Reviews

10 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
Final Prayer (2013)
10/10
Brutal, brilliant slow-burn of a horror masterpiece
8 February 2016
Warning: Spoilers
Some movies are so disturbing they make me question my own sanity in being a fan of horror. This film, along with The Wicker Man and Lord of Illusions, is at the top of that list. Horror (much like comedy) is notoriously subjective, so I want to be clear about what scared me with this film in order to give a fair review that gives most readers what they need to know: should I see this movie?

The trick here is that this is one of those films that's all too easy to ruin with spoilers. I'm going to bury the spoilers as far down this review as I can, but they're coming. So first things first: if you are a fan of most horror films, and would hate the thought of missing out on one of the 100 greatest horror films ever made, stop reading right now and see this movie. (Yes, it's not only on my top 100, I am still debating if it makes the top 10... I hold this film in that high regard!)

Next thing, a short list just to clear out folks who shouldn't waste their time. One, if you absolutely hate found-footage films on principle, this isn't for you. If you're an American who hates strong British accents, abandon all hope ye who enter here. Also, devout Christians might be upset by a plot line that is more Pagan (or possibly Lovecraftian) than strictly "the devil is the bad guy." Lastly, this is what we call a "slow-burn" film. Gorehounds and ADD-types with no patience for careful plot- and character- development need not apply. Much like Kubrik's The Shining, Roeg's Don't Look Now or Friedkin's The Exorcist, this is a thinking person's horror film.

Still with us? See the film already! It will plague your nightmares!! (Trust me, that's a selling point. If it isn't, you might want to question why you are seeking out a horror film. Good question for your priest/rabbi/psychoanalyst/etc.) Okay, so what's with the found- footage thing? Far from being an overused cliché, in this film it's integral to the plot. There's a church in the south of England that has produced video "proof" of some sort of demonic possession or otherwise malefic interference. The Vatican dispatches a group of investigators who are wearing head-mounted cams and who also deploy a series of statically-mounted cams. This not only justifies the use of the technique within the story, it also minimizes the "queasy cam" factor of people running with hand- held cameras.

---*** SPOILER ALERT ***--- The original title of this film was "The Borderlands", which is quite a good title for a UK audience that is more familiar with Pagan history (and more likely to have seen the original The Wicker Man, which is slyly referenced in an early bit of dialogue). The American re-title of "Final Prayer" might be seen as a little too on the nose, but it really does capture the essence of the horror, as well as anticipate the final moments of the film.

One of the things that makes this film so appealing is the charisma between the two leads, Deacon and Gray. Their dialogue and camaraderie pulls us into the film and also makes us feel for them as things turn inevitably dark. What distinguishes great horror films (as with all great drama) is identification with the characters. The thing that tanks crappy low-budget horror flicks is two-dimensional characters with whom we don't identify, and thus don't care about when they are plunged into peril. When we first meet the priest and first visit the church at the start of the second act, we already involved in the secular cameraman's (Gray's) hopeful optimism and the cynical priest's (Deacon's) jaded cynicism. Here is where the cinema-verite of the found footage conceit either works for you or it doesn't.

"Are you two making that noise?" It should be noted that this film has more static shots (ala Paranormal Activity) than it does crazy hand-held cam stuff (ala Blair Witch). And when all is said and done, there are a few shots that are done from traditional God's-eye view which renders moot the question of how we are seeing all this footage at the end. It is during the second act involvement within the church that we get to see experience some of the first truly creepy moments that feel like The Exorcist by way of Paranormal Activity. The "tent-pole" of the movie (the midpoint, essentially) follows the priest's suicide: that nighttime run through the fields, which admittedly does have the most nausea-inducing chaotic camera-work, is one of the film's moments of absolute peak tension.

