As a person that has grown up with America's image of Jet Li (I don't agree that he has to be paired with rapper's every other film - but alas that's how I know him) going back to his early films from China is a bit of a stretch for me. Particularly "The Legend Of Fong Sai Yuk", as this film has a bit of that comedic side that I don't necessarily pick up on.
The film is about a young man who falls in love with a the daughter of a wealthy government official type (off hand I can't remember exactly what) and finds out that his family is involved with a secret society that is out to start up some shit. Being of course the lead role of Fong Sai Yuk, Jet Li is again a man that can constantly kick ass and is rarely challenged in his awesomeness.
I'll give it to this film though, it has some very interesting and well put together fight choreography. There are a few battles that just simply astound. The fight in the courtyard on the heads of the crowd. The fight with the governor on the little bridges over the water. The final fight where part of it takes place under a wooden stage. There is a lot of pretty stellar martial arts going on in this movie and its by far the reason to watch it.
My largest complaint is the odd humor of the film. I have never in my life wanted to see Jet Li in drag and after seeing this film I never want to see it again nor claim that I ever did. But I'm sure some of you out there will find the 'comedy of errors' style humor in this film funny, but it just made me want to see a slightly more serious film. There are a few special effects moments that were laugh out loud funny (although this time unintentionally). Watching an obviously fake and poorly built horse fly from a dock to a ship in the beginning was one moment that I can never erase from my brain but I almost had to stop the film I was laughing so hard. This is just one moment of many where some of the special effects are little dated.
This film was all right when it comes to martial arts films/Jet Li's catalog, but too many odd moments in the film ruin what seriousness of story and action it had going for it. It's worth a watch just for the fight scenes honestly and that's what I recommend.
Written By Matt Reifschneider
Monday, August 17, 2009
Saturday, August 15, 2009
Infernal Affairs II - 5/5
When I first found out that "Infernal Affairs II" was a prequel to the first film, I thought that doing a film on the lives of the two moles and how they came to be where they were was an interesting concept. With its odd kinetic style, the first film was intriguing and overly amazing. The deal with "Infernal Affairs II" though, is that it wasn't anything like I expected but just as good as the first.
Oddly enough, a majority of this film has to do with the relationship and rise of Anthony Wong Chau-Sang's inspector character and Eric Tsang's Sam within the triads. A portion of the film has to do with our moles, but they seem to be there mostly to move other characters forward whilst showing their rise within the ranks. At first, I thought that this was somewhat of an odd choice, but in the end it probably works out better then it might have otherwise. We get even more tricky relationships between individuals (as in how Sam's wife has this odd connection to his mole) and even more story building that allows even more depth to the original. It almost makes this one even more epic.
The style of filming is different too. The original film had a feeling of chaotic fate and crumbling of the worlds, but this one moves at a slow burn pace focusing on the building situations within the world of the characters. This film might be more comparable to the "Godfather" then most with its epic storytelling and feeling of transitional phases with the end of an era and the beginning of a new one.
Acting wise, since this is a prequel we don't get our two main guys from the first film, but their younger counterparts whom do the job nicely. The real acting comes from bit players in the first film Tsang and Chau-Sang whom really make this baby cook. Particular nod goes to Tsang (whom before the first "Infernal Affairs" I had only seen in more comedic roles) as we get some pretty impressive back story and acting chops to go with it.
"Infernal Affairs II" is a whole different beast then its predecessor, even though its just as good. All around this is just a monster of a film, relying on the in depth storytelling to carry most of its weight. It will definitely make you want to go back and rewatch the first film.
Written By Matt Reifschneider
Oddly enough, a majority of this film has to do with the relationship and rise of Anthony Wong Chau-Sang's inspector character and Eric Tsang's Sam within the triads. A portion of the film has to do with our moles, but they seem to be there mostly to move other characters forward whilst showing their rise within the ranks. At first, I thought that this was somewhat of an odd choice, but in the end it probably works out better then it might have otherwise. We get even more tricky relationships between individuals (as in how Sam's wife has this odd connection to his mole) and even more story building that allows even more depth to the original. It almost makes this one even more epic.
The style of filming is different too. The original film had a feeling of chaotic fate and crumbling of the worlds, but this one moves at a slow burn pace focusing on the building situations within the world of the characters. This film might be more comparable to the "Godfather" then most with its epic storytelling and feeling of transitional phases with the end of an era and the beginning of a new one.
