Bob's Review: V/H/S (2012)

Genre/Tags - Horror, pov, “found footage,” anthology

The Basics 
A group of low lives are hired to break into an old man’s house and steal a rare video tape from his collection. When they enter the house, they find the old man dead, his body seated in front of a multi screen television display. With each video tape that is played by the thieves, we are shown a new and different event of horror and death.

My Recommendation
I would recommend this one for any and all fans of good horror. The R rating is for adult language, graphic violence, nudity, strong sexuality, and some drug use.

My Two Cents
I’ll start by saying that film “trends” kind of annoy me at times. For example, two of the biggest box office releases of 2001 were Harry Potter 1 and Fellowship of the Ring. The decade that followed saw Hollywood suddenly scramble to the bookstore for more block buster hits, and what we got was a slew of mediocre to poor quality movies based on books like Peter Pan, A Series of Unfortunate Events, Narnia, and led to the ultimate cultural disaster of my lifetime, Twilight.
 Sadly, the world of horror is not immune to this cycle of trends. Sometimes slashers are the “in” thing, sometimes vampires, then zombies, or ghosts, or demon possession, but for some reason, werewolves have yet to become popular. The rising trend now is the pov horror movie which attempt to put the viewer right in the “heart of the fear” using hand held cameras to film the sequence of events through the characters’ points of view. The most widely known of these films are The Blair Witch Project and the Paranormal Activity series.
 Out of all the pov horror films I’ve seen (not all of them, but a good number) V/H/S is the one that I would recommend the highest. For one thing, most, if not all, pov movies I’ve seen are slow to build, meaning you have to sit through a half hour of boring before the frightmare begins. The first shot of this movie is footage of the thieves harassing an unsuspecting bystander. So, instead of watching a half an hour of staged home movies, the film jumps right into it.
 Also, this is the only pov horror film I have seen with any level of violence or gore, both of which this movie contains. I’m not saying these things are necessary for good horror, but with the number of pov films out there, one would think that the ratio of violent to non-violent selections would be somewhat more even. And some of the segments are more violent than the others, so there are parts of the film that will satisfy those that prefer visceral terror over carnage.
 One “trick” that is used in pov horror, particularly the Paranormal Activity movies, is what I call the ambient scare. This is where loud and sudden sounds come through the surround system giving the illusion that the sound came from behind the viewer. I think this is very cool, but it is something that home viewers will miss out on if they do not have a sound system with 5.1 digital surround. And even then, this is not going to give you quite the same effect as it does in the theater, unless you turn your system way loud which tends to upset the neighbors. This film doesn’t rely on this effect, especially since the povs are on video tape rather than digital means, which gives the movie at least a little bit of believability.
 The thing that makes the movie stand out in my mind is the fact that it is an anthology style movie. It’s interesting to see the work of different writers and directors side by side in the same movie and see what they do with the time slot they are given to work with. Also being a fan of different styles of horror, I enjoyed seeing multiple styles in one film.
 Sure to satisfy any horror fan out there, this is a prime example of what can be done in the pov style.
 Ratings 
Story: Very Good. The foreground story was a bit generic, but all the footage stories were well written and executed.
Cast Performance: Good. Pov tend to work better with a cast of unknowns.
Violence/Gore: Heavy. Some of the segments are bloodier than others.
Nudity: Moderate/heavy. The total screen time with nudity is low, but there is a full frontal shot. Ambiance/music: Good. About what one would expect watching pov.
Overall Rating: 4.5/5

Awesome movie quotes: The Karate Kid (1984)

"We do not train to be merciful here. Mercy is for the weak. Here, in the streets, in competition: A man confronts you, he is the enemy. An enemy deserves no mercy."

Quick Look: Grave Encounters 2 (2012)

Grave Encounters 2 is a direct sequel to the 2011 film Grave Encounters.  Like the original, it is presented as a found-footage/ point of view (POV) style horror movie.  It was written by the original creators, the Vicious Brothers (Collin Minihan and Stuart Ortiz) and directed by John Poliquin.  It is not rated (NR), but I would consider like an 'R' for language, violence, intense supernatural moments, and brief nudity.

