 With the release of Edgar Wright's latest film, 'Last Night in Soho', I thought this would be a good opportunity to focus on my all-time favourite director with a few re-writes. We kick things off with what put his name on the map in the first place, 'Shaun of the Dead'. Even at the time of its release, it developed a bit more of a cult following, and shockingly enough, I was actually iffy about checking it out. A part of me thought it looked kind of dumb, and I ended up passing on it.
Eventually, I managed to rent it after its video release, and immediately fell in love with it. This is a film that I HAVE to show anyone who hasn't seen it yet, because it's just that awesome. It's one of Wright's films that does a good job of speaking to the masses as it's both a zombie survival movie (released in 2004, just a month after 'Dawn of the Dead'), and a "regular Joe" story. What some people still don't entirely realize is that Wright wasn't exactly going for a farce on zombie films with this. Generally speaking, if you see a zombie film, it's a lot of military, a lot of action, there's always some ex soldier etc. He just wanted to take a bunch of regular, everyday, people and depict how they might react in a zombie scenario. And of course, as British humour goes, it gets quite creative - especially in how it ends, but that's all I'm going to say about that. That dry British humour in an extreme situation always gets me, and I feel like this is where that appreciation all started for me. The film follows Shaun (Simon Pegg), who is in the middle of a breakup with his girlfriend, Liz (Kate Ashfield). It's fairly typical - to keep it short, she wants more than he's offering. While Shaun is comforted through this by his best friend, Ed (Nick Frost), Liz confides in her flatmates, David and Dianne (Dylan Moran and Lucy Davis, respectively). The tough times are about to get even tougher though, as there is a zombie apocalypse unfolding in front of them, slowly but surely. I love the way it's handled here, as it's so eventual, and Shaun seems so oblivious to everything around him. Once Shaun and Ed realize what's going on, however, they spring into action in an attempt to rescue Liz, her flatmates, Shaun's Mom, Barbara (Penelope Wilton) and her husband, Philip (Bill Nighy). The rest of the film is pretty much all of them trying to survive the night, often resulting in some hilarity, but it does a good job of offering up some true horror and drama as well. For as much as this is a straight up comedy, it's true that it doesn't feel entirely farcical, as there are certain elements to it taken from other, more serious zombie movies. The fact that this is able to gauge different emotions is honestly impressive, since going into this, one would easily assume it's just plain goofy. 'Shaun of the Dead' is the first film in the "Three Flavours Cornetto Trilogy"; each film depicting comedy blended with a certain genre as well as a certain Cornetto flavour. For those unfamiliar, a Cornetto is essentially what a Drumstick (the ice cream kind) is in North America. This one is representative of red strawberry - the red depicting horror, or more specifically, zombie horror. At the time of its release it was a sort of stand-alone cult movie, but it has since picked up through word of mouth, and gained some popularity. To this day, it is my all-time favourite zombie movie, and it will be very difficult to dethrone.
0 Comments
 With just a few days before Halloween, I thought I'd leave this Halloween edition of Screening Suggestions with a bang. 'The Haunting' is one of those few legendary black and white horror films that still totally hold up as being at least somewhat scary. In fact, a lot of the creepiness comes from the black and white footage with heavy shadows, odd angles, and various tricks of the camera. Even the very setting of Hill House, itself, is unsettling, as once again the house is just as much a character as the leads. And by the way, yes, I consider this version to be better than the 1999 remake.
