Based on Dean Koontz's cracking 1983 novel, this is lent a certain level of credibility given that the author himself wrote the screenplay.
The Plot: Two sisters, Lisa and Jenny Pailey, head to Snowfield, a small town in Colorado, population roughly 500, to escape the trials and stresses of family life.
As they drive into town, the place seems alarmingly quiet, even for such an isolated community. Entering a building, they discover a corpse, but worse is to follow as the two women discover a series of grisly finds; severed hands, arm, legs and feet, as well as more bodies, the people apparently falling where they stood, with no sign of a struggle.
What could possibly kill an entire population so swiftly that no-one has time to react?
And what link Timothy Flyte, editor and some time lecturer in matters mysterious and unexplainable?
For those familiar with the flatworm theory, the answer may be self evident.
For others, you’ll have to watch to find the answers.
Whilst many horror book to movie conversions are pretty unsuccessful, as Mr. King has found out to his cost on more than one occasion, this is not the case here.
Koontz's book is a master class in tension and intrigue, and the movie is certainly heading in the same direction. With some decent scripting, and above average 'names' in terms of the actors featured (Ben Affleck, Peter O'Toole, Rose McGowan, Liev Schreiber) this was clearly meant to be Koontz's big break into mainstream cinema. That it didn't turn out that way had more to do with marketing than the poor quality of the movie itself.
An old fashioned horror movie in many ways, this showcases credible character interplay, a nice line in vicious, face-eating beasties and is infused with a sense of the macabre almost from the opening shot, so should satisfy most horror devotees out there.
Even the presence of the usually vapid Affleck and the perma-bland Liev Schrieber can't keep this one down.
Proper horror, done the old school way, I enjoyed this very much indeed.
4 out of 5
Tuesday, 27 July 2010
Monday, 26 July 2010
Inception (2010) Dir: Christopher Nolan
Inception is the best movie ever made.
Inception is the most intelligent movie ever made.
Inception is the most ambitious concept ever to be committed to celluloid.
I have read all of the above sentiments with regards Christopher Nolan's latest offering and, whilst it is a very, very good film, don't be fooled by the hype machine.
The plot:
Leonardo plays Cobb, a man haunted by a traumatic event in his life, an event that means he is never allowed to return home to see his children. Cobb is also an Extractor, a man with the ability, through training not supernature, to enter people's dreams to 'extract' information. He does this with the aid of an Architect, a person adept at sculpting dreamscapes that fool the sleeping victim into revealing the information, no matter the secrecy.
When Cobb is given the opportunity to do 'one last job' at first he resists, but when the carrot is dangled before him that on successful completion he will, at last, be able to return home, he agrees.
The job?
Inception.
Instead of stealing an idea, can he place one within the mind of another and fool them into thinking that they thought of the idea themselves, independently.
Clever, no?
And it is clever.
This is a clever movie.
This is a movie that is chock full of smarts, and no mistakin'.
But that does not make it quite as awesome as everyone else seems to be claiming for, along with the IQ, come flaws:
It's too long by about twenty minutes, with many scenes stretched to breaking point.
The Cobb 'haunted by his past' dynamic I could have done without, thanks all the same.
The ending was a bit predictable, with most of the revelations flagged up well in advance.
I'll balance that out with the plus points:
The physical special effects were a real breath of fresh air in these sterile days of CGI overkill.
The performances all round are superb.
The action sequences were deftly handled.
But it is certainly not a masterclass.
In fact, if you want the truth, I think this movie is actually indicative of just how far we have allowed our standards to fall, of just what we have allowed Hollywood to get away with for too many long years.
Movies should challenge us, movies should stretch us, as this one surely does, but the fact that it feels so rare, so strange is in itself a savage indictment of the movie industry as a whole.
Heh, I'm not slating Nolan here: he's done his job consistently brilliantly for the best part of a decade now, it's just a shame we have allowed the situation where others feel they don't have to follow suit.
So, before you bemoan the lack of other quality, intelligent big budget movies take a look at your DVD collection, or Netflix queue. If a single McG or Michael Bay movie is present, ask yourself this simple question:
Am I partially to blame?