Albert Einstein once described insanity as "doing the same thing over and over again, expecting a different result".  While I would not call GE2 an exact duplicate of the first installment, I do not feel there was a large enough separation to take this new story in a direction to truly make it its own film.  But, I will say that if you want to consider it an 'extension' of the first GE, then GE2 could seem just a hair better than a sad-sack attempt to get a money making sequel produced and out on the market.

**spoiler alert** This movie opens with a bunch of hack video-bloggers giving their reviews of Grave Encounters, one of which is Alex (Richard Harmon), a film student.  Alex and his roommate Trevor (Dylan Playfair) come off as the typical hard partying sort, who appear to live their lives through shooting video clips via camera, cell phones, or recording video logs.  The audience sees Alex is involved in filming a couple sequences for some horror films he is directing for film school, although he noticeably detached from the action on the sets.
Alex begins receiving emails suggesting that Grave Encounters was, in fact, "real" and he quickly becomes obsessed with the idea of making a film about what really happened.  After getting in contact with Sean Rogerson's mom (Sean played Lance in the first film) and speaking with the Producer of the original movie, Jerry Hartfield, Alex, and 4 of his friends (Trevor, another cameraman, and 2 girls), proceed to up to the abandoned psychiatric hospital we saw in Grave Enoucnters.
The horrors that consumed the prior film crew are lying in wait for this new group of victims.  Interestingly, Sean Rogerson is found to be still alive, but appears to be in a semi-psychotic state from the supernatural forces that lobotomized him, and that still control the hospital.  When all is said done, Alex is the sole survivor with Grave Encounters 2 to his "credit".

What went right:
- There was hardly any fluff and there was no "waiting around" like the prior film, to build any tension.  Literally every moment seemed to be moving along either from action, or transition into action.
- The shots of the ghosts held a little longer in duration, which I liked.  There was also introduction of a female child ghost from a children's ward that was not shown in the prior film.  It added a little bit of creepiness.
- This film actually built on the "black magic" element that I had criticized from the prior film.  Sean explains to Alex that Dr. Friedkin had opened a link or bridge between the real world and the supernatural world, which is why the spirits are roaming free and the hospital appears to be an entity, or a character, itself.  I actually consider this element to be the most redeeming of the entire movie.
- The special effects overall were decent, but obviously nothing felt "new" as far as the asylum went, just revisited.
- There were a few good "jump" moments, were the action and scenes did create some minor scares.


What was not-so-great:
- Normally the jump cuts with the POV style films doesn't bother me, because they make the overall feel of the film appear more "authentic", if you will.  But there were so many sequences in GE2, it felt like every few seconds was another jump cut, and it made the flow of this movie feel schizophrenic.
- Jennifer Parker (Leanne Lapp) was a good character and was developed as well as any of the characters in the film, but once inside the hospital she seemed to be whining and whimpering, constantly.  Annoyingly so.  I do not know if the actor was given the room to improvise this, or if the director had her in this state of distress - but in my opinion, it hurt the on screen product.
- Alex was not that likable as a lead character.  I felt no attachment to him, so despite him driving the plot, I was not really concerned whether he lived or died.  By contrast, I felt that Sean actually carried the plot more than Alex once it was discovered he was still alive.
- I get the idea that Sean had lost his mind; he had been stuck in this supernatural labyrinth for what was equated to nine years.  But he kills Trevor on supposed orders from the "house", but then he is later sucked into a black hole that the house "creates" as Sean attempts to escape.  Using Sean versus the "haunted house" in this manner seemed shaky at best.  I could not tell if we were supposed to believe Sean was a victim of the supernatural forces, or if he was just crazy.  The direction and on-screen product kind of came off like both elements were valid, but the uncertainty takes my liking of GE2 down a few notches.

Recommendation: If you watched Grave Encounters, then you should probably give this once over, since it expands the original story.  As a standalone, however, this film would make little to no sense.
There are enough good elements (good looking ghost figures, decent moving story) to outweigh the cliche sequel moments.  I would not be surprised if a Grave Encounters 3 pops up in the future.

Awesome movie quotes: Gone in 60 Seconds (2000)

".. so check out my new move. I call it "the stranger". What I do is, I sit on my hand for like 15-20 minutes, until it goes numb. No feeling at all. And then, I rub one out."

Goofy Movie Quotes: Encino Man (1992)

"No weezin' the juice..."