The beginning and end of the film is narrated rather poetically by Dr. John Markway (Richard Johnson). It begins with the history of Hill House; constructed by Hugh Crain as a home for his wife, she dies in a carriage crash on the way up to the house. Crain remarries, but the second wife dies with a fall down the stairs. His daughter, Abigail, is left there by Crain while he goes off to England to drown. She lived in the house for the rest of her life, trapping herself in the nursery, eventually dying as well. Her nurse companion she was left with then inherits the house, only to hang herself from the spiral staircase in the library. It was then inherited by a Mrs. Sanderson (Fay Compton), but has been empty for a long time. In the then-present day, Markway is interested in studying whatever paranormal activity resides within the huge, mysterious house. He's allowed, and goes through a list of several potential "lab rats" for his study, inviting them all to participate. He is, however, left with only three people - Theodora (Claire Bloom), a supposed psychic, Luke (Russ Tamblyn), Mrs. Sanderson's heir; and Eleanor, aka Nell (Julie Harris). If all of these names sound familiar, they should, as they were rearranged to be a family in 'The Haunting of Hill House', which is an awesome reimagining of things and I highly recommend it. Nell has a bit more of a backstory than the others, being our main character. She has spent eleven years caring for her sick mother, but her recent death has left her feeling guilty. She has also experienced poltergeist activity when she was a child, and seems to be a bit more in touch with the spirit world than the others - although Theodora is psychic, Luke is just skeptic. The group stays several nights in the house for Markway's study, but the women experience heavy paranormal activity through these nights while the guys don't experience much of anything at all. This involves loud banging on the walls, giggling, heavy breathing, and that creepy cliché of the haunted doorknob turning, which I believe this film gets credit for inventing. While the others are curious, and maybe even a little afraid, there seems to be something about Hill House drawing Eleanor towards staying put. It doesn't help that they find things like writing on the wall saying "Help Eleanor Come Home". In a weird way, the house becomes likewise drawn to her, and seems to want her to stay just as well. Although she often shows fear for the events happening within the house, she also has this sensation of feeling wanted and loved by something, and she eventually becomes seemingly possessed by it. So, if you're more familiar with either the 2017 reboot or the 1999 remake, things aren't entirely different when it comes to the bare bones of the story. I have to admit that I genuinely enjoy the 2017 Netflix version of this story more, but as the original film with this title, I still give full credit to it. My only real criticism is narrowed down to a lot of the melodrama that comes from Nell. Some of her lines are a bit much, but that's my only real nitpick. The film still had my full attention, and as mentioned before, totally holds up today. It's widely regarded now as one of the all-time best horror films, haunting films, and even influential films. We've had ghost movies before this, but the big deal here was that things actually got scary with a completely invisible force of some sort. 'Paranormal Activity' would probably be the equivalent today as something (whether you thought so or not) successfully scary that uses more subtlety than anything. Director Robert Wise is no slouch, either. Odds are I could list five films he's sat in the director's chair for, and you've seen one - this, 'Star Trek: The Motion Picture', 'The Sound of Music', 'The Andromeda Strain' and 'The Hindenberg'. Even if you haven't seen any of them, you've probably heard of them at this point. It shows his flexibility in talent,, and I'd be curious to check out some more of the stuff he's directed (aside from a long-ass docking scene in 'Star Trek'). For now though, this is one of his highlights, often dubbed one of the best horror films of all time, and even by today's standards I completely understand why. Despite a bit of melodrama, I absolutely loved this.  While 'Halloween' is often toted as the start of the slasher genre, I prefer to think of it as the film that got things going. Before that, you had movies like 'Black Christmas', but 'Halloween' just had a strength to it. Perhaps the strength mostly comes from casting Jamie Lee Curtis in the lead role; daughter of Janet Lee, featured here in one of the most famous movie moments of all time - the shower stab, with the "ree-ree-ree" music!