Acting wise, since this is a prequel we don't get our two main guys from the first film, but their younger counterparts whom do the job nicely. The real acting comes from bit players in the first film Tsang and Chau-Sang whom really make this baby cook. Particular nod goes to Tsang (whom before the first "Infernal Affairs" I had only seen in more comedic roles) as we get some pretty impressive back story and acting chops to go with it.
"Infernal Affairs II" is a whole different beast then its predecessor, even though its just as good. All around this is just a monster of a film, relying on the in depth storytelling to carry most of its weight. It will definitely make you want to go back and rewatch the first film.
Written By Matt Reifschneider
Friday, August 14, 2009
Grudge 3, The - 3/5
This first straight to DVD sequel of the Americanized franchise, has its hits and its misses but ironically comes off with a better feeling than its theatrically released predecessor the very disappointing "Grudge 2". So on the whole this one was a lot better then I would have imagined this series going once it started going straight to the home theater systems, but its a far cry from its origins or even the remake at that.
After watching "Splinter" I was still a bit cautious about Toby Wilkins as a director, as he tended to use the shakey camera a bit too much on that one. This time around though he does it pretty straight forward and none of that bs. He tries very hard to replicate the Japanese directors that made these kind of 'ghost' films creepy, and occasionally he does make it work but more often then not it feels far too American and watered down to make the cut. He does a decent job though.
The big surprise for me was seeing Shawnee Smith in there...now none of the acting was great (most of it was good enough to get the job done) but anytime you throw Shawnee Smith in there I'm happy...not that she does a great job either, as a bit part how could she develop anything, but just having her in there makes this movie a little more special.
As for the storyline, I guess this is a pretty solid sequel in the sense that they kept it very much in the continuity of the series. None of this 'let's take it somewhere else' they tried with "2", so it makes it feel a little more legit. They tried to keep it's Japanese roots within the story by adding in the sister of the scary ass Ghost lady into the mix (her name escapes me at this moment) but her role is pretty paper thin by the end and when it comes to climax crunch time she pretty much just gets annoying. Good effort with the Japanese thread but in the end it felt far too forced for this one. The ending was a little bit of too open for my tastes as they build this 'we can finally end the curse!' a bit too much when we all know this is a franchise now, and there's no way they are going to end it now. Hope that it doesn't spoil it for you, but for those of you that wanna cry there is another twist at the end that you might like.
It was a fun watch but nothing to write home about. Definitely better than the second film (which to me was like grating nails on chalkboard) but the series is slowly losing those elements that made the original ones (and to some extent the first American one) such a surprise and great film experience. Bring back the subtlety and bring back the thought provoking approaches to a relatively simplistic idea and then I'll be fully happy again. Otherwise I will continue to follow the series but without too much enthusiasm.
Written By Matt Reifschneider
After watching "Splinter" I was still a bit cautious about Toby Wilkins as a director, as he tended to use the shakey camera a bit too much on that one. This time around though he does it pretty straight forward and none of that bs. He tries very hard to replicate the Japanese directors that made these kind of 'ghost' films creepy, and occasionally he does make it work but more often then not it feels far too American and watered down to make the cut. He does a decent job though.
The big surprise for me was seeing Shawnee Smith in there...now none of the acting was great (most of it was good enough to get the job done) but anytime you throw Shawnee Smith in there I'm happy...not that she does a great job either, as a bit part how could she develop anything, but just having her in there makes this movie a little more special.
As for the storyline, I guess this is a pretty solid sequel in the sense that they kept it very much in the continuity of the series. None of this 'let's take it somewhere else' they tried with "2", so it makes it feel a little more legit. They tried to keep it's Japanese roots within the story by adding in the sister of the scary ass Ghost lady into the mix (her name escapes me at this moment) but her role is pretty paper thin by the end and when it comes to climax crunch time she pretty much just gets annoying. Good effort with the Japanese thread but in the end it felt far too forced for this one. The ending was a little bit of too open for my tastes as they build this 'we can finally end the curse!' a bit too much when we all know this is a franchise now, and there's no way they are going to end it now. Hope that it doesn't spoil it for you, but for those of you that wanna cry there is another twist at the end that you might like.
