Category Archives: Horror

10 Cloverfield Lane-2016

10 Cloverfield Lane-2016

Director Dan Trachtenberg

Starring Mary Elizabeth Winstead,  John Goodman

Scott’s Review #643

Reviewed May 11, 2017

Grade: B+

10 Cloverfield Lane is a 2016 psychological thriller billed as somewhat of a successor to the 2008 hit Cloverfield, though I fail to see the apparent correlation between the films.

Furthermore, the two stories seemingly have little or nothing to do with one another.

Despite these pesky details, 10 Cloverfield Lane is a perfect, edge-of-your-seat type film that is unpredictable and thought-provoking.

By the time the credits roll, it is a film worthy of discussion—an excellent quality for a movie.

Without any dialogue during the opening sequence (a clever move), we meet Michelle (Mary Elizabeth Winstead), a twenty-something woman presumably on the outs with her boyfriend, who we never see.

Alone, she flees their residence and drives into the night to parts unknown. The couple is metropolitan, living in central New Orleans.

Now in the middle of Louisiana, and hearing radio reports of strange blackouts, Michelle is soon involved in a terrible car accident. When she awakens, she finds herself chained to a bed inside a small bunker inhabited by two men, Howard (John Goodman) and Emmitt (John Gallagher, Jr.).

They insist that the outside world is no longer and all human beings are dead as a result of a catastrophic attack. Initially skeptical, Michelle slowly uncovers various clues that baffle her about the truth.

10 Cloverfield Lane may very well be John Goodman’s best film performance.

He plays Howard with gusto and mystery, and the audience is primarily baffled about whether to trust this man. Is he a vicious abductor, creating a make-believe world to keep Michelle hostage-or is he telling the truth?

He plays the character as creepy and surly but with a tinge of vulnerability and sadness.

I certainly was both fascinated and confused by Howard and could not determine his true motivations.

Winstead also deserves credit for portraying a strong yet sympathetic female character who is never reduced to playing a victim, a testament to the actress’s ability.

Over the years, Winstead has appeared in several duds (Black Christmas, 2006, and The Thing, 2011), so seeing her in a film worthy of her talents is nice.

Michelle is intelligent and determined to deduce her surroundings and formulate a clever escape plan. However, in a nice twist, the filmmakers ask whether she wants to leave the safety of her bunker after all.

Producer J.J. Abrams weaves a story with twists and turns, keeping the tension and interest high throughout the film. The primary question that reoccurs is, “What on earth lies outside of the bunker?”

I enjoy that this film is not the typical, cookie-cutter fare in which we root for the female victim to escape the clutches of a male maniac—it is much deeper and more complex than that.

Most enjoyable is how events slowly unfold, and we, the audience, begin to question thoughts we have harbored throughout the run of the film.

A perfect example of this comes in the final chapter, when events take off in an entirely different direction than the rest of the film. I felt a bit suffocated inside the bunker. What a relief to finally have some action occur outside of this location and into the fresh air.

But what lurks in this new setting?

One slight oddity is that the film includes Bradley Cooper’s voice as Michelle’s boyfriend, Ben, who is heard only by telephone. I did not notice this until the credits rolled, and it seemed like a silly and unnecessary inclusion.

Also, we never know the turmoil between Michelle and Ben. Is their domestic trouble simply plot-driven antics, or does it have a deeper meaning?

In a nutshell, 10 Cloverfield Lane (2016) is a film best watched when one does not know the first thing about the plot or circumstances surrounding events.

The film was enjoyable because I did not know the twist, the conclusion, or even who starred in it. This kept all of the elements of surprise from me, making it more enjoyable.

The Innocents-1961

The Innocents-1961

Director Jack Clayton

Starring Deborah Kerr

Top 100 Films #98        Top 20 Horror Films #19

Scott’s Review #639

Reviewed April 29, 2017

Grade: A

The Innocents is a 1961 British psychological horror film that is a ghost story of sorts and based on the novella, The Turn of the Screw by Henry James.

Though horror, it contains few traditional elements, such as contrived frights, jumps, and blood. Instead, the film succeeds by using lighting and magnificent cinematography by Freddie Francis.

And, of course, fantastic storytelling and direction from Jack Clayton.

Deborah Kerr gives an excellent turn as a beleaguered governess hired by a wealthy bachelor (Michael Redgrave) to tend to his young niece and nephew- Flora and Miles.

The setting is a lavish, yet creepy, mansion outside London. As the Uncle goes away to India on business, Miss Giddens, with no previous experience, is left to tend to Flora and Miles, who both begin acting strangely.

To complicate matters, Miss Giddens sees sinister ghosts lurking around the property. The ghosts are former household servants who have died, whom Miss Giddens has never met.

Miss Giddens is assisted only by the kindly housekeeper, Mrs. Grose, who tells her about the servant’s tragic deaths.

The Innocents, shot in black and white, uses sound to its advantage. This, combined with the interesting camera angles and focus shots—mainly of the ghosts Miss Giddens sees—makes the film unique and scary.

When she hears strange voices, she becomes convinced that Miles and Flora are playing tricks on her, engaging in games. The whispers’ sounds are haunting and do wonders for the effects and chill the viewer will undoubtedly feel as the film progresses.

Is Miss Giddens imagining the voices and visions, or is this an actual reality? Could the children be sinister and playing a vicious prank on her? Could Mrs. Grose be evil?

Nobody else within the household sees or hears anything amiss- or admits to it.

Kerr, a treasured actress, plays the part with emotional facial expressions and genuine fear, so much so that she will win the audience over as we side and empathize with her character. Still, is she a woman on the verge of a mental breakdown? Does she have past mental problems?

Like the uncle, we know nothing of her past, only that she claims to be a minister’s daughter. How, then, does she have stylish, expensive clothes? Could she only be pretending to be a governess? Has she run away from her past?

The Turn of the Screw is a true ghost story, but The Innocents is a bit different- it relies upon, successfully, as more of a character-driven story.

As Miss Giddens becomes convinced that both children have become possessed by the servants’ spirits, she makes it her mission to rescue them from the spirits. We have an ominous feeling that events will not end well, and they do not.

