EdYerkeRobins Reviews

American Horror Story: Pilot (2011) Season 1, Episode 1

Promising Pilot

[7/10 · 6 October 2011]

I'm a long-time horror fan. My wife & her mom aren't. We all enjoyed "American Horror Story".

The setup is fairly standard: a feuding family moves cross country, only to find that they can't run from their problems, and may in fact run into even worse ones. Of the supernatural kind.

It's wonderful to see well-produced horror on TV. As much as I want to like shows like "American Gothic" & "Masters of Horror", these shows just feel cheap. While "American Horror Story" is a touch over-indulgent on camera tricks, it's got a wonderful atmosphere that truly unsettles. That being said, the show so far resembles more of a Lynchian melodrama than a straight-up spooktacular.

Much of this has to do with the personalities. Connie Britton & Dylan McDermott feel like a real couple going through real hard, awkward times, although I hope they lose their habit of YELLING EXPOSITION AT EACH OTHER. Their conflict is deep, yet their devotion feels real; while I can't say I agree with their courses of action, it isn't a "white hat, black hat" scenario. As for the rest of the leads, Jessica Lange was already on my nerves by episode's end, and I could take or leave Taissa Farmiga as the couple's daughter (that being said, I'm interested in where their threads take them). Luckily, there are top-shelf supporting cameos from Frances Conroy ("Six Feet Under") & Denis O'Hare ("True Blood"). Then, of course, there's the menagerie of ghouls & ghosts, from the bondage-suited "Rubber Man" adorning all the ads to bloody twin boys & the Down's syndrome girl next door.

"American Horror Story" isn't the greatest thing I've ever seen. But it shows great promise. A common criticism of the horror film (unfortunately for good reason) is underdeveloped characters. The TV season format allows for deeper connection & taking time to draw out characters, motivations & stories. For now, count me in for the ride.

Hard Candy (2005)

Starts Great, Quickly Falls Apart

[4/10 · 1 May 2006]

Is it safe to use the phrase "grindhouse chic"? With a slew of DVD releases and pastiches from the likes of Quentin Tarantino and Eli Roth, the mythic cycle of independent, ultra-low-budget exploitation remains en vogue well into the Oughts. Most neo-grindhouse product pays homage to the excessive sex and violence of b-action, horror, and nudies, all but ignoring the number of tight, subversive thrillers that also unspooled on the Deuce. In the tradition of the latter comes Hard Candy, a promising story that unexpectedly goes soft.

Hard Candy is at its dingiest from the outset. Hayley, 14, and Jeff, 32, meet over the internet, and then for coffee. Posters of missing children loom over the couple as they chat, but the most alarming aspects are the pleasantries of their conversation, their casual flirtation. It's a ritual familiar to both – to anyone who's ever dated – but uneasy snippets of dialogue belie their age difference as more than just a number.

More children leer from the walls of Jeff's house, this time in seductive poses. He's a photographer, and his squeaky clean accommodations double as a teen modeling studio. Yet, within the very depths of the lion's den, it's the mouse who bears the claws – or, given the film's explicit nature, tranquilizers, scalpels, information, and intent.

Hard Candy's visual style resembles that of Jeff's photography: interiors are sleek and minimal, and although an establishing shot places Jeff in the heart of Los Angeles, his neighborhood, like his house, is overwhelmed by emptiness. Drawing from his music video background, director David Slade keeps the camera on the move, constantly scanning bodies and disrupting the placid arrangements with flurries of cuts. The resulting frenzied adrenaline rush confuses and exhilarates, positioning viewer as both predator and prey.

Unfortunately, the writing can't keep up with the visual excitement. Intense interrogation sequences soon derail into hackneyed monologues, with the occasional twisted zinger. The story as a whole follows suit, as ridiculous failures of logic and underdeveloped red herrings quickly strain the story's credibility to a breaking point. This midway point, a frustrating cop-out, is but the first of a series of twists and turns that needlessly convolute and frustrate rather than introduce any new ideas. With her muscular build and unflinching resolve, Hayley purports to be a new-age femme avenger, but without any context or convincing character history, she's a one-dimensional character, made up of the least interesting parts of slashers and James Bond villains.

Hard Candy bears traces of the sleazy thrillers and rape-revenge sagas of yesteryear. But what made those films successful was the sparseness of their dialogue, which forced them to let raw moods and actions speak for themselves. In contrast, Hard Candy trips and drowns in its own verbiage, too absurd to be serious, too serious to be absurd. But, in the tried and true grindhouse tradition, at least it's got a great poster.

Men in Black II (2002)

Can You Say "Third Rate Cash In"?

[1/10 · 26 July 2002]

It's a sad but true fact that the majority of sequels are made not to continue any stories, but to cash in on the success of the original. With a film as popular as the original "Men in Black", a sequel of some sort was guaranteed, the only question would be when, and whether it would be any good. Five years later, it's come, and it's terrible.

"Men in Black II"'s biggest problem is its profound lack of originality. With the exception of a new villain, everything else is the same. There are no new major agent characters, and the explanation for this phenomenon being so is lame. The majority of the jokes are either directly ripped off from the first film or "spin-offs" or "reversals" of those jokes that aren't only incredibly stale, but not even slightly funny. Since no new aliens other than the villains are added, and there is little of the Men in Black headquarters expanded on, there isn't even the wonder of new dazzling summer blockbuster special effects or fun alien characters provided by the first film. The film's just so bland and boring, offering nothing that can't be found (for much cheaper) in an episode of "Men in Black - the cartoon series". When a cartoon shown before the feature and the intro to the film, a mock low-budget cheesy film, are more entertaining than the rest of the film, that's usually a bad sign.

Even the actors in "Men in Black II" must have realized this, because they put no effort into their characters. An opportunity for romance between Will Smith's J and a witness to an alien attack lacks both chemistry and screen time. A hinted at reversed dynamic between J and Tommy Lee Jones' K, which (unlike the rest of the rehashed plot details) is somewhat interesting, is totally scrapped, leaving us with the exact same relationship as in the first film. In an unsurprising event, "Jackass"' Johnny Knoxville shows in a lackluster co-starring villain role that not only are his 15 minutes long up, but that nobody even cares who he is if he's not trying to kill himself. Were it not for Lara Flynn Boyle's Serleena, there'd be no laughs or interesting moments in the movie at all.

"Men in Black II" is just sad. The first movie wasn't great, but had parts that were enjoyable. This is just a disappointing waste of time and money, which in due time will no doubt influence another, equally disappointing and uninspired "Men in Black III".

Cryptz (2002 Video)

Another Enjoyable "Horror in the Hood" Offering

[24 July 2002]

Usually I try and keep this semi-professional, but in this case I felt more compelled than usual as a Full Moon fan to post a quick quip to defend this film. One commenter on this board said this was the worst "vampire strip club film" they'd ever seen. With all due respect, how can you expect anything from a film with that description? Now then, the film delivers on that level, that it has vampires and takes place in a strip club, but does it work on other, "more sophisticated" levels? Like most Full Moon films, the answer is "sort of", depending on what you look for in a film.

I honestly don't understand why people keep renting Full Moon movies expecting technical masterpieces. Although Danny Draven has shown again that he's very capable when working with the low budget and criminally short shooting schedule, he has yet to direct the "break-out" film that will gain him the accolades and attention among non-genre fans that he deserves. Besides Draven's work, special attention should also be called to Josephine Soegjanty's score, which is amazing, and the best thing from a strictly technical aspect that the film offers. In addition to the film's good direction and great score, unlike standard low-budget fare, with performances that can be best described as "passable", all of the major roles in "Cryptz" are played by actors and actresses that are totally in touch with their characters, whether that means being legitimately funny, a legitimate "bad-ass", or legitimately sexy and mysterious. That's a definite plus, because although the location used for shooting has the perfect sleazy/creepy look to it, the film doesn't feature a lot of special effects or extras because of its budget, and at times, were it not for the lead's charisma to draw your attention from this fact, the film would look as if it were severely lacking.

It's good that the film lacks little in the acting and camera/production department, because the plot, in comparison, is a little lacking. It's a fairly standard vampire plot with a nice little "ghetto twist", but several important plot revelations that are made spontaneously to advance the plot, and never fully explained. Another slight problem with the script is some of the film's dialogue. Even though the exaggerated stereotypical "ghetto talk" used by the leads throughout the film was intentional and is often funny, it's also just as often annoying, especially compared to Full Moon/Big City Pictures' other "urban horror" projects, which for the most part had confident, intelligent black characters that still retained a share of "street talk" in their lines.

