The fifth installment of the popular POV horror franchise breaks away from story arc of the previous four; focusing on a group of teenagers and their brush with occult forces.
Jesse’s future looks bright when he graduates high school and he and his friends take to video taping their final summer of freedom. But the murder of one of Jesse’s neighbors changes everything, as the murderer was a classmate of the trio of friends. Soon after, Jesse notices a supernatural presence in his life, as he seems to be empowered by an unseen force that communicates with him through the use of an Simon Says game. A summer of fun becomes a struggle for Jesse’s soul, which could cost the friends their very lives.
*Spoiler Alert* The setting of the franchise has now moved from the suburbs to lower-middle class Oxnard, California, with the main characters being urban youth rather than an upper-middle class family. But other than that, not much has changed. There is a supernatural presence invading the main characters’ environments, it means to do evil, it starts with bumps and noises and escalates through electronic communication to various forms of physical manifestations before main character succumbs to demon possession, all at the hands of a secret black magic coven. While this movie steers away from the “family” from the previous entries of the franchise, it may or may not be a part of the “larger story.”
Just like in the previous installments, the plot takes a little time to get going, but once the plot thickens, the pace quickens, with the scares becoming more and more “intense” the closer you get to the end. There are some decent low-budget effects here with the crawling on Jesse’s skin, the Simon Says communications, and the quick demon effects. The story of three friends trying to solve a mystery which turns into saving the soul of one of their own is pretty interesting, if not slightly cliché at this point.
While this movie is entertaining, there is nothing “new” here to set it apart from any other POV title, which in and of itself, is beginning to become a little stale. Like the other Paranormal Activity films, this movie is best viewed in the theater, or on a good surround system to get the most of the film’s use of ambiance. If this film is part of a “larger picture,” then those who are invested in the series will want to catch it to get the next installment. But, the only real link to the rest of the story arc comes literally at the last minute.
I would recommend this film to fans of POV horror, and as stated, those invested in the franchise to this point.
Saturday, January 25, 2014
Thursday, November 28, 2013
Quick Look: A Hanuted House (2013)
People in the Movie: Marlon Wayans, Essence Atkins
Director: Michael Tiddes
Pigeonhole: Spoof / Comedy
The Horror: A Haunted House was written by Marlon Wayans and Rick
Alvarez, and is a spoof (primarily) of the found-footage horror film Paranormal
Activity. Being a horror spoof and
because of Wayans’ involvement, the comparisons to Scary Movie were going to be
inevitable, and unfortunately this film does not measure up to its predecessor.
A Haunted House, like Paranormal
Activity, is presented as “found footage” style with the audience seeing the
bulk of the activity through the view of either a home video and/ or a mounted security-type
camera. Malcolm (Wayans) and Kisha
(Atkins), a couple, have decided to move in together. Strange things start to happen and while
Kisha believes there is a ghost responsible, Malcolm initially rejects the
idea. However, as the ghost’s activity
escalates, Kisha reveals she has previously made a deal with the Devil for a
pair of shoes. Soon it appears Kisha is
possessed by the evil spirit, so Malcolm calls in Father Doug (Cedric the
Entertainer) to perform an exorcism. Everything
appears to work out, with the ghost being exorcised, but then Kisha kills
Malcolm in the last shot of the film. Parodies
of The Devil Inside and The Exorcist are also worked in, with nods to several
other horror films, as well.
It Dies: Woven through the basic plot and patchwork of the 5-6
minute “sequences” is plenty of toilet humor, racial jokes, sexual/ homosexual
themes and one-liners. Some of the
moments worked, and came off as very entertaining, but where A Haunted House
fails overall, in my opinion, is that it used the gags and comedy to drive the
film, rather than letting the “serious” plot drive the film and then highlighting
each new “scary” situation with a comedic moment or bit. Instead, this movie comes off more like an
episode of In Living Color, where anticipation for the punch-line is holding
your attention more the action going on around it. In that regard, the “spoof” is lost.
Recommendation: You know what you are going to get with a film like
this; it’s really just matter of “how funny”, overall, it is going to be. As I noted earlier, A Haunted House has
several good moments that I could say make it worth seeing. The downside is that some of the not-so-funny
bits are the ones that seem to go on the longest, or show back up in a later
scene and remain unfunny. ‘R’ rating is
for language, sexual content and comical violence.
Review: Kuroneko (1968)
Kuroneko, also called ‘The Black Cat’ and ‘A Black Cat in a Bamboo Grove’, is a 1968 Japanese horror film that I recently watched. With many elements expressed – revenge, true love, honor, and the afterlife – Kuroneko is an interesting movie to check out. It is directed by Kaneto Shindo; it is not rated, but I would consider it like an ‘R’ for brief nudity, violence, and sexual situations. The language spoken is Japanese, and the presentation is in black and white.
**spoiler alert** Kuroneko is set in one of the feudal eras in Japan; we are not given an exact date, but reading further about the film, I learned it is supposed to be during the Heian Period which was from 794-1185 AD. A woman and her adult daughter are seen eating inside their run down hut near a bamboo grove. A group of barbaric looking soldiers come out of the forest, descend on the hut, rape and murder the women, then set the dwelling on fire. Later, in the ashes of this moment, we see the two women’s bodies being examined by a black cat.
