers going to the Island of Matul. After meeting a shark wrestling zombie en route, they arrive at Matul where things are not going well. The hospital run by Dr. Menard has turned into a morgue where daily zombie killing has become the routine. Things go from bad to worse as the zombies grow in number and various dismemberment, eye gouging, jugular bites etc ensue. What makes this film so good are various factors. Apart from being one of the first gore films I ever saw, it has no social commentary or hidden meaning and does not try to be a comedy (although some may argue with this). It is a good, honest gore film. The special effects are nice and gruesome, with fantastic zombie make up, great zombie attacks and loads of maggots and worms. The crazy underwater battle between zombie and shark is totally original and not surprisingly has never been tried since. The infamous eye scene whilst a bit creaky still makes the viewer cringe. The acting and dubbing are dodgy but don't detract from the zombie mayhem, the music is great with calypso music to greet the heroes and throbbing effects to welcome the zombies. I cannot recommend this highly enough for good old fashioned zombie related thrills. Also look out for The Beyond and City of the Living Dead in a similar vein.
Ringu
(1998)
Great film that rekindles your interest in horror
7 April 2006
I must admit that I made the mistake of watching the US "Ring" before this, the original Japanese version. The US version is OK and indeed better than most modern horror films, but Ringu is superior and of course the impact of the famous ending is lessened slightly. This is the film that rekindled my interest in horror films after feeling for many years there were no new ideas or quality any more. As everyone knows Ringu follows the story of a cursed tape, once watched you receive a phone call that tells you of your impending doom. The tension of the film is the key to the impending terror, and it has a really cloying, dark feeling throughout. As is the case with most Asian horrors, especially the earlier films of the recent batch, the director does not make the plot too obvious to the viewer. You have to watch closely and decide a few things for yourself. I must admit I really enjoy this aspect of Asian films, you have to work at it, as opposed to the usual spoon-fed Hollywood story lines. There are some major differences between Ringu and Ring, the father is psychic, which makes sense, there are less jumps and telegraphed shocks, but the same dank, dirty atmosphere is there in both films. It is not a perfect film. It obviously lacks the budget of Ring and there are patches when nothing much happens which is difficult for an audience fed on constant periodic shocks. Asian cinema has a different pace, there are points of quiet, leading to out of the blue shocks. This actually increases the tension of the film, leading up to one of the most terrifying climaxes possible. Once you have seen the ending you will wish you hadn't, as you cannot watch it fresh again. A great film that is perfect for TV viewing, excellent acting throughout, with possibly the best ending of any horror film.
Napoleon Dynamite
(2004)
Brilliant comedy, definitely dynamite
5 April 2006
Going in to watch Napoleon Dynamite I must admit my expectations weren't high. It looked like a typical teen comedy which I would never normally watch, but interesting reviews pulled me in. What is so good about this film is that it is really funny without being cruel to the characters. Napoleon and his nerdy friends know they are geeks, but really don't seem to care, and they come out winning in the end against all odds. Watching Napoleon Dynamite you never quite know what stupid scene might come next, with great characters such as 1982 obsessed Uncle Rico, the scope for crazy sequences is endless. I have to admit crying with laughter, which is no easy feat for a film to achieve. I cannot recommend this comedy highly enough. If you enjoy absurd comedy such as Airplane or Police Squad (the series) you must watch this. It may not appeal to everyone, you need to just sit back and enjoy the stupidity. Don't expect any particular plot, stunts or special effects. This is a film to just turn off your brain and absorb. I can understand the negative reviews, if you were expecting an Adam Sandler type comedy you may be sadly disappointed. Actually if you expecting ANY sort of normal comedy you may be disappointed. Can't wait for Napoleon Dynamite 2!
Another great film by Wes Anderson
28 March 2006
The Life Aquatic with Steve Zissou carries on the legacy of Bottle Rocket, Rushmore and the Royal Tenebaums with great aplomb.
In a world where most films seem to be more of a chore to watch and have no lasting impact on the viewer, we are lucky to have film makers such as Wes Anderson. It is good that a film can split opinion so much that you either seem to REALLY love or REALLY hate The Life Aquatic, rather than it trying to appeal to everyone and anyone for revenue and box office ratings. I know some people who absolutely love it, to others who hate it with a vengeance. Whether we have been conditioned to need thrills and special effects every set portion of a film is a possible reason. I think that Woody Allen films have the same effect, either it appeals to your nature or it really doesn't. That has to be a good thing.