Several scenes will frighten the viewer- as Miss Giddens sees a haggard ghost (the female servant) quietly standing in the distance near a lake as Flora dances chirpily, the image of the faraway ghost figure is eerie and well-shot.

The film draws comparisons to the classic Hitchcock film Rebecca (1940). Each is British, takes place in large mansions, and features dead characters as complex villains.

Also, the sanity of the main character is in question.

With a compelling story and the nuts and bolts surrounding the tale to add clever effects and a chilling conclusion, the film succeeds as an excellent and intelligent horror film.

With great acting all around, including fantastic performances by child actors, The Innocents (1961) scares the daylights out of any horror fan and uses exterior and interior scenes to make the film an all-around marvel.

Get Out-2017

Get Out-2017

Director-Jordan Peele

Starring-Daniel Kaluuya, Allison Williams

Scott’s Review #629

Reviewed March 28, 2017

Grade: A

Get Out, a modern-day horror film, is a unique film, mixing classic horror elements (especially great camera angles to elicit jumps) with bits of slapstick humor, not done very often in horror.

In the case of Get Out, all of these tidbits come together in a marvelous experience, and the subject matter is rather risqué (see below), a plus for me as I like films that push the envelope a bit.

Certainly, as with most horror films, liberties must be taken in the way of plot points and continuity issues, but this film is an impressive work. Kudos, given the film, is director Jordan Peele’s directorial film debut.

Chris Washington is a young photographer, handsome, educated, and enjoying life. He is black, and his girlfriend, Rose, is a pretty white girl from an affluent upbringing- it is implied that they are opposites on the social scale.

One weekend, they traverse out of the city (presumably New York City) to visit Rose’s parents in the country. Her parents, Dean and Missy, own a sprawling estate with acres of land. Nervous to meet Rose’s parents and make a good first impression, Chris notices that Dean and Missy’s servants are all black and act in quite a peculiar fashion.

Soon, it is revealed that Chris’s mother died when he was a little boy and when Chris is hypnotized by Missy, things begin to go from strange to downright scary.

I adore how the film immediately feels ominous- there is simply something not “right” with the situation-even before Chris and Rose arrive at her parent’s estate, something seems off. They hit and kill a deer with their car, the policeman who aids them seems racist, and despite Rose seeming fresh-faced, she also seems not to be trusted.

There are so many ominous warnings not to approach her parent’s house, that when they finally do arrive the audience is compelled to nervously watch for more, perhaps while biting fingernails.

Jordan Peele’s decision to have everything cheery and bright during most of the film only makes the audience wonder what secrets are lurking about in the grand estate- the setting where most of the action takes place.

When the pair finally arrive at her parent’s house everything is out of whack. The film undoubtedly borrows from The Stepford Wives in the pleasant, almost robotic cheerfulness of some of the characters.

The big reveal and the rather objectification of all of the black characters- specifically black males- can certainly be cause for debate. The racial motives of the characters are also only skimmed over and never discussed or rationalized in detail.

The physical strength and resilience of the black male are mentioned a few times and Rose’s parents being a psychologist and a neurosurgeon are major points in the story, but the intentions are somewhat wishy-washy and hardly plausible.

In a wise move, Peele mixes a hilarious scene amid the doom and gloom. The comic relief of the film, Rod, Chris’s best friend, and proud TSA agent, calls the police and describes in detail his fears of a sex slave operation, which results in the police having a good guffaw- at Rod’s expense. Rod serving as an instrumental part of the film’s conclusion is a fantastic decision- mixing dark humor with more grotesque horror moments.

This succeeds in setting Get Out well above the traditional genre.

The acting by all parties is believable and deserving of acclaim, but newcomer (to me) Daniel Kaluuya carries the film very well, even offering more than one heartfelt dramatic scene, mostly when remembering his mother.

Allison Williams (a dead ringer for a young Jennifer Connelly) is also a marvel, especially as the character changes direction mid-stream and essentially becomes a different character.

Fantastic are the throwback elements of The Stepford Wives, complete with a similar setting. The film does not reveal whether “in the country” is Connecticut or upstate New York-Stepford Wives was Connecticut.

Get Out is a fresh, novel approach to the standard elements of horror, mixing comedy and aspects of race into a story brimming with suspense, good frights, and especially, interesting camera angles.

This film, a great success at the box office, does not seem like the sequel type, but if so, I am intrigued by what more can be done with it.

Oscar Nominations: Best Picture, Best Director-Jordan Peele, Best Actor-Daniel Kaluuya, Best Original Screenplay (won)

Independent Spirit Award Nominations: Best Feature (won), Best Director-Jordan Peele (won), Best Male Lead-Daniel Kaluuya, Best Screenplay, Best Editing

Chained-2012

Chained-2012

Director Jennifer Lynch

Starring Vincent D’Onofrio

Scott’s Review #627

Reviewed March 24, 2017

Grade: B-

Chained is a 2012 independent horror film directed by Jennifer Lynch, who is the daughter of the brilliant film and television director, David Lynch.

His influence is readily felt throughout.

The film is an exercise in cerebral, psychological horror, and is quite mesmerizing for most of the experience. The ending, however, is the pits and takes away from the enjoyment of the rest of the film in its asinine, quickly wrapped-up, conclusion.

The film is set in an unknown area- all the audience knows is a  decrepit, isolated, cabin in the middle of nowhere and that the shack exists in somewhat proximity to a college town.

Since the film is shot in Canada that is a good enough locale for me to accept.

One day a seemingly happy husband drops off his wife and nine-year-old son at the movies but implores them to take a taxi home as the bus is too dangerous. When they heed his advice, they are accosted by a deranged serial killer, Bob (D’Onofrio), who drives a cab and whisks them away to his remote home.

After he kills the mother, he makes the son, whom he re-names Rabbit, his slave, reducing him to household chores and a somewhat accomplice to the subsequent victims he brings home.

As the years pass and Bob continues to kill, he is determined to have, a now mature, Rabbit, follow in his footsteps.