Soon we see Shige (the daughter) out late in a town square where she meets a samurai on horseback. She asks him to see her home so she is not attacked by bandits. They proceed to her nice looking large house where she invites the samurai inside. Her mother appears from another room, and serves the man several drinks. The mother leaves the room and we see her initiate an eerie looking dance. Shige then begins to seduce the samurai, but just as quickly as the moment starts, we see Shige tear out his throat with her mouth. Several more samurai are lured by Shige, seduced, and killed in this manner.
Meanwhile we see young solider fighting in a battle; he kills the enemy leader. He decapitates the body and brings the head to the local governor named Raiko. The solider is made a samurai for his accomplishment. The new samurai, Gintoki, then heads to his home, only to find it burned down and his wife and mother missing. Raiko has also now been informed of the killings of the other samurai, so he dispatches Gintoki to investigate and destroy the monsters responsible.
Gintoki comes across Shige in the town square, and goes with her back to the house as the previous samurai had also done. However, Gintoki begins to comment to Shige and the mother that the two of them look exactly like his wife and mother, but three of them seem reluctant to acknowledge this fact. Rather than kill him, Shige instructs Gintoki to leave and come back the next night, which he does. At this point they both embrace the fact that they are husband and wife, now reunited. Each morning Gintoki leaves, and comes back at night to be with Shige. After 7 nights, Gintoki returns to the house and Shige is gone. He does not understand, and questions his mother, who then proceeds to explain that she and Shige were murdered. They prayed to the gods of the underworld to allow them to take their revenge. The two were permitted to live on earth by drinking the blood of the samurai they killed, however, Shige forsook her vows (killing samurai, including Gintoki) to have one week of love with Gintoki again, and she is now in hell, forever. Gintoki is overcome with grief, but reports back to Raiko that he has destroyed one of the two ghosts responsible for the killings. Raiko sends Gintoki back to destroy the remaining spirit. Gintoki confronts his mother, and cuts off one of her arms, but she later returns to retrieve it from him. The last scene of the movie we see Gintoki failing about helplessly on the floor of his former home, the burned out cottage while snow falls and covers his now dead body.
Let me start by noting that while the film is considered in the ‘horror’ genre, I think of it more like a supernatural thriller. There are a few shocking elements, but compared to what is on TV and in film today, it is extremely mild.
The pace of the movie is somewhat slow and not overly tense, but the director does an excellent job of masking the “horror” of these murderous spirits by having cast beautiful women. Further, Shige and mother also move through the scenes like delicate Japanese royalty, and, as I mentioned earlier just prior to each of the killings the mother is seen dancing gracefully. This dichotomy is something I truly appreciate about Kuroneko. Also, using the samurai, a symbol of honor in the history of Japan, as the protagonist, the antagonists, and victims, was masterful as far as the story-telling went.
You will not be scared watching Kuroneko, the Japanese horror film, but you will be intrigued by these characters as their fates play out, almost like a Greek tragedy. The visuals throughout, while simplistic, are quite beautiful, which is not something you will often hear associated with a “horror” film.
**spoiler alert** Kuroneko is set in one of the feudal eras in Japan; we are not given an exact date, but reading further about the film, I learned it is supposed to be during the Heian Period which was from 794-1185 AD. A woman and her adult daughter are seen eating inside their run down hut near a bamboo grove. A group of barbaric looking soldiers come out of the forest, descend on the hut, rape and murder the women, then set the dwelling on fire. Later, in the ashes of this moment, we see the two women’s bodies being examined by a black cat.
Soon we see Shige (the daughter) out late in a town square where she meets a samurai on horseback. She asks him to see her home so she is not attacked by bandits. They proceed to her nice looking large house where she invites the samurai inside. Her mother appears from another room, and serves the man several drinks. The mother leaves the room and we see her initiate an eerie looking dance. Shige then begins to seduce the samurai, but just as quickly as the moment starts, we see Shige tear out his throat with her mouth. Several more samurai are lured by Shige, seduced, and killed in this manner.
Meanwhile we see young solider fighting in a battle; he kills the enemy leader. He decapitates the body and brings the head to the local governor named Raiko. The solider is made a samurai for his accomplishment. The new samurai, Gintoki, then heads to his home, only to find it burned down and his wife and mother missing. Raiko has also now been informed of the killings of the other samurai, so he dispatches Gintoki to investigate and destroy the monsters responsible.
Gintoki comes across Shige in the town square, and goes with her back to the house as the previous samurai had also done. However, Gintoki begins to comment to Shige and the mother that the two of them look exactly like his wife and mother, but three of them seem reluctant to acknowledge this fact. Rather than kill him, Shige instructs Gintoki to leave and come back the next night, which he does. At this point they both embrace the fact that they are husband and wife, now reunited. Each morning Gintoki leaves, and comes back at night to be with Shige. After 7 nights, Gintoki returns to the house and Shige is gone. He does not understand, and questions his mother, who then proceeds to explain that she and Shige were murdered. They prayed to the gods of the underworld to allow them to take their revenge. The two were permitted to live on earth by drinking the blood of the samurai they killed, however, Shige forsook her vows (killing samurai, including Gintoki) to have one week of love with Gintoki again, and she is now in hell, forever. Gintoki is overcome with grief, but reports back to Raiko that he has destroyed one of the two ghosts responsible for the killings. Raiko sends Gintoki back to destroy the remaining spirit. Gintoki confronts his mother, and cuts off one of her arms, but she later returns to retrieve it from him. The last scene of the movie we see Gintoki failing about helplessly on the floor of his former home, the burned out cottage while snow falls and covers his now dead body.