It was a fun watch but nothing to write home about. Definitely better than the second film (which to me was like grating nails on chalkboard) but the series is slowly losing those elements that made the original ones (and to some extent the first American one) such a surprise and great film experience. Bring back the subtlety and bring back the thought provoking approaches to a relatively simplistic idea and then I'll be fully happy again. Otherwise I will continue to follow the series but without too much enthusiasm.
Written By Matt Reifschneider
My Bloody Valentine 3D - 3.5/5
Alright folks, here it is. The remake of the cult classic "My Bloody Valentine"! I avoided it to begin with due to its 3D hurricane advertisements, partially cause I plain and simple don't enjoy many 3D films and the source material is pretty much shit. Now the original film had its moments but overall was hindered by horrible acting and sub par directing. This one however, had many more good moments, gave homage to those good moments in the original but mostly created a new world for Harry Warden to terrorize.
When going into this film one must understand that this is, still, indeed a slasher horror film. So the three things one will get in a slasher are: a) loads of gore b)loads of nudity and c)loads of creative deaths. So if you are going to watch "My Bloody Valentine" for its submersive plot twists and in deep character work then look elsewhere. It's not found here. Pretty straightforward throughout (the big twists come from the 'whodunnit' type guessing game towards the end) but otherwise its based on those 3 slasher requirements. And seriously, it gets those 3 items out of the way quickly. Right from the get go there is extensive gore and killings to establish the plot point that 'Warden is a very brutal killer and these our are main characters'. And soon after that there is a solid 10 minute scene of full female nudity - so if you want kids to watch it you might want to hold off for 10 years or so. By the time the actual story gets moving they've already hit the slasher requirements leaving all those starving horror fans satisfied and ready for some kind of thinking.
The film moves at a pretty quick pace which did wonders for the relatively simplistic story telling. I watched the film in its 2D format (did I already mention that 3D just doesn't float my boat?) so many of the obvious pulls at 'shit that flies at the audience' seemed cheesy at times but they made it fit with the story enough it didn't make me roll my eyes as "Friday The 13th Part 3" did.
So I did enjoy the film quite a bit by the end and it beats the hell out of its source material which although considered a classic is far from being even remotely good. Pretty solid slasher but don't expect it to boggle your mind or even challenge you at all. Enjoy it for what it is (just remember the 3 things!) and you will have a good time.
Written By Matt Reifschneider
When going into this film one must understand that this is, still, indeed a slasher horror film. So the three things one will get in a slasher are: a) loads of gore b)loads of nudity and c)loads of creative deaths. So if you are going to watch "My Bloody Valentine" for its submersive plot twists and in deep character work then look elsewhere. It's not found here. Pretty straightforward throughout (the big twists come from the 'whodunnit' type guessing game towards the end) but otherwise its based on those 3 slasher requirements. And seriously, it gets those 3 items out of the way quickly. Right from the get go there is extensive gore and killings to establish the plot point that 'Warden is a very brutal killer and these our are main characters'. And soon after that there is a solid 10 minute scene of full female nudity - so if you want kids to watch it you might want to hold off for 10 years or so. By the time the actual story gets moving they've already hit the slasher requirements leaving all those starving horror fans satisfied and ready for some kind of thinking.
The film moves at a pretty quick pace which did wonders for the relatively simplistic story telling. I watched the film in its 2D format (did I already mention that 3D just doesn't float my boat?) so many of the obvious pulls at 'shit that flies at the audience' seemed cheesy at times but they made it fit with the story enough it didn't make me roll my eyes as "Friday The 13th Part 3" did.
So I did enjoy the film quite a bit by the end and it beats the hell out of its source material which although considered a classic is far from being even remotely good. Pretty solid slasher but don't expect it to boggle your mind or even challenge you at all. Enjoy it for what it is (just remember the 3 things!) and you will have a good time.
Written By Matt Reifschneider
S. Darko - 3/5
So I honestly thought that there was no way in hell one could conceive a sequel the to the amazingly awesome "Donnie Darko" but since Hollywood deems it necessary that everything either needs a sequel, prequel, or remake then I guess this was the best possible solution. That and I'm a sucker for franchises.
Needless to say I did not have high expectations for "S. Darko", being as it was straight to video and the complexity and 'have to watch it a billion times to even catch everything' side of the first film, this was going to be a long shot. But, in the end, I was definitely on the pleasantly surprised side of the fence for this one.
