The Quick and the Dead (1995) Dir: Sam Raimi

Sam 'Evil Dead' Raimi goes all Wild West on us, with pretty satisfying results.

The plot:
Redemption is your typical frontier town, ruled over by tyrannical land owner Herod, played with some zeal by the ever-menacing Gene Hackman.
A tournament is arranged, where all of the local shootists and assassins can compete, one against one, for a huge cash prize.
Only trouble is, you either win outright, or you die trying.
Lady, the sole female entrant - Sharon's Stones - struggles to be taken seriousy to begin with, but soon proves her worth. And besides, she has more reason than most to win the competition for, as a small girl, she witnessed Herod execute her father.
So how do you think this one's gonna end, pardners?

Yeah, not exactly hot on the originality front but then, that wasn't really the idea. Seems Raimi just wanted to try his hand at a new genre, happy to throw in as many Western cliches as you could toss down a gold mine.
Saloon doors, fire water, The Old Joanna, chewin' tobaccie and busty harlots, all are present and correct, and that's fine.
'Cos it's a Western.
With a stellar cast, including DiCaprio, Crowe, Lance Henriksen and Tobin Bell, as well as the two already mentioned - though no sign of Raimi stalwart Bruce Campbell, unfortunately. His scenes were left on the cutting room floor, apparently - this is a cut above your average homage flick, certainly in the acting stakes.
If gritty, realistic Western is your bag, or if the more Spaghettified option floats your boat, you may be a touch disappointed, but for those of us who just like a good old fashioned shoot 'em up, there's plenty to entertain here.
Decent enough.

4 out of 5

Journey to the Center of the Earth (2008) Dir: Eric Brevig

Fun filled adventure for all the family.
Yikes.

The plot:
Brendan Fraser is teacher Trevor Anderson, and that rarest breed of teacher too, for an American movie, as all of his students appear bored in his lectures, adding a genuine air of reality to proceedings. Usually they are hanging on every fucking word; pupil-bots the like of which exist NOWHERE.
Anyway, when his nephew comes to stay, albeit reluctantly, Trevor finds a copy of Jules Verne's eponymous classic, along with annotation from his recently deceased brother.
See, his brother was on a mission to find 'volcanic tubes' to the centre of the Earth.
Could it be that he really found them?
Could this very book contain all of the clues to follow in his footsteps?
Well, could it?
You bet your flingin' flangin' ass it can, Batman.
Quicker than you can say Around the World in 80 Days, Trevor's off to Iceland for an adventure of a life time, and not a sign of Kerry Katona anywhere.
Weird.

Mildly diverting as far as family adventure movies goes, this is perfectly adequate stuff.
At no point is anyone imperiled, at no point do we genuinely belief the giant insects or T. Rex's are gonna mash 'em, crush 'em, or inject them with anything too deadly, so nothing to frighten any vulnerable ones - I'm looking at you, Matt.
With a decent budget, the special effects would be expected to be of a decent standard but, truthfully, they are laughably poor, which only serves to distance from the on screen action. Listen, I love my old Who and Blake's 7, so have no problem with ropey FX and wobbly sets but, for a Hollywood movie in 2008, this just ain't good enough.
One to put on when the kids need quietening, then.
For everyone else, it's safe to avoid.

3 out of 5

The Woman (2011) Dir: Lucky McKee

A movie that has the feel of a 'made for TV' production, this is nevertheless interesting stuff.

The plot:
A traditional family man, who rules the home with an iron fist, decides that it is the family's moral duty to 'civilise' a wild woman he captured in the woods. Imprisoning her in an underground shed he, along with his wife and children, attempt to feed her, to keep her clean and to teach her how to behave correctly.
But the man has other designs on The Woman.
One night, when he thinks his wife is asleep, he sneaks from the marital bed and goes to The Woman, raping her.
Only trouble is, the wife was not asleep at all.
Calm is maintained, until an inquisitive teacher from his elder daughter's school comes to visit, when all manner of madness ensues.