4 out of 5
Inception is the most intelligent movie ever made.
Inception is the most ambitious concept ever to be committed to celluloid.
I have read all of the above sentiments with regards Christopher Nolan's latest offering and, whilst it is a very, very good film, don't be fooled by the hype machine.
The plot:
Leonardo plays Cobb, a man haunted by a traumatic event in his life, an event that means he is never allowed to return home to see his children. Cobb is also an Extractor, a man with the ability, through training not supernature, to enter people's dreams to 'extract' information. He does this with the aid of an Architect, a person adept at sculpting dreamscapes that fool the sleeping victim into revealing the information, no matter the secrecy.
When Cobb is given the opportunity to do 'one last job' at first he resists, but when the carrot is dangled before him that on successful completion he will, at last, be able to return home, he agrees.
The job?
Inception.
Instead of stealing an idea, can he place one within the mind of another and fool them into thinking that they thought of the idea themselves, independently.
Clever, no?
And it is clever.
This is a clever movie.
This is a movie that is chock full of smarts, and no mistakin'.
But that does not make it quite as awesome as everyone else seems to be claiming for, along with the IQ, come flaws:
It's too long by about twenty minutes, with many scenes stretched to breaking point.
The Cobb 'haunted by his past' dynamic I could have done without, thanks all the same.
The ending was a bit predictable, with most of the revelations flagged up well in advance.
I'll balance that out with the plus points:
The physical special effects were a real breath of fresh air in these sterile days of CGI overkill.
The performances all round are superb.
The action sequences were deftly handled.
But it is certainly not a masterclass.
In fact, if you want the truth, I think this movie is actually indicative of just how far we have allowed our standards to fall, of just what we have allowed Hollywood to get away with for too many long years.
Movies should challenge us, movies should stretch us, as this one surely does, but the fact that it feels so rare, so strange is in itself a savage indictment of the movie industry as a whole.
Heh, I'm not slating Nolan here: he's done his job consistently brilliantly for the best part of a decade now, it's just a shame we have allowed the situation where others feel they don't have to follow suit.
So, before you bemoan the lack of other quality, intelligent big budget movies take a look at your DVD collection, or Netflix queue. If a single McG or Michael Bay movie is present, ask yourself this simple question:
Am I partially to blame?
4 out of 5
Sunday, 25 July 2010
Cellular (2004) Dir: David R. Ellis
Larry 'The Stuff' 'It's Alive!' Cohen is not a man known for wasting a good idea so, here, he retreads ground similar to that covered in the short, sharp 2002 Colin Farrell thriller Phone Booth.
The plot: A primary school teacher, Jessica Martin (Kim Basinger) is kidnapped by a ruthless gang who believe her husband has something that they want, and they will do whatever it takes to get their hands on it. Trapped in her own attic, the wall mounted telephone smashed to smithereens, Jessica jiggles a few wires and touches a few cables together and gets lucky, managing to make a connection to a man called Ryan (Chris Evans) on his mobile.
At first, he doesn't believe her story but, when one of the gang members re-enters the attic and Ryan hears threats issued, he is convinced, kick starting a race against time.
Can Ryan reach Jessica's husband and son before Jayson Stayffum and his cronies get their hands on them.
High concept stuff, I'm sure you'll agree, with the mobile phone plot device an effective one, lending the movie a genuine sense of the frantic.
Of course, on occasion, things become somewhat implausible - Ryan's method of obtaining a charger, the fact that the police don't take him down within minutes of commandeering the Porsche, the fact that Ryan didn't just head straight to the nearest newspaper HQ the second he saw what the crooks were after - but these quibbles are minor, and kind of missing the point.
This is all about the adrenaline rush.
Have to say, ten minutes in I felt sure I was going to hate the movie, as Ryan's character was fleshed out on Santa Monica pier, his perfect physique and Jockish banter with his 'bestest buddy' enough to make you pray for the Megashark to emerge from beneath the waves and chow down on the insufferable prick, but give the film the credit it deserves, once the MacGuffin was in place, the energy carried it through to the end.
A good action thriller.
But no more than that.