Let me start by noting that while the film is considered in the ‘horror’ genre, I think of it more like a supernatural thriller. There are a few shocking elements, but compared to what is on TV and in film today, it is extremely mild.
The pace of the movie is somewhat slow and not overly tense, but the director does an excellent job of masking the “horror” of these murderous spirits by having cast beautiful women. Further, Shige and mother also move through the scenes like delicate Japanese royalty, and, as I mentioned earlier just prior to each of the killings the mother is seen dancing gracefully. This dichotomy is something I truly appreciate about Kuroneko. Also, using the samurai, a symbol of honor in the history of Japan, as the protagonist, the antagonists, and victims, was masterful as far as the story-telling went.
You will not be scared watching Kuroneko, the Japanese horror film, but you will be intrigued by these characters as their fates play out, almost like a Greek tragedy. The visuals throughout, while simplistic, are quite beautiful, which is not something you will often hear associated with a “horror” film.
Happy Thanksgiving
Maybe you like the parade, and the football games on Thanksgiving...
But if your day is not otherwise filled with these late November staples, look for an awesome movie to see.
Sunday, September 29, 2013
Saturday, September 21, 2013
Review: Flowers in the Attic (1987)
Principal cast: Louise Fletcher, Victoria Tennant, Kristy Swanson, Jeb Stuart Adams
Director: Jeffrey Bloom
Tags: Drama, Mystery, Thriller
The Basics: Based on the novel by V.C. Andrews, the film tells the story of four children (two teenagers and two pre-school aged kids) who are brought to their mother’s family estate after the tragic loss of their father. From day one the children receive nothing but hostility and hatred from their tyrannical, Bible beating grandmother who lock the four children into a single bedroom with access to a large attic. Locked away and hidden from the world, the children are captive to a grandmother who hates them for a sin they did not commit, and a mother who slowly disappears from their lives. The older of the children plot their escape; at first to find their lost mother, but the struggle for freedom becomes a fight for survival.
Recommendation: This is a dark family drama with elements of mystery, psychological thriller, and claustrophobic suspense; and fans of these styles should appreciate this film. Fans of V.C. Andrews’ novel will enjoy this movie as well.
My Two Cents *Spoiler Alert* For the most part, this film stays true to the source novel, taking only a few, yet substantial liberties, with the story (which we’ll get to shortly.) It starts off by showing the quaint yet happy all American life of the Dollanganger family, and in the next heartbeat, the lives of the main characters are derailed when the father is killed in an auto accident, forcing the mother and her four children to seek refuge with the grandmother, which turns out to be the veritable gates of Hell for the siblings. So, the film wastes no time in thickening the plot, and as soon as the tension is introduced, it never lets up. As soon as the viewer begins to catch their breath, something else happens to tighten the atmosphere and keep the tension going. And, unlike many thrillers of today, there are no cheap, superlative jump scares or false alarms to give any semblance of reassurance. It isn't made clear as to how until later in the film, but from the moment the four kids enter their bedroom prison, the audience just knows their lives are in danger.
The casting for this movie was as close to perfect as one is going to get. Louise Fletcher is downright frightening in her role as the hateful, Bible armed grandmother. Her physically overpowering and hostile stage presence fit the character so perfectly that one could believe she walked right out of the pages of the novel onto the screen. Victoria Tennant also does a very good job as Corrine, especially in the way she portrays the evolution of her character from token housewife and mother to a murderous, self-serving upper class socialite. Both Kristy Swanson and Jeb Stuart Adams do a wonderful job in showing how their respective characters grow from naïve and optimistic children into broken hearted young adults who have to fight for their own survival as well as their younger siblings. And, Ben Ganger and Lindsay Parker perfectly fit into the rolls of the young twins: the powerfully loud Carrie and the adorably sweet Cory. It’s impossible not to melt when little Cory, stricken with illness looks up and quietly utters, “Hello John” as his last words on Earth.
As I said, there were some liberties taken from the novel in making this film; some of which are understandable, some not so much. Number one; in the novel, the children were locked away in the room and attic for over three years, while in the film, the time frame is closer to one year. I can imagine that this was done to accommodate the fact that the film would be shot over a period of months rather than years; and while older actors could pull off the growth from 14 to 17, it would be harder to pull off a growth from five to eight in that time frame. That could be a reason, but in the novel, Carrie and Cory barely grew in their seclusion because they had barely any exposure to sunlight and fresh air, and their diet was far from balanced. I could see this as not an easy decision to make, especially when considering the audiences that have not read the book.
The second element that was changed for the film was the relationship between the older children. In the novel, Christopher and Cathy grow into physical, emotional; intellectual, and most importantly, sexual maturity during their time in the attic; but their captivity and the abuse they suffer has it’s effect on this growth. In a way, the Dollanganger children have become a sort of family unit with the older children becoming parents to the younger twins. This, coupled with their fight for survival causes a sexual link between the two which leads to a climactic act of incest. Their fight for survival and their surrogate parentage for the twins are present in the film, but the sexual aspect is left out. I can imagine this was done to keep the movie from being rated R, and while it doesn’t bother me per se, I still think this was an important plot element to show the coming of age of the two older kids and how it is twisted by the greed of their mother and the hatred of their grandmother.