Other than those minor quibbles with the plot, there's very little wrong with the film. While at first viewing it wasn't that impressive, the film's fun comes out more after repeated viewings and observing the chemistry the cast had with each other and director Danny Draven on the accompanying "behind the scenes" footage on the DVD release. To the detractors, yes, it's still just another low-budget film, made without the best film stock or any expansive shots or sets, but to those same detractors, I challenge them to find another film made in 8 days on this small of a budget that's so enjoyable.

Motorama (1991)

A Selfish Brat and His Bizarre Adventures...Huh?

[3/10 · 7 July 2002]

Some movies are off-beat, but enjoyable, but many movies are just mind-numbingly weird. "Motorama" fits not-so-nicely in the latter category. Many seem to like it because of endless guest appearances and a total lack of sense, but those two things can only take a movie so far, and "Motorama" simply doesn't have any other merits to its credit.

"Motorama" delights itself on plot improbabilities. Its main character, Gus, is a cussing 10-year old on a roadtrip across an imaginary country trying to collect game pieces to win $500 million. When interacting with adult figures, none of them seem to notice or be concerned with the fact that he's 10 years old. At first it's incredibly funny, but it quickly becomes just too unbelievable, especially considering the people he runs into and the fact that he seems so unfazed by a lot of the disturbing (to someone that age) imagery going on around him. Gus has no depth, and, as an anti-hero who has no problem causing misery for others to get his game pieces, it's hard to feel sorry for him when he encounters trouble.

That trouble is provided by a slew of guest appearances, each mistreating Gus in more and more strange ways. Besides making the already worn-out plot even more unbelievable and less enjoyable, the characters share Gus' lack of depth and are equally unmemorable. The character's actions can get a little interesting, but the actors themselves don't add anything to them, thus negating the whole point of getting big names (they could've been played by anyone and the character would've been the same). These guest appearances seem to have been signed more for marquee value than anything else.

"Motorama" should be interesting - it's a unique idea, but there's too little semblance of sense in the script for it to work. Incidents that should have a lasting effect on the anti-hero and the viewer don't, as the movie quickly moves from incident to incident, in the hope that something will eventually make the audience feel sorry or understanding for Gus. That never happens, as by doing so nothing is allowed to connect, it just jerks back and forth as if on a conveyor belt, one incident after another. With a story so nonsensical it ceases to be enjoyable, and a main character who never evolves to care for himself or anyone else on a higher level, "Motorama" has little to offer except a brat sneaking around and trying to get rich. Why should we care about that?

Insomnia (2002)

Christopher Nolan Goes Chronological, and Almost Gets Another Neo-Classic

[7/10 · 1 June 2002]

Christopher Nolan's previous two films, "Following" and the buzz-starter "Memento", have earned him quite the attention. It seems he's been dubbed one of those rare directors who can put out mainstream films with an artsy/"underground" feel and appeal, all after only two movies. His latest, a remake of the 1997 foreign thriller "Insomnia", features no lasting gimmick, which, interestingly, detracts from the film, but instead features excellent performances and setting/cinematography to solidify it.

The best thing about the film is the great acting performances from the big-name leads. Robin Williams shows he can be as convincing a disturbing villain as a beloved family hero. Al Pacino sells the sleepless induced descent to madness of his character brilliantly, but otherwise is just his normal self (which is still good, but it's difficult to see him as the "beloved good cop" the script makes his character out to be). Hilary Swank delivers another top performance with her portrayal of too perky cop Ellie, bored with the small-time crimes only to discover on an exciting case that her idol Al Pacino might not be the man she thought him to be. The three characters have great chemistry amongst each other, ironically much more chemistry than Pacino with his character's partner Hap Eckhart (Martin Donovan).

On that rare occasion when eyes are off the main characters' dynamics, a good look reveals the beautiful cinematography. The film was shot in Alaska and British Columbia, and the landscapes have a certain lush yet desolate feel that can't be found anywhere else. It's also interesting because even in a setting with the sun out 24/7, Nolan finds a way to give pivotal scenes an apparent darkness reflecting the tone of the picture. The never-ending sunlight also adds an eerie quality to scenes with Pacino walking around the town late at night. With no other individuals around, but bright sunlight, it seems as though the world has ended (which, in a small town like that in the movie, when a high-profile murder occurs, it probably has).

With excellent performances and cinematography, the only thing that slightly drags down "Insomnia" is its lack of a gimmick. "Memento" was deemed revolutionary because it was cut backwards from end to beginning, which made the audience identify with its confused main character (once you knew what was going on, the movie was simply not as great as it was when you were as perplexed as its lead). "Following" earned similar interest for another non-chronological editing gimmick. Although parts of "Insomnia" do employ visual and audio distortion, these parts are few and far between. While there's nothing wrong with the film, the lack of an expected "cutting-edge" (no pun intended) gimmick throughout makes the film ever-so-slightly less interesting, especially as a remake. It's still a very solid film that's worth watching, but it only has one real nail-biting moment and no real unexpected twists. It's undoubtedly one of the best films of 2002, but it can't compare to other classic thrillers or even Nolan's own track record.

They Live (1988)

Carpenter's Overlooked Gem

[8/10 · 15 May 2002]

John Carpenter has always been willing to take "risks" as a director with personal, lower-budget projects with actors who are decent but not exactly Oscar candidates and special effects that are top-of-the-line for their budget range but still can't compare with a bid-budget production. Sometimes this works wonderfully, as in his most famous film, "Halloween", and sometimes it doesn't work so well, as with 2001's "Ghosts of Mars". "They Live", produced in 1988, is somewhat of a midpoint between these two films: on one end there's a very enjoyable sci-fi film which uses its "nothing is real" theme for social commentary, with a surprisingly good performance from wrestler-turned-actor Roddy Piper, and on the other end, the film's alien effects (which, given that they're the antagonists, is a pretty major part of the film) have decayed over the years and left the film with a tinted cheese/b-movie feel.

Although wrestlers have to "act" for promotional vignettes and in the ring, anyone who's seen a Hulk Hogan movie or Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson in "The Scorpion King" can attest that that acting doesn't translate on the screen at all. Though he has put on his share of cult classic fare, Roddy Piper is definitely the exception to that rule. Though he still suffers slightly from overacting (though not to the extent that made Johnson look joyfully absurd in "The Scorpion King"), he's believable as both a blue-collar everyday man and a hero. His wrestling skills are also referenced via their use in the film's famous ten-minute back alley brawl between Piper (whose character is never named in the film) and co-star Keith David (Frank). Piper certainly never won any awards for his performance, but it's more than enough for the film, and he even has a couple of classic action-style lines.

The film is also surprising because of its effective social commentary. The theme of the world as seen through human eyes not being "real" is fairly standard in sci-fi, but that's also because it's open to so much interpretation. In the late ‘80s, the U.S. was a mess, economically and socially. The film's setting is true to that, with Piper and Frank wallowing in and putting up with their own social misery by residing in a homeless/lower-class commune of sorts, only to later literally break into and destroy foundations of corporate America. Scenes in Los Angeles where the "real world" is revealed to Piper for the first time are chillingly effective, particularly a whole line of news-stands where the news' subliminal messages have been revealed: "Obey" and "Stay Asleep" being the most pronounced, though there are many others. The reason these scenes and their messages are so effective is because that was definitely how the world seemed at the time to those in the ever-increasing lower class of America, full of hidden messages forcing them to unquestionably follow the rich whose only goal in life was to help others in the upper-class get richer. This is represented not only through the aliens' dialogue relating giving promotions and material items to other aliens, but through the actual upper-class humans siding with the aliens because it'll lead to more economic gain for them in the short-run.

Though they are the main villains, unfortunately the aliens haven't aged well. They look less menacing than just goofy mixtures between bad zombie make-up and bug-eyed insects. Also, as the film gets closer and closer to the end, more and more small holes and nitpicking begins to surface, but it still doesn't detract too much from the overall film. As it stands, "They Live" is surprisingly excellent, the text-book definition of a sleeper if there ever was one – not the best movie ever by any standards, but very good and relatively unrecognized. This is easily the best movie with a wrestler in it, but more importantly, it's arguably John Carpenter's last good movie.