A large chunk of Chained (and the film is aptly named because Bob commonly keeps Rabbit chained) takes place in Bob’s lonely home and Bob and Rabbit are all each other have for support. Bob presumably earns a living by stealing the cash his victims carry.

Many scenes of a binding nature, albeit perverse, are featured as the two dole away the time between Bob’s kills, almost like a father and son.

Jennifer Lynch wisely moves the film at a slow pace for appropriate build-up.

Bob’s psychologically troubled childhood is told through flashbacks as he is victimized by his abusive father and forced to have sex with his mother, who blames him rather than her husband.

As a result, Bob hates women, and lures victim after victim into his cab and then slices and dices them back at his home.

Bob is sympathetic, like a wounded bird, and whether he rapes the victims before killing them is unclear, as much happens off-screen.

The cabin is purposely suffocating and when Bob teaches Rabbit intellectual facts and encourages him to read and study to become smart, it is a bonding experience.

Slowly, Bob trusts Rabbit more and more.

When Bob makes Rabbit pick out a young girl in a school yearbook to kill, the film kicks into high gear. Suddenly, it becomes vague whether Rabbit is loyal to Bob or still determined to escape. Will he help his intended victim instead of killing her?

David Lynch’s imprint is blatant in both the pacing of the film and more specifically in the low hum musical score, common in his films.

Daughter Jennifer knows her father’s techniques as they continually come into play. A nice homage to Mulholland Drive (1992) appears when a sweet older couple rides in the back of Bob’s cab, reminiscent of the older couple featured in Mulholland Drive.

The gloomy ambiance is highly effective in Chained and the relationship between Bob and Rabbit, not sexual or overly violent, becomes rather sweet in some moments.

The rushed conclusion of the film is disastrous and Lynch’s attempt at a twist goes haywire in the “makes sense” department.

After a compelling fight scene with Bob, Rabbit finally kills him, escapes his clutches, and returns to his father’s open arms (now newly re-married with another son) only to reveal to his father that he knows he orchestrated Rabbit and his mom’s abduction years ago and that Bob is Rabbit’s uncle!

To matters even more confusing, after a dramatic event, Rabbit is sent away yet again and returns to the cabin as his only safe place.

This final act is a real dog, makes little sense, and is tough to digest.

I will give some liberties to 2012’s Chained since the director is spawned from the great David Lynch and the mood and several characteristics mirror his work, but still with her unique vision an obvious characteristic.

Most of the film is a solid effort, but due to the ending of the film being such a letdown, the body of work seems incomplete.

King Kong-1933

King Kong-1933

Director Merian C. Cooper, Ernest B. Schoedsack

Starring Fay Wray, Robert Armstrong

Scott’s Review #624

Reviewed March 11, 2017

Grade: A

The original, black-and-white 1933 version of King Kong (a few other remakes or reboots followed) is a masterful achievement in special effects never before done in film. It is also a great horror/adventure film that is timeless in its look and feel, capturing 1930s New York City, especially in majestic fashion.

Some of the dialogue and scenes are now dated or slightly racist, but the film still holds up well as an overall lesson in film exploration and is a treasure to watch again and again.

The film is a take on the classic tale Beauty and the Beast, sans the happy ending.

In the watery harbors of New York City, filmmaker Carl Denham (Robert Armstrong) prepares to embark, via ship, on a journey to film his latest picture.

Known for films about exotic wildlife, he has a film to end all movies in mind and, reluctantly, is talked into casting a female lead in the part. He scours the streets of New York City, finding broke and hungry Ann (Fay Wray)—a struggling actress unable to find work. She agrees to the role and heads off to a destination unknown.

Weeks later, he reveals to the crew that they are headed for Skull Island, a secret island known for pre-historic creatures and a beast only known as “Kong.”

Amid the voyage to the island, Ann and First Mate Jack Driscoll (Bruce Cabot) fall madly in love, giving the film a nice romantic slant along with the male-driven adventure story.

The adventure begins when the crew arrives at Skull Island to find a weird, ancient ritual marriage occurring among the tribal people. All hell breaks loose when the dangerous “King Kong” escapes from captivity and falls in love with Ann.

Mixed in with the story are enormous dinosaurs who destroy everything in their paths, including many of the men from the island and the film crew.

As I watched the film in 2017, not too far from 100 years after its incarnation, I often sat in wonderment, amazed at how the filmmakers achieved the luminous special effects throughout the second half of the film.

Given that the film is in black and white, the contrast between the dark, enormous ape (Kong) and the bright New York City and the majestic Empire State Building is prominently featured in the final, climactic act.

The scenes of a struggling Ann in King Kong’s hand seem flawless and believable. I marvel at how these scenes were shot and the enormous amount of effort it took to make them dramatic and not hokey-looking.

Since the film was made “pre-code”, several shocking scenes exist- when Kong rips off Ann’s clothes as she struggles in his palm and Kong’s stepping on and squashing men are featured sparing no graphic details.

In addition to the great adventure story of King Kong, there is also a tender love story and a bit of melancholy. King Kong is not so much a dangerous creature; instead, he has fallen in love with Ann and serves as her protector.

He is a scared animal, chained and confined, and subsequently shown to a stuffy Broadway crowd as entertainment—he becomes angry. I find Kong to be a sympathetic, misunderstood character. Because the human beings in the story are frightened, he becomes their enemy. He adores Ann and would not harm her in any way, but he is perceived as vicious, which he is not.

It can be argued who the real villain of the story is. Would it not have been filmmaker Carl, intent on exploiting King Kong and gaining profit from it? Is it the tribe people who keep Kong locked up, or is it for their protection?

My favorite scene is the climax of the film. After taking Ann from a hotel room, he scales the Empire State Building and is pursued by four military airplanes.

When he sets Ann down on the rooftop ledge, he battles the planes, only to sadly topple down to the ground- dead. As he swipes at the aircraft and succumbs to gunshot wounds, it is a sad and powerful scene.

King Kong (1933) is a legendary film. Audiences will empathize with the “villain” of the story, be impressed by the technical nuances, and enjoy the conventional and unconventional love stories presented.

One thing is sure: King Kong is one of the most influential films ever made.