To me, there was only one liberty taken from the book that has no excuse, which is the plot line and ultimate fate of Corrine, the mother. The film stays true to a point. She starts out by keeping her children a secret until her dying father forgives her for marrying her Uncle and writes her back into his will, and as soon as he passes away, they get the money and can start a new life. Throughout the story, Corrine visits her children less and less. Fearing for her life, the two older children find a way to leave the room and explore the house, only to find that their mother is living in extreme comfort and happiness while they suffer in their prison. According to the grandfather’s will, if it is discovered that Corrine had children from her marriage to her uncle, even after the grandfather passed on, she would be disinherited all over again and would have nothing, which prompts Corrine to attempt to murder her children in an attempt to keep them a secret forever. In the film, the children confront their mother during her wedding to Bart Winslow, the family lawyer, and in a tussle with Cathy, Corrine in thrown from a balcony and hanged to death with her own wedding veil. In the novel, Corrine marries Bart Winslow halfway through the story and tells her children about her wedding and their honeymoon to Europe. Bart lives with the family in their giant house, and during one of their nighttime searches, Cathy sees him sleeping in a chair and lightly kisses him as he sleeps (which becomes important in the next book of the series.) When the children leave the house in the end, the mother is very much alive. The reason for this change is a little less clear, but I can guess that it was changed to give the movie a more climactic ending. It might have also been altered to end the movie with a sense of justice; that Corrine did not win the fight and does not get the money, or her life. I still think this was a mistake seeing as how Corrine is an important presence in the second novel, which was intended to be made into a movie as well. There is a definite social commentary made by this story about the evil of wealth and the lengths some will go to in order to acquire/keep hold of their gold. It shows how the desire for riches and comfort can corrupt the human soul, and it is the innocent that will pay the price for their greed. But this is a story about a family; about death and survival, good and evil; love and hate, with both God and the devil watching.
The Breakdown
Cast Performance - Perfect. The cast shines in this film. There is not one performance that is less that great, and I almost never say that.
Violence - Mild. There is some hard slapping, including a strike against a young child.
Nudity - none. Plot elements that would have called for nudity were omitted.
Ambience/Music- Excellent. The bedroom and attic set were almost exactly as they were described in the book. The main theme of the movie is memorable and beautifully haunting.
Overall rating: 4.5/5.0
Interesting Notes
-Louise Fletcher and Kristy Swanson were both given scripts for the second book of the series, “Petals on the Wind.” The movie never went into production. Swanson described the movie as “all sex.”
-Kristy Swanson was introduced to V.C. Andrews, and the author said that she was just how she pictured Cathy.
-V.C. Andrews makes a cameo appearance in this film (she’s a old lady washing the windows.) Sadly, the author passed away before the film was released.
Director: Jeffrey Bloom
Tags: Drama, Mystery, Thriller
The Basics: Based on the novel by V.C. Andrews, the film tells the story of four children (two teenagers and two pre-school aged kids) who are brought to their mother’s family estate after the tragic loss of their father. From day one the children receive nothing but hostility and hatred from their tyrannical, Bible beating grandmother who lock the four children into a single bedroom with access to a large attic. Locked away and hidden from the world, the children are captive to a grandmother who hates them for a sin they did not commit, and a mother who slowly disappears from their lives. The older of the children plot their escape; at first to find their lost mother, but the struggle for freedom becomes a fight for survival.
Recommendation: This is a dark family drama with elements of mystery, psychological thriller, and claustrophobic suspense; and fans of these styles should appreciate this film. Fans of V.C. Andrews’ novel will enjoy this movie as well.
My Two Cents *Spoiler Alert* For the most part, this film stays true to the source novel, taking only a few, yet substantial liberties, with the story (which we’ll get to shortly.) It starts off by showing the quaint yet happy all American life of the Dollanganger family, and in the next heartbeat, the lives of the main characters are derailed when the father is killed in an auto accident, forcing the mother and her four children to seek refuge with the grandmother, which turns out to be the veritable gates of Hell for the siblings. So, the film wastes no time in thickening the plot, and as soon as the tension is introduced, it never lets up. As soon as the viewer begins to catch their breath, something else happens to tighten the atmosphere and keep the tension going. And, unlike many thrillers of today, there are no cheap, superlative jump scares or false alarms to give any semblance of reassurance. It isn't made clear as to how until later in the film, but from the moment the four kids enter their bedroom prison, the audience just knows their lives are in danger.
The casting for this movie was as close to perfect as one is going to get. Louise Fletcher is downright frightening in her role as the hateful, Bible armed grandmother. Her physically overpowering and hostile stage presence fit the character so perfectly that one could believe she walked right out of the pages of the novel onto the screen. Victoria Tennant also does a very good job as Corrine, especially in the way she portrays the evolution of her character from token housewife and mother to a murderous, self-serving upper class socialite. Both Kristy Swanson and Jeb Stuart Adams do a wonderful job in showing how their respective characters grow from naïve and optimistic children into broken hearted young adults who have to fight for their own survival as well as their younger siblings. And, Ben Ganger and Lindsay Parker perfectly fit into the rolls of the young twins: the powerfully loud Carrie and the adorably sweet Cory. It’s impossible not to melt when little Cory, stricken with illness looks up and quietly utters, “Hello John” as his last words on Earth.