Hot Blooded Woman (1965)

Sloppy "Thriller" Makes my Blood Run Cold

[9 May 2002]

Sometimes film is messy. Sometimes suspense and drama are messy. However, there are some who believe that a film can be suspenseful and dramatic solely on the virtue of it being messy and confusing. "Hot Blooded Woman" is one such film, and, although it's certainly messy and confusing, has nothing but that and its score to its credit.

"Hot Blooded Woman" has a rather meager plot, at best. It appears to be a simple "wife gets revenge on cheating/unappreciative husband" story, yet it hints at so much more. Unfortunately, those hints are never developed or realized, and it all comes off as terribly disjointed. The audience is supposed to feel sorry for main character Myrtle, when her demeanor and actions vary wildly from scene to scene (e.g. one minute she is being raped, only to begin willingly making out with her rapist). In the same manner, her husband George is made out to be the bad guy, but, even though it clearly shows him "cheating on Myrtle", before they were married, during the marriage he seems totally loyal to her and concerned with her well-being afterward and the most competent person in the whole movie.

The producers and editors certainly did nothing to rectify that situation. There are no smooth transitions between scenes; every single one is forced, noticeably cutting off many scenes. It seems like a lot is missing, but at the same time because of the lack of plot none of it seems terribly important or worthwhile. What scenes are shown unabridged are so pointless that the lack of a solid plot is further aggravated. Watch as Myrtle dances for five minutes straight, or Myrtle's husband Greg fights for ten minutes with a man she was randomly making out with (after he tried to rape her), only for the other man to run off with no reason or rhyme. What gives these scenes even more of a serene, dream-like quality is the score, which is surprisingly good, and, given that there is little dialogue, holds up well amongst all its repetitions throughout the picture. It's still far from a timeless movie score, but the jazz/big band tunes are certainly the most enjoyable aspect of the film. Watching these scenes are a strange experience indeed, as the film becomes less and less of a film to the point that it seems more like someone's extended takes of drunken escapades on home-movies.

"Hot Blooded Woman" is a movie that's very difficult to make any sense of. Though that might be expected of some of its audience because of its genre (exploitation), even those viewers will be disappointed and confused because there isn't even any nudity or real violence in the picture.

Jason X (2001)

What, You Were Expecting An Art-house Classic?!

[6/10 · 30 April 2002]

Ten movies. Twenty-two years. The unstoppable, hockey-masked being known as Jason Voorhees seems to have come a long way. His greatest previous venture had him in Manhattan, but now he has gone to that special place where all horror franchises go to die – space. Disregarding the fact that Jason went to Hell in the last film and the well-known fact that there has NEVER been a good franchise film set in space (ever), New Line Cinema green-lighted "Jason X", which promises and delivers nothing new, proving that the more things change, the more things stay the same.

Set in 2455 on the space-ship Grendel, the film shows that in the future, female scientists are all teenagers that have been genetically engineered to look super-attractive and wear clothes that would make the primitive woman of today yell, "Scandalous!" Apparently, said genetic engineering has also kept said teenage "scientists" as dumb and horny as ever. The only sensible one (male or female) of the lot is Rowan, the obvious heroine (obvious because she is still alive after the first half hour) who's been cryogenically frozen along with Jason for over 450 years, and has the most practical knowledge on how to deal with Jason (even though that knowledge is limited to, "He can't be killed!" and "Run!") and the many mishaps that always occur with advanced technology when tragedy strikes.

Jason has pretty much remained the same. As in "Jason Goes to Hell" (the other New Line Friday the 13th Film), there have been slight changes, but it's still the same old big guy with a hatchet and a hockey mask. The much touted "upgrade" to uber-mecha-Jason that occurs near the end is really more of a laugh than anything else, as he doesn't look scary, or even that sleek, just a bit goofier with a metal mask and red contacts. Although he gets a couple unique killings, the majority of his kills still remain the same, hacked with his trademark machete or over-powered and crushed with his inhuman strength. The film's best kill is one of the earliest, and one of the film's funniest moments of Jason violence occurs about ten minutes into the movie, thus showing that the producers of "Jason X" have no problem blowing their load early to insure that nobody walks out.

Those two killings would be the only reason to stay if other parts of the movie weren't so funny. The comic relief character (who looks suspiciously like Carrot Top), as is usually the case with comic relief characters, isn't funny on his own, so the producers make him funny (a rare accomplishment), by subjecting him to the second-funniest moment of Jason violence (committed while still frozen solid!) early on in the film. The film's funniest moment occurs near the end, and, without giving it away, Jason meets images from his past with hilarious results. In addition to the intentional humor, there is the unintentional humor from all the bad CGI (mainly in several "explosions" that take place in space outside the Grendel) and ludicrous (even for the genre and series) plot developments. There are even some simple math errors in the dialogue because of the film's constant changes in release dates over the past couple years.

Were it not for the humor, "Jason X" would be disappointing and unwatchable. As it is, it's still disappointing, with some very entertaining cheesy moments, but who would expect anything more out of a Friday the 13th film or a horror franchise "in space" film? Fans of the series will no doubt enjoy this, and the best moments are amusing enough that the film's not a total waste of time and talent, but this just proves (along with "Jason Goes to Hell") that Jason Voorhees is just another ‘80s pop icon that is good for nostalgia or parody every so often but completely falls apart when resurrected for a new generation.

The Scorpion King (2002)

"The Scorpion King" Hits Rock Bottom!

[1/10 · 21 April 2002]

Although his much clamored about role in "The Mummy Returns" only amounted to less than five minutes of actual screen time, the media attention and subsequent sales were enough to insure that Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson was already signed up for the lead role in the film's prequel, "The Scorpion King". Speculation amongst wrestling and movie fans raged, as both wondered whether the film would be a hit or a flop, and whether Johnson was willing to take a page from wrestling icon Hulk Hogan's book and risk putting out a bad film for the chance of becoming a legitimate star in the wrestling and movie world. It turns out he is following more along the lines of "Rowdy" Roddy Piper, starring in a movie that is nowhere near as bad as Hogan's films, but entertaining enough for all the wrong reasons to earn the title of "cult classic".

Johnson's role in "The Mummy Returns" did not require him to speak. In retrospect, this is the best thing they could do for that role, as it left the character with a shred of credibility. As Mathayus (the man who would be the Scorpion King), Johnson blatantly overacts, treating the entire film as if he were simply cutting a long WWF promo. It's a legitimate shock that he doesn't burst out an "It doesn't matter!" or "If you smel-l-l-l-l-l-l what Mathayus is cookin'!" during the course of the film. As it is, there are surprisingly few wrestling moves and only a few subtle references to The Rock's WWF character. However, given that this film, like "The Mummy Returns", credits him as The Rock and seems to be aiming toward attracting an audience of wrestling fans, it is puzzling and interesting that there weren't more obvious references.

To make up for the lack of wrestling moves, the film promises and delivers nothing but action! The paper-thin plot has its share of holes, but it doesn't matter (no pun intended) when the film is 90% action. Long stretches of the film are devoted to non-stop violence, Johnson against all comers, with barely a scratch against him. This type of "invincible hero destroys mobs of foes with the bat of an eyelash" style action has never been realistic or appealing, especially in a non-gory (due to the film's PG-13 rating) context, but if anyone is to make it look believable, it's Johnson. Those who bought tickets solely to see "The Rock whip some candy ass!" will not be disappointed. To those who were hoping for something more, there's always the inevitable sequel (especially given the most obvious plot hole of The Scorpion King being a villain in "The Mummy Returns" and a hero in this film).

Perhaps it would be easier to take the film seriously if it wasn't so cheesy and unintentionally funny. Vast amounts of CGI are thankfully spared, but the CGI ants and snakes that do make appearances are plastic-like in appearance, unrealistically shiny, and nowhere near convincing. As if that alone weren't bad enough, what does Johnson do? Squash the ants with his chin. Though a little tongue-in-cheek, the majority of sequences such as these are presented seriously, which makes them all the more funny. Ironically, the scenes that are played for laughs, such as those with comic relief, are for the most part not funny. Also, in true cult fashion, one of the film's biggest draws is an attractive female lead. In this case, said lead is Kelly Hu, who actually gives the best performance of the movie (not that anyone really noticed due to her wearing of the skimpiest outfit in the movie).

This film has all the elements (lots of meaningless violence, a popular celebrity making a total fool of himself with a poor performance, thin plot, unintentional humor, and a sexy lead) to be a cult classic, and on this level it's very enjoyable. Although the film was by all means terrible, and the worst I have seen all year, it's a decent stepping stone for Johnson to have a legitimate acting career some day (or, more likely, a semi-legitimate career in the fashion of another wrestler turned actor, "Rowdy" Roddy Piper), and had parts that were enjoyable. It's definitely not a film worth $9 though, wait for it to come out on video, then get a party together and laugh at it.