Cheap as chips in terms of production, the first hour or so has the real feel of a Hallmark movie or the like. Everything is muted, reigned in, wasting opportunity after opportunity to really traumatise the viewer.
Then the final act kicks in, and the director unleashes the beast within, with much bloodshed, tearing of flesh, and general behaviour befitting a true demoniac.
An intriguing one, then, with some interesting concepts explored, though rendered a little flat to begin with, this is still worth sticking with for the balls out ending.
Liked it.

3 out of 5

The Crazies (2010) Dir: Breck Eisner

Yet another remake of a horror classic, this one came out of nowhere, really, as few outside the circle of true horror fans are likely to have even heard of the original.

The plot:
A college baseball team are mid-game when onto the field of play wanders a local, known to be slightly eccentric. Thought to be drunk, the town's Sheriff approaches, only for the man to point a shotgun at him.
Instinctively, the Sheriff shoots him point blank.
Assuming alcohol to be the cause for his behaviour, the Sheriff is surprised when the toxicology report indicates no alcohol in his bloodstream.
Next, an ordinary family man sets fire to the family home, with wife and children inside.
So begins a sequence of events that will see the town quarantined, as an unknown virus contaminates the population, the government unprepared to answer any questions, intent instead upon eradicating the problem via a Scorched Earth policy.
Can the Sheriff and his family get out alive?

George Romero's original is oft hailed as a cult classic, but that is stretching it a little. Overly long, bloated and amateurish in places, the remake strips away all the fat, trims the story right down to the bone and focuses on one man's struggle against seemingly impossible odds.
And, say it quietly, folks: it's better than the source material.
Gone are the prolonged sequences where nothing really happens.
Gone are the overtly political exchanges of dialogue that really take you nowhere.
All replaced, but replaced for the better, by nought but tension and fear.
Just how would you react if your town was cut off from the rest of civilisation, and you were forced to fight enemies both beyond and within the boundary of the quarantine?
Decent performances, the odd moment of gore, and an occasional spot of the old ultra-violence, this is perhaps unique amongst remakes in that it only serves to improve upon the original.
I feel slightly ashamed of myself, now......

4 out of 5

Primal (2010) Dir: Josh Reed

Australian horror, here, from debut feature director Josh Reed.

The plot:
Six friends head into a remote region of The Outback, one of them preparing a thesis on Aboriginal cave paintings, the site selected as it features a cave with some early examples of the art form which, so the story goes, have not been see for several hundred years.
Arriving and setting camp, it's not long before things start to go awry.
Mel, the liveliest of the bunch, goes skinny dipping, only to emerge covered in leeches. Soon after, she is a-fevered, and the group assume an allergic reaction to the leeches' anti-coagulants.
Wrong.
Before the night is out, Mel's normal teeth have fallen out, and fangs have grown in their place and, more disturbingly still, she appears to have a taste for raw flesh.
And what's with all the insects eating everything in sight?

Haven't seen many Australian horrors, but the ones I have tend to be pretty bloodthirsty and pretty low budget, and both factors are true here, also.
With a reasonably competent set of actors, the implausibility of the scenario is easily overlooked and, with some stylish directorial flourishes, the action bounces along at a fair old clip.
True, it only just has the legs to sustain the relatively brief run time - about 80 minutes - but I'm never one to complain about brevity as far too many movies outstay their welcome.
If a bit of gory, shrieky, Aussie mayhem sounds like it might float your boat check this out.
At the very least, you'll probably enjoy the script because, let's face it, no-one swears as well as an Australian.
Entertaining, then.

4 out of 5

Puppet Master (1989) Dir: David Schmoeller

Written by Charles Band, a man who has forged a career out of straight to video, low budget horror, a huge proportion of which deal with killer dolls of one form or another.
This is probably his most famous effort.

The plot:
It's 1939, and a master puppeteer, Andre Toulon, is applying the final coat of paint on his latest creation, a living puppet. Around him, other puppets appear animate. Suddenly, unwelcome arrivals: Nazi's. as the door is broken down, Toulon places a pistol in his mouth and pulls the trigger.
Present day, and a psychic sensitive begins to 'feel' things. Drawn to an old house in Bodega Bay, the psychic invites a motley collection of imbeciles along to help him figure out what secrets the house holds, little realising that the legend of the puppet master lives on and that, by meddling, they will be awakening forces they cannot possibly understand.
Muhahahahahaha.