This film is a milestone in horror, technically being the first big slasher movie. It's brought to us by the master of suspense, himself, Alfred Hitchcock, and it honestly still holds up to this day. Certain things have tried to duplicate it, like an awful 1998 remake, and a much better TV series in 2013, but no matter how they try, nothing can quite grasp the feeling of the classic 1960 film, where it all began. It all opens with real-estate secretary, Marion Crane (Janet Leigh) and her boyfriend, Sam Loomis (John Gavin), providing us with yet another tie to 'Halloween'. They are talking about marriage and the unaffordability of it with Sam's debts. Some time after, Marion is left a $40,000 cash payment on a property. Instead of bringing it to the bank to deposit it, she instead takes the money and runs, headed to Sam's house in Fairvale, CA. On the way, she is caught in a rainstorm, misses her turn, and ends up at the Bates Motel. There, she is greeted by Norman Bates (Anthony Perkins) who gives her a room for the night. It's Norman Bates' character that really makes this movie shine, as even today, there's something terribly unsettling about him. He plays the role so well, as a bashful, almost boy-like man who just plain gives you that bad vibe. The only other actor I can think of who delivers the subtle horror of a serial killer while being polite is probably Anthony Hopkins from 'Silence of the Lambs', although I'm sure there are other examples between the two films. The two have a conversation where things intensify, and it all leads to that famous shower scene, killing off a main character only about half way through the film. To this day, that scene is intense, especially when the music stops, everything is still, and you see the bloody water pour down the drain. It's as though the film says "I'm not playing around here." The latter half of the film involves Marion's sister, Lila, coming into the picture. Together with Sam and a private investigator, Milton Arborgast (Martin Balsam), they all try to get down to the bottom of why Marion has disappeared without a trace. Meanwhile, Norman Bates tries to cover his tracks while dealing with his overprotective and strict "mother". I think by this point we all pretty well know the big twist there, but when I first saw this years and years ago and new nothing about it other than the shower scene existing (I was still in elementary school, I think), it did manage to catch me off guard. In a time when I thought black and white equaled boring, this was one movie that came along and showed me otherwise. Over the years and after a fair bit of re-watching, it has become a personal favorite piece of cinematic art from the 60s. With franchises like 'Halloween', 'Friday the 13th' and 'Elm Street', I wonder where those would be now if 'Psycho' didn't plant the seed. I strongly consider this film to be the Grandfather of slasher horror ('Halloween' is the father). It is just plain legendary, and held high in my opinion as perhaps the quintessential Hitchcock movie. If you haven't seen this, you haven't seen wat Hitchcock was capable of - like making Janet Leigh terrified of ever showering again.  Almost 30 years before we got the presently super famous 'It', featuring Bill Skarsgård, we had the still-relative miniseries. I think it's safe to say that the miniseries holds a place in the heart of most from my generation. 'It' was always a very interesting phenomenon, growing up. A whole bunch of my peers got into reading the novel as almost a right of passage, relating heavily to the kids involved and the idea of facing personal fears head-on.
Some of that reading was fueled by this, and though it was initially released in November, 'It' soon because synonymous with Halloween. It was almost like 'Saw' or 'Paranormal Activity' in that sense. It had nothing to do with Halloween, but it fit so perfectly, constantly making an annual comeback. If I remember correctly, the miniseries would often return to TV for Halloween night, so that after a night of trick-or-treating, the kids had something suitably scary to watch. Yes, this one was indeed horror for the whole family, and holds a current rating of "TV-PG", just going to show what we used to be able to get away with on the small screen back in the day. Ah, 1990, how I miss you. Anyway, for those of you who have seen the current version, divided into two fantastic films, you already know how this works. The difference here is largely in how it's told, and the fact that this takes place in the 50s while the remake takes place in the 80s. This all blends pretty awesomely with the idea that Pennywise returns every 27 years to feast on the fears of children (at least if you are able to round to 30). Anyway, while the new movies feature a perfect divide between the story from their childhood and the story from their adulthood, the miniseries does a lot more jumping around, but with a primary focus on childhood in the first episode, and adulthood in the second. To be fair, that's a bit closer to the book's execution as well. I might say the remake takes a few more liberties with the source material. To start, I'll let you know that when I credit people here, it goes by "adult actor/child actor", as they both play near-equal parts throughout the miniseries. Part One opens with the mysterious murder of a little girl in Derry, Maine, which prompts Mike Hanlon (Tim Reid/Marlon Taylor) to place a few phone calls to his old friends - The Losers Club; Bill Denbrough (Richard Thomas/Jonathan Brandis), Eddie Kaspbrak (Dennis Christopher/Adam Faraizl), Stanley Uris (Richard Masur/Ben Heller) Beverly Marsh (Annette O'Toole/Emily Perkins), Ben Hanscom (John Ritter/Brandon Crane) and Richie Tozier (Harry Anderson/Seth Green). The gang made a pact 27 years ago to come back to Derry if "It" ever came back. One by one, the first part goes through each