As I said, there were some liberties taken from the novel in making this film; some of which are understandable, some not so much. Number one; in the novel, the children were locked away in the room and attic for over three years, while in the film, the time frame is closer to one year. I can imagine that this was done to accommodate the fact that the film would be shot over a period of months rather than years; and while older actors could pull off the growth from 14 to 17, it would be harder to pull off a growth from five to eight in that time frame. That could be a reason, but in the novel, Carrie and Cory barely grew in their seclusion because they had barely any exposure to sunlight and fresh air, and their diet was far from balanced. I could see this as not an easy decision to make, especially when considering the audiences that have not read the book.
The second element that was changed for the film was the relationship between the older children. In the novel, Christopher and Cathy grow into physical, emotional; intellectual, and most importantly, sexual maturity during their time in the attic; but their captivity and the abuse they suffer has it’s effect on this growth. In a way, the Dollanganger children have become a sort of family unit with the older children becoming parents to the younger twins. This, coupled with their fight for survival causes a sexual link between the two which leads to a climactic act of incest. Their fight for survival and their surrogate parentage for the twins are present in the film, but the sexual aspect is left out. I can imagine this was done to keep the movie from being rated R, and while it doesn’t bother me per se, I still think this was an important plot element to show the coming of age of the two older kids and how it is twisted by the greed of their mother and the hatred of their grandmother.
To me, there was only one liberty taken from the book that has no excuse, which is the plot line and ultimate fate of Corrine, the mother. The film stays true to a point. She starts out by keeping her children a secret until her dying father forgives her for marrying her Uncle and writes her back into his will, and as soon as he passes away, they get the money and can start a new life. Throughout the story, Corrine visits her children less and less. Fearing for her life, the two older children find a way to leave the room and explore the house, only to find that their mother is living in extreme comfort and happiness while they suffer in their prison. According to the grandfather’s will, if it is discovered that Corrine had children from her marriage to her uncle, even after the grandfather passed on, she would be disinherited all over again and would have nothing, which prompts Corrine to attempt to murder her children in an attempt to keep them a secret forever. In the film, the children confront their mother during her wedding to Bart Winslow, the family lawyer, and in a tussle with Cathy, Corrine in thrown from a balcony and hanged to death with her own wedding veil. In the novel, Corrine marries Bart Winslow halfway through the story and tells her children about her wedding and their honeymoon to Europe. Bart lives with the family in their giant house, and during one of their nighttime searches, Cathy sees him sleeping in a chair and lightly kisses him as he sleeps (which becomes important in the next book of the series.) When the children leave the house in the end, the mother is very much alive. The reason for this change is a little less clear, but I can guess that it was changed to give the movie a more climactic ending. It might have also been altered to end the movie with a sense of justice; that Corrine did not win the fight and does not get the money, or her life. I still think this was a mistake seeing as how Corrine is an important presence in the second novel, which was intended to be made into a movie as well. There is a definite social commentary made by this story about the evil of wealth and the lengths some will go to in order to acquire/keep hold of their gold. It shows how the desire for riches and comfort can corrupt the human soul, and it is the innocent that will pay the price for their greed. But this is a story about a family; about death and survival, good and evil; love and hate, with both God and the devil watching.
The Breakdown
Cast Performance - Perfect. The cast shines in this film. There is not one performance that is less that great, and I almost never say that.
Violence - Mild. There is some hard slapping, including a strike against a young child.
Nudity - none. Plot elements that would have called for nudity were omitted.
Ambience/Music- Excellent. The bedroom and attic set were almost exactly as they were described in the book. The main theme of the movie is memorable and beautifully haunting.
Overall rating: 4.5/5.0
Interesting Notes
-Louise Fletcher and Kristy Swanson were both given scripts for the second book of the series, “Petals on the Wind.” The movie never went into production. Swanson described the movie as “all sex.”
-Kristy Swanson was introduced to V.C. Andrews, and the author said that she was just how she pictured Cathy.
-V.C. Andrews makes a cameo appearance in this film (she’s a old lady washing the windows.) Sadly, the author passed away before the film was released.
Tuesday, September 3, 2013
Bob's Quick Look - The Mortal Instruments: City of Bones (2013)
Based on the first book of the bestselling series, this film centers on a teenage girl who is thrust into a world of dark mysticism when her mother disappears, and evil forces hunt for her and an ancient artifact her mother was hiding. As she searches for her lost mother, and learns about the angel blood in her veins and the power she possesses, she is torn between her closest friend and the young warrior who is sworn to protect her.
*Spoiler alert* I’ve heard quite a few people describe this movie as Harry Potter meets Twilight. I can see that. As with both, the main story element centers on a “normal” person being thrust into a supernatural environment. Visually, it has a bit in common with the Harry Potter films; especially with the scenes inside “the Institute” and visual effects such as the dimensional portal. It also carries the love triangle aspect and the teenage target audience of the Twilight saga.
Even though this film would not have to reach far to do so, it does possess a level of sophistication that these other two franchises lack. Even though there were times that felt like the writers wanted to take us from point a to point be a little too quickly, the movie had a good flowing motion with a decent balance of action scenes and story telling to keep the plot moving. And I will say that this is a beautiful movie to watch on the big screen.
While the motion was fluid for the most part, it does get choppy at a couple of points. It also seemed at times that there were things going on that one might understand if they had read the novel. When I saw this movie, I had not, so I was left with questions such as, “Why could Simon not see Jace in the club, but could see him later on?” This is answered in the book but not the movie, as far I remember.