4 out of 5
The plot: A primary school teacher, Jessica Martin (Kim Basinger) is kidnapped by a ruthless gang who believe her husband has something that they want, and they will do whatever it takes to get their hands on it. Trapped in her own attic, the wall mounted telephone smashed to smithereens, Jessica jiggles a few wires and touches a few cables together and gets lucky, managing to make a connection to a man called Ryan (Chris Evans) on his mobile.
At first, he doesn't believe her story but, when one of the gang members re-enters the attic and Ryan hears threats issued, he is convinced, kick starting a race against time.
Can Ryan reach Jessica's husband and son before Jayson Stayffum and his cronies get their hands on them.
High concept stuff, I'm sure you'll agree, with the mobile phone plot device an effective one, lending the movie a genuine sense of the frantic.
Of course, on occasion, things become somewhat implausible - Ryan's method of obtaining a charger, the fact that the police don't take him down within minutes of commandeering the Porsche, the fact that Ryan didn't just head straight to the nearest newspaper HQ the second he saw what the crooks were after - but these quibbles are minor, and kind of missing the point.
This is all about the adrenaline rush.
Have to say, ten minutes in I felt sure I was going to hate the movie, as Ryan's character was fleshed out on Santa Monica pier, his perfect physique and Jockish banter with his 'bestest buddy' enough to make you pray for the Megashark to emerge from beneath the waves and chow down on the insufferable prick, but give the film the credit it deserves, once the MacGuffin was in place, the energy carried it through to the end.
A good action thriller.
But no more than that.
4 out of 5
Saturday, 24 July 2010
Mega Shark vs Giant Octopus (2009) Dir: Jack Perez
There are some movie titles that just scream out at me '"Watch this!" despite the fact that I know, with absolute certainty, they will be awful.
There are certain movie conventions and genre's that just demand my attention and, for my shame, giant killer sharks is most certainly one of them. The context almost doesn't matter All I need to know about a film is that it will feature at least one enormous, mutant shark, though more is better, as with the very entertaining Shark Swarm, the movie with possibly my favourite DVD cover:
as well as a great tagline: Fear travels in packs.
So, with Mega Shark vs Giant Octopus the promise is that we will have not one, but two aquatic behemoths, presumably engaged in battle, Godzilla Vs. Mothra styleeeee.....
The plot: As a glacier suddenly recedes due to global warming, the titular monsters are released from their icy prison, where they have been encased since prehistoric times:
Megalodon, a hitherto extinct species of super shark that, according to the fiction of the movie, can leap as high as the clouds and ensnare a jumbo jet coming into land.
Giant Octopus, an eight tentacled brute that seems to attack anything that moves, but has a particular dislike for Megalodon's.
A team of scientists led by 80's pop starlet Debbie 'Electric Youth' Gibson (!) devise a plan to bring the beasts back together, in an ocean trench, where they will fight to their watery death.
Being an Asylum movie, several things are guaranteed:
The narrative will struggle to fill the running time, resulting in many torturously lengthy scenes that lead nowhere.
The special effects will be diabolical and repetitive.
The acting will be on a par with most 70's porn.
All of the above are present and correct.
But something is missing here. Some indefinable ingredient that elevates it above the insipid into kitsch, campy goodness.
As bizarre as it may seem with such a title, the movie is just not OTT enough. Despite the plane attack, despite the shark hanging off the fucking Golden Gate Bridge, despite the ambition far above what the budget could ever stretch to.
In fact, this movie committed the cardinal sin for a a B movie: It bored me.
Pretty disappointed with this one.
2 out of 5
There are certain movie conventions and genre's that just demand my attention and, for my shame, giant killer sharks is most certainly one of them. The context almost doesn't matter All I need to know about a film is that it will feature at least one enormous, mutant shark, though more is better, as with the very entertaining Shark Swarm, the movie with possibly my favourite DVD cover:
as well as a great tagline: Fear travels in packs.
So, with Mega Shark vs Giant Octopus the promise is that we will have not one, but two aquatic behemoths, presumably engaged in battle, Godzilla Vs. Mothra styleeeee.....