R.I.P. Roger Ebert

Whether you liked his opinions or not, at least after reading a review of his, or listening to him review a movie, you knew what he thought about it.
That fact alone is why I chose to write this blog in the first place; because too many times I would read a random movie review (not one of his) and think to myself  "Ok, so what the hell did I just read, and I do I want to actually want to watch this movie?"  With Ebert (and Siskel, too), I could tell - even if I totally disagreed with his review - whether or not I would want to see said movie, and that, I respected very much.  I always attempt to bring that one element to my reviews - should you go see this film.

There are people who are gifted writers, and Ebert's weaving of words was excellent.  I will miss his blogs and articles, as well as some of his political commentary.
 

Quick Look: Lucas (1986)

People in the Movie: Corey Haim (The Lost Boys, License to Drive), Charlie Sheen (Major League, Hot Shots), Kerri Green (The Goonies), Winona Ryder (Edward Scissorhands, Heathers), Courtney Thorne-Smith (TV's Melrose Place, TV's Ally McBeal), Jeremy Piven (PCU, TV's Entourage)
Director: David Seltzer
Pigeonhole: High School Drama / Coming of Age / Teen Romance

The Plot: **spoiler alert** Lucas (Haim) is a nerdy 14 year old tweener who meets Maggie (Green) when she moves into the neighborhood, in the summer.  Maggie is at least a year or two older than Lucas, but despite this age separation, they become fast friends and hang out constantly until school starts.  The audience sees that Lucas' feelings for Maggie are a little deeper than friendship, although Maggie seems oblivious.
At school Lucas seems to be on the receiving end of taunts and bullying, mostly at the hands of two football players named Bruno and Spike (Piven), despite his friendship with the football team's quarterback, Cappie (Sheen).  Maggie quickly develops a crush on Cappie and joins the cheerleading squad to be closer to him, much to the chagrin of Cappie's girlfriend Alise (Thorne-Smith).  Lucas gets upset that Maggie is no longer spending lots of time with him and becomes jealous of her growing attraction to Cappie.  Lucas later embarrasses himself further by assuming Maggie will "automatically" go with him to an upcoming school dance - only for us to later witness Maggie and Cappie kiss that same night while Lucas looks on.  In the periphery of this heartbreaking scene we see one of Lucas' friends named Rina (Ryder) giving Lucas advice, and that she has feeling for Lucas - but Lucas is oblivious to this, much as Maggie is oblivious to his feelings.
In a final desperate attempt to win Maggie's affections, Lucas suits up to play football and heads out onto the field in the middle of a game, only to get a head injury, mainly because the equipment was too big for him.  At the conclusion on the film, Lucas and Maggie agree to reconcile their friendship, and Lucas earns the respect of his previous tormentors. 
My Thoughts: Lucas is an oft-overlooked 80's film that not only had a sizable cast of future stars, but may be one of Corey Haim's best dramatic performances.  It is very much a feel good movie, but where Lucas breaks down for me was the complete lack of comic moments that usually are found in the high school romantic films.  It seems that Lucas is meant to be the lovable loser, and that his station is created by his own foolish choices - albeit from a first "crush".  I think Haim did an outstanding job in the lead role and was very believable, especially in his moments of letdown.  Another strange reveal for me was after Lucas was injured at the football game (and in the hospital at this point), Rina tells Maggie and Cappie that Lucas lived in the trailer park and that his dad was basically "not around", likely due to alcoholism.  I am not sure if this was meant to have us, the audience, feel more sympathy for Lucas, or if it was meant to highlight the fact that Lucas' supposed friends really were not, in fact, his friends.  Either way, this element felt a little melancholy to me, and really brought the mood down a notch. 
I am glad the movie was able to come full circle, but had this film be able to incorporate a few more light or comic moments, it could have easily joined Sixteen Candles or Just One of the Guys as an excellent 80's high school movie.

Extras:
- The movie was originally going to be produced as an 'R' rated film.  I cannot figure out where the 'R' rating would have come from, other than language, because none of the subject matter really lends itself to an 'R' rating.

Another Karate Kid? Say it ain't so ...

Because we loved Ralph Macchio, Hilary Swank, and Jaden Smith learning to stand up for themselves so much - another Karate Kid-like sequel is coming.