phone call, and personal recollections from each character about what It was. Although It takes the common form of a clown named Pennywise (Tim Curry), It is really more of an ancient, extraterrestrial evil that makes fearful children its prey, returning to Derry, Maine every 27 years to feed again. It also uses special abilities to its advantage, including shapeshifting, manipulating reality, and going completely unnoticed by adults. The takeaway from the whole ordeal is that these kids have to face their worst fears head on. Then, as adults in Part 2, things seem to get a bit more metaphorical in that fears "return" (they all have some sort of pressure going on in their adulthood) and they reunite to conquer them once and for all. I also fell that much of this has to do with the support of strong friendships in the face of adversity. I've always seen it as very symbolic, and something anyone can relate to. Out of all of Stephen King's material, it's probably safe to say that this is the story I've gotten the most out of over the years. One should take that with a grain of salt though, since this is the only King book I've ever read through (on audio, anyway), and that was for Halloween, last year. I enjoyed it, but I have to be blasphemous and say out of all of the 'It' material out there, I personally enjoy the two remakes more than anything else. The book gets... super, super, super weird - and I'm not just talking about the 12-year-old orgy at the end (yes, it's totally a thing). As for the film at hand, however, there's a lot to be said about it. It's interesting to me that this was a huge risk for ABC to take in airing, as in 1990, horror TV wasn't exactly at the top of the list of things to make. However, King fans took a real liking to it, and it really did turn into a bit of a Halloween tradition for many, for a while. So needless to say, it certainly had its popularity back then. Although pretty creepy for the time, however, it has aged to be pretty corny, altogether. The acting and dialogue often feels a bit stilted, the visual effects weren't quite touching CG yet, and all in all, it's not entirely scary... bearing in mind this is rated TV-PG. But one thing about it has remained a continued guilty pleasure for many, including myself, and that's Tim Curry's wonderfully hammy performance as Pennywise. He's having so much fun with the role, you can't help but be oddly charmed by him. I know I didn't exactly get deep into detail on the basic plot here, but I feel like just about anyone reading this knows what it's about, and to get into detail would really drag this already fairly long review out. So to conclude it, I will say that although I recommend the 2017/2019 films, there's definitely a really fun, Halloween connection I have to this all the same. It's not quite an annual watch, but it totally could be, even though it's not even really that good of a miniseries. I suppose one could chalk it up to a certain nostalgia, as this represents an interesting risk that sort of opened the doors up for horror TV, or at least allowing drama and sci-fi TV to have a more horrific edge ('X-Files' anyone?). It's a product of its time, but a lot of fun if you have three long hours to kill.  This month I decided to go full Halloween, and conjure up a few suggestions from my past. We stat with 'The Craft'; a somewhat modern take on witches. This movie was so powerful for its time that when the mid to late 90s brought the Goth trend around, this film was one of the primary fuel sources (along with many other things). We also get a great take on strong female characters, each having to overcome their own obstacles in their complex teenage lives.
When a troubled teenage girl named Sarah Bailey (Robin Tunney) moves to a new town in LA, three girls who practice witchcraft quickly pick up on the fact that she can pull off some real magic. Seemingly headed by Nancy Downs (Fairuza Balk), the rest of the crew consists of Rochelle Zimmerman (Rachel True) and Bonnie Harper (Neve Campbell), who is the one who discovers Sarah as she twists a pencil into the surface of her desk using only her mind... how no one else sees it is beyond me, but it's the moment that gets things going. The three girls approach Sarah to be their fourth so that they can really start to pull off some real magic, and the desire to do so is fueled individually. Nancy lives with an abusive stepfather in a trailer, Rochelle has to deal with a nasty, racist blonde cheerleader type named Laura (Christine Taylor), and Bonnie has horrible burn scars all over her back. Meanwhile, Sarah's trouble is mostly from herself, and the trauma of attempted suicide haunts her. While the four form a bond, and start to get their witchcraft on track, what begins as simple curses turn into real threats when some of their powers are abused. This mostly comes from Nancy who will stop at nothing to feel bigger than she is, even if it means invoking a wiccan spirit known as Manon - essentially a wiccan version of The Force. The way it's described in the film is, to paraphrase, "the stadium in which God and Satan would play football" - a pretty cool idea. One can look at this film in several different ways, but I tend to see it as a mixture between a story about teenage angst, and a cautionary tale about abuse of power. A lot of the angst comes from the girls being the outcasts of the school, the desire to use their magic to get rid of their problems. Let's face it, as teenagers, we all wanted a little bit of magic on our side to deal with whatever problems we were facing. The rest, about abuse of power, is fairly self-explanatory. The final takeaway from yours truly is "be careful what you wish for", as well as there being a karmic factor to one's actions. If I were to make a Top 10 list of "most influential high school films", in general, this would probably make the list. Much like 