The plot: As a glacier suddenly recedes due to global warming, the titular monsters are released from their icy prison, where they have been encased since prehistoric times:
Megalodon, a hitherto extinct species of super shark that, according to the fiction of the movie, can leap as high as the clouds and ensnare a jumbo jet coming into land.
Giant Octopus, an eight tentacled brute that seems to attack anything that moves, but has a particular dislike for Megalodon's.
A team of scientists led by 80's pop starlet Debbie 'Electric Youth' Gibson (!) devise a plan to bring the beasts back together, in an ocean trench, where they will fight to their watery death.
Being an Asylum movie, several things are guaranteed:
The narrative will struggle to fill the running time, resulting in many torturously lengthy scenes that lead nowhere.
The special effects will be diabolical and repetitive.
The acting will be on a par with most 70's porn.
All of the above are present and correct.
But something is missing here. Some indefinable ingredient that elevates it above the insipid into kitsch, campy goodness.
As bizarre as it may seem with such a title, the movie is just not OTT enough. Despite the plane attack, despite the shark hanging off the fucking Golden Gate Bridge, despite the ambition far above what the budget could ever stretch to.
In fact, this movie committed the cardinal sin for a a B movie: It bored me.
Pretty disappointed with this one.
2 out of 5
The Host (2006) Dir: Joon-ho Bong
I liked this, but I so wanted to love it.
On a warm, pleasant day down by the Han River in South Korea's capital, Seoul, there are people aplenty. Students relaxing by the water, couples walking hand in hand, just enjoying each others company. One family run business takes advantage of its strategic location, selling chocolate bars, cold drinks and simple meals to the milling masses. The father who runs the place seems to do all of the graft, his lazy, layabout son constantly falling asleep behind the counter, giving youngsters the opportunity to steal their goods. After a customer complains that their squid does not have enough tentacles (!) the younger of the two goes to hand them a replacement when something strange is seen hanging beneath the bridge. All eyes are drawn when, suddenly, it drops from the bridge, plunging into the water beneath. As the crowd gathers, something is seen approaching the shore, a dark shape beneath the surface that most seem to believe is a dolphin, increasing the excitement. As it reaches the riverbank, it's no fucking dolphin , instead an enormous-toothed beast with powerful legs for running and a gaping jaw that proceeds to go on the rampage, snapping at anything that moves.
Our young hero bravely tries to help those running but he too must flee and is horrified when he spies the monstrosity approaching his own daughter. As he tries to lure the thing away it ignores him, snatching her up in its mouth before plunging back into the river and away. Presumed dead, the father receives a call from his daughter (I apologise for the lack of identification but I'm no good with Korean names. Call me a daft old racist if you must) who informs him that she is in a sewer somewhere, though in a pit from which there is no escape.
So begins the hunt to find her before the creature devours her once and for all.
It's nonsense.
Of course it is, but well realised and fairly shocking nonsense at that.
The inspiration behind Cloverfield, apparently, the comparisons are limited once you get past the 'behemoth emerges from the water' angle as, culturally, the two movies are poles apart. Here, we see much more of the monster and, crucially, we get to know the characters involved much more intimately.
Being an Asian movie, there are issues for a Western viewer, particularly when it comes to the moments of humour - the scene where the family are grieving in an OTT manner is particularly bizarre - as, for the most part, humour is confined to one part of the world for a reason: No-one else finds it funny.
The monster itself is very well realised, albeit obviously CGI'd though, oddly, here it is not an issue, despite my constant gripings about the over-use of computer effects these days.
A schizophrenic movie, then, with moments to drop the jaw and moments to leave you scratching your head wondering just what the hell is going on, but never less than entertaining and, at times, spellbinding.
Check it out (subtitled preferably, not dubbed, you unspeakable droogs).