Here's what I learned:
A bullied 8th grade kid discovers that a creepy old man living in the neighborhood is actually an ex-special forces, ninja trained warrior.  We see the man and child becoming uncomfortably close, while in training, and that there seems to be no parental figure in the child's life to prevent this.
Now ready to stand up to the bullies, the child unleashes a fury of stealth attacks leaving a trail of 5 dead bodies.  The victim now becomes the attacker and is the new power broker at school.
With no evidence to tie the child to the crimes, the police are left to wonder...

The old man smiles.





April Fools Day - this is entirely ficticious.

A new horror/ POV movie coming soon, Take 2

The internet is abuzz about the new film called 'Take 2'.
Like many of the recent horror / POV/ found footage style films that have recently flooded the genre, this film tries to take a slightly new approach:
A group of college film students with handheld cameras is secretly following a group of film interns who are researching and filming a supposed haunting on an old abandoned reality TV location.
Finding nothing, the interns decide to smoke some of the local herbs and turn into zombies.  They find and eat the film students (who thought it was all a joke), then eat themselves.

The footage is found a year later.




April Fool's Day - this is completely ficticious

Go back and check out those childhood and teen favorites...

I have noticed that favorite movies from my childhood, and even my early teen years look and seem very different to me now.  I would not say my taste in movies has changed, but that elements I may have looked for or ignored in the past are now blindingly obvious or absent, causing me to have a change of heart about my approval of said film.

If it has been over 5 years since you watched a "favorite movie" of yours from years past - watch it again now and see what you think.
Is it still as scary/ funny/ emotional/ exciting/ deep/ or entertaining as when you first watched it?
You may be surprised.


 

Future Release: The New Friday the 13th?

I just received word of the new plot for an upcoming Friday the 13th installment:
Concerned about Jason's murderous tendencies, a group of friends decides to hold an intervention at Crystal Lake, convincing Jason to "lay down the machete".  At first Jason agrees realizing the error of his ways for the past 30+ years of murders, but when later asked to consider "taking off the hockey mask", Jason becomes incensed, kills the group of hippies and then their families.




April Fools Day - this is entirely fictitious.

Quick Look: G.I. Joe: Retaliation (2013)

This is the followup to 2009's GI Joe: The Rise of Cobra.  I had a chance to see this movie in 3D on opening night - a rare feat indeed - and I was not disappointed.  'PG-13' rating is for stylized violence involving gunfire and explosions.
The plot is overly simplistic; Cobra (the evil terrorist organization), hatches a plan to destroy the GI Joe's then attempts to take over the world.  Bullets fly and explosions light up the screen.  The characters on both sides are cartoonish in their portrayals, with the Cobra Commander being my personal favorite because of his voice.  The special effects and visuals of the different locations shown around the world were excellent.  The stunt work and choreography were also very entertaining - possibly made better by the 3D.  My favorite stunt scene is the oft-advertised fight on the side of a mountain involving Snake Eyes (Ray Park).  Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson is the lead actor as Roadblock, and Bruce Willis shows up about 2/3 of the way through, but there was nothing outstanding about their portrayals or dialouge.  Ray Park and Byung-hun Lee (who portrays Storm Shadow) were the most noticeable actors for their martial-artistry and stunts.
**spoiler**
The lovable character Duke (Channing Tatum), dies.
Despite the odds, Roadblock, Flint, Lady Jaye, and Snake Eyes foil Cobra's plans and save the world.

Recommendation: This looks and feels like a big budget summer movie, so the release in March was a bit of surprise.  A bit of reading revealed that this movie was to release last summer, however, it was held to convert to 3D - which as I noted did work well.
As a purely adolescent action/thriller based on the toys/comic book/ cartoon GI Joe: Retaliation delivers.  

Quick Look: Commando (1985)

People in the Movie: Arnold Schwarzenegger, Alyssa Milano, Rae Dawn Chong
Director: Mark Lester
Pigeonhole: Action / Thriller

Commando is light on plot and script, but it what it lacks in those areas, it completely compensates for in gunfire and explosions.  Schwarzenegger plays John Matrix, a retired special forces operative, who is raising his daughter Jenny (Milano) as a single parent.  A crazy South American warlord named Arius (Dan Hedaya) tries to blackmail Matrix into helping him to assassinate the current ruler of a fictional country called Val Verde, by killing all of Matrix's former comrades and kidnapping his daughter - all so Arius can take over.
Matrix decides to instead kill his escort (sent by Arius), and then he "enlists" the help of stewardess/ pilot-in-training named Cindy (Chong) to garner a cache of weapons and fly to Arius' staging area near Val Verde to kill everyone.  Literally.  Oh, and to rescue his child.