Happy Birthday to Me-1981

Happy Birthday to Me-1981

Director J. Lee Thompson

Starring Melissa Sue Anderson, Glenn Ford

Scott’s Review #621

Reviewed March 4, 2017

Grade: A-

Happy Birthday to Me is a 1981 slasher film that I fondly remember scaring the shit out of me as a little kid-too young to be watching a film of this nature, but sneaking into my parent’s bedroom with my brother to catch it on HBO.

Certain that the film helped shape my passion for the horror genre, I hold a fondness for it- critics be damned. My opinion is that the film is a small treasure in the land of 1980s slasher films, containing a neat whodunit and a grotesque ending.

Melissa Sue Anderson, desiring to break out of her nice television persona thanks to the wholesome Little House on the Prairie, is cast in the lead role.

Happy Birthday to Me also achieves some merit since the film is directed by acclaimed British director, J. Lee Thompson (Cape Fear).

Anderson carries the film quite well in a challenging part and Glenn Ford co-stars as a Doctor.

Virginia Wainwright is a pretty and popular senior at exclusive Crawford Academy- a school for elite, rich kids. She is part of the “Top Ten”, the most popular and richest kids in the school. The ten friends meet nightly at the local pub.

One night, Bernadette, one of the top ten, is murdered by an assailant on her way to meet her friends.

This murder sets the tone as, one by one, the others are subsequently killed off, sending the school and local townspeople into a frenzy of panic.

To thicken the plot, Virginia was involved in a horrible car accident four years earlier, which killed her mother, and caused Virginia to only have sparse memories of the accident.

This piece is key to the film’s mystery.

There are many comparisons I can make to slasher classics that heavily influenced Happy Birthday to Me, but the most prominent must be 1978’s Halloween.

The character of Virginia is very similar to Laurie Strode (Jamie Lee Curtis), in their somewhat virginal, good girl characters, and both have an almost identical hairstyle!

Also, Happy Birthday to Me successfully uses the killer’s point of view as the camera frequently serves as the perspective of either the killer or somebody lurking around spying on someone else.

The film also just “looks” similar to Halloween.

The whodunit aspect is the most effective of all the qualities of the film. There are a multitude of likely suspects and the film does not shy away from this, purposely casting doubt on several characters- could it be the creepy Alfred, who carries around a pet mouse and creates a fake head of the murdered Bernadette?

Or the suave French student, Etienne, who snoops in Virginia’s bedroom and steals a pair of her panties? Finally, could it be Head Mistress, Mrs. Patterson, a harsh, no-nonsense woman harboring resentment for the snobbish, elitism that exists at her school?

When the killer is finally revealed a measure of pure shock and confusion will undoubtedly transpire- how can this be? But by the time the ultimate finale is played out, all will make sense.

The conclusion does disappoint slightly in the implausibility factor, and the original ending is much more logical and compelling than what was actually in the final cut- rumors have run rampant that the screenplay of the film was rewritten numerous times well into the production- never a good thing.

So, the motivations of the actual killer are quite weak, but the buildup is amazing.

Not to be outdone by the whodunit, the kills themselves are superlative: a shish kabob to the throat, falling gym weights, a scarf caught in the spokes of a bike, and the traditional fireplace poker are done in macabre and fantastic fashion.

We always see the killer’s gloved hands and we are aware that the victim is friendly with the killer, so we continually try and deduce who it could be.

The gruesome “Birthday party” finale is gruesome and gleeful at the same time. Each murder victim is propped up around a dining room table, each with a party hat on and all in various forms of dismemberment or blood-soaked from their murder wounds.

It is a grim and hilarious reveal. The murderer parades out of the kitchen wielding an enormous birthday cake, cheerily singing “Happy Birthday to Me”.

This is one great finale.

Happy Birthday to Me (1981) is a wonderful trip down memory lane and still holds up as a key, perhaps overlooked part of the slasher genre that should be rediscovered by fans and followers everywhere.

Snakes on a Plane-2006

Snakes On A Plane-2006

Director David R. Ellis

Starring Samuel L. Jackson

Scott’s Review #607

Reviewed January 11, 2017

Grade: B

Snakes on a Plane, the surprise internet bruhaha sensation of 2006 has much to criticize.

The plot is inane, the acting way over the top, and the subject portrayed in such a dumb manner, I could see the results being horrific, but there is just something I enjoyed about the film too, as admittedly stupid as it is.

I simply could not help but sit back and enjoy it.

I enjoyed the setting of an airplane- trapped at 35, 000 feet, in peril, has always enamored me (think Airport disaster films of the 1970s).

The story involves a plot to release hundreds of deadly snakes on a passenger flight, to kill a witness to a murder trial.

Of course, innocent passengers are met with their dire fates as the cartoon-like characters are offed one by one, horror film style.

Sadly, the film did not live up to anticipated expectations, commercially or critically, and was considered somewhat of a dud after all of the hype, but I rather enjoyed it for what it was.

Hardly high art, it entertained me.

My Bloody Valentine-2009

My Bloody Valentine-2009

Director Patrick Lussier

Starring Jensen Ackles, Jaime King

Scott’s Review #604

Reviewed January 11, 2017

Grade: B

What can I say? The remake of the classic slasher film from 1981 is a very slick version of the perfect Valentine’s Day treat- My Bloody Valentine.

To compare the 2009 offering to the original is unfair since I consider that one top-notch. This version is what I expected it to be.

Though several aspects of it were changed from the original, it was entertaining all the same.

The sleepy mining town that the film is set in becomes immersed in scandal as a string of grisly murders occurs in one of the town mines. It is revealed that a tragic accident occurred at one time causing several deaths. The one remaining victim awakens from a coma and goes on a killing spree.

At the same time, youths throw a party near the mine and a series of deaths begin again.

The 3-D effects are necessary for a film like this because, without them, this movie would have been as generic as anything else in the same style.

The story is lame and implausible, and the characters are dumb, but looking past all that, as I usually do in the horror genre, this was a fun ride.

Lots of gore, nudity, violence, and a few genuine scares.