'Dazed & Confused', it was almost a high school staple. Things took off with this so much, in fact, that because of it, some of the people I went to school with actually got heavily into the wiccan culture, and taking it about as seriously as Ned Flanders takes Christianity. It was sort of mind-blowing, and the whole witch thing would become super popular. I don't know if this is true or not, but I also wonder if the whole trend helped guide younger minds towards 'Harry Potter', whose first book was published just one year after this. There really was something about magic back then. Anyway, with a new one on the horizon for this Halloween (which I intend on reviewing as well), the timing here couldn't be much more perfect. It had been a while since I've actually sat down and watched this, so I wondered how dated it would be. However, I personally thought it held up pretty well. It may look like something very 90s on the surface, but there is something timeless about the story being told, teaching us to curb our power (if we have it) as well as love ourselves enough to face the darkness head on (a little more towards the climax). If nothing else, it's a fun flick for the season, complete with a great, dark soundtrack that will put you in the mood for Halloween. Christine Taylor  One of the best-known roles for Jack in existence has to be Jack Torrence of 1980's 'The Shining'. This is a movie the author of the original source material strongly dislikes due to it being so far off from the book, but we all love it so much because Jack is so awesome in it. Surprisingly, it's even seemingly been put ahead of the book in popularity.
I actually tend to use this as a "shining" example of a film no one really complains about due to its differences from the book its based on. It proves the point that sometimes we just have to separate the book and film as different things altogether in order to appreciate the film for what it is. Though, with that said, 99% of the time the books are better. Our story here has two main focuses. First, we have Jack, a writer and recovering alcoholic who takes his wife, Wendy (Shelly Duvall) and son, Danny (Danny Lloyd) to the Overlook Hotel, as Jack takes a job as winter caretaker. This will mean being shut in for the season with very little outside contact due to a lack of costly winter road maintenance. Seeing it as an opportunity to work on his novel, Jack welcomes the experience with open arms. However, this hotel has a nasty past, and quite literally speaks to Jack in all the wrong ways, playing on his alcoholic cravings and writers block. Soon enough, we find him losing his grip, chopping down doors and announcing his arrival in the style Johnny Carson. The second side to the story is Danny, who harbors a special psychic gift. He learns that he's not alone on this when he meets the facility's chef, Dick Hallorann (Scatman Crothers) who shares his gift. With the hotel already having a shady past in which the former winter caretaker lost his mind and murdered his family, Dick tells Danny to use his special gift to call on him if there's ever any trouble with his Dad. Of course, whether you've seen this before, or have only seen the 'Simpsons' Halloween segment, 'The Shinning', you know how it all goes. Kubrick does a fantastic job here for the time with his visuals and overall mood setting. There's something genuinely uncomfortable about this movie, and so much of it comes from the choice of cinematography. It's a fine example of a film that shows how even the subtle set-up of a certain angle is enough to be creepier than it would be from another angle. There are a lot of wide shots used here to subtly show the presence of the hotel, which really ends up being another character in the film. They bring it back for 'Doctor Sleep', but it's not quite as effective as it is here. Danny, cycling his trike through the hallways before running into those twins is still iconic, and one of my favorite creepy shots. It's even to the point where when I'm staying at a hotel, late at night, I get a bit weary walking the halls. What really nails this movie to the horror history books, though, is Jack's performance. He has always been a great actor, but there was so much here that had him cranking his performance to eleven. Even shots of him being quiet and seemingly calm have him either delivering sarcastic tones or just plain looking crazy. Few people can give that look to the camera that says "yes, I'm crazy, what are you gonna do about it?" but the front runners are Anthony Hopkins in 'Silence of the Lambs' and Jack in 'The Shining'. Had the Oscars been looking in horror's direction back then, he probably would have at least gotten nominated. You'll be one of two minds on this movie. You'll see it for the psychological work of horrific art that it is, or you'll side with Stephen King and lean more towards the book-like telling. If I'm honest, I actually DO like the miniseries more than most. For being something that came straight to TV, it's just fine. But I also don't particularly meet these in the middle. If I wanna throw on a good, creepy horror movie to have a great ride with, I have to lean towards Stanley Kubrick's vision. The miniseries is more to throw on if you want something new or different to check out, but other than Steven Weber's performance as... John Torrance?... it's pretty blasé. And even then, who can hold a candle to Jack's performance as a crazy person?... That is, other than maybe Heath Ledger or Joaquin Phoenix, anyway.  So, of course we know that this series has gone on for a while. Likely, it's finally over, since '5' was released back in 2011. It, much like 'Saw' or 'Paranormal Activity', became something audiences kinda got tired of. There's only so many ways you can do it. That said, I highly recommend the bookends of the series, 'Final Destination' and 'Final Destination 5'.