Straight to video, this one, but don;t let that put you off.
as with the sequels, this has real charm.
The killer dolls themselves are great creations: Leech woman, Blade, Pinhead and co. putting their particular talents to murderous use in reasonably inventive style.
In terms of quality movie-making, well, don;t hold your breath, cos there's none of that here, but to expect that would be entirely missing the point.
Cheesy, and by God it knows it is, this is just about enjoying the ride and, truthfully, not thinking too hard about anything that is taking place as even the most cursory amount of scrutiny would spew forth a kidney bowl full of plot holes and logical flaws.
So forget all that.
Turn the lights out, lock the door, sit back and enjoy.
Just make sure you've locked away all the kids toys before you do.

4 out of 5

Watchmen (2009) Dir: Zack Snyder

Based on the Alan Moore graphic novel, a work that Terry Gilliam declared unfilmable when he had a bash at it - that's right, Terry Baron Munchhausen, Twelve Monkeys, Brazil, Time Bandits Gilliam - Zack Snyder seemed an unlikely choice to achieve the impossible.

The plot:
In an alternate reality, Russia and America teeter on the brink of nuclear Armageddon. A huge, metaphorical nuclear clock points at five minutes to midnight and, should the hour strike, Western civilisation will end.
An unlikely band of superheroes, each getting on a bit, may be all that stands in the way of total war, but here there are complications, too, not the least of which is Dr. Manhattan, a nuclear physicist who, by virtue of a terrible accident, can now bend time and space to his will.
When the women he loves rejects him, Manhattan vanishes.
But has he gone for good, or could he possibly be planning to wreak a terrible revenge?

There's more to it than that, much more, as this is multi-layered and complex, apparently in keeping with the source material, something I am yet to read.
With a runtime verging on the three hour mark, it was with some trepidation that I approached this movie, but my fears were groundless as, with a style and verve that belied the fact that the same director brought us last year's execrable Sucker Punch, this deftly manoeuvres from all out action, to political intrigue, to scenes of tenderness, however brief.
Dazzling to look at - seriously, some of the effects here just knock your socks off - this has just about everything going for it.
It's violent, too, reminiscent at times of the simply excellent counter-culture celebration that was Kick Ass.
By far the best of the Alan Moore adaptations - V for Vendetta is all but unwatchable, and From Hell fares little better - this is one that the author could be proud of but, as is his wont, he choose to remove his name from the project, the eccentric old curmudgeon.
Snyder's best film, and one of the best comic book adaptations out there, this is a must watch.

5 out of 5

The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo (2011) Dir: David Fincher

Fincher's English language remake of a Swedish original, which itself was based on a novel.
Got it?
Let's go.

The plot:
Mikael Blomkvist is a journalist, employed by Millennium magazine, based in Stockholm.
As we join the action, his life is in turmoil, an article he wrote accusing a businessman of misdeeds landing him with a libel case, which he lost.
Desperate, life savings gone on defending the case, he is offered a lifeline when a request comes in that he investigate a family, possibly implicated in a string of murders, some dating back many, many decades.
Lisbeth Salander is twenty three though, due to a traumatic past, she is still a ward of the state, deemed incapable of deciding what is right or wrong. Her life collides with Mikael when he discovers that she was employed to hack into his personal details with such efficiency, instead of turning her over to the authorities, he instead requests she join him as assistant in investigating the murders.
Inevitably, chaos and bloody mayhem soon follow.....