Fans of the first film (and you HAVE to see it to even begin to crack into this one) are going to find a lot of things to love about this one. It does keep it pretty faithful to the style and approach of "Donnie" with its use of music from the era (this time its the 90s!), the slow and fast motion shots and lots of wacky shit, I still can't wrap my mind on what the hell that glowing feather really is, and of course, the rabbit from hell. I was curious to see how they made the rabbit fit in this time as it was so situational specific for "Donnie" but without giving away spoilers, they made it work.
At times, I felt "S. Darko" tried almost too hard to be like the first film and it had some almost predictable moments due to that. We know these films have that hidden Sci-Fi time travel aspect, but this time its almost just mushed into the story rather than unraveled out again...(one of my big complaints is that it takes Donnie extensive brain blows to figure out how to make time travel work and yet in this one it seems like child's play and anyone can do it).
Bringing back Ms. Chase as S. Darko was a pretty sick move and considering how well she pulled off this film I was thoroughly impressed. as for most of the other parts, they were done well but not to the high expectations this man had. I wanted them to delve more into the Preacher character and explain that sub plot a wee bit more but I understand that they probably didn't have the budget to fully flesh that one out. Otherwise props to Ms. Chase for a job well done.
I have to say that I did enjoy this film quite a bit. Being a "Donnie Darko" fan from the beginning (before it blew up and went all Hot Topic and shit!) this did fill my craving for some more wacky hidden Sci Fi work. It was far more clever of a sequel then I was expecting and here's to hoping they make a few more that deliver like this one did!
Written By Matt Reifschneider
Needless to say I did not have high expectations for "S. Darko", being as it was straight to video and the complexity and 'have to watch it a billion times to even catch everything' side of the first film, this was going to be a long shot. But, in the end, I was definitely on the pleasantly surprised side of the fence for this one.
Fans of the first film (and you HAVE to see it to even begin to crack into this one) are going to find a lot of things to love about this one. It does keep it pretty faithful to the style and approach of "Donnie" with its use of music from the era (this time its the 90s!), the slow and fast motion shots and lots of wacky shit, I still can't wrap my mind on what the hell that glowing feather really is, and of course, the rabbit from hell. I was curious to see how they made the rabbit fit in this time as it was so situational specific for "Donnie" but without giving away spoilers, they made it work.
At times, I felt "S. Darko" tried almost too hard to be like the first film and it had some almost predictable moments due to that. We know these films have that hidden Sci-Fi time travel aspect, but this time its almost just mushed into the story rather than unraveled out again...(one of my big complaints is that it takes Donnie extensive brain blows to figure out how to make time travel work and yet in this one it seems like child's play and anyone can do it).
Bringing back Ms. Chase as S. Darko was a pretty sick move and considering how well she pulled off this film I was thoroughly impressed. as for most of the other parts, they were done well but not to the high expectations this man had. I wanted them to delve more into the Preacher character and explain that sub plot a wee bit more but I understand that they probably didn't have the budget to fully flesh that one out. Otherwise props to Ms. Chase for a job well done.
I have to say that I did enjoy this film quite a bit. Being a "Donnie Darko" fan from the beginning (before it blew up and went all Hot Topic and shit!) this did fill my craving for some more wacky hidden Sci Fi work. It was far more clever of a sequel then I was expecting and here's to hoping they make a few more that deliver like this one did!
Written By Matt Reifschneider
Drag Me To Hell - 4.5/5
Here it is. The return of the Sam Raimi to the coveted Horror genre. We all know (and if you don't then you should probably just move on from this review) that "The Evil Dead" franchise is one of the greatest of all time and to finally have Raimi return got me very excited. And it all paid off in the end!
Granted, I know there is going to be a majority of people out there that 'won't get it'...Raimi's style is simply that way. And his style is by far the most apparent thing about "Drag Me To Hell". The quirky camera work, the ambient suspense, and the very unique 'voice' that he adds to all his films is far more up front then his more mainstream work like "Spiderman". This is what truly made this film a great watch and fun from beginning to end. The story isn't all that unique (although Gypsy witches are fewer and far between now that vampires are all the hype) but the quest that Alison Lohman goes on to rid herself of this curse is fun to follow and the scares are abundent.