Zombie Strippers-2008

Zombie Strippers-2008

Director Jay Lee

Starring Jenna Jameson, Robert Englund

Scott’s Review #599

Reviewed January 10, 2017

Grade: C-

Zombie Strippers (2008) is so filled with campy moments and so over-the-top, that it’s a film that is impossible to remotely take seriously.

As they say, there is a time and a place for everything, and this includes films.

It is completely a cheesy, campy B minus horror film.

The story, if one can call it that, involves a small strip club, in Nebraska, in the middle of nowhere. The star stripper is played by former adult film star, Jenna Jameson, who, I am pretty certain, was not hired for her acting talents.

One day, a government-controlled virus is released by the government, causing Jameson’s character to be transformed into a flesh-eating zombie.

The motivation is not there, and, who cares anyway?

This is not the film to watch for a compelling plot.

The acting all around in the film is poor, and the story is completely unrealistic-laced with stereotypes galore. However, how nice to see horror legend, Robert Englund (Nightmare on Elm Street-1984) in a prominent role, even in a bad film.

Also deserving of credit is the makeup and prop department, having a small budget, for making the film look better than it might have.

If you are looking for a cheesy, after-midnight, and after-a-few-drinks fun film, this is it. Otherwise, don’t waste your time.

Friday the 13th-2009

Friday the 13th-2009

Director Marcus Nispel

Starring Jared Padalecki, Danielle Panabaker

Scott’s Review #592

Reviewed January 8, 2017

Grade: C-

As a devoted and faithful fan of the Friday the 13th film franchise and I have many wonderful memories of Friday the 13th of the past, I was expecting better than this version.

There was no reason for the producers to start from scratch with a brand new beginning- that makes no sense to me.

There is nothing to distinguish this, 2009 Friday the 13th,  from other sequels. They would have been better suited to making a “Friday The 13th Part 11” since that’s what it was.

An entirely new storyline was created- only keeping to the original Jason and Mrs. Voorhees characters and Camp Crystal Lake location.

This movie is not scary, nor are any of the characters particularly likable. Several were quite unlikeable- way too many horror films do that.

The film also contains very distinct stereotypes, which in this day and age seem ridiculous.

Also, Jason has now graduated to “taking prisoners” instead of simply hacking his victims.

There is also a “flashback” scene from 1980, which, inexplicably is a newly filmed scene. A wiser choice, and treat for loyalists, would have been to show this scene from the original Friday The 13th from 1980 instead of foolishly recreating one.

The story is completely implausible in countless ways.

I am giving this film a very liberal C- grade for at least giving us a new film and for being somewhat entertaining, even though there are many negatives.

This film will be forgotten before too long.

Drag Me To Hell-2009

Drag Me To Hell-2009

Director Sam Raimi

Starring Alison Lohman, Justin Long

Scott’s Review #591

Reviewed January 7, 2017

Grade: B

Drag Me To Hell (2009) is a fairly predictable, modern-day horror film, with some supernatural elements and special effects that make it slightly above average.

Directed by Sam Raimi (of Spiderman fame) one can see his stamp on it, as he has a way of horror camp. 1983’s cult classic, Evil Dead, directed by Raimi is evidence of this.

Young Loan Officer, Christine Brown, played by Alison Lohman, is bucking for a promotion and intent on impressing her boss by being a stickler for the rules. She chooses the wrong day to do this as an elderly woman, desperately needing a loan, is denied one by Christine.

The angry woman places a curse on Christine, causing her life to spin out of control. She has a mere three days to remove the curse before her soul is “dragged to hell”.

As with most horror films involving a curse, the plot is completely unrealistic and filled with holes. The film also tries to be both serious and comical at times- sometimes succeeding, sometimes not.

In a few scenes I was not sure if the intention was to be comical or if it was unintended, but periodically the acting was over the top.

With all that said, if one is interested in a fun horror film that has a few scares and is not too gory (it is rated PG-13 after all), one will enjoy Drag Me To Hell (2009).

The Final Destination-2009

The Final Destination-2009

Director David R. Ellis

Starring Bobby Campo, Shantel VanSanten

Scott’s Review #587

Reviewed January 7, 2017

Grade: B

The Final Destination (2009) is a fun, entertaining film, and exactly what one might expect from a film of this nature, of the horror genre, and by this time the fourth in the series.

The 3-D effects are a nice and needed addition to the franchise as a way of keeping it modern and fresh.

The film has the expected additives- an attractive cast, mediocre acting, and ridiculous situations, which inevitably lead to the fated kills- in typical grisly fashion.

As audiences of the Final Destination films know, characters cannot tempt fate, and there is a specific order to the deaths. The only aspect that sets The Final Destination apart from its predecessors is the 3-D effects.

The story is reminiscent of the original version of Final Destination, made in 2000, only instead of an airport, the action begins at a raceway, where the main character of the film, Nick O’Bannon, has a premonition of a grisly accident at the racetrack.

After he saves some folks from their deaths, they believe they have “cheated” “death”, but before long, fate has other plans for them.

Some fun kills include decapitation by a flying tire, a sharp rock emitted from a lawnmower, a crushing tub, and a speeding ambulance.

The novel concept of the film, originally fresh and unique, has become to be expected and rather redundant. The fun part is the creative kills.

The film is the perfect movie to sit back, relax, have fun, see some interesting deaths, and be entertained by.

The Fourth Kind-2009

The Fourth Kind-2009

Director Olatunde Osunsanmi

Starring Milla Jovovich, Will Patton

Scott’s Review #583

Reviewed January 4, 2017

Grade: B-

I went into the theater to see The Fourth Kind (2009) not expecting a classic, but rather, a few frights, chills, and something compelling. I ended up completely entertained and believing it was a good movie.

However, after the credits rolled, I was left with an unsatisfying and misrepresented feeling.

The premise of the film is admittedly a bit trite. An Alaskan female psychiatrist, Dr. Abigail Tyler (Milla Jovovich) videotapes her therapy sessions with patients and discovers some sort of alien has possibly abducted them.

Yes, this sounds crazy, but the film is well-made and rather believable.

The look of the film is similar to the Paranormal Activity films, a craze that was happening when the film was released in 2009.

The documentary look and the interviews with the actors will be looked back on as “of its time”, to be sure.