2001: A Space Travesty (2000)

A "Travesty" Indeed!

[1/10 · 21 April 2002]

Oh how the almost mighty have fallen. Leslie Nielsen may not be regarded as a comedic genius by anyone's standards, but he has made some stupid, but enjoyable films in his career. In contrast, his latest, "2001: A Space Travesty", is just stupid, a very poor rehash of Leslie Nielsen's "Naked Gun" series and character with dated attempts of humor that just aren't funny.

Leslie Nielsen is Richard Dick Dix, a total rip-off of his Lt. Frank Drebin, his most well-known role from "Police Squad!" and the "Naked Gun" series. As his name and the film's R rating already tell, instead of going for light-hearted stupid slapstick comedy a la most of Nielsen's other films, "2001: AST" attempts light-hearted stupid sexual comedy. This in itself wouldn't be a bad thing if it didn't fail so miserably at it. There is a ton of crude toilet and sexual humor, and none of it is funny to anyone over the age of 10 (and the majority of it wouldn't be funny to anyone under that age either). Nielsen's trademark straight delivery of absurd lines and situations is still present, but the material isn't by any means even remotely funny so it doesn't work.

A good portion of the material is not only unfunny, but dated as well. A Bill Clinton impersonator playing the President is OK considering production of the film began in 2000 and probably before the new election, but scenes near the end featuring "celebrities" include impersonations of the Three Tenors, Madonna, Prince, and Hulk Hogan. This dated nature can also apply to the jokes; in reality they are no different than those in "Naked Gun", except that the last film in that series was made almost ten years ago, and sex-based humor has moved on, which would explain why it's just not funny. Director Allan Goldstein and writer Alan Shearman have no expertise in comedy to notice or help matters much. Shearman in particular hasn't written a comedy since 1990, which further explains the dated feel of the film.

Perhaps if this film had been released 10-15 years ago it would be funny. I would still be a child who would appreciate the attempts at toilet humor, and lewd sexual comedy was still on this level. The dated "celebrity" in-jokes may have even made sense. Even then, however, this film would still be known as the worst "Naked Gun" film. Released today, my ideas of comedy have matured much past this simple childish toilet humor, the dated jokes make no sense, and it's just terrible, by far one of the worst films I have ever seen.

Bad Taste (1987)

"Bad Taste" - "Classic" Cult Cinema That's Easy to Swallow

[8/10 · 16 April 2002]

Peter Jackson's "Bad Taste" is a cult film on all levels. It features a unique plot (or, more accurately, lack thereof) with interesting characters, a large amount of low budget violence and gore, and a great director with vision and charm who has now broken into popular cinema.

Though aliens have visited earth many times in many low budget films throughout the history of the media, it's not very often that they are here to collect humans to be ground up for interplanetary fast food. It's also not very often that said aliens are foul-mouthed cretins with assault rifles. The "secret government agency" that fights these fiends is no slick, deadly task force (c'mon, this is New Zealand!) but a group of chummy metal heads with assault rifles of their own. The true uniqueness of the plot, however, is that it's missing. Lines are largely improvised, and there's little more to the movie than said metal heads stalking and/or gunning down a house full of aliens (think "Night of the Living Dead" only completely silly, with heavy artillery and the shoe on the other foot, so to speak).

Since the majority of the film consists of violence, the majority of the special effects in the film are towards the creation of gore. Though not every dead alien gushes (the majority of them fall after one shot, and just have a bloody bullet hole appear on their clothes), several of the aliens become literal fountains of blood, spraying the fluid all over the place. Given that there is so much of it, and that these are low-budget gore effects, overall the vast amounts of blood and guts are neither offensive nor distasteful, but comically absurd. The movie comes off as a live-action, ultra-violent cartoon (particularly in scenes dealing with the misadventures of the character Derek, played by none other than director Peter Jackson).

Though this was his first film, Jackson was already beginning to show his incredible talents as a director. There is nary a continuity error in the film, even though it wasn't shot all at once (which is difficult enough for some films to keep continuous), but piece by piece on weekends over a four year period. Also, Jackson and his friends were not working from a proper script; as previously mentioned, the majority of the lines were ad-libbed on the spot. Neither is apparent from watching the film, although the spontaneity of its production has no doubt contributed to the humorous aspects, and made the film's weirdest moments even more enjoyable. Jackson is also able to make the aliens interesting even though for the majority of the film they are "in human form", and look nothing like the fat, angry alien with the lewd gesture on the box-art until the climax. Jackson also provides one beautifully shot, genuinely disturbing scene, one with a captured human roasting in a stew-pot as a group of aliens watch and goad him; strangely reminiscent of Tobe Hooper's "Texas Chainsaw Massacre", it was a taste of Jackson's competency not just as an entertaining director with gory, goofy source material, but as a superior overall director (this description would take almost 15 years to be fully realized by mainstream viewers and critics when Jackson would helm the "Lord of the Rings" film series).

Though Jackson's most over-the-top work was yet to come with "Braindead" (known as "Dead/Alive" in America), there is a certain charm in this, perhaps because he was working so carefully with it over such a long period of time. A text-book "cult film" (and one that lives up to its title), it's ultra-violent, with one-of-a-kind oddball characters and events, and a demented sense of humor. For fans of Jackson's later work ("Lord of the Rings" fans will want to approach with caution though) and b-cinema in general, it would be in poor taste to miss "Bad Taste".

Horrorvision (2001 Video)

Too Much for Full Moon to Handle?

[8/10 · 14 April 2002]

A science fiction film is often one of the most expensive types of films to make, especially as the science in our own era gets more and more advanced. No longer are viewers impressed by cardboard and plastic cutouts with shining buttons. Now, audiences desire heart-stopping slow motion effects, intricate designs, and costly CGI (computer graphics). Perhaps even more difficult than a science fiction film is a science fiction/horror film, because not only must the technology be conceived and impressive, it also must be believable as frightening, deadly, and evil or aiding an evil force. Can Full Moon's 2000 release "Horrorvision", a science fiction/horror film made for "the Matrix's coffee budget", be believable without a big budget and a lot of special effects? Although it has a strong story, and (as usual) wrings an amazing amount of effects from its low budget, "Horrovision" is unfortunately just too ambitious for Full Moon.

"Horrorvision" definitely has a strong story and plot. Instead of featuring a true physical entity as its technological nemesis, the film features a techno-spiritual being, a god-like manifestation of all the hate that is allowed to be spread over the internet (known, fittingly, as Manifesto). Though Manifesto has physical outlets, it is essentially indestructible because it can live and act within any piece of computer technology. The story also benefits greatly from being set in an urban, underground "geek is chic" type circle, with uber-cool, leather-clad programmers/hackers as its lead roles. Despite sharing general appearance and character types with contemporaries in films such as "Hackers" and "The Matrix", the leads in "Horrorvision" act and relate to each other like real people (e.g. Dazzy constantly tries to encourage Dez to follow his aspirations of writing a screenplay, but he'd rather make porn sites because it pays the rent). Though sometimes the plot moves a bit fast, it's well paced until the last 10 minutes where, because of the short length, it becomes extremely rushed. As soon as Dez and his mysterious ally Bradbury get their first leads, the film kicks into high gear, with a series of short, anti-climactic confrontations with the "main villains" Wetwall and Manifesto (the Manifesto one, being the film's climax, immensely disappointing) as the film just ends. Interestingly enough, there were several unnecessary music video sequences in the movie that could've been easily cut to save time and fix the pace problems near the end (combined the sequences must have eaten up around 10 minutes of screen time in an 80 minute movie), and it's a wonder why they were left in.

Although "Horrorvision" doesn't have a ton of awe-inspiring effects like its bigger-budget contemporaries, coming from a label as accustomed to low budgets as Full Moon, there is a lot wrung out of the budget. Particularly impressive are the cyber-bug creatures and the Wetwall machine/man (that whole set is amazing). The full-body suit of Manifesto is well-detailed, but the design looks just as goofy as it does sleek. Unlike the practical effects and costumes, the computer effects still aren't up to par. CGI has just not advanced to the point where it can be used effectively by low-budget film-makers yet (although for a neat little flashback of how far it has advanced, check out the footage from the 1994 Full Moon release "Arcade" that Dez watches on a hotel TV).