My true surprise though that came from "Drag Me To Hell" came from Raimi (and brother Ivan who co-wrote the film with Sam) and how the film managed to work around its more mainstream PG-13 rating. Of course, he couldn't do the ridiculous gore he had before, but there are plenty of great gross out moments (including lots of body fluids!) and more then enough ridiculousness. When a goat possessed by a deity calls you a 'bitch' - now that's awesome. But besides the gross out moments the scares are great. There are tons of jump scares that use everyday elements and don't seem, pardon the phrase, dumbass scares. It's a nice change of pace to see a Horror film succeed with creepy and jump scares that isn't a remake of an Asian film.
On the acting side, Lohman does what is needed and carries the film quite well where the big surprise comes from Justin Long. Normally, I can't stand Mr. Mac in films (there are several Apple placements in the film concerning him that made me laugh) but he does a solid job as both voice of reason and some joking moments. I was impressed.
So if you are a Raimi fan, then this is A MUST SEE. If you are a fan of unique filmmaking and great directing then I also must advise this for watching. If you don't catch the dark humor then this might be a massive let down for you, otherwise its on the list for best films of 2009.
Fans of Raimi will instantly recognize when his car appears too!
Written By Matt Reifschneider
Granted, I know there is going to be a majority of people out there that 'won't get it'...Raimi's style is simply that way. And his style is by far the most apparent thing about "Drag Me To Hell". The quirky camera work, the ambient suspense, and the very unique 'voice' that he adds to all his films is far more up front then his more mainstream work like "Spiderman". This is what truly made this film a great watch and fun from beginning to end. The story isn't all that unique (although Gypsy witches are fewer and far between now that vampires are all the hype) but the quest that Alison Lohman goes on to rid herself of this curse is fun to follow and the scares are abundent.
My true surprise though that came from "Drag Me To Hell" came from Raimi (and brother Ivan who co-wrote the film with Sam) and how the film managed to work around its more mainstream PG-13 rating. Of course, he couldn't do the ridiculous gore he had before, but there are plenty of great gross out moments (including lots of body fluids!) and more then enough ridiculousness. When a goat possessed by a deity calls you a 'bitch' - now that's awesome. But besides the gross out moments the scares are great. There are tons of jump scares that use everyday elements and don't seem, pardon the phrase, dumbass scares. It's a nice change of pace to see a Horror film succeed with creepy and jump scares that isn't a remake of an Asian film.
On the acting side, Lohman does what is needed and carries the film quite well where the big surprise comes from Justin Long. Normally, I can't stand Mr. Mac in films (there are several Apple placements in the film concerning him that made me laugh) but he does a solid job as both voice of reason and some joking moments. I was impressed.
So if you are a Raimi fan, then this is A MUST SEE. If you are a fan of unique filmmaking and great directing then I also must advise this for watching. If you don't catch the dark humor then this might be a massive let down for you, otherwise its on the list for best films of 2009.
Fans of Raimi will instantly recognize when his car appears too!
Written By Matt Reifschneider
Lord Of Illusions - 3.5/5
For the most part, I believe this film to be quite underrated. Yeah, its pretty much right in the middle when it comes to Clive Barker films: not as good as "Hellraiser" but better than "Nightbreed", but there are a lot of great things that happen in this film. Unfortunately, this film has an almost too epic for its own good storyline and thusly tends to brush over things too quickly for my tastes too.
Now I've been a Clive Barker fan for years. Whether its his writing, directing, or painting I think he is quite brilliant. Unfortunately, its his directing that tends to be the lesser of the three as he tends to be hit or miss even for the die hard fans. "Lord Of Illusions" is an example of such. Great enriched storytelling that is hindered by some cliche moments and borderline cheesiness. If one is able to get around these elements (although the love making scene still has some of the most cliche and hilarious music ever!) then one can see some of the better parts including some of the ideologies within the story about death and the difference between magic and illusion.
Bakula surprisingly is able to carry this film on his back but its the cult favorite Kevin J O Connor that pulled me in most of the time. His character of Swann tends to be underdeveloped in the script (technically he isn't the main character) and although it leaves a lot of his decisions in shrouds of mystery, there are some moments where one thinks "why" a bit too much and it detracts from the film. This goes with almost all the characters though. As a film fan, this is somewhat frustrating.
As I said earlier, this film is almost too epic for its own good and although it carries a lot of weight in its concept (the philosophical statements and struggles with Nix at the end make this feel as a bit anti-climactic in the suspense and horror sense but very interesting in the 'let's talk about the the end of the world and afterlife' sense) much of the film tends to be dragged out a bit.
