Change Your Image
jpfordguy
Reviews
Prince of Darkness (1987)
Creepy, atmospheric, and very well done.
This review has potential spoilers. Suffice to say, it is still a very creepy film after nearly 30 years, and you need go no further than that.
I read some of the negative reviews about this movie, and about the acting, and I just sort of shake my head. They are missing one of the key aspects upon which this movie stands: disbelief. And it's also the same reason why you can watch this film maybe 40 years later, and it would probably still creep the livin' h*ll out of you.
Indeed, it starts a little slow. The music Carpenter adds for the non-dialog scenes builds a very thick sense of dread. But it's when they get the graduate students is where this film gets legs. The students and the professors, all of whom are very scientific and rational people, are asked to analyze something that only lives in what modern Man thinks is nothing more than Dark Age superstition. Yet, the green goo is there, in all of its horrible glory. Moreover, not only are they asked to PROVE that this is evil incarnate, but find a way to stop it. And their reactions reflect their basic struggle to come to grips of what they are seeing.
And yet, Carpenter's sound track rolls on. It really does give you the creeps.
And that's the genius of the film: the fact that the security of modern thinking has just been ripped away in one fell swoop, and you're staring straight into a chapter or two of Revelations of John, in the flesh. And you're trying to turn it all back with test tubes and computer print-outs. Even early in the film you get the impression that this isn't going to end well.
And then there is the dream sequences that lengthen as the movie rolls. This is also key to the movie, for reasons that I won't explain because it is a potential spoiler.
To that end, this is a film whose premise is to turn Christianity on its head. For those of faith, this is a bit of an issue. I personally put that aside - it's a horror film, and a flight of fancy. All in all, this film is best experienced in the dead of the night, in a darkened room, alone. That you'll get it.
The last scenes in the movie are undoubtedly the best.
Savageland (2015)
Great concept, but many flaws in execution.
As a whole, this is a good movie, and pretty creepy. The acting is, for the most part, solid. However, there are some REALLY BIG flaws that just spoil the movie. For one, the only survivor of the town is an illegal alien whose first language happens to be English (his Spanish accent is horrible). The next thing is that they drag politics into the mix, adding an Alex Jones local clone in there for spice. The problem is that someone like Alex Jones would be more apt to delve into the photos and conspiracy than what the script presents. The portrayal of the sheriff is good at times, and at others pretty obvious. The guys in the bar? A prime representation of what an LA screenwriter's concept of town locals would be, in that it is stereotypical, one-dimensional, and about 160 degrees out of phase with reality. The phone call of the pastor as part of the "evidence" is completely ridiculous, and - again - sounds like some LA screenwriter's concept of local pastor gone mad, but missing the mark by a wide margin. The movie went into a lot of miscellaneous detail about the families of the victims and the background of the sheriff that could have been completely lopped off and no one would have noticed. Lastly, there is all of this evidence laid out, and all of this material gone over, and yet absolutely no conclusions about what it was that killed the residents of the town. And that's pretty much what made me kind of mad that I spent all of this time wading through the film, only to end up with basically nothing.
That being said, much of the rest was done pretty well. The narration of events, coupled with the pictures keep you engaged through the film. And while they were a distraction in the narrative, the interviews with the family members were actually very well done. How they lay down each event as described by the pictures is very good. The most notable part of the film is the interviews with the "professional photographer" that I found bolstered the whole tone and direction of the film.
So, a bit of a mixed bag. I would have REALLY liked this thing if they had just tightened things up a bit. Maybe they'll do that in a sequel. Who knows...?
It Comes at Night (2017)
My first thought was, "I paid $12.00 for this...?"
Overall, it's a fair movie. But, it was sold as a horror film. This thing is - at best - a thriller, and would be best classified as a drama. You keep waiting for that ominous threat out there to crest the top of the hill for the climax, but it literally never comes; it's barely even implied. And once you figure out the script's point of view, it's not really all that hard to see what the ending will be - I figured it out (much to my great disappointment) about 10 minutes into the film. About halfway through I was hoping that this is one of those films where all of the action and "good stuff" happens in the last twenty minutes. You know, one of those films where the monster is always offstage until the very end? Well...uh...nope. The monster is off stage, stays offstage, and was probably eating bon bons in it's dressing room throughout the entire film. I actually heard people in the theater complaining about the ending. Frankly speaking, I had to agree.