The first movie features a group of high school students, getting ready to go on a trip overseas to Paris, France. Before the plane takes off, Alex Browning (Devon Sawa) has a precognitive dream, showing the plane that they're on exploding, killing everyone on board. He causes a scene, is dragged off the plane with a select few others, and sure enough, they witness the plane explode from the ground. As the movie goes on, we basically discover that death isn't something that can be cheated, and one by one, in order, these guys get theirs in different and creative ways. All the while, Alex and his new friend Clear Rivers (Ali Larter) seem to be the only ones who fully understand that they all need to be on their toes in order to dodge death - thus making it pretty thrilling and suspenseful. This whole idea was great at the time (I'm going against most critics on this one), but it was soon followed by the exact same deal with a massive traffic collision in 2, a broken down rollercoaster in 3, a race car crash in 4 (entitled 'The Final Destination') and a suspension bridge in 5. As mentioned before, it pretty much just got old and stale, at least until 5. What sets 5 apart from the others is that it's generally self-aware, and gets very creative with its kills. For example, a gymnast who you're 100% convinced is gonna get horribly electrocuted just straight up lands stupidly and breaks her neck. By far, it's the best of the series. However, I had the need to start with the first one 'cause, well, it's just the first one. I'd almost go so far as to say you could watch 1 and 5, not be terribly lost on anything, and get the most from the experience. I'm not sure this one quite plays on fears of death as much as something like 'Arachnophobia' plays on fears of spiders. But I will say that it keeps you on the edge of your seat, especially fully knowing that no one is safe at all. Hell, it even ends on that not so friendly reminder. So, if you're looking for a fun classic thriller, definitely check it out. I find it doesn't quite get the credit it deserves, and I mostly blame the sequels for wearing it thin. But again, 5 is pretty much just awesome. So check those out (along with the in-betweens if you feel so inclined) and see for yourself where you stand on these films. Opinions are generally split down the middle on these, but for myself, I'd say they're kinda the 'Saw' or 'Paranormal Activity' of the early 2000s - some good titles, some terrible titles.  Imagine giving the "puppet supervisor" from 'Team America' / "creature fabricator" from 'Turbo: A Power Rangers Movie' / "stop motion animation supervisor" from 'Elf' and give that guy and his brothers some creative control with their own product. This here, is the end result - however, predating all said movies.
