31 Days of Halloween

I don't know, I hear a lot of people say "it's not really a horror movie and shouldn't be judged that way" but... I think it kind of is trying to be a horror movie and sort of fails at it.  I mean, when you have a scene like a woman opening a closet only to have a ghost pop out of it and yell "boo" you are kind of killing the "gothic romance" vibe.  

Also the fact that the movie has its audience being way out ahead of the idiot protagonist is kind of a big problem with the movie's first half.

Day Somethingth
Gremlins



I probably haven't seen Gremlins since I was a kid, and honestly I really just remember thinking Gizmo was cute.  Am I a prude if I think this is not a really good movie?  Even if I think its fun anyways?

The design of Gizmo and of the gremlins themselves is pretty awesome and holds up well.  The acting.... does not.  Was it a choice to have acting that bad?  And if so, why?  It feels like this movie can't decide if it wants to be a monster b-movie or be a legitimate family thriller along the lines of Poltergeist.  But wow, that acting is terrible.  Those people didn't act like anything was out of the ordinary at any point.

The Omen is two good death scenes surrounded by a whole lot of stupid and a pretty good score.

The way I see it, the movie's intention isn't to scare the audience, but rather to spin this yarn about Edith and her crazy new husband and sister-in-law.  The ghosts/horror elements are just the cherry on top.  After the first ten minutes, how long does the movie go before we see another ghost?  An hour, at least.  And all the intervening time is spent establishing the real story.

31 DAYS OF HALLOWEEN

LET'S TALK BLU-RAY'S

THE THING (1982)



I spent like 6 hours going through this blu-ray the other day. There's new special features plus ones from the 90's DVD. It's a bit repetitive but still nice to have. The 2K transfer is fantastic. Although I'm not as picky as Dracula so I can't say it has the full seal of approval. The movie holds up pretty well. It's a bit of a slow burn but the great moments are still great. Now here's the part that stood out to me. Since the special features are a mixture of old and new stuff, you're able to compare the various film qualities. There's the original theatrical trailer in all its 1982 glory. There's TV spots in their... betamax quality? I think that was still the industry standard at the time. In the 90's documentary, you see clips from the DVD. The main difference in all four is the lighting. The trailer and the DVD clips are really dark. There are scenes where you barely see what's going on. The TV spots and the 2K blu-ray are bright. Even in nighttime scenes and low-light interiors you can see every detail. I thought that was very interesting. From what I saw, there's no feature on the 2K restoration, but it's possible the details are included in the commentary tracks.


ARMY OF DARKNESS (1992)



This blu-ray features FOUR versions of the movie: theatrical, director's cut, international and the TV version. I don't have time to watch all four before Halloween and I don't think I need to. I watched the director's cut. The only difference from the theatrical version is that sex scene, which is in the TV version so you've probably seen it already, and the original ending. Also, I think some shots linger a bit longer. The movie felt slower than I remember. Then again, I'm probably just thinking of the TV version. I've seen that one more than the theatrical cut. The special features are pretty standard. I'm assuming the past DVD's and Blu-Ray's didn't have much features cause there isn't too many old stuff here. Most of it is brand new. They even manage to plug Ash vs Evil Dead on Starz. The one thing that stood out is the clips from the theatrical version. The colors seem very... artificial. It's possible they may have tampered with it. I'm gonna have to watch the theatrical version and see what's going on. The director's cut has the natural looking colors you associate with the movie. It also doesn't have that new-looking quality that come with most blu-rays. It has that 90's film quality. It's possible they just cleaned it up and upgraded it to 2K, but didn't do a restoration. To me it's fine. I can live with both. The Indiana Jones blu-ray is a great example. Temple of Doom and Last Crusade look brand new, but Raiders still has that 80's look to it. I don't know the details of why things like that happen. I just go along with it as long as it looks good.

Film Thirty: The Witch (2016)
I saw this and did a full review of this movie when it came out earlier this year so I’ll be brief right now, in part because I don’t have much to add except that it totally holds up. I was once again amazed by it’s incredible attention to detail, its chilling imagery, its acute understanding of both religious extremism, its uncompromising adherence to its aesthetic and principles. That it was made by a first time director is amazing and also worrying in that I don’t know how Robert Eggers can possibly follow this up given that it seems like a movie that he’s been meticulously planning out since he was quite young: how many other movies can he use his deep knowledge of New England folklore for? Anyway, a re-watch does reveal a few more tidbits

but more importantly it just gave me one more shot at admiring the film’s great imagery and incredible control. This will go down as a horror classic.
***** out of Five

Day somethingorother
Unfriended



I ... didn't hate this. And there's plenty to hate, I will admit. The characters are completely unlikable, its full of "teenager speak", and the melodrama is amped up to eye-rolling levels in parts (especially the never-have-i game). Also, the final shot is awful and completely cliched.

And yet I was still drawn in. I didn't seek this movie out; it was on TV and I just sort of started watching it. I was intrigued by the gimmicky concept of having the movie take place entirely on this girl's desktop. Its an interesting twist on the found-footage format of horror films. I thought that the scare moments worked for the most part (not all- looking at you blender). I also liked how the ghost manipulated their computers in small ways.