The style and interspersing of “real” events with fictitious events were interesting. However, I was disappointed when I read that the supposed “real” events were entirely made up, a fact the movie never admits, and, in fact, time and time again reminds the audience are real events.

I enjoyed the movie but felt duped afterward, rendering The Fourth Kind (2009) trivial and forgettable.

The Crazies-2010

The Crazies-2010

Director Breck Eisner

Starring Timothy Olyphant, Radha Mitchell

Scott’s Review #568

Reviewed December 27, 2016

Grade: B+

The Crazies (2010) is an example of a very rare instance of a remake (especially in the horror genre) being better than the original (Cape Fear also comes to mind).

Despite the original film being made in 1973, a wonderful time for creative film-making, I was not such a fan.

The remake is more slick and stylized, but I think it works well and makes the film an above-average effort.

There are many thrills during The Crazies and jump-out-of-your-seat scares (car wash scene), and I may never look through a keyhole again!

I felt tense watching several scenes and I genuinely did not know what was going to come next, which is quite an achievement for the modern horror genre.

I love the heartland, small town, middle of nowhere elements. A feeling of isolation and vulnerability is apparent and a must for successful horror.

The acting is above average for a horror flick, though, let’s not kid ourselves- who watches horror films for the Shakespearean acting?

This film was sort of a cross between 28 Days Later (2002) and Night of the Living Dead (1968) but set in mid-western surroundings.

A must for fans of modern horror.

Repulsion-1965

Repulsion-1965

Director Roman Polanski

Starring Catherine Deneuve

Scott’s Review #554

Reviewed December 21, 2016

Grade: A

Repulsion is an excellent British film, an early film by the great director Roman Polanski, made in 1965. The film was shot on a low budget, and the action mainly takes place inside a small London apartment.

Repulsion is part of Polanski’s “Apartment Trio,” along with Rosemary’s Baby (1968) and The Tenant (1976), which are all set in apartments.

The film tells the story of Carol (Catherine Deneuve), a beautiful young woman who slowly goes insane throughout a weekend while left alone by her vacationing sister.

Carol is a beauty parlor worker who is seemingly sweet and shy but gradually becomes violent, volatile, and unbalanced. She experiences hallucinations, and it is alluded to that she may have been sexually abused as a child.

She loathes men.

The film is shot in black and white, with eerie camera shots, background noises, and very little music. Its claustrophobic atmosphere makes it all the more disturbing.

These characteristics make the film a challenging experience to watch, but that is to its credit.

We see Carol unravel and are mystified by the aspects that make her this way. The bathtub scene and the scene with Carol’s landlord are highlights of their brutality.

Repulsion (1965) is challenging to watch but an excellent piece of cinema. It is an in-depth character study of an unhinged woman reaching her psychological breaking point.

Friday the 13th: Part VII: The New Blood-1988

Friday the 13th: Part VII: The New Blood-1988

Director John Carl Buechler

Starring Lar Park Lincoln, Terry Kiser

Scott’s Review #551

Reviewed December 19, 2016

Grade: B-

The seventh installment of the legendary Friday the 13th franchise is enjoyable, yet predictable.

Props must be awarded to the creators for at least attempting a novel idea- this time the “final girl” is not the damsel in distress type, but rather, gives as good as she gets.

Friday the 13th: Part VII: The New Blood (1988) is a decent offering in the horror genre and better than some of its companion films.

The main heroine is a telekinetic girl named  Tina Shepard (Lar Park Lincoln). Via flashbacks, we learn that Tina’s father was an alcoholic and abused her mother. When Tina’s telekinesis was unlocked ten years earlier, Tina caused her father’s drowning death, conveniently at Camp Crystal Lake.

Tina has harbored deep regret ever since and is now treated by Doctor Crews (Terry Kiser). The duo- along with her mother- decides to stay at the lake where a group of partying kids takes up residence next door.

None of them have any idea who Jason Voorhees is.

The beginning and end are ridiculous even by horror standards as the action is way over the top and too convoluted to go into, but everything else is fine.

The cast seems a bit larger than in other chapters, which is great because that means more kills. Unfortunately, many of the kills have been edited to make an R rating. (I try to watch NR horror films- no edits).

My favorite kill by far is the “sleeping bag” kill. Awesome!!

Unfortunately, the DVD version of this kill is severely edited from the theatrical version.

Also, Jason looks like a true monster in this one and that is to be applauded. Stuntman Kane Hodder would begin a successful stint at the killer and he looks the part.

Friday the 13th: Part VII: The New Blood (1988) is a fun popcorn horror flick.

Eraserhead-1977

Eraserhead-1977

Director David Lynch

Starring Jack Nance, Charlotte Stewart

Scott’s Review #541

Reviewed December 10, 2016

Grade: B+

Eraserhead is one of the oddest films that I have ever seen. The film is an early (1977) David Lynch film and is shot entirely in black and white.

It is a surrealist horror film.

Entrancing is the locale of the film- a bleak wasteland, of sorts, in an even bleaker town. The name is unknown.

Factory worker Henry Spencer (Nance) is garish in appearance/with spiky hair, and wild eyes, he is peculiar, to say the least.

He trods day after day, to and from his job, meeting interesting, yet grotesque characters. He has a child, who is inhuman with a snakelike face.

Henry meets an odd woman while carrying groceries home, and his apartment is filled with rotting vegetation.

While not one of Lynch’s best works, since the “plot” is incomprehensible to follow or make very much sense of, still, Eraserhead is a blueprint for his later works, with odd visuals, and even odder characters, and is to be revered for its imagination alone.

The film is fascinating in its weirdness, but I probably never need to see it again.

It’s a must-see for any David Lynch fan for the warped experience.

Saw V-2008

Saw V-2008

Director David Hackl

Starring Tobin Bell, Donnie Wahlberg

Scott’s Review #532

70098905

Reviewed December 1, 2016

Grade: B

The Saw franchise films are fun, bloody, late-night flicks.

It is quite helpful if you see them close together, and in sequence, as they either continue or backtrack to previous films- past knowledge is very helpful.