All in all, I would say this is a pretty good summer movie; visually striking with an interesting premise. This film could have used a rewrite or two of the script before being filmed with focus on the fact that not everyone in the theater has read the book.
All in all, I would say this is a pretty good summer movie; visually striking with an interesting premise. This film could have used a rewrite or two of the script before being filmed with focus on the fact that not everyone in the theater has read the book.
Monday, September 2, 2013
Quick Look: Back to School (1986)
People in the Movie: Rodney Dangerfield, Keith Gordon, Sally Kellerman
Director: Alan Metter
Pigeonhole: Comedy
Basics: Thornton Melon (Dangerfield) is a millionaire businessman who owns the successful chain of clothing stores called "Tall and Fat". His son, Jason (Gordon), is a freshman at Grand Lakes University, but is questioning his desire to continue at GLU after a mediocre first term. Thornton decides to enroll - having never gotten a higher education himself - to motivate his son, and to party, but quickly learns that his challenges in the classroom are not like the challenges of being a successful entrepreneur. Somehow, Thornton is able to balance his academic life and personal life by starting a romance with one of his professors, Dr. Diane Turner (Kellerman).
Recommendation: Back to School has some of the actors and elements of the best 80's comedies including: Dangerfield's irreverent "no respect" type humor; Robert Downey, Jr. in a supporting role; William Zabka as the bully/ antagonist to one of the main characters; Sam Kinison as a history professor and Burt Young as the sloppy, low-talking manservant. While it is not the "best" movie for any one of the actors, it is a funny, well-paced movie, and you get exactly what you are expecting.
At the Dead Man's Party we Twist and Shout: **spoiler alert**
After divorcing his cheating, gold-digging wife at the beginning of the film, Thornton hops in his limo to visit his son at school. Jason tells his dad he does not like it there; he did not make the diving team his first semester, his only friend is Derek (Downey), and he is not doing "that great" in class. Thornton's answer to move in with Jason and Derek - by buying several rooms on Jason's floor and remodeling them into a giant party suite - and enrolling in classes. Thornton falls for his literature professor, Dr. Turner, (on the first day of his class, no less) which has the typical ups and downs of a fling in a comedy.
While the plot unfolds in a very formulaic manner, there are enough laughs to keep it moving along. Kinison is a professor of Contemporary American History who likes to unleash his crazy screaming on students. Oingo Boingo headlines Thornton's dorm party "of the year" with a nice musical bit. Zabka, known for his high school bullying in Karate Kid and Just One of the Guys, graduates to college, to bully Jason as the captain of the swim team. At the end of the film Thornton shows off his ultimate trick dive called the "Triple Lindy" to win a swim meet, in a kind of Animal House/ Revenge of the Nerds 80's victory.
Extras:
- Dangerfield was actually a trick diver in his younger days
- The film was shot mostly at the University of Wisconsin- Madison
Director: Alan Metter
Pigeonhole: Comedy
Basics: Thornton Melon (Dangerfield) is a millionaire businessman who owns the successful chain of clothing stores called "Tall and Fat". His son, Jason (Gordon), is a freshman at Grand Lakes University, but is questioning his desire to continue at GLU after a mediocre first term. Thornton decides to enroll - having never gotten a higher education himself - to motivate his son, and to party, but quickly learns that his challenges in the classroom are not like the challenges of being a successful entrepreneur. Somehow, Thornton is able to balance his academic life and personal life by starting a romance with one of his professors, Dr. Diane Turner (Kellerman).
Recommendation: Back to School has some of the actors and elements of the best 80's comedies including: Dangerfield's irreverent "no respect" type humor; Robert Downey, Jr. in a supporting role; William Zabka as the bully/ antagonist to one of the main characters; Sam Kinison as a history professor and Burt Young as the sloppy, low-talking manservant. While it is not the "best" movie for any one of the actors, it is a funny, well-paced movie, and you get exactly what you are expecting.
At the Dead Man's Party we Twist and Shout: **spoiler alert**
After divorcing his cheating, gold-digging wife at the beginning of the film, Thornton hops in his limo to visit his son at school. Jason tells his dad he does not like it there; he did not make the diving team his first semester, his only friend is Derek (Downey), and he is not doing "that great" in class. Thornton's answer to move in with Jason and Derek - by buying several rooms on Jason's floor and remodeling them into a giant party suite - and enrolling in classes. Thornton falls for his literature professor, Dr. Turner, (on the first day of his class, no less) which has the typical ups and downs of a fling in a comedy.
While the plot unfolds in a very formulaic manner, there are enough laughs to keep it moving along. Kinison is a professor of Contemporary American History who likes to unleash his crazy screaming on students. Oingo Boingo headlines Thornton's dorm party "of the year" with a nice musical bit. Zabka, known for his high school bullying in Karate Kid and Just One of the Guys, graduates to college, to bully Jason as the captain of the swim team. At the end of the film Thornton shows off his ultimate trick dive called the "Triple Lindy" to win a swim meet, in a kind of Animal House/ Revenge of the Nerds 80's victory.
Extras:
- Dangerfield was actually a trick diver in his younger days
- The film was shot mostly at the University of Wisconsin- Madison
Saturday, August 10, 2013
Awesome movie quotes: Ghost Busters (1984)
Tuesday, August 6, 2013
Awesome movie quotes: In The Line Of Fire (1993)
"Do you have any idea what I've done for God and country? Some pretty FUCKING HORRIBLE things! I don't even remember who I was before they sunk their claws into me!"