On the whole, "Horrorvision" is just too much for a Full Moon picture. The story is involving, and definitely requires much more than the hour and a half length that a Full Moon picture is limited by budget to be, not to mention the super-expensive CGI and other special effects it requires and can never get; Danny Draven definitely shows his talents as an up-and-coming director on this one, unfortunately he has too great of a vision for the low budget. The plot and concept are just too involved, and by the end too rushed (of course, this can be blamed on the time lost on the useless music video sequences previously mentioned), such that it seems like a work-in-progress that will never be finished.

Suspiria (1977)

Argento's Brilliant Atmosphere Vastly Improves a Simple Plot

[8/10 · 12 April 2002]

Dario Argento's "Suspiria" is regarded by many as a horror classic, and others as mindless drivel. Having recently watched it, I've found that the film itself is rather simple, but is regarded as a classic because the brilliant atmosphere created by the direction and score is able to add suspense and character to what would otherwise be a bland, standard film.

The plot is surprisingly plain, perhaps because it's been rehashed many times before and since. I usually don't prefer to do plot summary in my reviews, but "Suspiria" can be summed up in one sentence: a new girl at a renowned dance school discovers that strange supernatural murders are occurring that appear to be related to her teachers and headmasters. Perhaps the other reason this plot is so simple nowadays is that the concept of an occult evil occurring unknowingly "under one's nose" at a place with any fame, is ludicrous in light of today's tabloid media. Although the plot should be and is for the most part executed well, there are still one or two holes, but there are also a lot of scenes that just seem really funny. Not to mention occasionally the dubbing becomes a little too obvious.

That being said, the film is still intriguing because all of its other aspects are beautiful. Argento presents the audience with his trademark macabre shots; although not very gory, killings and bodies are presented at viewpoints that are noticeably different than in American cinema (some still look cheesy because of their age, but others, such as the "eyes in the window" shot near the beginning, are very effective). Argento is also brilliant at warping the concept of light as "safe" and "good"; light is usually only shown as a predecessor to something terrible, making it seem rather evil. Argento's effective use of darkness is at first distracting, but once adjusted to it adds incredibly to the sense of evil in the atmosphere.

The other piece that adds greatly to the film's eerie atmosphere is the score. Composed by the band Goblin, it's one of the best soundtracks to ever grace horror cinema, and even cinema in general. It gives Argento's imagery an even more haunting dream-like impression, and, similar to John Carpenter's famous "Halloween" theme, never fails to bring tension to a scene.

What "Suspiria" lacks plot wise in originality, it makes up for with style, and instead of "style over substance", the style works with and greatly improves upon its little substance. Unfortunately, that style isn't readily appreciated by mainstream fans; even for those who do appreciate it, after over 25 years it's beginning to show signs of wearing thin (e.g. the scenes that are unintentionally funny). However, Argento is still looked upon favorably as a "Euro-horror" innovator in the art-house/horror circles, however, and seeing "Suspiria", one of his more well-known pictures, it's obvious why.

She Creature (2001 TV Movie)

A Step Forward in the Creature Feature Genre

[8/10 · 10 April 2002]

Columbia/Tri-Star's "Creature Features" film series is intended to create new horror films in the spirit (and title) of 1950's sci-fi b-pictures. The first in the series, "She Creature", has nothing in relation with the 1956 film of the same title, or even its 1990's genre contemporaries. This may be the first creature feature film where the creature takes a backseat to the story.

The titular "beast" is an alluring mermaid, a combination of live actress, mechanical tail, and puppet. In this film's history, mermaids are related to the harpies of Greek myth, and both lured sailors to their doom because they, unlike the popularized "Little Mermaid" friendly/romantic mermaid, feed on human flesh. This idea would seem absurd were it not for the excellent performance of Rya Kihlstedt as the mermaid. Although confined to a small tank for the majority of the film, she gives the mermaid depth (no pun intended), making her to be beautiful and seemingly helpless, but with cold-blooded stares and expressions that convince the audience of her dark nature. Later in the film, the mermaid transforms into a scaled beast that looks like a modernized Gill Man. As usual, Stan Winston (who also co-produced) provides excellent work on the creature effects, but the mermaid's second form is given very little good shots; all killings are in the trademark low-budget "from the monster" point of view, and even when the mermaid goes on a rampage in the climax, there are only a couple fleeting glimpses of the full body (the scenes feature almost exclusively head shots or corpses of sailors torn apart).

Interestingly enough, Winston's work actually detracts from the film as the whole. Though labeled and intended as a creature feature, the story is strong enough to push it far beyond that genre, where story is just filler between creature attacks. The initial reason for this is because of the incredible chemistry between Angus (Rufus Sewell) and Lillie (Carla Gugino). As the story progresses though, the film's focus moves from their relationship to that of Lillie and the mermaid. Gugino never loses her chemistry in this transition (proving that her forgettable performance in "The One" really wasn't her fault). Lillie's relationship to the mermaid changes over the course of the film from fear to hate to love; her captivation with the mermaid continues to grow to the point that she distances herself from Angus. The romantic and sexual overtones that drive the story are infinitely more compelling than the bland "romantic subplots" that plague other films in the genre, and should be applauded; this is the first true step ahead in the creature feature genre since its inception. This isn't the first film to give a creature a sexual or romantic nature, but to combine the two to give it a real character is a definite rarity. It's a shame when the mermaid transforms and the "monster rampage climax" takes over, as it ruins the character built up throughout the film, as well as the romance between Lillie and the mermaid and a hinted-at confrontation between Angus and the mermaid over Lillie that would've made for a much more innovative climax.

The most interesting (and ironic) thing about this film is its supposed inspiration from such an uninspired film ("The She Creature" was a half-hearted attempt to rip off the classic "Creature from the Black Lagoon"). Whereas "The She Creature" featured a confusing forced plot and trademark unmemorable performances, this film's plot and acting are its strongest points. In fact, its only real connection to the creature feature genre at all is its disinterest in its own plot as it carelessly throws it aside for a few minutes of monster attacks. As disappointing as it is when the film goes that route, it's understandable (not forgivable, but understandable), given that were it not for those few minutes of monster attacks the rest of the film would never have been made (the entire point of a creature feature film, after all, is a creature). As it is, the film is impressive and unique in that its "filler" plot is much better than its sadly standard genre climax. I almost hope the other films in the series are more true to their "inspirations" in having a less interesting plot such that when it becomes totally creature-driven it's more enjoyable instead of distressing and distracting.

The One (2001)

Second-Rate Action Film, but Entertaining Nonetheless

[7/10 · 7 April 2002]

Jet Li is essentially an Asian Jean Claude Van Damme. He's a great fighter, but lacks the personality of a Jackie Chan, or the serious acting skills of a Chow Yun Fat. As such, he is limited (at least in his American releases, I'm unfamiliar with his HK films) to forgettable second-rate action films. Compared to the rest of his American films, "The One", is no different in that it's essentially a second-rate action film, but the addition of science fiction elements actually makes the story work quite well and the film quite enjoyable.

Any action film, particularly one driven by a kung-fu name, needs to feature at least a couple of memorable fighting scenes. Although I'm no kung-fu aficionado, I have seen fighting that far surpasses that in "The One", but I have also seen fighting that is worse. As cool as the gimmick of a perceived master fighting himself sounds, it also limits the amount of fighting greatly (it seems much slower and more controlled, since, no matter how well trained a stunt man may be, he is no substitute for another fighter), as well as virtually eliminating any hope of chemistry. It's a great idea in theory, but on screen, it's simply not compelling. More enjoyable are scenes where the "evil" Jet Li takes out scores of police officers in prototypical comic-book fashion to the tune of awful "nu-metal" rock songs.

Besides lacking chemistry with himself, Li also lacks any sense of romantic chemistry with his wife, T.K. (Carla Gugino) (there is much more chemistry between the supporting characters of the multiverse peace-keepers, Roedecker [Delroy Lindo] and Funsch [Jason Statham]). Though he is believable as the two separate personas, Li is still pretty bad in dialogue-heavy scenes, suffering from a robotic delivery (a la the aforementioned Jean Claude Van Damme). Originally, the lead in this film was intended to be Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson, but thankfully the writers re-wrote the majority of the dialogue to better suit Li. As such, most of Li's dialogue is simple, but given that his delivery still isn't very good, it works well.