Saw V (2008) is no exception, as we learn the hows and the whys of serial killer Jigsaw, an apprentice, and detective Mark Hoffman.

What would possess this man to follow in the footsteps of Jigsaw?

In their heyday, the Saw films were intriguing and more cerebral than the standard slice and dice ’em offerings.

I like these films because there is usually a plot twist or some other surprise connection to an earlier entry to look forward to.

Also, the victims are not merely innocent but are in the wrong place at the wrong time, nor are they killed for the sake of killing.

They typically have embezzled someone, maimed an innocent party, or caused someone pain in some fashion, so the audience does not feel sorry for them, making their various tortures tolerable to watch, if not satisfying.

In Saw V, as far as the kills go, we are treated to somebody being sliced in half, a decapitation, another blown to bits by a detonating bomb, bloodletting, a crushing to death, and various other forms of mutilation.

This is all well and good, but by Part V in a franchise, even the most clever of stories run out of gas, and by this point, the series is feeling a little tired, although still enjoyable for the puzzle of story connections.

Saw V (2008) is a very bloody film, so not intended for the squeamish.

Piranha 3D-2010

Piranha 3D-2010

Director Alexandre Aja

Starring Richard Dreyfuss, Elisabeth Shue, Ving Rhames

Scott’s Review #529

70108986

Reviewed November 29, 2016

Grade: C-

2010’s Piranha 3D is a tongue-in-cheek horror comedy that saves itself from being a complete drivel by having some sense of humor.

Remarkably, it stars some decent talents- Richard Dreyfuss, Ving Rhames, and Elisabeth Shue.

The film is pure fluff- not high art in the least, with no message or purpose to be found.

The film is terrible, but kind of fun at the same time. It’s camp and not to be taken at all seriously.

The plot is simplistic and standard horror fare- a school of piranhas are unleashed after an underwater earthquake, kill a fisherman, and ravage a college vacation party on a lake.

The college kids come to Lake Victoria to party and lounge on the beach, and typically, are dressed precariously. They are unceremoniously ripped to shreds by the angry and hungry killer fish.

Shue and Rhames must have hit rough times, and have required a paycheck to star in this. They play a Sheriff and Deputy- laughably unbelievable- as they try to protect the beach-goers from a grisly fate.

Dreyfuss plays a ridiculous and unnecessary role as the aforementioned fisherman.

On a serious (and sour) note, the objectifying of women is shocking in this day and age. Haven’t we seen enough stereotypes in one lifetime?

A few cool kills and humor, but Piranha 3D (2010) is a dumb, popcorn horror film.

The Last Exorcism-2010

The Last Exorcism-2010

Director Daniel Stamm

Starring Ashley Bell, Patrick Fabian

Scott’s Review #528

70136074

Reviewed November 27, 2016

Grade: B+

The Last Exorcism (2010) is an enjoyable independent horror film.

I found it unique and creative and it’s shot documentary style, so there is a level of watching something new and different in the horror world, that I appreciated.

The usage of either hand-held or documentary footage has been done before, but this film feels fresh and not cliche-driven.

Horror master Eli Roth produced the film.

A doubtful preacher (Reverend Cotton Marcus) who lives in Louisiana, sets out to perform his final exorcism with a documentary crew in tow, only to find a girl who is possessed by the devil.

Cotton is assumed a con artist, so we doubt he actually can help the girl, which is what makes the film so interesting and unpredictable.

What will happen next? Could the girl or her family be frauds?

The film is really scary and contains a dark, creepy, ambiance. It reminds me a bit of The Blair Witch Project (1999) with its shaky camera, dark, raw tones, and independent nature.

Recommended mostly for fans of horror.

Independent Spirit Award Nominations: Best Supporting Female-Ashley Bell, Best First Feature

Devil-2010

Devil-2010

Director John Erick Dowdle

Starring Chris Messina

Scott’s Review #523

70142822

Reviewed November 23, 2016

Grade: B

Devil (2010) is an enjoyable thriller/horror film deemed the first in a trilogy, though it is unknown if the subsequent films will see the light of day since this film was not a smash success at the box office nor was it critically acclaimed.

A fun fact is that the screenplay is based on a story written by respected director, M. Night Shyamalan.

The premise is delicious;  set in Philadelphia, a man suddenly jumps from a tall skyscraper to his death. We learn from a narrator that the devil takes many forms and makes his presence known by suicide.

Detective Bowden (Messina) is called to investigate the death.

Eventually, five people are stuck in an elevator and one is a killer, presumably the devil. The film is a whodunit of sorts and a tale of morality, good versus evil.

Parts of the film are a bit hokey and suspension of disbelief is certainly required, but Devil is also a decent, edge-of-your-seat thriller.

Being only rated PG-13, the film tones down the gore and the death in favor of lighter, tamer activity.

The revelation of the actual killer is surprising and rather enjoyable.

Saw VI-2009

Saw VI-2009

Director Kevin Greutert

Starring Tobin Bell, Shawnee Smith

Scott’s Review #518

70119356

Reviewed November 12, 2016

Grade: B

The Saw movies are a fun experience. They are like watching a puzzle form and there is usually some sort of twist or reveal at the end of each film, making them enjoyable.

John Jigsaw’s torture legacy lives on in this film.

This installment picks up where Saw V left off and there are many flashback scenes to earlier installments so things make sense and all come together.

The twist, however, is not as interesting as earlier ones, but the kills are extremely gory and the reasons behind the victims are always interesting.

In typical fashion, the victims deserve, in some way, their punishments, either causing someone else’s death or ripping someone off in their past, so the brutality is not exacted on the innocent.

Deaths and torturous methods such as a severed arm, busting temples, cages, hydrofluoric acid, and needles are all used readily.

For any Scream Queens reality show fans, Taneadra Howard has a role in this one.

Saw VI (2009) is a decent movie, but not as good as other Saws.

28 Weeks Later-2007

28 Weeks Later-2007

Director Juan Carlos Fresnadillo

Starring Rose Byrne, Jeremy Renner

Scott’s Review #513

70058018

Reviewed November 6, 2016

Grade: B-

At the time of its release, I remember 28 Weeks Later (2007) to be a successful follow-up to the original 28 Days Later (2002), a clever play on the title and picking up events some seven months after the original.