Except for the end. I truly hope that no one reading this still hasn't seen the film. The final moments of this movie will haunt my dreams forever. I had this movie "spoiled" for me, in some list that promised "the most brutal ending in a horror film" or some such. But even though I saw a screencap and had a general sense of where the story arc was going, I was sucked in and was genuinely terrified by the time I reached the ending. Horror should kick your soul's ass. If you are patient and smart enough, this one will do the trick. The spoiler said something along the lines of "getting digested by a Lovecraftian horror," but what really struck me on multiple viewings is that this is open to interpretation as to whether this is a traditional "Father of Lies" Satanic deceit or a more modern Lovecraftian slant. Our lads are most fuc'd, either way... This might be the most perfect ending to a horror movie ever.
14 out of 22 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Complex, sexy dramedy
15 December 2010
Warning: Spoilers
This is a very difficult film to review without spoilers... The trailers promise a sexy and heartwarming comedy, which is not misleading although the film brings much more than that to the table.

The charisma of Anne Hathaway (mad sexy!) and Jake Gyllenhall worked for me, and so therefore so did this film. They have great chemistry, and that's more than half the battle. The trailers don't, however, betray the emotional depths that this film plumbs, and if you don't like a hearty dose of bitter with your sexy-sweet, you should pass this one by...

as you should the rest of this review if you don't like spoilers!

Ask yourself: why is Hathaway's character in the doctor's office in the trailer? A moment's reflection will reveal that this necessarily entails a lot more drama than the fluffy-sexy-silly trailer promises. The major theme is of course the joy and laughter of love, but the sub-themes involve the corruption within the pharmaceutical industry, the alienation and other attendant difficulties of being/being perceived as handicapped, and all of the trust and autonomy issues concomitant with being in a committed relationship.

The trailers definitely don't indicate that this film owes far more (and pays homage) to "The Graduate" than to "American Pie." Bring your brains and heart, as well as your libido and funnybone, to this film and you will not be disappointed!
2 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Faster (2010)
7/10
Dependable if underwhelming thriller
10 December 2010
Solid, humorless action/drama with themes of vengeance and redemption.

The only really rewarding part of the drama is the relationship between Billy Bob Thornton and Moon Bloodgood. Nice sub-plot with a character named simply "Killer," and a somewhat interesting twist at end. In no way essential that you see this on the big screen.

I like the fact that the names of the characters are simply "Driver", "Cop", "Killer", etc. I also like the fact that this is a very straightforward tale of revenge: no unnecessary subplots (the thing with Killer is a subplot, but it's fairly central to the main story), no needlessly circular or overly flashback-y exposition, no dream-sequences or psyche-outs, etc., just a briskly-paced thriller with interesting characters and decent, wholly-believable action. Nice.

Decent cinematography & soundtrack, very good acting.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Murder Party (2007)
10/10
Sweet creeping zombie Jesus, this movie RAWKS!
22 April 2009
Warning: Spoilers
First of all, if you are a fan of independent cinema at all, and especially if you are a fan of horror/comedy hybrids, don't read another word: just go see this movie. Now. Seriously, I'll wait for ya, right here. ... Back yet? Pretty sweet, huh? You're welcome!

Where to begin? This is one of my favorite independent horror films of all time. Not as dialog-driven as the original The Wicker Man (1973) nor nearly as bloody as Evil Dead 2, but in it's own way just as unique and remarkable. The blurb on the DVD cover describes it as "Napoleon Dynamite meets the original Texas Chainsaw Massacre," which is pretty good--there definitely is some chainsaw violence in this, no surprise if you've seen the cover art!--but I think a better way to put it would be "The Breakfast Club on acid." ("Art School Confidential" meets "Friday the Thirteenth" also comes close. "Reservoir Dogs" meets "Halloween"? I'll stop now.)

Although this is definitely a legitimate, high-quality horror film, I should state: this film will not please impatient gore-hounds. This film has a story to tell, one driven by character development, and it moves at a fairly deliberate pace. (As follows: first act starts slow, second act picks up the pace, third act really books. Sound familiar?) By the film's conclusion, some extraordinarily gruesome violence will have splashed across the screen, but that's not really the point of the film.

Murder Party is all about a man named Chris and his pet cat, Sir Lancelot.

Well, not exactly.