Saturday, August 3, 2013
Awesome movie quotes: When Harry Met Sally (1989)
<Meg Ryan just finishes her "fake orgasm" in the deli>
woman nearby: "I'll have what she's having..."
woman nearby: "I'll have what she's having..."
Quick Look: Friends With Benefits (2011)
This is an entertaining little romp starring Justin Timberlake and Mila Kunis; while the plot is absolutely predictable, the comedic moments, dialogue, and supporting cast make it worth seeing. It is directed by Will Gluck, and is rated 'R' for language and sexuality.
Friends: Jamie (Kunis) is a New York head-hunter, and recruits Dylan (Timberlake) away from his job in Los Angeles to come work for GQ Magazine. Not knowing anyone in New York, Dylan hangs out with Jamie, and they become fast friends seeing each other frequently, but this relationship inevitably turns sexual. Jamie and Dylan make a pact for their relationship not to turn romantic, attempting to do as the title suggests - be friends with "benefits" - but as the plot unravels we discover both characters have intimacy issues linked to their parents and remaining just friends with benefits is an impossibility.
Dylan cannot fully commit because his mother left his father (and family) after it was discovered his father had Alzheimer's disease, and she chose to abandon them. Jamie cannot commit (from what I gather) because her mother is a free-spirit and cannot stay committed to men in any relationships, highlighted by the fact that Jamie's mom remembers almost nothing about Jamie's father. But, this being a romantic comedy - all works out in the end and they get back together after resolution of the "conflict".
The Benefits: Timberlake and Kunis have good on-screen chemistry, and you could believe the two were actually friends. This is definitely more of an adult 'R' rated comedy because of the dialogue being interlaced with a fair amount of profanities, and the subject matter being more about how 2 adults attempt to kept their friendship and their sex compartmentalized versus the building of their romance. Of course, common sense dictates that in life and in film, there really is no true way for people to be friends and sexual partners without the romantic and/or emotional attachments, as well.
Jenna Elfman turned in an excellent supporting role as Dylan's sister. She lives in L.A., is a single mom, and is taking care of Dylan's father. Elfman was a serious character (compared to her typical comic roles), but still very happy and bright in light of her circumstances. I would also say she was the proverbial glue holding Dylan's family together. Woody Harrleson plays a flamboyant, gay co-worker of Dylan's at GQ, and offers perfect comic relief at multiple moments through the film.
Recommendation: I do not consider myself a big fan of the rom-com genre, but Friends With Benefits is worth seeing. I hold this on the same level as I hold 'When Harry Met Sally', as far as entertainment value.
Friends: Jamie (Kunis) is a New York head-hunter, and recruits Dylan (Timberlake) away from his job in Los Angeles to come work for GQ Magazine. Not knowing anyone in New York, Dylan hangs out with Jamie, and they become fast friends seeing each other frequently, but this relationship inevitably turns sexual. Jamie and Dylan make a pact for their relationship not to turn romantic, attempting to do as the title suggests - be friends with "benefits" - but as the plot unravels we discover both characters have intimacy issues linked to their parents and remaining just friends with benefits is an impossibility.
Dylan cannot fully commit because his mother left his father (and family) after it was discovered his father had Alzheimer's disease, and she chose to abandon them. Jamie cannot commit (from what I gather) because her mother is a free-spirit and cannot stay committed to men in any relationships, highlighted by the fact that Jamie's mom remembers almost nothing about Jamie's father. But, this being a romantic comedy - all works out in the end and they get back together after resolution of the "conflict".
The Benefits: Timberlake and Kunis have good on-screen chemistry, and you could believe the two were actually friends. This is definitely more of an adult 'R' rated comedy because of the dialogue being interlaced with a fair amount of profanities, and the subject matter being more about how 2 adults attempt to kept their friendship and their sex compartmentalized versus the building of their romance. Of course, common sense dictates that in life and in film, there really is no true way for people to be friends and sexual partners without the romantic and/or emotional attachments, as well.
Jenna Elfman turned in an excellent supporting role as Dylan's sister. She lives in L.A., is a single mom, and is taking care of Dylan's father. Elfman was a serious character (compared to her typical comic roles), but still very happy and bright in light of her circumstances. I would also say she was the proverbial glue holding Dylan's family together. Woody Harrleson plays a flamboyant, gay co-worker of Dylan's at GQ, and offers perfect comic relief at multiple moments through the film.
Recommendation: I do not consider myself a big fan of the rom-com genre, but Friends With Benefits is worth seeing. I hold this on the same level as I hold 'When Harry Met Sally', as far as entertainment value.
Monday, July 29, 2013
Bob's Quick Look: The Conjuring (2013)
James Wan (Saw, Insidious) directs this haunted house film which is based on a true case from the files of noted paranormal investigators, Ed and Lorraine Warren, who are famous for investigating the notorious “Amityville” house.
The Perron family have moved into a picturesque farm house in Rhode Island, and from day one their lives become a living nightmare. Their dog refuses to enter the house (it’s often noted that animals can sense the supernatural) and the next day, she is found dead. The mother wakes up every morning with bruises, and the daughters are all terrorized in different ways; being pulled across their bed, induced into sleepwalked, etc. The demonic attacks only get worse, and the Perrons enlist the help of Ed and Lorraine Warren to clear their house of the evil spirits.