This one comes from the Chiodo brothers, Edward, Stephen and Charles, and boasts one of the most fun oldschool horror titles in existence. One could think of it as a sort of fully self-aware "good/bad" movie. I mean, shit, look at the title! The basic story involves a circus tent from outer space landing on Earth. Of course, this is the vessel these Killer Klowns take to invade our home planet. The plan pretty much involves going around, zapping human beings with a gun that wraps them in a cotton candy cocoon, and taking them on board their ship for, well, reasons. This is one I would probably classify as more of a comedy than a horror movie, and even the worst coulrophobes might not have that bad a time with it. It's pretty damned silly altogether. But that said, it's not like aspects of strange and unusual horror aren't still there to give you a few shivers. In a movie so seemingly silly, that must sound odd, but there are things like what the victim inside the cotton candy cocoons looks like, and even the way the Klowns communicate and laugh has an odd sort of creepiness to it. And lets not forget one scene where some creepy clown is trying to lure a child outside while holding a mallet behind his back. It's not the mallet that's creepy though, it just the imagery of something so reminiscent of every child's worst stranger fears. By no means is any of this stuff truly horrific and terrifying or anything, and your dreams will likely be safe when all said and done. However, I can't deny that the creepiness is there, despite the fact that this movie plays out as such a self-aware comedy over horror. It's kinda what makes it so enjoyable. This movie may not be everyone's cup of tea though, and reviews are seemingly split down the middle. So it's kind of a hard one to sell people on, but I'd just ask that you bear this in mind. If nothing else, this makes for some great fun around Halloween to get you into the holiday spirit. That's when I introduced myself to these Klowns.  We're all afraid of something. I mean, you can sit there and tell me how much you're afraid of nothing, but I feel if one digs deep enough, some kind of fear will be brought up, from the big one of death, to the little ones like spiders. And that brings me to my first suggestion for what I am dubbing "Fear Month", with what is arguably the best spider-related movie ever (and no, none of the 'Spider-Man' movies count). This is generally followed by 'Eight-Legged Freaks', and whatever other movies feature spiders as something to be afraid of.
Arachnophobia, the fear of spiders, is a very common one among people, and this film does a great job of exploiting that fear by keeping things relatively realistic. It's even mentioned throughout the film that, despite these fears, spiders are pretty much completely non-fatal when it comes to human beings, with the exception of maybe the black widow on a small child, or elderly and ill. This movie, smartly, makes it so all our worst fears about spiders become a reality. It all starts when a deadly spider finds its way to the small town of Canaima, California after an expedition to South America. It breeds with a common domestic spider, creating something tiny, but monstrous, in a whole new breed of arachnid that starts taking out not just insects and small animals, but people, in a gruesome fashion. I've always considered this one to be a great film for horror beginners. Not quite as traumatizing as something that's full tilt horror, but creepy enough to sort of leave you on edge after you're done watching it. That is, of course, unless you're already very arachnophobic and just know it's a movie you can't sit through anyway (I actually know a few people who refuse to watch this movie because of their fears). This would also be a bit of an example of horror comedy, but leaning more towards the horror. It does a great job at exploiting these fears, but at the same time adds some light humor with some of the dialogue, and the presence of John Goodman playing a sort of dopey but lovable exterminator. Speaking for myself, I can tolerate the presence of spiders quite well, so this movie doesn't particularly get to me in a big way. But if you are afraid of spiders and want a good adrenaline rush based on your fears (some choose roller coasters, I choose horror movies), it's definitely worth checking out. Whether you suffer from arachnophobia or not though, after a viewing of this one, You might just be hard-pressed going to bed after watching it without thinking of something 8-legged and fuzzy crawling up your leg.  Back in '97, something terrible happened to the superhero movie, and it's name was 'Batman & Robin'. Still considered one of the worst movies of all time, let alone superhero movies, it pretty much killed any further 'Batman' films, and most studios seemed to think the superhero movie couldn't quite be done to full advantage quite yet. So the question was, what now? The answer was to introduce a hero that people may have been familiar with, but they could easily do their own thing with. On top of that, give it an R-rating, because you can get away with more of a dark take on things that way. The final product was 'Blade', and at the time, it blew us all away.