This is the story of a Halloween party gone horribly, horribly wrong. Our hero, the nebbish traffic cop Chris (who does, in fact, own a cat named Sir Lancelot), unthinkingly accepts a random invitation to something billed as a murder party. "Seriously--anybody stupid enough to show up to something called a 'murder party' deserves to die!" Indeed. But things go horribly wrong when...

You're not still reading this without having seen the film, are you? That would be stupid, reading any further without having experienced this thing yourself, because HEREIN BE SPOILERS! YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED!!!

Okay, here we go: the hosts of the murder party are art students whose charm and pretension is matched only by their amorality and ineptitude. The premise of this film is rather like Stephen Dorff's line from the great Cecil B. Demented: "We make art until somebody dies." I'd write more, but I'm late for a hearty dinner of milk and candy corn. You know how it is.

highlights: -cinematography (both well-composed static shots & beautiful steady-cam stuff) -makeup (best chainsaw effect in the history of film, i kid you not!) -ultimate truth-or-dare (sodium pentothal-fueled Breakfast Club homage) -dialog ("Sky just died.", "Dildoes!", "I didn't sign up for 'Second-Degree Assault' party!", "Stupid shoes!" and "This is gross!" are personal faves) ...and, best of all... -the "MacGuyver scene" (escape from the closet--too funny for words!)

Long live Murder Party! Long live the Lab of Madness!!
5 out of 15 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Pi (1998)
10/10
An extraordinary debut
5 September 2006
This is the film that made me realize Darren Aronofsky was a name to watch out for... which was confirmed when his even-more-disturbing sophomore outing "Requiem For A Dream" practically redefined film editing. (Can't wait for the Fountain!)

If you hate math or don't even know what Pi stands for, you will hate or be confused by this movie. I refuse to spoil this movie as part of the joy is in seeing how the story unfolds... I would just say this film has the strange tone and unsettling black and white beauty of "Eraserhead," although much more comprehensible. If that doesn't scare you away, then see this movie!
2 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Immortal (2004)
10/10
Funny, Sexy, Smart... Hauntingly Beautiful
12 June 2005
Metropolis, Brazil, Blade Runner, City of Lost Children, Fifth Element, Dark City... throw them all in a blender and you've got the dark futuristic look of Immortal (Ad Vitam). Along with "Moebius" (art designer for Fifth Element) and Alejandro Jodorowsky (director of El Topo), Enki Bilal is one of the master story-tellers from the original Metal Hurlant publication known to most American comic-book aficionados as Heavy Metal.

This is the film the original Heavy Metal should have been. There is sex and humor and action, but it is all thoroughly in service of a science-fiction plot gleefully drenched in Egyptian-mythological fantasy. The style is pure Bilal, textured and palpable.

The plot is cerebral in that all humor (and tension) relates to character development; much like Blade Runner, if you do not follow the dialog there may not be enough action to sustain interest throughout the story. As such, there is little I could reveal about plot particulars without spoiling enjoyment of the tale's unfolding... the sad business about the leg, the quest for a certain woman, experiments with consumption, bathroom services, an oddly-formed fish...

If you have a taste for science-fiction and fantasy, I highly recommend you take a little tour of New York 2095!
56 out of 81 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Bijitâ Q (2001)
8/10
Freudian roller-coaster ride
21 February 2005
Warning: Spoilers
A friend called me up to go out halfway through my screening of "Visitor Q," and I was overjoyed for any excuse to interrupt this harrowing adventure. As I told my friend, "I feel so dirty I think my soul needs to take a shower!" Yes, this film is that depraved. The reason that I finished it, and that I rated it so highly, is because this film is clearly *about* something! It has a voice and a vision, and refuses to mumble or blur to spare audience squeamishness... quite the contrary, this film is hell-bent on shoving your face into a certain ooky situation and forcing you to consider just *why* it bothers you.

Still with me? If you haven't seen a Takeshi Miike film before, this probably isn't the one to start with. Try Happiness of the Katakuris, instead. Hell, even Audition might be an easier ride than this one! Imagine Roman Polanski directing an early John Waters film...