With Fincher back on familiar territory here, you know you are in a safe pair of hands, and he surely delivers. From the moment the trademark, highly stylised credits roll, it really does feel like slipping on a well loved pair of denier 15 tights.
Daniel Craig mooches around efficiently enough, doing his best 'I'm not Bond, honest Guv'nor' impression, much as he always does, but the stand out here really has to be Rooney Mara as the troubled Lisbeth. A goth type, covered in tattoos and piercings, she packs quite the visual punch, and the characterisation is impressive and damned intriguing too, the combination of haunted wisdom and fiery spontaneity a compelling one.
Having not seen the Swedish original, it is hard to comment on the validity of this remake, though the usual position is to frown upon them, especially if the only purpose of the remake is to allow the terminally lazy to watch the damned thing, but this may be an exception as, have to say, it was pretty darn riveting.
The book is supposedly a fine read, too, and has been sitting idle on my bookshelf for far too long.
Maybe now's as good a time as any to dust it down.
Following the disappointment of Benjamin Button, and the puzzlement of The Social Network - a movie about Facebook? Really? - it's pleasing to see Fincher deliver the goods once more.
Rock solid stuff.

4 out of 5

Timecrimes (2007) Dir: Nacho Vigalondo

A Spanish movie that packs quite a punch.

The plot:
Hector is an ordinary man. He lives in an ordinary house with his ordinary wife. They have sex in ordinary ways and complain about things in an ordinary manner.
One day, he spies something in the woods behind his house: a young woman, hoisting up her t-shirt to reveal pert, bare breasts. He looks away as his wife wanders by and, when he looks back, the girl is gone.
Understandably intrigued, Hector goes to investigate, only to find her, naked, dead.
Panicked, he goes to flee, when a man wearing bandages covered in blood to hide his face attacks, stabbing Hector with scissors.
A pursuit ensues, which ultimately leads to Hector clambering into a strange machine, on the insistence of a man who appears to be helping him escape the bandaged maniac. The machine closes and opens again, seemingly instantaneously, but Hector has in fact travelled back in time by just a few hours.
So now there's two of him.
Or is that three?
Just how many Hector's are there?

It's gripping stuff.
A movie that plays with viewer's expectations, starting out in the most mundane manner and gradually escalating the sense of lunacy and mania the main character is feeling, the viewer tagging along for the ride.
Smartly scripted, this deftly deals with issues of causality by actually making them essential plot points.
Having something of a soft spot for sci-fi movies that play out in conventional surroundings, this certainly ticked the right boxes down here at Smell the Cult HQ.
Not seen many Spanish movies, but those I have tend to be of a decent standard, and this is no exception.
Good quality brain fodder, this.

4 out of 10

Mission: Impossible - Ghost Protocol (2011) Dir: Brad Bird

Some five years after the last installment, Mission Impossible 4 was always likely to be a hard sell but, despite this, two weeks at the top of the charts both here and on home soil suggests people are flocking in droves.
So what's all the fuss about?

The plot:
Ethan Hunt (Tom's Bruise), IMF's top agent, is imprisoned in a Moscow jail. Happily, his team are determined to break him out and, shortly afterwards, they are assigned a mission to infiltrate The Kremlin to obtain vital files. Halfway through the mission, new information comes to light and they are forced to abort. As Hunt flees The Kremlin, the building explodes in a shower of CGI goodness.
America responds swiftly, invoking Ghost Protocol, so now Hunt and his cohorts must establish precisely who was responsible for the attack, else be labelled terrorists for the rest of their days.

It's piffle.
It's a Mission Impossible movie, so of course it is, but that doesn't stop it being unrelentingly entertaining.
Bruise is starting to look his age - maybe he hasn't been 'auditing' quite enough down at The Church - but that does nothing to dampen his enthusiasm for character building stuntwork. Sure, most of it is green screen stuff, but still, those flexing muscles were not the product of computer generated imagery.
With a globe trotting plot that takes in Moscow, Dubai and Mumbai, this has the feel of a good old fashioned espionage yarn, with some high technology modern wizardry thrown in.
It flags towards the end and, at two hours fifteen, is clearly half an hour too long, but that's about the only flaw to find here.
This winter's blockbuster season continues to surprise, then, following the equal success of Sherlock Holmes 2.
Pleasantly enjoyable daftness.

4 out of 5

Do You Like Hitchcock? (2005) Dir: Dario Argento

A modern TV movie from the master of Giallo.