4 out of 5
On a warm, pleasant day down by the Han River in South Korea's capital, Seoul, there are people aplenty. Students relaxing by the water, couples walking hand in hand, just enjoying each others company. One family run business takes advantage of its strategic location, selling chocolate bars, cold drinks and simple meals to the milling masses. The father who runs the place seems to do all of the graft, his lazy, layabout son constantly falling asleep behind the counter, giving youngsters the opportunity to steal their goods. After a customer complains that their squid does not have enough tentacles (!) the younger of the two goes to hand them a replacement when something strange is seen hanging beneath the bridge. All eyes are drawn when, suddenly, it drops from the bridge, plunging into the water beneath. As the crowd gathers, something is seen approaching the shore, a dark shape beneath the surface that most seem to believe is a dolphin, increasing the excitement. As it reaches the riverbank, it's no fucking dolphin , instead an enormous-toothed beast with powerful legs for running and a gaping jaw that proceeds to go on the rampage, snapping at anything that moves.
Our young hero bravely tries to help those running but he too must flee and is horrified when he spies the monstrosity approaching his own daughter. As he tries to lure the thing away it ignores him, snatching her up in its mouth before plunging back into the river and away. Presumed dead, the father receives a call from his daughter (I apologise for the lack of identification but I'm no good with Korean names. Call me a daft old racist if you must) who informs him that she is in a sewer somewhere, though in a pit from which there is no escape.
So begins the hunt to find her before the creature devours her once and for all.
It's nonsense.
Of course it is, but well realised and fairly shocking nonsense at that.
The inspiration behind Cloverfield, apparently, the comparisons are limited once you get past the 'behemoth emerges from the water' angle as, culturally, the two movies are poles apart. Here, we see much more of the monster and, crucially, we get to know the characters involved much more intimately.
Being an Asian movie, there are issues for a Western viewer, particularly when it comes to the moments of humour - the scene where the family are grieving in an OTT manner is particularly bizarre - as, for the most part, humour is confined to one part of the world for a reason: No-one else finds it funny.
The monster itself is very well realised, albeit obviously CGI'd though, oddly, here it is not an issue, despite my constant gripings about the over-use of computer effects these days.
A schizophrenic movie, then, with moments to drop the jaw and moments to leave you scratching your head wondering just what the hell is going on, but never less than entertaining and, at times, spellbinding.
Check it out (subtitled preferably, not dubbed, you unspeakable droogs).
4 out of 5
New Nightmare (1994) Dir: We Craven
The 7th in the Nightmare series was released to fairly mixed reviews, some hailing it a post-modern horror classic, others incapable of seeing through their genre jaded prejudices and declaring it derivative and wholly unoriginal.
New Nightmare is many things, but unoriginal it ain't.
The plot: Heather Langenkamp plays herself, a moderately successful actress, best known for playing the part of Nancy in parts 1 & 3 of the series.
Robert Englund is also a chief protaganmist, again playing himself, the man behind the Freddy mask.
With Wes Craven suddenly struck by a new idea for a Nightmare movie, he has taken to writing again, and is eager that both Heather and Robert are a part of the movie.
When strange events begin to occur, including some pretty grisly killings, Heather begins to become convinced that there is more to what is happening in Craven's imagination than simply penning a new movie, begins to believe, in fact, that Freddy is trying to break through from the world of fiction into the real world, to hunt down and kill all those involved in the original movie way back in 1984.
See, I told you it was pretty original.
As well as an elevation in storytelling craft, the direction is first rate as are the performances (though Langenkamp still can't act for shit).
Craven, in revisiting his most famous horror creation, manages to demonstrate that Freddy, far from the comic book, wise-cracking anti-hero that he became in the later Nightmare movies is in fact a frightening, dread-inspiring creature more than capable of putting the willies up an audience.
Clever, unpredictable and, at times, pretty intense, this is a successful reinvention.
4 out of 5
New Nightmare is many things, but unoriginal it ain't.
The plot: Heather Langenkamp plays herself, a moderately successful actress, best known for playing the part of Nancy in parts 1 & 3 of the series.
Robert Englund is also a chief protaganmist, again playing himself, the man behind the Freddy mask.
With Wes Craven suddenly struck by a new idea for a Nightmare movie, he has taken to writing again, and is eager that both Heather and Robert are a part of the movie.
When strange events begin to occur, including some pretty grisly killings, Heather begins to become convinced that there is more to what is happening in Craven's imagination than simply penning a new movie, begins to believe, in fact, that Freddy is trying to break through from the world of fiction into the real world, to hunt down and kill all those involved in the original movie way back in 1984.