So I don't think I can recommend it really. Its full of cliched "cool kid" characters who get overly dramatic, love to swear and yell a lot, and have already lived very seedy lives apparently. But there was something there that grabbed my attention anyway.

IanTheCool Dracula

The new transfer for The Thing was supervised by the cinematographer, so it should be closer to the original intent. There's no feature on it, but there is a new commentary track with him in it, so he probably goes into details there. To me, in my 2010 HD TV, it looks great. That leads us now to Army of Darkness. Personally, I've never experienced that glossy look. It might just be a 2016 4K TV problem. With my mom's TV this past summer it took a couple of days to get all the settings right. That's not an issue I faced with my TV. Here, the movie either looks brand new or it retains some of its aged quality. In regards to Army of Darkness, the director's cut looks fine. It's the theatrical version that seems a bit off cause of the colors.

Day Twenty Four to Day Thirty: Random Catch-Up


The Ring


This is probably one of the most culturally significant horror films of the 2000s and as such it sort of felt like I'd seen it before even though this was my first time viewing it. This is probably the best show case for Gore Verbinski's talents as a director. There's some beautiful imagery here and the dreadful tone created is perfect. I also really dig Naomi Watts performance and she helps bring some added legitimacy to the film. The urban legend set up is really neat and the film develops a really engaging mystery. I do think the third act is a little drawn out and I'm not entirely pleased with where it ends up, but it's a hell of a ride all the same.

Also, the actual video the characters watch is pretty fucking rad.

A-


Jacob's Ladder


Few films are able to evoke the same sense of powerlessness brought in by a nightmare like Jacob's Ladder. The film follows Vietnam veteran Jacob Singer who, following his return home, the death of a son and a collapsed marriage, is plagued by strange hallucinations and visions. What is real and what isn't is largely ambiguous. Jacob discovers several of his former comrades are suffering as well, and begin to suspect the US Army is somehow responsible for their suffering. The film is almost a Polanski-esque exploration of paranoia, albeit with a heightened edge. Director Adrian Lyne does an excellent job creating the sense of a visual hell on screen, crafts some very creepy sequences, and gets great performances from his lead actors.

Jacob's Ladder is a haunting film, one which is overtly disturbing while watching and lingers long after. It's also a perfect example of how to make a horror film beyond just the scares. The film is clearly meant to examine the unethical choices made by the United States in the Vietnam War, as well as a mediation on dying and spirituality. If the film has any problem, it's that the ending is something of a disappointment. It isn't bad or anything, it just lacks the right kind of punch, either viscerally or emotionally. Hell of a journey though.

A

The Keep


"This was directed by Michael Mann?" is a thought I had repeatedly while watching The Keep. The film, which revoles around some Nazi soldiers who stumble across a "keep" containing a powerful demon which begins killing them, is terrible. Mann's original cut of the film was apparently well over three hours so the studio took it away and cut it down to an hour and 40 minutes. That explains the unorganized plot, bizarre pacing, and general lapses in logic, but even with that aside this is still a really awful movie. Mann's decisions are just baffling. From the random use of slow motion, to the dull cinematography, poor visual effects, boring performances, and disorienting staging, I can't help but wonder what the dude was thinking. I know this was early in his career, but he had already made the compelling ad very sharp Thief so I'm really not sure what happened. Of course, it doesn't help that the story is adapting seems like a total waste. I mean, Nazis fighting an evil demon? That sounds like the type of horrible schlock you see Red Letter Media ripping into on "Best of the Worst", not something made by Michael fucking Mann.

This is an all around awful movie and I'm struggling to find anything remotely positive to say. I suppose the Tangerine Dream score sounded cool, but it also didn't match the period setting of the film at all and further took me out of the movie. Fuck it, The Keep sucks.

F


Splice


Now here's an interesting little gem from the beginning of the decade; a sci-fi/horror film which actually leans heavier into science-fiction. Splice tells the story of a group of scientists who fuse human DNA with that of a hybrid animal and in the process create a new creature called Dren, whom they will watch grow from an infant to a child to a teenager of sorts. Really, the film is more concerned with Dren's growth than anything and it's interesting to watch this unfold. There's some exploration of nature vs. nurture and the film also isn't afraid to venture into some Cronenberg like weird sexual territory. The make-up effects used to bring Dren to life are awesome and Delphine Chanéac is really good in the role. Unfortunately, the film does go off the rails at the end when it embraces horror and becomes a full on monster movie, more out of obligation than anything. It's disappointing to see a film so steeped in ideas end up going down such a lazy path, but the journey was still interesting and ultimately rewarding.

B+


The Abominable Dr. Phibes


Every Thursday of last month, TCM ran a spotlight on the films of American International Pictures, a company which specialized in low-budget genre films. I ended up skipping most of these films (busy with other films, videogames, books, work, etc) but I did wanna make time for at least one and The Abominable Dr. Phibes seemed a good choice. Vincent Price plays a deformed concert pianist who takes vengeance on the nine doctors who failed to save his dying wife. While the film has a lot of murders, the set-pieces weren't nearly as interesting or creative as I was hoping for. However the film does have a decent atmosphere thanks to the cool colourful cinematography, costumes, and sets. On the whole, I didn't really connect with the story all that much, but the superficial elements were fun.