What really makes the film work, though, is the story. Interdimensional travel, a power-hungry ex-multiverse-peace-keeper, spiritual balance, the possible collapsing of the entire universe, somehow it all clicks. There are a few bothersome holes, but the writer and director make no claims about scientific accuracy, stating simply and truthfully that they only used the plot device to get Jet Li to fight himself. For this purpose, not only does it work perfectly, but it also makes it somewhat surprising how well the rest of the story holds up. At a little under an hour and a half, the story is the perfect length, neither too short so that it's difficult to follow nor dragged down by filler and unnecessary dimension to the characters (normally this would be a bad thing, but once it's accepted that it's simply a plot device to get the two Jet Li's together for a climactic battle, the expectation for character substance becomes suspended like any other belief in this type of picture). Perhaps it is because, unlike movies based on time travel (of which the holes surrounding the idea of time travel are more known and arguable, sometimes taking precedence in criticism over elements of the actual film itself) such as the "Terminator" and "Time Cop" series, nothing like this has been done before, and the idea scientifically is relatively new.

"The One" utilizes the science fiction elements of its plot well to set up its real draw – Jet Li fighting himself. While that unfortunately doesn't live up to its promise, as a whole the film will never win any accolades or appear on any "best of" lists, but is entertaining and knows its limits. It may not be totally innovative, or brilliantly executed, but it's certainly fun, and definitely a guilty pleasure.

Who Knows? (2001)

Honestly, Who Cares? (spoilers)

[2/10 · 4 April 2002]

The worst kind of film is not one with bad acting, or bad direction, since these can be campy and unintentionally funny. The worst kind of film is not a style over substance summer blockbuster, since these at least provide a temporary cheap thrill. The worst kind of film is a film with competent acting and directing, but with NOTHING of interest going on. Jacques Rivette's "Va Savoir (Who Knows?)" is one such film, running at two-and-a-half hours, without any real purpose or entertainment value for the first two hours (!).

Perhaps the reason a film such as "Va Savoir" is so disappointing is because it is so well done. There are no problems with the direction (director Jacques Rivette being a true veteran, has been making films for around 50 years); it is neither distractingly experimental, falsely grandeur, or frustratingly inept. The acting is up to par with that in an American romantic comedy, and is edged slightly higher due to the flawless bilingual dialogue of leads such as Jeanne Balibar (Camille) and Sergio Castillitto (Ugo), who are involved in an Italian theatre production. The characters have somewhat normal (normal for the type of film anyway) relations with each other, including past lover, current seducer, and half-brother with hints of incest. "Crazy" characters such as Pierre (Jacques Bonnaffé) and Arthur (Bruno Todeschini) seem genuinely off-kilter, under the influence of mortal pleasures (Pierre by the love of his ex Camille, and Arthur by the money he gets from selling stolen goods, such as priceless manuscripts "borrowed" from his dead father's library). Sounds like an interesting cast of character to spend some time with, right?

Sadly, absolutely nothing happens in the film until around the two-hour mark. At this point, all of the film's memorable moments, which the rest of the film spent carefully (too carefully) trickling out one drop at a time, begin to flow uncontrollably. Suddenly the film's much-touted "farce" status becomes realized and obvious, with a series of odd events, some of which, indeed, mock "traditional romance themes" (e.g. a duel for the love of Camille is a drinking contest atop a scaffold). Are these moments enough to make up for the rest of the film? Not really. The period up until then is wasted through over-drawn character development (which does little but establish every character as pretentious and confused, traits that are almost expected to some degree in romantic comedies) and many scenes of the play produced ("Come tu Mi Vuo", an Italian play that, from the excerpts presented alone, is already a better farce of romance in general than the film, but has no specific connection to the characters other than their participation in it). The first two hours of the film are a great displeasure to sit through, being dialogue-heavy with characters that are still "normal" in their actions and dialogue. As a final assurance that the time spent watching this was in vain, every character remains within the same relationships they were in at the beginning of the movie, shrugging off the previous sub-plot romances and character development.

The problem I have with American romantic comedies is their saccharine and non-unique nature. I rented this seeking redemption for the genre in a stereotype of "artsy" European films and film-makers as being able to revitalize a seemingly forever-tired genre. As much as I hate maudlin American romantic comedies with boring characters that never stand out, at least these are generally an hour or so shorter than an "artsy" maudlin European romantic comedy with boring characters that become interesting at the midnight hour. I shudder at the thought that this is one of director Jacques Rivette's shorter films.

Sexy Beast (2000)

Multi-Layered Film with Excellent Performances

[9/10 · 2 April 2002]

The title "Sexy Beast" is a grand misnomer. There's only one beast in the movie and it's not very sexy at all. Bad puns about the name aside, "Sexy Beast" successfully fuses elements of several different types of movies together with some brilliant performances and interesting direction.

Even the crew and actors behind the film are unsure of how to classify "Sexy Beast", and the film's spreading over multiple genres does make it a tad difficult. At its heart it's a simple crime story, of an ex-con gone clean having to go back for one more job. Though this basic theme is simple, built off of it are elements of romance (the love of an ex-con for his wife, who doesn't want him to do the job), suspense (ex-con doesn't want to do the job, other con has to convince him, through any means necessary), and even a few lines of comedy. Unlike other films that try to blend multiple genres, "Sexy Beast" doesn't seem unbalanced at all; the comedy is so slight that it never overwhelms the serious aspects, and all else is built evenly off the main story. The fact that the film is 90 minutes may seem worrisome on paper, but the film isn't too short and never feels rushed (a definite problem amongst good movies that are less than two hours).

Besides proper balancing, the film's multiple elements are able to work because of excellent leading performances. Although his accent occasionally becomes so thick as to require closed captioning, Ray Winstone has great romantic chemistry with Amanda Redman and general chemistry with Ben Kingsley and other co-stars. He comes off as a genuine good guy, who genuinely loves his life and wife and would never leave them. When Kingsley's Don Logan gets into an angry confrontation, the atmosphere quickly becomes chilling, as his imposing nature overshadows his character's simple dialogue (such duality being the reason some have labeled the film a black comedy). He also comes off as genuinely crazy, with enough screws loose that it's surprising when he becomes even more furious over the course of the film. Yet even underneath such a hard shell, there are traces of a lacking self-confidence, which perhaps is what fuels his fire. Kingsley brings such power and emotion to a character that essentially does nothing more than cuss throughout the entire movie.

The direction is also classy, leading to some interesting shots. The most interesting of these is during a crashing one-boulder rockslide; as the boulder begins to roll, it is shot from the boulder's position, only to switch back to an oblivious Winstone, where the rock barely misses him and crashes into his swimming pool. More excellent direction occurs in an underwater sequence later. The only sequences that lack a true sense of belonging are those involving the film's titular beast; it is obvious the beast is a metaphor for something, but it's never made clear exactly what. Such sequences come off as rather curious and unnecessary.

"Sexy Beast" includes many different film aspects, compelling characters, and excellent direction. Although occasionally the accents or foul language become too much, it is still one of the more interesting and better done films of the past couple years.

Blood Dolls (1999)

Band's Most Innovative Yet!

[10/10 · 29 March 2002]

Whether you consider Charles Band a low-budget genius or a scourge to film-makers everywhere, he certainly has an active imagination. "Blood Dolls" blends several of his favorite themes – killer (and marketable) dolls, freaks, and rock music into a trademark memorable twisted film.

"Blood Dolls" certainly sports an odd cast of characters. There is Virgil (Jack Maturin), eccentric billionaire, his right-hand man Mascaro, an assassin with clown make-up, and his butler, little person Phil Mascaro. Virgil also has a faithful band in a cage, a rock anti-Spice Girls (each member of the band has a `Baby' nick-name) who play dark, death-themed background music on command – or get shocked. When Virgil runs into any trouble, he sends Mascaro and his own personal strike-force, the Blood Dolls – Pimp, Sideshow, and Ms. Fortune. The film's antagonists, though much more normal (with one notable exception), may not be as weirdly entertaining as the film's bizarre protagonists, but they are well-acted (they have to be, since they don't have a gimmick to fall back on) and still great characters (they just have incredible protagonists to contend with!), with enjoyable lines, albeit some fairly standard death scenes.