See, I told you it was pretty original.
As well as an elevation in storytelling craft, the direction is first rate as are the performances (though Langenkamp still can't act for shit).
Craven, in revisiting his most famous horror creation, manages to demonstrate that Freddy, far from the comic book, wise-cracking anti-hero that he became in the later Nightmare movies is in fact a frightening, dread-inspiring creature more than capable of putting the willies up an audience.
Clever, unpredictable and, at times, pretty intense, this is a successful reinvention.
4 out of 5
Sweeney! (1977) Dir: David Wickes
Cult British police show classic The Sweeney spawned two spin off movies, the first of which – Sweeney! – by far the better of the pair.
The plot: A politician, known for an occasional dalliance with ladies of vice, is threatened with ruination when a prostitute he has been 'visiting' is found dead in his hotel suite. Rather than face up to his misdemeanours, he instead chooses to hide his involvement. All seems well, until a friend of the dead woman asks hard smoking, hard drinking, hard punching Detective Regan to investigate and, when he starts asking the right questions to the wrong people, a plan is set in motion to discredit him. Suspended from The Flying Squad on a drink driving charge that was only partially erroneous – he had been drinking though, to ensure a conviction, he was pulled over by a couple of crooked police sorts, kidnapped and forced to swallow an entire bottle of spirits – Regan must go it alone to uncover the truth, with even his ever faithful partner Carter reluctant to get involved.
Gritty is a word often batted about when The Sweeney is mentioned and, in this case, it is absolutely applicable.
Locations are chosen for their levels of dereliction and the dialogue is stripped to the bone, with barely a sentence passing by without an expletive or three offered, the conversations ribald and profane, though never without good reason. Inevitably, some of the language would be deemed inappropriate in this day and age, specifically in terms of attitudes towards race and women but, some allowance must be made given the context.
I’m not saying it’s OK, I’m just saying it’s understandable given the age of the movie and the type of characters portrayed.
Look, I said it’s not OK.
Heh!
What the hell are you doing? Why are you handcuffing me? Oh Christ, it’s the moral acceptability police come to take me away....and they're wearing Kevlar vests with the word OUTRAGED writ large across their chests.
With lashings of violence, though sporadic, and a crackling atmosphere, this is one TV to movie spin off that managed to make the transition without losing too much credibility.
Good stuff.
4 out of 5
The plot: A politician, known for an occasional dalliance with ladies of vice, is threatened with ruination when a prostitute he has been 'visiting' is found dead in his hotel suite. Rather than face up to his misdemeanours, he instead chooses to hide his involvement. All seems well, until a friend of the dead woman asks hard smoking, hard drinking, hard punching Detective Regan to investigate and, when he starts asking the right questions to the wrong people, a plan is set in motion to discredit him. Suspended from The Flying Squad on a drink driving charge that was only partially erroneous – he had been drinking though, to ensure a conviction, he was pulled over by a couple of crooked police sorts, kidnapped and forced to swallow an entire bottle of spirits – Regan must go it alone to uncover the truth, with even his ever faithful partner Carter reluctant to get involved.
Gritty is a word often batted about when The Sweeney is mentioned and, in this case, it is absolutely applicable.
Locations are chosen for their levels of dereliction and the dialogue is stripped to the bone, with barely a sentence passing by without an expletive or three offered, the conversations ribald and profane, though never without good reason. Inevitably, some of the language would be deemed inappropriate in this day and age, specifically in terms of attitudes towards race and women but, some allowance must be made given the context.
I’m not saying it’s OK, I’m just saying it’s understandable given the age of the movie and the type of characters portrayed.
Look, I said it’s not OK.
Heh!
What the hell are you doing? Why are you handcuffing me? Oh Christ, it’s the moral acceptability police come to take me away....and they're wearing Kevlar vests with the word OUTRAGED writ large across their chests.
With lashings of violence, though sporadic, and a crackling atmosphere, this is one TV to movie spin off that managed to make the transition without losing too much credibility.
Good stuff.
4 out of 5
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)