There have been movies in the past, such as “The Fourth Kind,” that were supposedly based on true events, but were later debunked as either embellishments of otherwise non-noteworthy events, or just downright hoaxes. It came out in the mid 90’s that the Amityville case was a mortgage scam. But, in the case of this movie, no debunking has happened yet, and the Perrons and Lorraine Warren were deeply involved in this movie’s making (Ed Warren sadly passed away in 2006.) So, as far as I know, the events in the movie are true.
*Spoiler Alert* The first thing I liked about this movie is that Wan creates a tense atmosphere once we are brought into the home, and never lets up on the tension. In a lot of ways, this is a better way to get the audience with a jump scare than to build the tension then snap, then let the tension die away. There is no sense of safety for the characters until the very end, which was an effective way to bring the viewer into the character’s fear for the hour and 50 minutes we’re together. There was one element missing that many screenwriters use to create tension in films like this; which is internal family tension, such as sibling rivalry or marital problems either in place before or caused by the haunting. I was quite happy about this as it never creates tension but does cause annoyance, kind of like the French fry scene in “The Possession.”
As far as the ghosts and haunting elements themselves, one has to remember that this film was based on true events, because there is nothing here that has never been seen before. James Wan has said in an interview that he did not embellish the events to raise the scare factor, but it is a horror film and not a documentary. As a horror fan, I would say that the balance between realism and fright factor is well maintained.
At the risk of sounding bitter, I will say that this movie is rated R for no real reason. There is very little (if any) blood, there is no nudity, only one very slight allusion to sexuality between a married couple, very little in the way of adult language, and nothing really that has not been seen in a PG-13 film. The only conclusion Wan could see is the MPAA were concerned about the fact that this was based on true events and the overall intensity of the film. I, on the other hand, am of the opinion that the MPAA are a bunch of power hungry Nazis who were trying to exercise their authority over movies in general, or extort money from the studio for a lower rating. I for one am happy that the studio accepted the R rating, but it concerns me that films like this might start being rated NC-17 for the aforementioned reasons.
Overall, this is a good example of what can be done in a haunted house movie. It gets my high recommendations.
Interesting stuff:
*The case from the Warrens’ career involving a possessed doll named “Annabelle” was shown briefly in the beginning of the movie. In the film, “Annabelle” is a porcelain doll with some facial damage. In real life, “Annabelle” is a rag doll.
*In the film, Bathsheba Sherman is a witch who, in the name of Satan, cursed those who inhabited her family’s land before hanging herself. In real life, Bathsheba Sherman was suspected of witchcraft and murder of an infant, but was found not guilty by the court of law. She also died of natural causes.
There have been movies in the past, such as “The Fourth Kind,” that were supposedly based on true events, but were later debunked as either embellishments of otherwise non-noteworthy events, or just downright hoaxes. It came out in the mid 90’s that the Amityville case was a mortgage scam. But, in the case of this movie, no debunking has happened yet, and the Perrons and Lorraine Warren were deeply involved in this movie’s making (Ed Warren sadly passed away in 2006.) So, as far as I know, the events in the movie are true.
*Spoiler Alert* The first thing I liked about this movie is that Wan creates a tense atmosphere once we are brought into the home, and never lets up on the tension. In a lot of ways, this is a better way to get the audience with a jump scare than to build the tension then snap, then let the tension die away. There is no sense of safety for the characters until the very end, which was an effective way to bring the viewer into the character’s fear for the hour and 50 minutes we’re together. There was one element missing that many screenwriters use to create tension in films like this; which is internal family tension, such as sibling rivalry or marital problems either in place before or caused by the haunting. I was quite happy about this as it never creates tension but does cause annoyance, kind of like the French fry scene in “The Possession.”
As far as the ghosts and haunting elements themselves, one has to remember that this film was based on true events, because there is nothing here that has never been seen before. James Wan has said in an interview that he did not embellish the events to raise the scare factor, but it is a horror film and not a documentary. As a horror fan, I would say that the balance between realism and fright factor is well maintained.
At the risk of sounding bitter, I will say that this movie is rated R for no real reason. There is very little (if any) blood, there is no nudity, only one very slight allusion to sexuality between a married couple, very little in the way of adult language, and nothing really that has not been seen in a PG-13 film. The only conclusion Wan could see is the MPAA were concerned about the fact that this was based on true events and the overall intensity of the film. I, on the other hand, am of the opinion that the MPAA are a bunch of power hungry Nazis who were trying to exercise their authority over movies in general, or extort money from the studio for a lower rating. I for one am happy that the studio accepted the R rating, but it concerns me that films like this might start being rated NC-17 for the aforementioned reasons.
Overall, this is a good example of what can be done in a haunted house movie. It gets my high recommendations.
Interesting stuff:
*The case from the Warrens’ career involving a possessed doll named “Annabelle” was shown briefly in the beginning of the movie. In the film, “Annabelle” is a porcelain doll with some facial damage. In real life, “Annabelle” is a rag doll.
*In the film, Bathsheba Sherman is a witch who, in the name of Satan, cursed those who inhabited her family’s land before hanging herself. In real life, Bathsheba Sherman was suspected of witchcraft and murder of an infant, but was found not guilty by the court of law. She also died of natural causes.
No we haven't gone dark...
My brother and I are both still alive and well, but in the dog days of summer it seems we have been unable to get much writing done.
Never fear, posts are on the way.
Never fear, posts are on the way.
Sunday, July 14, 2013
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)