I almost wanted this to be a mini-series of sorts. Yeah, most mini-series that are based on horror writers tend to suck (I'm talking to you Stephen King!) but this needed way more time to delve into characters and concepts. I still love this film but I wanted it to be so much more then it could ever be.
Written By Matt Reifschneider
Now I've been a Clive Barker fan for years. Whether its his writing, directing, or painting I think he is quite brilliant. Unfortunately, its his directing that tends to be the lesser of the three as he tends to be hit or miss even for the die hard fans. "Lord Of Illusions" is an example of such. Great enriched storytelling that is hindered by some cliche moments and borderline cheesiness. If one is able to get around these elements (although the love making scene still has some of the most cliche and hilarious music ever!) then one can see some of the better parts including some of the ideologies within the story about death and the difference between magic and illusion.
Bakula surprisingly is able to carry this film on his back but its the cult favorite Kevin J O Connor that pulled me in most of the time. His character of Swann tends to be underdeveloped in the script (technically he isn't the main character) and although it leaves a lot of his decisions in shrouds of mystery, there are some moments where one thinks "why" a bit too much and it detracts from the film. This goes with almost all the characters though. As a film fan, this is somewhat frustrating.
As I said earlier, this film is almost too epic for its own good and although it carries a lot of weight in its concept (the philosophical statements and struggles with Nix at the end make this feel as a bit anti-climactic in the suspense and horror sense but very interesting in the 'let's talk about the the end of the world and afterlife' sense) much of the film tends to be dragged out a bit.
I almost wanted this to be a mini-series of sorts. Yeah, most mini-series that are based on horror writers tend to suck (I'm talking to you Stephen King!) but this needed way more time to delve into characters and concepts. I still love this film but I wanted it to be so much more then it could ever be.
Written By Matt Reifschneider
Thursday, August 13, 2009
Friday The 13th (1980) - 3/5
Let's time travel shall we? Back to the early 80s when things were changing. It was a whole new decade with a whole new generation of film goers and with that ideology comes a change in film. For the most part one can look at the original "Friday The 13th" as a sign of new things to come within the Horror genre. Perhaps not the first 'slasher' of its kind, one can easily tell that "Halloween" or even "Psycho" were influences for films of this type, but this film went on to inspire and change the way that Horror could be perceived.
Upon its release, it received high ticket sales despite the severe critical backlash. Even watching it now almost 30 years later, one can see why it was influential for its time but one can also see its many many faults. With that, I must say that I have some very high respect for this film. Perhaps not in the usual sense, but this was pretty ballsy for American cinemas at the time (okay perhaps it wasn't "The Exorcist" or even Italian films for that matter) and despite some very weak links I find that I enjoy this film no matter how many times I watch it.
For starters, this film has some of the poorest character development and plot build for any kind of film. Despite the brilliant twist ending, that most of you already know but I still won't spoil it for the others, this film is about the killing and not about even caring all that much for the teenagers. Most of them are idiots and probably deserve to die for lack of character depth. But the film is very focused on this fact and delivers it swiftly. For its time, the special effects had to have been awesome, despite being an independent film with a fairly low budget, and the cleverness of the deaths is something that would inspire legions of films later on.
One aspect I still have issues with isn't the story or the somewhat cheesiness that time has give the film, but Cunningham's directing. One can easily tell that he is new to the craft and his later films would show a much better director. He tends to bog down flow of the film and he has a very un-inspired 'let's just shoot it' style for this one. It doesn't help that he doesn't have a good script to work with, or great actors either (despite Kevin Bacon of course whom's character is essentially a pile of rocks in flesh) but he does nothing to help it either.
And despite all of these flaws of poor film making its still hard for me not to enjoy this film. I still watch it every 13th that falls on a Friday and I still enjoy it at the end. Its far from great but I have respect for it (in a sense) and will always find myself draw to it.
Written By Matt Reifschneider
Upon its release, it received high ticket sales despite the severe critical backlash. Even watching it now almost 30 years later, one can see why it was influential for its time but one can also see its many many faults. With that, I must say that I have some very high respect for this film. Perhaps not in the usual sense, but this was pretty ballsy for American cinemas at the time (okay perhaps it wasn't "The Exorcist" or even Italian films for that matter) and despite some very weak links I find that I enjoy this film no matter how many times I watch it.