The plot:
Giulio is an aspiring journalist, desperate to spot a story to get him the break that he needs. After meeting a mysterious and exotic neighbour at the local video store, he begins to suspect that all is not as it seems in his neighbourhood.
Spying on the world from the expansive window of his apartment, he observes what he believes to be murderous activity and, worse still, he thinks the beautiful neighbour may be involved.

And this is certainly watered down fare.
First off, a confession: Against my better judgement, I watched the dubbed version of this movie. Never a wise move, and it certainly proved folly here as the poor quality of the voice acting made much of this movie feel like a particularly low budget porno.
Setting that aside, here we have the occasional Argento style directorial flourish, though everything is reigned in, presumably for budgetary reasons.
The cast are likeable enough, I suppose, but the plot is so contrived it is difficult to really buy into it.
Also, think about this: Argento takes Hitchcock's Rear Window as his source material, and effectively tries to replicate it, but on a shoestring budget and, frankly, that was simply never going to work.
A pale imitation of his more famous works, this feels like something of an experiment for Argento and, in my humble one, it was a failed one.
Disappointing.

2 out of 5

The French Connection (1971) Dir: William Friedkin

Considered by many to be the finest cop movie ever made, I really tried to like this.

The plot:
Marseille, France. A policeman is assigned to stake out a businessman suspected of drug trafficking. Whilst on duty, the policeman is executed.
New York, USA. Two cops, 'Popeye' Doyle (Gene Hackman) and Buddy Russo (Roy 'We're gonna' need a bigger boat' Schneider) are also on stake out duty. After watching a suspected drug offence, the two swoop in for an arrest and, after mercilessly beating the suspect, details emerge that will lead them into very dangerous waters indeed, with repercussions on both sides of the Atlantic.

It's slick as you like, Friedkin effortlessly blending the stake out dynamic with the more action-oriented scenes.
Hackman and Schneider are both in fine form, playing off one another effectively, a display of such machismo you won't find anywhere outside of an army barracks.
But it's dull.
Crushingly dull.
And I understand the reasons for it.
Friedkin's choice here is to aim for total realism so, when a cop is on a stake out, we are on a stake out, too. Trouble is, for the most part, staking a joint out is terribly boring so, in order to achieve maximum realism, the director has to make the film terribly boring, too.
The soundtrack doesn't help, all crashing cymbals and blaring brass, grating on the nerves of most creatures with sentience.
I'm glad I watched it, but I know for certain I will never watch it again.

3 out of 5

The Fountain (2006) Dir: Darren Aronofsky

Darren Aronofsky's most confounding work to date, this one will severely stretch those synapses.

The plot:
Three storylines run in parallel, each seemingly featuring the same main players, though the story played out spans more than a thousand years of existence.
Story 1: In Medieval times, the Spanish are the dominant force in Europe. A knave is issued a quest by the princess he secretly loves: find the Tree of Life, as spoken of in Genesis, that Spain may conquer the world for, with the power of the tree's sap, no army could be stopped; wounds would be healed instantly, limbs would regenerate and Death itself would be conquered.
Story 2: Present day, and an experimental scientist is working with animals to discover the cure to a debilitating illness. He has a vested interest: his wife is suffering from the disease, and she doesn't have long to live.
Story 3: Not really a story, more a sequence of visuals. In the far future, the spiritual form of a man sits beneath the Tree of Life, positioned in a far off nebula, only just visible to the naked eye in the night sky. The nebula is encased by a bubble, allowing him to breath and, as the other two stories play out, so too is his existence affected.

Breathtakingly avant garde, this by turns baffles, bewilders and leaves you breathless. Aronofsky is not one for making simple movies - with the possible exception of The Wrestler, though even that was pretty intense - but here he ratchets things up another notch entirely to the point that, for the first hour at least, he sorely tests the patience.
But this man is an auteur, a genuine visionary, and that patience that began to wear thin is amply rewarded in the final thirty minutes, as jaw dropping spectacle after heart-stopping scenes of beauty follow one another relentlessly. Just as you think he can't do anything more mind-bending, he lays another one on you.
A genuine work of genius, even if flawed, everyone must watch this, just be prepared to doubt yourself for a little while along the way.
Aronofsky, I love you.

4 out of 5