The 80's actions genre was really led by Schwarzenegger, Stallone, and Willis.  Commando, while not the crown jewel of Arnold's action days, is still a fun hour and half ride that requires no thinking; there are no double crosses to reconcile; and there is no silly attempt to try to force in a love story.  The audience clearly knows who the bad guys are, who the good guy is, and frankly that can be a breath of fresh air.  Commando moves along at a good pace - yes there is a little suspension of disbelief at how Matrix gets the clues to save his daughter - but it does not get bogged down with any fluff.  Arnold does spout off some sarcastic remarks, but still nothing close to Willis' Die Hard movies.
Anyone with a Y chromosome will enjoy the hail of bullets and destruction caused by rocket launchers being used (similar to a Stallone film out earlier in 1985).  An entire mercenary army cannot stop Arnold on the way to saving to his daughter.  And speaking of Alyssa Milano (who was just a year into her role on Who's the Boss) did a good job to be the scared teenager without being a whiny brat, which I really appreciated.
Rae Dawn Chong does a serviceable job as Cindy, the reluctant helper, although at times it was tough to tell if she was the comic relief or some victim of circumstances.
Bill Duke (who later joins Arnold in the movie Predator) is probably the "best" actor of the bad guys.  He comes off as very reserved, but when time for action he is ready to fight.  Plus he has very distinct voice which is perfect for action movies.

Recommendation: See this film for video-game-esque slaughter of bad guys who were ignorant enough to kidnap an ex-special forces colonel's daughter.  Enjoy Arnold's dispensing of said villains with impunity. Commando, beginning to end, stays serious enough to not degenerate into lame one-liner spewing, or attempting to wedge in a sad-sack romance.  **I could not detect any difference in the unrated cut from the theatrical release.
'R' rating is for violence, language and brief nudity.

Bob's Review: The Human Centipede: First Sequence (2009)

Principal cast: Dieter Laser, Ashley C. Williams, Ashlynn Yennie, Akihiro KitaMura
Director: Tom Six
Genre tags: Horror, Thriller

The Basics 
The film starts like a multitude of horror films. Two American girls touring Europe are driving through the woods, this time in Germany, and blow a flat tire right before a heavy rain storm. Instead of staying with their car, then run through the forest trying to find shelter or a phone and come to the home of Dr. Heiter, a frightening looking German surgeon. The doctor drugs the two girls and takes them down to his basement laboratory where he also brings a Japanese tourist. This is where he unveils his plan to unite the three individuals into one being by surgically attaching one person’s mouth to another person’s anus, and the third person to the anus of the person in the middle, creating a human centipede. The operation is a success and the doctor has a new pet to play with.

My Recommendation
Fans of indie horror and/or “medical” based psychological thrillers, if there is such a thing yet, might enjoy this one. The film is rated R for violence, disturbing images, nudity, and adult language. 