C+


Monster House


Even as a kid I never had any interest in Monster House and that's my loss because this is actually a really fun movie. The film wisely avoids trying to be photo-realistic with its CGI animation and instead plays up the more stylized visuals of the characters. Speaking of stylized visuals, the titular house is a really cool piece of film design and the way different features are humanized is quite fun. The story itself is a fairly basic one of kids who take it upon themselves to fight an evil force, but its elevated the characters. The central trio are likable and well-defined, but the supporting cast is filled out with funny people like a pair of cops who come in a few times or an obsessed arcade gamer. It's also neat that the film is set in the 1980s, but it doesn't make a big deal out of that outside of some strong background details.

Where the film goes wrong is its climax, which is just too ridiculous for its own good and goes on too long. Another problem is the end is meant to take place on a larger scale, but we still only see four characters, making their suburban neighbourhood feel under populated. Still, this is a really fun movie and a nice gem from the 2000s explosion of kids movies.

B


The Virgin Spring


In medieval Sweden, a young girl travels from her farm to take candles to church. She is stopped, raped, and murdered by three herdsmen. The herdsmen later find themselves staying at the farm of the girl's parents, who slowly discover what happened to their daughter. This is a very simple plot, but there is a lot going on in this Ingmar Begman film. At the center is the classic Bergman theme of the absence of God. The family is revealed to be highly religious and spiritual. As such, the violence is not just viscerally horrifying to them, but confusing. Why would God allow such pointless cruelty to occur? And the unspoken question; why to this family which has been so loyal? The film also implies that this family has seen other hardships in the past, which adds resonance to the themes at hand. There's also some interesting material regarding guilt and the way different members of family feel as if they are responsible for the horror.

Beyond theme, the film is another exceptionally well-crafted piece from Bergman, one which is well-paced, highly engaging, and emotionally charged. Bergman takes time to develop his characters and establish the relationships in the family in the first act, which makes the the other two thirds all the more impactful. The performances are also great, and Sven Nykvist's cinematography is incredibly striking. On the most basic and visceral level, the film is very thrilling and full of powerful moments. The Virgin Spring is no easy watch, but it is a great and thoughtful work from an artist exploring important ideas.

A+

I think I'm detecting a pattern. 

31 DAYS OF ... OH SHIT! ... IT'S HALLOWEEN!

10 CLOVERFIELD LANE (2016)



A few weeks ago Doomsday was shocked to learn that people gave a shit about Boyhood. It would be easy to roast him, but I had a similar experience a few months back. I learned that people cared about Cloverfield. Didn't we all hate that movie because of the shaky cam? That's my memory from 2007. J.J. Abrams must have had the same recollection because 9 years later he released a random sequel that has little in common with the original. He's just using the name for branding. That's fine with me. Is it fine with everyone else? Of course not. Out of nowhere, passionate fans of Cloverfield came out to criticize the sequel for a long list of silly reasons. My question is: if this had NOTHING to do with Cloverfield, would people still be upset? Of course not.

Mary Elizabeth Winstead stars as Michelle, a wannabe fashion designer who wakes up in a bunker after a car accident. At first she thinks she's been kidnapped, but in typical J.J. Abrams style, there's a twist. She's actually been rescued from an alien apocalypse. Seriously. Her hero is a man named Howard, played by John Goodman. Howard is a weirdo and she never believes his story about an alien invasion, but she plays along until she finds a way to escape. When she does, guess what, there's aliens everywhere. Oh, J.J., never change.

Now, what are people's beef with 10 Cloverfield Lane? For starters, it takes place almost entirely in the bunker. Where's the excitement? Remember all that great shaky cam from the original? This is boring. The camera doesn't move and people don't go anywhere. Horrendous! Secondly, there are unresolved issues with Howard. There are details from his past that are not fully explored. I think people don't realize the movie is from the point of view of Michelle. She doesn't give a fuck about Howard. She just wants to get the hell out of there. That leads us to... the ending. This is where people lose their mind. Howard wasn't lying. There's aliens killing people and Michelle is now in the middle of it. It's irony.

10 Cloverfield Lane plays out like a great Twilight Zone or even a great Tales from the Crypt. You can look at it in two ways. Michelle goes from a bad situation to a worse one and Howard built a bunker to protect himself but ends up getting killed by the person inside the bunker. It's irony. Forget Cloverfield. Forget Howard's past. Focus on the big picture. That's not to say the small details should be ignored. I'm just saying the faults aren't meaningful enough to get worked up about. This isn't a great movie, but it's a really good one.

This leads to the final topic. We have two months left in the year. How disappointing was 2016? Regardless of your feelings towards 10 Cloverland Lane, you can't deny it's one of the best movies of the year and features two of the best performances of the year. You think the Academy Awards will bother to acknowledge that? Of course not. They won't even acknowledge The Nice Guys. Horror/Thrillers can't catch a break, not even on a mediocre year.


HAPPY HALLOWEEN!