Though they are the title characters, the Blood Dolls are, surprisingly, not the film's main focus. As the film continues, it turns from a simple killer doll film to a twisted romance. The transition is smooth, and adds a sense of freshness to the story; there are even two endings, one for the romantically inclined and another, more typical ending. The plot innovations are believable because of Maturin's great facial expressions and delivery during his interactions with other characters. Unfortunately, the practical effects budget barred Maturin from being in any shots other than close-ups; a well-used puppet head (it's not totally apparent, and is used sparingly from careful angles to prevent it from becoming so) takes his place in a couple shots. Like many Full Moon releases, CG-effects were ditched in favor of practical effects, and though they worked well for Virgil and the rest of the film, the Blood Dolls are not as animated as their fellow killer-puppets in the Puppet Master series; they look fantastic but move more stiffly. Perhaps this is partially why Band made this film more story-oriented than death-oriented.

Though not all professional musicians, an original idea was for the actresses playing Virgil's band-in-a-cage to record a soundtrack CD and go on tour after the film's release as The Blood Dolls. This was scrapped, but the majority of the movie's soundtrack is provided by the band (along with a music video on the DVD), is quite good (it could certainly fit in with some of today's bands). The themes and lyrics are quite dark, but are presented in an almost pop-music manner, catchy and relatively up-tempo.

Charles Band has remarked that by the time Full Moon has made 500 pictures that he hopes "Blood Dolls" will be one that truly stands out. "Blood Dolls" is a unique and entertaining film that definitely fits Band's hopes as one of the best Full Moon releases.

Blade II (2002)

Thrills? Yes. Style? A little. Substance? NO!

[5/10 · 23 March 2002]

There are two kinds of vampire movies: those that present the vampire as a dark, soulful, mysterious, troubled being, and those where they're just fodder for ass-kickings from uber-cool vampire hunters. "Blade II" is, like "Blade", definitely in the latter category. It's also the kind of film that works solely as a cheap thrill, enjoyable for the moments watching it in the theatre without any lasting impression.

"Blade II" is full of one thing, and that is Wesley Snipes killing lots of vampires. Not just everyday vampires, mind you, but a new breed of super-vampires called Reapers. The Reapers are such a threat that Snipes is joined not only by old friend Whistler (a returning Kris Kristofferson) and new assistant Scud, but also by a vampire task force, a motley crew who look interesting enough but not-so-surprisingly provide very little help to Snipes in any of the film's multitude of fight scenes. They also make lots more Reapers very fast, which also helps because it provides a lot of fodder for the film's multitude of fight scenes.

Now that it's been established that the core of the movie is composed of fight scenes, the question becomes are the fight scenes enjoyable? Exciting, thrilling, and absurdly unrealistic (director Guillermo del Toro replaced the live actors with computer-generated body doubles so they could do what no real actor could – its just a shame that the transition from live actor to CG body is so obvious), the one-on-one fight scenes are a sight to behold (particularly when Blade uses wrestling movies in a climactic battle, after running up walls and jumping what looks like 20 feet in the air), but, like in any other film, anti-climactic sequences where Blade takes on large groups of Reapers single-handedly without batting an eyelash get old very fast. Seeing vampire after vampire vanish into CG smoldering ash and bones is impressive the first time, but after seeing it time and time again, one will leave the theatre in a sort of trance, the only thoughts on their mind being, "Too many computer graphics..."

This is really a shame because there's some beautiful direction and unexpectedly good story in "Blade II". Del Toro, following up his acclaimed "Devil's Backbone" and considerably less acclaimed "Mimic", has crafted a beautiful dark atmosphere. An interesting mixture of technology and gothic architecture, it fits the film and its characters perfectly. Scenes in an underground series of tunnel-like enclosures have great use of shadow, even giving a sense of mystery to something as obvious as a roving pack of Reapers seen in the background creeping along the ceiling and walls of a corridor towards a character. David Goyer crafted a much more significant and engrossing story (when all is revealed at the end, its surprisingly smart) this time around, albeit with some occasionally really dumb dialogue. It really kills the dark tone of the setting and movie if the audience (myself included) is laughing at the protagonists' lines (Whistler was especially bad at this, lashing petty insults at the vampires at every opportunity). Unfortunately, since the action takes precedence, very little of these two great traits come off as more than afterthoughts.

"Blade II" is a little too action packed. As enjoyable as seeing Wesley Snipes killing lots of vampires is, when that seems to be the only draw it's enjoyable for all the wrong reasons. The film's other aspects are good and would've been really great had they been developed, but these were shelved for action that is good enough for a quick thrill but cheapens the film so it doesn't leave a lasting impression. Is this a terrible thing? Not really, but it's a little disappointing. If quick thrills are all you are interested in, "Blade II" is a good fix, but if you want more substance in a film look someplace else.

Rat Race (2001)

Really Funny Stuff

[8/10 · 22 March 2002]

Jerry Zucker is responsible (as writer, producer, or director) for some of the funniest movies of all time – from the lewd, crude, and rude "Kentucky Fried Movie", to "Airplane", to the TV series "Police Squad" and its film spin-off "Naked Gun". "Naked Gun"'s sequels began a comedic downfall, which continued for a decade, until 2001's "Rat Race".

"Rat Race" is, quite simply, hilarious. Like any Zucker film, its presentation is rapid-fire joke after joke, in totally unrealistic situations tied together by a plot thin enough to let them go off into absurdity but with just enough substance to be able to bring them back together at the end (and what a positive-vibed ending! I'd call it implausible but in this film that's a moot point. It really does make one's day though). "Rat Race" definitely has this down, as long as one checks their brain at the proverbial door. Not every joke works, and most are surprisingly clean (but risky clean – particularly a gag involving accidental Hitler impersonation at a WWII veteran's celebration), but the fact is most work, and this has one of the best laugh-to-joke ratios in a long time. It even bests what I have seen of Zucker's earlier work (everything except "Kentucky Fried Movie").

Though I personally thought the film was hilarious, it is easy to see the other side of the issue. The reason these situations are so funny are because they come totally unexpected and totally absurd; knowing what happens I doubt I would laugh at it all again. Some of the situations, upon close inspection, reveal themselves as annoying (Lucy's, I'm looking at you, though I realize they were intended to be annoying) or too stupid to work more than once (what's up with the squirrel lady?). There never seems to be enough of the most enjoyable characters – the brothers Seth Green and Vince Vieluf, and "Mr. Bean". Though these are valid points, they are the same points that can be made about any Zucker film. For what it is, there are no major flaws with "Rat Race", but if you don't like what it is, then you simply will not enjoy "Rat Race".

It's difficult for me to review comedies because they're either funny or they're not. If they're funny bravo, if not they're a failure. Though I never tested to see how well it holds up through multiple viewings, "Rat Race", thankfully, is funny for at least one viewing, and quite possibly more.

Ginger Snaps (2000)

A New Horror Classic - Brings Dimension and Meaning to the Monster Film!

[10/10 · 21 March 2002]

The term "classic" hasn't been used to describe a horror movie in a long time, because most films from the genre of the past few years have been either enjoyable but unoriginal and unmemorable or terrible. Leave it to the independent Canadian production "Ginger Snaps" to be the one to break the trend.

Though "Ginger Snaps"' evil beast is a werewolf, this is far more than just a monster movie. The film is as much, if not more, focused on the changing relationship between two sisters, played masterfully by Emily Perkins (Brigette) and Katharine Isabelle (Ginger). The girls promised that they would be together in their deaths (a subject they have a rather unhealthy fixation with), but Ginger's first period brings about changes in her that tear a great divide in their relationship. Brigette finds herself to be a little jealous of her sister (and vice versa, her sister's growing overprotection and distaste for her), and her management of these feelings, the physical and personality changes in her sister, and beginning to find her own identity, is well-written and developed. The issue is a very real one, which everyone has dealt with to some degree in their lives, yet the movie is smart enough to be able to focus on that without having a hokey after-school special feel to it.

Given that this is a werewolf movie, there's obviously some serious lycanthropy playing heavily into the plot. The connection of changes due to puberty/teenage years and changing into a werewolf is rather brilliant, and, as mentioned in the last paragraph, adds a real depth and class to the characters. It also adds another interesting thinly veiled metaphor to the teenager/werewolf connection – that lycanthropy is a disease spread through blood, which takes place in both attack and unprotected sex (Michael J. Fox's "Teen Wolf" never had to deal with this!). As for the actual werewolf/make-up effects, they are believable - not the best but certainly not hokey either (though Ginger looks much better as the `mid-transformation' girl/werewolf at the greenhouse party scenes than as an all-out werewolf). The film's best make-up effects, however, are utilized during the girls' death photography project; they are eerie in their realism, and set the tone for the sisters' relationship and negative attitudes towards life in general throughout the rest of the film.