My Two Cents 
*Spoiler Alert* This movie has a cult following primarily because of the “weirdness” of the idea, namely sewing people together ass-to-mouth and adjusting their knees so they cannot bend. Tom Six has also stated that he consulted with surgeons prior to filming who confirmed that the human centipede designed is possible, which I will admit is what brought me to the theater of Netflix to view the film. But does it live up to the hype, as they say?
For the most part, I did enjoy this movie. First, the idea of creating a three person centipede is a unique, if not strange, concept. This movie also seeks to unnerve the audience on the psychological level instead of relying on blood and gore, which it could have very easily done given the subject matter. Dieter Laser’s performance as the mad doctor is grade A; unnerving, and just downright creepy. That is not to knock the performances of the other actors, who were all admirable in their roles, but Laser was nothing short of astonishing.
As far as the physical aspects of the movie are concerned, I can say that what was presented was disturbing to a point. Even though most of the posterior was covered with gauze, they still showed the flaps of skin from the front person’s buttocks sewn to the face of the person behind, which I will admit sent a shiver down my spine. But, even considering the focus on psychological vs. gore scare factor, there was still a surprising lack of blood. I think it is common knowledge that surgery scars do seep on occasion, and you would think they would bleed especially when the centipede is walking around and the skin flaps are pulling away from the behind faces. I know there was a limited budget on this film, but fake blood is cheap to make.
As far as the medical aspect of this film is concerned, the other problem I had was the fact that the doctor’s plan called for the back two parts of the centipede to be fed on the feces of the person in front. The doctor in the movie is a highly credited surgeon who would have know that a person cannot survive on human waste alone. They will either starve to death, or die from one of the many sicknesses that can be cause by fecal consumption, and there was nothing said about nutrients or antibiotics being given through iv, or anything like that. And, it IS clear that the mad doctor wants his creation to survive as long as possible, so these things would have been nice to see. But, given the time span of the movie (at least the implied time span) the events of the movie aren’t beyond the scope of belief, I guess.
Once you get past the weird idea and the scary doctor, who we can assume is an ex-Nazi, there’s not a whole lot more to this movie. Once the human centipede is created, the only real human presence in the Japanese front person who expresses extreme anger to his situation, which I liked. But from that point, the two female leads are forced to the background (no pun intended.) They show no force of will or any sign of humanity other than whimpering and slight eye movement. I would have like to see more of a reaction from them on the situation, or an attempt to communicate outside of the scene where they try to escape.
This is a movie that I enjoyed, but understand the reasons why many people didn’t. It is a unique film, and I like the focus on psychological terror, but a little more blood for clinical detail and some more character involvement would have added that certain something. I still recommend this film, even to say that you saw that one movie people have been talking about (or did a few years ago.)

Rating 

Story: Interesting. Good build on a fascinating idea.

Cast Performance: Excellent. Laser is outstanding as the mad doctor and cast of the “centipede” deserve special commendations, which is something that sadly cannot be said of many horror films these days. 

Violence/Gore: Moderate. The images are disturbing, but not very bloody.

Nudity: Moderate. The two females are uncovered from the waist up, but all things considered, no real focus is given to their form.

Ambiance/music: good. The doctor’s home is made to be sterile and in order on that certain creepy level. 

Overall rating: 3.75/5.0

Review: Angel Heart (1987)

People in the Movie: Mickey Rourke (9 1/2 Weeks, Sin City), Robert De Niro (Heat, Godfather II), Lisa Bonet (TV's The Cosby Show)
Director: Alan Parker (Pink Floyd: The Wall, The Life of David Gale)
Pigeonhole: Mystery / Suspense / Detective / Film Noir (or Neo Noir)

Briefly: Set in 1955, a down-on-his-luck detective named Harry Angel (Rourke) is hired by a suave looking gentleman named Louis Cyphre (De Niro) to locate a singer named Johnny Favorite.  It seems that Johnny owes Cyphre a debt, but Harry is not told more about it at this point.  The search begins in New York and soon proceeds down to New Orleans, where it seems Favorite was mixed up with a very eclectic collection of individuals, including voodoo practitioners.  At every turn Angel's leads turn up dead soon after speaking to him, with Harry thinking that he must be close to locating his target.  And then he finds out the truth.  The movie comes full circle and Johnny is located, much to the horror of Harry Angel.