Being that it was released in '98, and R-rated, I didn't manage to catch it in theaters, having just turned 16. This was also back when the theater actually cracked down on underage people who sneaked their way in to R-rating. Nowadays, I'm never surprised to see a group of 5-year-olds wandering in. But upon renting it once it came out, I remember loving it, and wishing I had gotten the chance to see it on the big screen. It was dark, action packed, Blade was a badass, and I even considered the special effects good for the time. That said, they are now so painfully dated, it looks cartoonish, but the rest of what I enjoy about it is certainly still there. The film starts with a very brief backstory in which a woman, freshly bitten by a vampire, gives birth to Blade. 30 years later, Blade is known as the "Day Walker", as somehow when the infection carried over to him as a baby, he managed to absorb all of a vampire's strength with none of the weaknesses. However, the blood thirst was one thing that he managed to inherit, which he staves off, using a consistent injection of special syrum. Blade's villain in this is a young, turned vampire (in other words, not pure-blood) named Deacon Frost (Stephen Dorff) who has big plans for the vampire world, wishing for them to take it over, and essentially wiping out all humans. I like to refer to this as "Magneto Style". Anyway, it's the basic story of the race between hero, who wants to prevent, and villain, who wants to destroy. It's not entirely a new concept. For it's time, 'Blade' was considered something very special, and is often claimed to be the spark of the new superhero movie. For the most part, people seem to give that title to 'X-Men'. Personally, I tend to side with this one a bit more as the "spark", where 'X-Men' more just got the ball rolling. Of course, 'X-Men' also wasn't R-rated, so there were still some limitations with this and a younger audience. Watching it now, there's a lot more one can nitpick about, not the least of which being the laughable CG effects. I'd even say they were actually pretty bad for the time, but that's CG in the late 90s for you - not quite developed to perfection yet. The villain, Deacon Frost also comes across as a little weak. I remembered him being a total badass the first few times I watched this, but nowadays I guess I just see the douchebag shining through a bit more. Other ideas they have here are silly, like the vampires using sunscreen to get around in the sunlight without dying. But I mean, the sun is as strong as it is, so that's just confusing. It's just not quite as great as I remembered it, and by today's standards, there's cheesiness spilling out of it's seriousness. That said, it's still a fun movie, and it marks an R-rated superhero movie that came along, and succeeded, way before 'Deadpool' did it's thing. 'Deadpool' wasn't really a first, it was just resurrecting an idea that studios seemed to forget about - likely because PG and PG-13 offers itself to a wider audience. But isn't it strange that they seemed to have something special here, and never even made a string of R-rated superhero movies? It's not perfect by any means, but it's kind of a gem for it's era.  We are fast approaching my favorite season, Fall. This means colorful leaves, cooler hoodie weather, Thanksgiving feasts and, of course, the end all be all of holidays for yours truly, Halloween! I do have a whole special getting rolled out next month, but I'd like to take this opportunity to get the jump on recommending some of my favorite horror comedies. Let us start with one of the best of recent years, 'Tucker and Dale vs Evil'.
Our story starts out as most American horror does. A bunch of teens head out on a camping trip somewhere in West Virginia. Automatically reminiscent of a typical 'Friday the 13th' setup, it's easy enough for the audience to realize that not everyone is gonna be safe here. Although, there tends to be some mystery behind it, as nothing to us seems directly threatening. Tucker (Alan Tudyk) and Dale (Tyler Labine) are introduced as the film's would-be psycho killers, but we soon find out that they're just a couple of redneck dudes. All they wanna do is head for a cabin in the woods that was left to them, do some repairs, and make themselves a nice retreat for the summer. The key scene has the teens running into them at a gas station, where they give off a sort of creepy vibe. To the teens, they're a couple of dangerous looking freaks, but in truth, they're just kinda awkward and shy - namely Dale. Coincidentally enough, the teens end up camping out very close to the cabin Tucker and Dale are repairing. When one of the girls, Allison (Katrina Bowden) wipes out when attempting to go for a swim, Tucker and Dale rescue her. However, the other kids still see them as crazies, and assume that they straight up knocked her out and kidnapped her. So, they take it upon themselves to go retrieve her, lead by Chad (Jesse Moss). What follows is dark hilarity at it's finest, as no one seems to know what's going on and the body count keeps piling up. The whole thing is about misunderstandings, and clearly the moral is "don't judge a book by it's cover". BUT the idea is truly original, and one that's surprisingly not bee explored all that much. It plays as a "what if" scenario in which the question is essentially "what if all this time Jason Voorhees was just misunderstood and wasn't actually killing these kids?" The question remains, what DOES kill these kids? Well, I won't tell you because it's pretty damn funny and truly highlights the stupidity of the teen victims in almost any horror movie. So, if you're looking for something that might get you into the spirit of Halloween nice and early, I highly recommend this title. I've seen it more times that I care to admit, but it does end up being one of those titles you can keep coming back to. |
Categories
All
Archives
September 2022
|
RSS Feed