Watching the film now, however, I see flaws, mostly in the lack of a character-driven story and the resulting traditional action-type film.

Still, the film is far from all bad.

The action begins as the audience meets a “family”, barricaded in a homey residence, attempting to resume normalcy in life by preparing and serving a delicious family dinner- almost reminiscent of Thanksgiving.

The scene is tranquil and rich in familiarity.

When a little boy pounds on the door to be let in, the terror begins and the Rage virus is proven to still be alive and well.

The story was written for 28 Weeks Later has nothing to do with the original and contains none of the original characters. Rather, a father, mother, and young boy and girl are the family that we follow throughout the film.

Rose Byrne stars as a doctor- laughingly named Scarlet- and Jeremy Renner as a U.S. military presence, NATO having been sent in to keep order as best they can.

The opening sequence is fantastic as peacefulness turns deadly rather quickly and the characters are in immediate peril. In another scene, when the father and mother are alone in a laboratory and events go awry, the sequence is gory, shocking, and quite heartfelt.

These are merely moments, however, and are not quite enough to carry the film into a successful sequel.

Another positive to note, even more, prevalent than in the original, are the wonderful location shots of London. From the London Eye to Big Ben to street shots of downtown London and the surrounding streets, are capably done and I loved seeing the ariel views of said city.

The conclusion at Wembley Stadium was also great. This was a treat for any fan of London and gave the film a clear sense of location.

Conversely, I was not a fan of the characters in 28 Weeks Later.

Whereas, in 28 Days Later, the characters were well-drawn and compelling, rich with beauty and emotion, the same cannot be said for the sequel. I am unclear what the purpose of Renner’s tough, no-nonsense military type was for, or Byrne’s sympathetic, but pointless turn as a scientist/doctor.

Both held little appeal and gave snore-worthy performances. Or perhaps the roles were just not written well. Regardless, neither worked.

The dynamic between the father and mother did work, but the kids were not the best actors and I found their additions pointless as well.

The last scene, a frenetic trip through a tunnel by the infected and arriving in gorgeous Paris- a shot of the Eifel tower as proof, is a nice touch.

With a few nice touches, cool location shots, and intense peril in a few sequences, but with limited compelling characters, 28 Weeks Later (2007) is okay, but hardly an upgrade to the original or even close to the character-driven film.

No follow-up film, while initially planned, was ever completed.

Let Me In-2010

Let Me In-2010

Director Matt Reeves

Starring Kodi Smit-McPhee, Chloe Grace Moretz

Scott’s Review #509

70135744

Reviewed November 4, 2016

Grade: A-

I loved Let Me In (2010).

It is nearly as exceptional as the original, Let the Right One In (2008), which is Swedish.

Billed as horror, it contains none of the typical horror cliches or corny dialogue- rather it is mysterious, compelling, and character-driven.

This in itself is refreshing.

Additionally, the cinematography is exceptional in its coldness, darkness, and good old-fashioned ambiance.

Let Me In is about a twelve-year-old outcast, named Owen (Kodi Smit-McPhee),  who befriends a neighbor girl-Abby (Chloe Grace Moretz)- who we learn is a vampire.

Owen is bullied at school and through Abby, learns to stand up to his tormentors.

I am partial to foreign language films so, to me, the American version lacks the engaging language a bit and is not…well, foreign, so that detracts slightly, but not much at all, and this effort is quite remarkable.

This film is a horror film- in the classic sense of containing vampires and not being played for goofs- and quite gory, but also a beautiful, emotional film, and the concepts of sadness and loneliness are explored.

Let Me In (2010) is one of the best horror films I’ve seen in recent years.

28 Days Later-2002

28 Days Later-2002

Director Danny Boyle

Starring Cillian Murphy, Noah Huntley

Scott’s Review #507

60027998

Reviewed November 2, 2016

Grade: B+

Before the influx of zombie-related horror films and television shows filled the land- arguably offset by the success of The Walking Dead series, a little film came along- now almost teetering on its influence being forgotten- that presented this genre with fresh insight and creative storytelling posing questions amid the mayhem.

28 Days Later (2002) rejuvenated this largely dormant film category with a gritty story of peril among a group of survivors spared from a deadly virus.

The film is smart as it explores morality issues and the needs of society to continue.

We initially are immersed in confusion as chaos immediately ensues. After a brief prologue of a group of laboratory chimpanzees gone mad, inflicted with rage, being let loose by animal liberators, and killing all present as well as inflicting the humans, we meet a lone man named Joe- the timing is relevant as it is “28 days later” from the incident.

The young man awakens in a hospital to find himself alone amid downtown London- not a soul in sight.  Fortunately, he has been in a coma and missed the crumbling of society due to an outbreak- somehow Joe has been spared.

Gradually, Joe meets others uninfected by the virus and they forge through the country in search of a military base rumored to be a haven.

The infected humans are not zombies, but rather, violent creatures who destroy anyone in their path. The film not only presents the grotesque creatures but also challenges the audience to think in a political sense- how will the survivors forge a new society?

How will women be treated differently from and by their male counterparts in a world that now lacks any police force or government?

My initial reaction to watching 28 Days Later- years after its initial release- is that it now seems slightly dated, but that has more to do with the legions of copycat films that have come after it and have been exposed to.

We have become more encompassed by this type of film, both in genre and in style. Appreciation is warranted for its gritty, fast-paced camera-work, extreme violence, and the use of “infected” who turn from human beings to vicious beings.

A fantastic part of this film is that it is not simply a horror film, it is more layered than that. There are moments of great beauty and tender moments among Joe and Selena- the sole surviving female other than the young, waif-like, Hannah, whose world has been shattered by the death of her loved ones.

In one sad scene, a couple has peacefully committed suicide, rather than face what would surely become of them.

There is a sense of a human story in 28 Days Later, which made me find the film heartfelt and almost sweet. Even the military soldiers- their motivations questionable- are relatable based on the world being turned upside down. A layered, complex, zombie film with some character-driven elements.