For starters, this film has some of the poorest character development and plot build for any kind of film. Despite the brilliant twist ending, that most of you already know but I still won't spoil it for the others, this film is about the killing and not about even caring all that much for the teenagers. Most of them are idiots and probably deserve to die for lack of character depth. But the film is very focused on this fact and delivers it swiftly. For its time, the special effects had to have been awesome, despite being an independent film with a fairly low budget, and the cleverness of the deaths is something that would inspire legions of films later on.
One aspect I still have issues with isn't the story or the somewhat cheesiness that time has give the film, but Cunningham's directing. One can easily tell that he is new to the craft and his later films would show a much better director. He tends to bog down flow of the film and he has a very un-inspired 'let's just shoot it' style for this one. It doesn't help that he doesn't have a good script to work with, or great actors either (despite Kevin Bacon of course whom's character is essentially a pile of rocks in flesh) but he does nothing to help it either.
And despite all of these flaws of poor film making its still hard for me not to enjoy this film. I still watch it every 13th that falls on a Friday and I still enjoy it at the end. Its far from great but I have respect for it (in a sense) and will always find myself draw to it.
Written By Matt Reifschneider
Hellraiser (1987)
Notable Cast: Ashley Laurence, Clare Higgins, Andrew Robbinson, Sean Chapman, Doug Bradley
Whenever there are discussions about some of the most iconic horror films and franchises, it's notable that Hellraiser and its various sequels may be mentioned, but usually towards the end of the list. The degrading quality of the franchise is something of a trick though as the original Hellraiser is not only spectacular, but it still retains significant impact. Clive Barker's directing debut is a whopper of a film (it helps he wrote it too) and there are plenty of things to admire about this low budget masterpiece of atmospheric weight and horrific, meaningful gore.
Spiral - 3/5
I was definitely hoping for more from "Spiral". It was impressive to see the range of films that Adam Green could pull off (the reason I got this was it was from the director of "Hatchet" one of the best off beat Horror films I've seen in a while) and he does so with some pretty stylistic charm that makes him a director I will continue to follow in the future.
Unfortunately, the story wasn't has 'thrilling' or 'mysterious' as I thought it would be. There is a few Hitchcockian moments, I thought multiple times through the film that it would have been better in black and white, but overall it just didn't have the edge that it could have. The twist at the end was rather predictable and not all the twisty, but getting there had some great moments.
I was also rather impressed with Joel Moore in particular. All of the actors did far better than I had expected and even the best friend/boss guy had some great subtle moments particularly towards the end, but Moore impressed me. His awkward and social irrelevance made you really feel for him so that by the end when he was breaking down it was somewhat of a crisis for the viewer too.
I'm not going to go too in depth on the film as it is a mystery film and I don't want to spoil it. I will say that this isn't going to be for everyone. It's very slow moving with lots of character building through what would be seen as idle conversation (part of the Hitchcockian vibe I got) but it works in the end. The jazz music choices were wonderful and added a very cool layer to the film that many viewers might overlook. It's a nice touch.
I just wish that this film had a little more of a unique ending. It really was somewhat anticlimactic and easily guessed. Otherwise the film was a pleasant surprise and recommended for at least one viewing.
Written By Matt Reifschneider
Unfortunately, the story wasn't has 'thrilling' or 'mysterious' as I thought it would be. There is a few Hitchcockian moments, I thought multiple times through the film that it would have been better in black and white, but overall it just didn't have the edge that it could have. The twist at the end was rather predictable and not all the twisty, but getting there had some great moments.
I was also rather impressed with Joel Moore in particular. All of the actors did far better than I had expected and even the best friend/boss guy had some great subtle moments particularly towards the end, but Moore impressed me. His awkward and social irrelevance made you really feel for him so that by the end when he was breaking down it was somewhat of a crisis for the viewer too.
I'm not going to go too in depth on the film as it is a mystery film and I don't want to spoil it. I will say that this isn't going to be for everyone. It's very slow moving with lots of character building through what would be seen as idle conversation (part of the Hitchcockian vibe I got) but it works in the end. The jazz music choices were wonderful and added a very cool layer to the film that many viewers might overlook. It's a nice touch.
I just wish that this film had a little more of a unique ending. It really was somewhat anticlimactic and easily guessed. Otherwise the film was a pleasant surprise and recommended for at least one viewing.
Written By Matt Reifschneider
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)