Having watched and enjoyed all of Wes Andersons films there is natural progression from the very bare (but still excellent) Bottle Rocket, right through to the more adventurous Life Aquatic. The common feature is the attention to detail and the little things in the dialogue and visual points that make the film so appealing. A lot of time and effort has obviously been spent making the film, with the cut out ship showing the various cabins being really great, and stupid but excellent bits such as the Team Zissou Adidas training shoes.
The acting is first rate. Bill Murray as usual plays the grizzled old has been perfectly. Although all of his roles seem the same these days he is so good at it and such a good actor that he gets away with it. Owen Wilson is excellent as the long lost son, with Willem Defoe in a smaller but equally great role, and Anjelica Houston playing the ex wife just right.
The whole plot revolves around the hunt for the elusive Jaguar Shark which apparently killed Zissou's partner, with various adventures along the way. Once again nothing earth shattering happens but the small points such as Zissou taking on a whole army of pirates whilst never getting shot and the rivalry with the rich Jeff Goldblum make the whole film special.
The CGI is excellent, not that it looks realistic, but because it looks so fantastic, with the candy crabs and other weird creatures visually stunning and very funny. The ending when they actually find the Jaguar shark is brilliant.
I cannot recommend this film highly enough. If you want to smile throughout a film, from Portuguese Bowie to great witty dialogue to crazy CGI animals, The Life Aquatic has it all. Just don't complain to me if you don't like it!
In a world where most films seem to be more of a chore to watch and have no lasting impact on the viewer, we are lucky to have film makers such as Wes Anderson. It is good that a film can split opinion so much that you either seem to REALLY love or REALLY hate The Life Aquatic, rather than it trying to appeal to everyone and anyone for revenue and box office ratings. I know some people who absolutely love it, to others who hate it with a vengeance. Whether we have been conditioned to need thrills and special effects every set portion of a film is a possible reason. I think that Woody Allen films have the same effect, either it appeals to your nature or it really doesn't. That has to be a good thing.
Having watched and enjoyed all of Wes Andersons films there is natural progression from the very bare (but still excellent) Bottle Rocket, right through to the more adventurous Life Aquatic. The common feature is the attention to detail and the little things in the dialogue and visual points that make the film so appealing. A lot of time and effort has obviously been spent making the film, with the cut out ship showing the various cabins being really great, and stupid but excellent bits such as the Team Zissou Adidas training shoes.
The acting is first rate. Bill Murray as usual plays the grizzled old has been perfectly. Although all of his roles seem the same these days he is so good at it and such a good actor that he gets away with it. Owen Wilson is excellent as the long lost son, with Willem Defoe in a smaller but equally great role, and Anjelica Houston playing the ex wife just right.
The whole plot revolves around the hunt for the elusive Jaguar Shark which apparently killed Zissou's partner, with various adventures along the way. Once again nothing earth shattering happens but the small points such as Zissou taking on a whole army of pirates whilst never getting shot and the rivalry with the rich Jeff Goldblum make the whole film special.
The CGI is excellent, not that it looks realistic, but because it looks so fantastic, with the candy crabs and other weird creatures visually stunning and very funny. The ending when they actually find the Jaguar shark is brilliant.
I cannot recommend this film highly enough. If you want to smile throughout a film, from Portuguese Bowie to great witty dialogue to crazy CGI animals, The Life Aquatic has it all. Just don't complain to me if you don't like it!
Land of the Dead
(2005)
Poor effort from Romero
20 March 2006
Warning: Spoilers
Like many horror directors (Carpenter, Argento, Hooper, etc) George Romero seems to have run out of ideas and forgotten that a horror film should at least entertain viewers, with some suspense as a bonus. Being a zombie fan for years, from Lucio Fulci classics to all the Living Dead trilogy, I was looking forwards a great deal to LOTD. Unfortunately after the decent opening titles and recap, the film turned into a second rate MTV video, with heavy rock soundtrack, inane army/buddy sequences and unconvincing ideas throughout. Anyone with any sense could see the subtext of the closed communities in the US, with the rich all dying and the poor somehow managing to survive anything that might happen. However, while I agree with the sympathies to an extent, that should not be an excuse for the film to be so derivative and tedious. With clever swimming zombies with underwater GPS, non-toughened zombie resistant safety glass, dodgy acting and dumb humans, definitely one to avoid. Sad end to another horror director.
Tell Your Friends