"Ginger Snaps" is a new classic horror film because it develops and maintains believable characters and their relationships, while at the same time keeping a horror movie atmosphere and monster. It's the next step from the "Buffy the Vampire Slayer" TV series, which has added realistic internal developments to their characters as well, but not as seriously and consistently as this film. Its balance and seamless connection of both elements (growing up and werewolves) makes this highly recommended, as it's truly the most intelligent and best horror film I've seen in years, and one of the best I've ever seen.

O (2001)

Career-Making Performances Make "O" A Winner

[10/10 · 21 March 2002]

Jealousy can drive someone to extreme lengths. A constant theme in literature and in film, no matter how extreme it is, it always hits close to home because everyone is jealous of someone or something. Such extreme jealousy is the subject of "O", a suspenseful high school drama based on Shakespeare's "Othello" (which I'm not familiar with, so I'm uncertain how faithful "O" is to its source) and was held back from release for over a year following the Columbine shootings, at a time when everything that involved teenagers and violence was censored in the paranoid American media. Thankfully, the film was not shelved permanently, as such would be a great loss to the art of film.

Any drama relies heavily on the cast to make it believable, and "O" sports what was easily the best teen cast as well as one of the best casts overall in 2001. Mekhai Phifer is one to watch (though he isn't as typecast in teen roles as the other leads) as Odin, the betrayed, and the most real character in the movie. Unsure of who to trust, and played for a fool by his devious jealous "friend" Hugo (Josh Hartnett), one feels his disparity and paranoia. Less than a week after seeing (and trashing) him in the horrid "40 Days and 40 Nights", Josh Hartnett redeems himself and shows that, given the right character, his relative coldness and stoic nature can work well; "O" is without a doubt his best performance, and hopefully this has opened an opportunity for him away from awful bubble gum romance flicks. The final lead liberated from teen-movie hell is Julia Stiles' Desi, who is just as confused and angry as Phifer's Odin. The pair has some chemistry at the beginning, but when the lies and allegations arrive the two ignite.

The film's setting in a prep school in the Carolinas adds much to the character's conflicts, particularly Odin's. As the only African-American in a Southern private school, another layer to his character is that he still has to contend with proving himself against racism, and his interracial relationship with Desi may still cause controversy in some viewing circles. As a spoiled rich teen, Hugo is that much more angry when he doesn't get what he wants and is overshadowed by Odin, particularly in his father (the coach of the team)'s eyes. The sense of privacy and secrecy that a prep school instills in an audience (at least an audience that doesn't attend one) adds even more to the suspense and the complicatedness of Hugo's elaborate plan.

The plan is elaborate, complex, and cold-hearted is relatively easy to follow and unexpected at the same time. It all fits together perfectly, with only one minor plot hole (what happens to the school mascot?) and one unnecessary detracting character (the drug dealer who appears in a couple scenes without connection to any of the characters). As it steadily and seamlessly unfolds and the plot thickens, it becomes more amazing that someone like Hugo could even exist and feel so strongly as to commit such despicable acts. Yet the whole time, Hugo is cool and collected, and his plan never leaves the bounds of realism. It's powerful, and a terrible vision of the most intimate relationships forced apart in the name of jealousy.

"O" is one of those rare movies that can take a cast of hot teen faces and really make them shine in a well-written, well-acted film that they can be proud of when they outgrow teen idolatry. It may turn off their prime audiences, but it shows the rest of us what they are truly capable of if given the opportunity, and with this cast, it is hoped they can be paired with such an excellent, challenging film again.

Haiku Tunnel (2001)

"Temp" Enjoyment that Never Gets Past its Kinks to Go "Perm"

[6/10 · 15 March 2002]

Work is one of the ripest subjects for parody, being that one absolute necessity in life loved by few and hated by many. Following in the steps of such popular office humor as "Dilbert" and "Office Space", "Haiku Tunnel" comes off as a fairly enjoyable work-place comedy, though its adaptation from a monologue is obviously in need of some fine tuning.

"Haiku Tunnel" teaches that being a temp worker (in this case, a temp male secretary) can be the greatest and worst experience at the same time (greatest because one can live fairly freely, the worst because that freedom's cost is being, for all purposes, invisible), and that switching to permanent status can take much getting used to. This theme of the perils of going perm for the first time is naturally the focal point of most of the film's humor – the new deadlines, responsibilities and relationships with some too-perky coworkers. Josh Kornbluth (who also directed, and co-wrote, adapting the script from his own comedic monologue), does a good job at playing himself – a big dork who wants to be a novelist and just can't stand any sort of commitment (though really, how could he fail at playing himself?). The coworkers are great about not being too annoying (the usual problem with ultra-perky characters), but the boss' character is confusing – Josh claims that he is the Devil, but he's obviously not, begging the question of this being the fault of the actor, character, or if Josh is just wrong and has no idea what to expect of a real boss (for thematic purposes I'll go with the latter).

Along the way, there are a few snags, mainly resulting from the fact that this was derived from a monologue. In monologues, especially comedic ones, it is rather common to have a break from the story where the narrator explains the background of a situation or character, since that may not be apparent from the dialogue alone. That works fine on a stage performance, but when kept in a film adaptation, it disrupts the flow of the movie, particularly since none of these `explanations' (barring the one in the beginning) are particularly relevant for understanding what's occurring in the next scene. Another problem with the plot is that Josh isn't really a lovable dork; he's just a dork, and as one that chooses to end his relationships only to lament over their ending, comes off a bit like a jerk as well. Though a "straight" dork/jerk can be an engrossing and entertaining character who eventually gains an audience's affections (the best example of this being "High Fidelity"), it can just as easily be a character the audience is indifferent to, which is the case in "Haiku Tunnel" (and given that said dork is the main character, this is a fairly bad thing).

"Haiku Tunnel" is funny at parts, but at other parts rather uninteresting. It's certainly not a bad movie, but with a little fine-tuning around the monologue and a reason to really care for the main character, it could've been a really great one.

Pootie Tang (2001)

Occasionally Sipi-Tai (but mostly not even Wadata)

[3/10 · 15 March 2002]

"Pootie Tang", based on a sketch character from The Chris Rock Show, is another piece of evidence to add to the fact that sketch characters usually don't work for long periods of time – look at most Saturday Night Live movies, and to a lesser extent Jay and Silent Bob. While the film is fun at parts and stays true to its audience, it's not a very enjoyable or memorable experience.

The film's main draw for me was Chris Rock; unfortunately, he was greatly limited by his weak supporting roles and this wasn't one of his best performances (and it wasn't one of his best performances either). Lance Crouther was pretty slick as Pootie Tang, a new-age blaxploitation superhero, but the gimmick of his own language without subtitles or anything went downhill really fast, especially since the same words seemed to have multiple meanings throughout the picture depending on the situation (though I'm no linguist, it could've just been misinterpretation). The villains, a generic evil white corporate geezer and decidedly less generic brother/dirty street dealer, served their purpose, the latter being more memorable only because of his obsession with staying literally dirty. All other characters (most of which are urban culture stereotypes, with the exception of a couple backwoods/redneck culture stereotypes) are introduced, serve no real purpose other than to fill space towards their one (or two) gag(s), do their gag(s), and then exit all the same without leaving a lasting impression (or, in the case of a bad gag, any laughter).

The problem with "Pootie Tang" was that the vast majority of the characters and gags just don't leave any lasting impression. Some of them were worth a chuckle, but the rest of it just seemed like Chris Rock light, toned down and lacking his signature edge (maybe I just expected too much as a Chris Rock fan who saw his name on this). It's quite possible that I'm just not the right audience, as it's quite apparent that the film knows its limits and caters exclusively to a specific type of cynical urban audience mind-set (as evidence for this, a friend told me when he saw it in the theatre that he, along with the rest of the audience, was rolling in the aisles with laughter).

One admirable and interesting thing to note is the film's soundtrack. Unlike most urban soundtracks, where seemingly random songs plucked together and marketed to push units with few connections to the film, songs in this film are lyrically linked to and played in connection with characters and events. This gives the songs the feel of a literal soundtrack, serving the same purpose as the score in other movies, and brings a welcome freshness that the rest of the film should have shared.

Part of the film's plot centers on Pootie Tang "selling out" and going from a street hero to just another image. In real life, this will never be an issue, because the film makes the effort but is just not funny or original enough to turn into the fun movie necessary for a worthy new franchise. The aforementioned soundtrack was rather clever though, along with the ending, but that was really it.