More:  Easily one of the most underrated movies of the 1980's, Angel Heart is a very stylish looking film that brings some elements of film noir (a cynical detective, femme fatale, sexual elements, scenes shot in the shadows, for example) to the table.  The scenes in New York looked tough, cold, and dirty, while the scenes in New Orleans looked hot, sweaty, and tense.  Parker really deserves superior marks for the scenery, backgrounds, sets, costumes (including the actors appearances in general), and locations - plus being a period piece made it that much tougher to maintain the look and feel of 1955, as well.  Rourke carried the action, the dialouge (except maybe the ones with De Niro), held the scenes, and really shined as Harry Angel.
I think a previous "bad rap" this film may have garnered upon its release was because of Lisa Bonet appearing nude in different scenes, which allegedly got her ostracized from the very popular Cosby Show (she went onto the spin-off show 'A Different World' before finally returning).  What is most ironic, in my opinion, is that Lisa Bonet was probably the weakest actor in the entire film.  I feel that she brought very little to the screen, and that negative publicity of the "Cosby kid gone bad" hurt an otherwise great movie.
**spoiler alert**
After Harry's first meeting with Louis Cypher, he goes to a psychiatric hospital where Johnny was last known to have been.  Harry learns that a Dr. Fowler had accepted a 25,000.00 dollar bribe back in 1943 from two of Johnny's friends to maintain a record that Johnny was still at the hospital, while the friends removed Johnny that night.  Harry also learns that Johnny's face was heavily bandaged from his wounds received in World War II (part of the reason for his hospitalization), so Dr. Fowler did not even recollect what Johnny looked like.  Harry leaves Dr. Fowler at the doctor's house, locked in his own bedroom, promising to return with more questions, while Harry goes to a diner to eat.  Upon his return, Harry discovers Dr. Fowler has shot himself in the head.  Harry cleans up after himself, to remove evidence of his having been in the house, and returns to New York to let Louis know the information he got from Fowler and that he wants off the case, because he does not want to be mixed up in a murder investigation.  Cyphre offers Harry another 5000.00 to stay on the case, which Harry reluctantly accepts. 
Harry contacts a girlfriend/lover of his who works at a newspaper to gather any known information about Johnny Favorite.  He learns that before the war, Johnny was engaged to a wealthy southerner named Margaret Krusemark, but  Harry also discovers that Favorite had a lover named Evangeline Proudfoot - so Harry heads to New Orleans to continue his pursuit.  Margaret informs Harry that Johnny is dead, or at least dead to her and gets nowhere with new information.  Harry then attempts to track down Evangaline, but learns that she is dead. She did, however, have a child named Epiphany Proudfoot (Bonet) that was Johnny's daughter.  Epiphany offers Harry nothing as to Johnny's whereabouts.
Thinking he is near a dead end, Harry discovers an old Johnny Favorite band member playing in a bar named Toots Sweet.  While Toots tells Harry nothing useful, Harry believes him to be lying, so after his set, Harry follows Toots out to the swamp and witnesses a voodoo ritual, which Epiphany appears to be leading.  After the ceremony Harry confronts Toots about what he just witnessed and the whereabouts of Johnny Favorite.  Toots directs Harry back to Margaret Krusemark.
The next morning Harry is awakened in his hotel room by the police informing him of Toots' murder the previous night, and that he could be a suspect.  Harry heads back to Margaret's house to find her murdered - her heart cut out.  Now leaving in full blown panic mode, Harry is jumped by men hired by Ethan Krusemark, Margaret's father, and Harry is informed to leave town.
Harry goes back to his hotel where Epiphany is waiting for him.  They have sex - in a very weird scene where Harry hallucinates that blood is pouring from everywhere in the room - and Epiphany reveals after that Johnny was an evil man who hurt everyone he met.  Harry leaves to go confront Ethan Krusemark and the reveal / twist is finally made.
**better not read here if you don't want the end ruined**
Johnny Favorite had sold his soul to the devil for his fame.  In an attempt to break his contract, as it were, Johnny, Toots, and the Krusemarks kidnapped a solider to perform a voodoo ritual in which Johnny would remove and eat the boy's still beating heart to steal the victim's soul and identity.  Guess who the solider was?  Harry Angel.  Louis Cypher, aka Lucifer, appears and tells Harry/Johnny he has known all along, with Harry denying this nefarious plot saying "he knows who he is".  But Lucifer unleashes Johnny's memories and Harry realizes he is Johnny, and he has actually killed everyone he came in contact with on this case, including Ethan (moments earlier) and Epiphany (his daughter who just recently had sex with).  A very creative, self-destruction of an ending, to say the least.

Recommendation: I highly recommend this film, it is a great detective-noir story with some horror type elements mixed in.  This is one of Rourke's best performances, in my opinion.  De Niro, although on screen for just a few minutes, really was a memorable evil character.  
There is an 'R' version and an 'Unrated' version, the difference being the editing of the sex scene, and the on screen violence/gore shown of the killings. 
Beginning to end there is an ominous, foreboding feel in Angel Heart, that I highly enjoy.  If you go back and watch it a second time, suddenly all of the mannerisms, conversations, and flashes to the elevator (to hell) seem to go on a slightly different slant knowing the twist.