*********************************** Spoiler alert!!

Well, not really, but I hate people who give too much away. If you're going to experience this film, just go take it in. Like Audition, it can lose a LOT of its impact if you already know what it's about.

This film is ultra-low-budget (under $70k), shot on video in under a week! Consequently there's a real crappy look to the film, funny colors and poor resolution. One of the central motifs of the work is "Reality TV," however, so this works perfectly! It also makes some of the sexual-transgressions much harder to take, as that lends a strong cinema verite feel to the whole proceedings. And if that (along with my subject title) doesn't tip you off, yes, THE central motif is sexual dysfunction along distinctly incestuous lines.

If that makes you go "Eeew," then we have clearly established that this film is not for you. Okay, so you're still reading, now we get to the point where I say *MAJOR SPOILER ALERT*.

*********************************** A lot of the humor of the film derives from how the episodes of the story intertwine and lead to one another, so I won't relate the plot structure here (see the effin' movie already, alright?!?), but I will give you the "laundry list." What's bad in this movie? I'd have to say that incest, necrophilia and lactational water-sports definitely top the list. Your enjoyment of this film is entirely dependant on your ability to find (blacker-than-black) humor in these subjects. ***********************************
1 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Hellboy (2004)
10/10
Sublime
4 May 2004
The universe of Guillermo Del Toro keeps getting more beautiful...

Hellboy is the perfect comic book film, surpassing the first Superman, Batman, Spiderman and X-Men movies in my book. Ron Perlman just kicks so much ass. Everyone is great in this, Jefferey Tambor and David Hyde Pierce in particular adding some needed levity to the otherwise gloomy and gothic surroundings. Perfect balance between romance and action, comedy and suspense so this long but just-the-right-length movie never drags for a minute, nor ever feels rushed to get through anything or get anything "out of the way" (like those tedious exposition scenes in most every other comic book film which this one masterfully avoids through flashbacks).

I'm already dying for a sequel to this ridiculously entertaining film!
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
most gripping Stephen King screen adaptation
7 May 2003
Most people would without hesitation nominate Kubrick's "The Shining" as King's best screen adaption. Even putting aside my reservations against the film's *major* deviations from the book, I have to say Dolores Claiborn is the more powerful film. Jack Nicholson and Shelley Duvall (and Scatman Crothers) are great, but not as great as Kathy Bates, Jennifer Jason Leigh, Judy Partfitt, Christopher Plummer, John C. Reilly, Eric Bogosian and David Strathairn together! What an incredible ensemble cast--excellent performances all!

Although this is from one of the few King novels I haven't read (yet), I think it's fitting that the most thrilling suspense in a King flick would come from his one major non- supernatural outting. This is rough territory, folks--if Sigmund Freud were to see this film somehow, they'd be dragging his sweaty, passed-out body out of the theatre about two thirds of the way through! It only works because you care about the richly- developed characters. (Any veteran King fan will tell you the spooks are icing on the cake--the characters are what matters. King's love-affair with the American character, warts and all, is what makes him a national treasure.)

And the plot? I'll say nothing about the specifics, because (like Resevoir Dogs and Memento) the narrative structure, the very order in which the plot is unfolded, is the central pleasure of the film. (Along with Kathy Bates' alternately chilling/heartwarming preformance, that is!) One little thing: this film has the best visualization of memories being superimposed on present-day vision that I've ever seen in a film.

The less you know about this film, the better; don't even read the blurb on the back of the video or DVD case. If you love King's writing, if you love suspense, best of all if you just love great movies, SEE THIS FILM!

Warming: this'll be an extremely rough ride if you've just lost or are about to lose an elderly family member. That shouldn't stop you, but be prepared.
4 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Astonishingly bad
3 May 2003
The most astonishingly bad motion picture it has ever been my misfortune to watch.

Save for a moderately-amusing forty-five second shtick by Billy Zane, this film is completely bereft of humor.

Avoid, avoid, avoid.
3 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed