MY CALL: Heartfelt horror with endearing characters whose warmth transcends the genre, Burn is the gem you’ve been looking for, made by the people who need to be making more films, and safely steering us clear of exhausting tropes.
MORE Indie Reviews: Here at MFF we occasionally do horror short film and pre-release indie film reviews on request. Among recent solicited promotions are Order of the Ram (2013; short film), Love in the Time of Monsters (2014; feature length), Interior (2014; feature length), Smothered (2014; feature length), In the Dark (2015; feature length), Trailer Talk: The Void, TRAILER TALK: Blood Money, Short Film Buzz: Burn (2016; press release), Brother (2016; short film), the indie techno-horror Other Halves (2016; feature length), Short Film Buzz: Kickstarter Campaign for Scythe (2016; press release), Scythe (2016; short film), Shallow Waters (2017; short film) and Tethered (2017; short film).
Disclaimer: This review was solicited by the filmmakers (Slaughtered Bird Creations and Dragon Egg Media) and/or producers who provided privileged access to the film. However, my opinion remains unbiased as I was neither hired nor paid to produce this critical review, nor do I have an investment stake in the film.
Burn (@BurnShortFilm), a short psychological horror film made in Hertfordshire and north London, UK: “After several local disappearances prompt a nationwide manhunt, Burn focusses on Peter and Louise – two of many gripped by media-induced fear. When their son, Charlie, is born, Louise must find a way of raising him amid continuing public hysteria and incomprehensible personal tragedy.”
Short films come in all manner of quality and style and, if you review them, you’ve come to learn this the hard way—like desperately sifting river sand in your pan, hoping against hope for that glimmering speck of gold. So, imagine my relief when I found Burn boasting the skilled camera work and shots of a more learned eye. The production value is high (until the end when we could feel the budget limitations) and most scenes are crisply executed. From artistic visuals to simply filming perfunctory tasks, the emotionally powerful first five minutes of this film feel like a montage of technically pleasing filmmaking. Kudos to director Judson Vaughan and his cinematographer!
I felt particularly edgy watching the “old gritty family tapes” opening sequence. Between the new trailer for It (2017) and films like Sinister (2012), I’ve come to fear they are signs of bad things to come for the characters in our favorite genre. However, I’d have liked to see this element more explored in the film.
Kindly playing a father whom his son will never know, Max Cavenham brings a candid compassion to the screen. His performance, complemented by solid editing work, breathes humanity into this role—and a challenge it certainly is to truly relate to short film characters in such short time. Playing his wife, Emma Kelly likewise provisions a sincere, lived-in character. They are real people who say credible things rather than slasher fodder festooned with clichés. Their moments together feel very real, as if you might have warmly shared them with someone in your own life just yesterday. Again, paramount filmmaking from everyone involved in this.
Not flawless, the second act (i.e., minutes 4 to 9) plods along, feeling like the product of different filmmakers and writers who had to force the plot’s hand a bit. But, again, with such a short running time this is perhaps simply indicative of the reality that we need some exposition and staging to drive us to the climactic revelation… and that revelation, our third act, found me quite satisfied. At first it felt quite familiar and a tad campy (which may garner negative criticism from some due to the drastic shift in tone), but then I formed a vast Cheshire smile at the “real” reveal. Interestingly, it inspired a twisted sort of heartfelt relief…while also murderous! LOL
A patient film highlighting the skills of the entire team on and behind the screen, Burn’s story is the brainchild of www.TheSlaughteredBird.com co-owner, Chris Barnes (@TheBlueTook), and in partnership with Vaughan’s Dragon Egg Media label it was released under production umbrella Slaughtered Bird Films (@SlaughteredBird). So, I’d like to say thank you to Barnes and Vaughan. We need more thoughtful horror like this, and more considered characters like these.
If there is a take home message here, the thing I’ll remember most about this film, it actually won’t be the sort of double-twist zinger (which I quite enjoyed). Nope. For me it will be Charlie’s endearing father, nervously and meticulously preparing videos for his unborn son with such tender care. In those show-stealing moments Max Cavenham was brilliant! So much more than just “great scenes [that happen to be] in a horror movie,” the heart of those opening scenes transcends the genre and would shine in any film of any genre. Imagine that, real filmmakers making horror.
Thanks to everyone involved and for sharing and asking me to review this. You likely felt you were asking a favor of me, yet I feel I’m the one who owes you something.
Share this post:
The MFF Podcast #101: It Maybe Comes at Night
You can download the pod on Itunes or LISTEN TO THE POD ON BLOG TALK RADIO.
If you get a chance please make sure to review, rate and share. You are awesome!
The MFF podcast is back and we are talking about It Comes At Night and movies we loved in high school. It Comes at Night is the latest arthouse horror film to hit the market and it features a neat blend of melancholy, blood and gas masks. Listen as we discuss when it might actually come and if red doors actually keep out gross stuff. We love horror movies here at MFF and I guarantee this discussion will open your eyes to a whole new paradigm of horror movie chatting.
Best gas mask work of 2017 so far.
As always we answer random listener questions and ponder why The Mummy never gets old. If you a fan of the podcast make sure to send in some random listener questions so we can do our best to not answer them correctly. We thank you for listening and hope you enjoy the pod!
You can download the pod on Itunes or LISTEN TO THE POD ON BLOG TALK RADIO.
If you get a chance please make sure to review, rate and share. You are awesome!
Share this post:
Why did the control center have to be so far away!
Do you ever wonder how long it took the Merman to travel from the elevators to the control room in The Cabin in the Woods? I sure have. After doing an excessive amount of analysis (E.G. pausing to count the number of steps on a staircase) I have an answer that is based on guess work and actual data. Much like my other posts that center around Michael Myers using his blinker, sharks scheming underwater and Leatherface running. I’ve done as much homework as possible to make an educated guess.
If you haven’t watched The Cabin in the Woods, it centers around a bunch of good looking people being killed to satiate the ancient god’s thirst for sacrifices. Helping the Gods are a bunch of office drones who make sure the killing goes off without a hitch. One of the main controllers Hadley (Bradley Whitford) is fascinated by the murderous Merman, who never seems to get picked by the unwitting victims. In true horror comedy fashion, irony strikes when he is killed by the Merman when everything goes wrong.
The problem is the slow moving creature had to crawl its way through long corridors and down some stairs to find his target. Watch this behind the scenes clip to see how slow it moves.
After watching and rewatching various clips from the movie I’ve patched together a likely path the Merman had to take. First, let me start off by telling you that the Merman moves at a very slow pace of 41.25 feet every 60 seconds. Basically, it reaches out one of its arms, and pulls itself forward very slowly. The most curious thing about the Merman is that there is no blood on its body when it finally attacks Hadley. Thus, it must’ve stayed away from the chaos and not murdered anyone because he is really clean. Here is the initial attack
.
I believe the Merman was one of the first creatures to be delivered by the elevators, because it didn’t have to crawl through the insane amounts of blood. It exited the elevator and made its way through roughly 264 feet of corridors on the 100 level. I came up with 264 feet, when I tracked the time it took for the armed guards to reach the elevators. I clocked them doing a 15-minute mile (5280 / 15 = 352 feet a minute) and I did the math from there. They cautiously walked through the corridors for roughly 45 seconds (264 feet) and I believe their main security station was close to the staircase that the Merman had to go down. Take a look at the video to get a feel for the building.
Once at the stairs, the Merman had to go down approximately 40 feet of steps (we need this deleted scene). Why did he have to go downstairs? In the beginning of the film, Hadley and Sitterson are walking on the 100 level to get some coffee. You can clearly see they have to go down a staircase to get to their golf cart. Also, during the attack, you will notice the creatures going down stairs to attack their prey as well. I believe the 100 level was where the elevators exited the monsters because during the unicorn attack you see a sign for room 100. I don’t think the unicorn had a chance to go down some stairs so 100 level it is!
After they make the trek downstairs the duo get into a golf cart and go to the control office. I’m wagering the trip had to be at least 300 feet to warrant taking a golf cart. Since these two guys seem bored with their job and caught in a routine I think they take the cart everywhere out of boredom. Throw in an added 20 feet to get into the large control center and the total jumps up to 320 feet.
They have a sweet setup.
The Merman had to travel 624 feet (264 + 40 + 300 + 20) in order to kill Hadley and create a whole lot of irony. Since Mr. Merman could only move 41.25 feet every minute the trip took a total of at least 15.127 minutes (+/- 30 seconds.). I initially thought the scene played out in real time but after destroying my soul with multiple brutal viewings I started REALLY watching the video screens that showed the villains corralling various workers and killing them in Saw-esque fashion.
I am 93.456% certain that 15 minutes was the minimum amount of time needed to make the deadly trip. The Merman didn’t waste time killing anybody else and his 15-minute crawl left plenty of time for professional/mythical killers to horribly kill people via fire, chains, and gross surgery. Here is a drawing of the trip to give you a visual flavor.
There you have it! I’ve tracked the Merman’s journey!
Make sure to share this on Facebook, Twitter and other places where people will love random horror movie data!
If you liked this post make sure to check out my series featuring random data and useless numbers. Start with my groundbreaking posts about Leatherface sprinting, Deep Blue Sea and Stellan Skarsgard, I Know What You Did Last Summer trunk cleaning and Michael Myer’s Halloween H20 driving then work your way down the list!
- Jet Ski Action Scenes Are the Worst
- A Closer Look at Movies That Feature the Words Great, Good, Best, Perfect and Fantastic
- An In-Depth Look At Movies That Feature Pencils Used as Weapons
- Cinematic Foghat Data
- Explosions and Movie Posters
- The Fast & Furious & Corona
- Nicolas Sparks Movie Posters Are Weird
- Predicting the RT score of Baywatch
- The Cinematic Dumb Data Podcast
- What is the best horror movie franchise?
- How fast can the fisherman clean a trunk in I Know What You Did Last Summer?
- It’s expensive to feature characters being eaten alive and surviving without a scratch
Share this post:
John’s Horror Corner: Phantasm V: Ravager (2016), an unworthy apocalyptic end to a once great franchise.
MY CALL: This is the only film in the series I didn’t like at all. Completely uninspired, yet still boasting our favorite characters reunited yet again and some nice ideas that find only the poorest execution. MORE MOVIES LIKE Phantasm V: Ravager: There is little out there that compares to these films, so I’ll just suggest starting with Phantasm (1979) and Phantasm II (1988)—both of which are far better—and only then perhaps should one venture the subsequent sequels Phantasm III: Lord of the Dead (1994), which paled in comparison to parts 1-2, and Phantasm IV: Oblivion (1998), which finally started to offer us some answers to the mysteries behind the Tall Man.
With a filmography almost entirely composed of animated children’s series, director David Hartman (Transformers Prime, My Friends Tigger & Pooh, Jackie Chan Adventures, Astro Boy) is a rather “interesting” choice to follow up the four previous Phantasm films from the mind of writer/director Don Coscarelli (Phantasm 1-4, The Beastmaster, Bubba Ho-Tep). About now you might be hypothesizing about what talents or perspective he might bring to the table. I’ll save you the trouble… the answer is none at all.
Phantasm IV: Oblivion (1998) revealed something of a time travel loop, resulting in Mike (A. Michael Baldwin; Phantasm 1-5) being left presumably for dead now that the sphere (with his brain probably inside according to Lord of the Dead) was removed by the Tall Man (Angus Scrimm; Phantasm 1-5, Subspecies, Wishmaster). Now in Ravager, Reggie (Reggie Bannister; Phantasm 1-5, Wishmaster) has been searching the American wastelands for nearly two decades in search of Mike and the Tall Man.
Toying with the notions of time travel, dreams and alternate dimensions, we switch back and forth between a “possible” future and present (maybe two presents). In one of these times/dimensions, Reggie is older and senile. He tries to explain the whole Phantasm story to Mike, who visits him and explains that he was found wandering the desert like Moses with dementia. In another, he’s joining freedom fighters against the Tall Man, his dwarves and his now giant balls in a post-apocalyptic war zone.
We cover some familiar plot points of parts 2-4—most notably when Reggie picks up a cute hitchhiker (Dawn Cody) much younger than him and tries to sleep with her. Also, like parts 3-4, there are some rather zany scenes, among them is a neat visit from the Lady in Lavender (Kathy Lester; Phantasm 1 & 3) and a curious sighting of a giant silver sphere.
So now we find ourselves almost 20 years after Oblivion (1998) and despite all technological advancements these evil CGI balls just don’t measure up to the metal spheres of the early films. Don’t even get me started on the just plain stupid death scenes—all from lame ball impalements and lame ball blood spews that don’t look as good as parts 1-3… or boring gunplay. Moreover, this is easily the worst written and least inspired installment of the series. The camera shots are lame and basic, and the “television movie” atmosphere is akin to an R-rated movie on the Hallmark or Lifetime Network.
But let’s appreciate the “good” here. While, I must sadly admit this is the only Phantasm movie I didn’t enjoy, there were some cool attempts at meshing the same characters across different dimensions along a linear timeline. I felt that it didn’t work, but the thought was there. My understanding (from gleaning the IMDB trivia page) is that portions of this were originally a web-series picking up the story after Oblivion (1998), and then they decided to film more content and string it together as a film. This was simultaneously a great and terrible idea. Great in continuing to develop the story, terrible in having such a low budget that nothing looked good.
Overall, this was not good. I found it quite disappointing even as a major fan of the franchise. The best thing about this film was the ongoing reunion of A. Michael Baldwin, Angus Scrimm, Bill Thornbury and Reggie Bannister from 1979 to 2016.
Share this post:
John’s Horror Corner: Wrong Turn 4: Bloody Beginnings (2011), the best cannibal hillbilly sequel in the franchise so far.
MY CALL: This is an outstanding, bloody flick; just a great bad movie for horror lovers! It starts in uber-raunchy porn-script mode, but it finds its deliciously gory footing in due time and is well worth the wait. MORE MOVIES LIKE Wrong Turn 4: Bloody Beginnings: Well, of course, you need to go back to Wrong Turn (2003; the best one), maybe Wrong Turn 2: Dead End (2007; more silly but fun), but probably skip Wrong Turn 3: Left for Dead (2009). More to try include The Hills Have Eyes 1-2 (1977, 1984, 2006, 2007), Just Before Dawn (1981), The Texas Chainsaw Massacre (1974) and The Texas Chainsaw Massacre 2 (1986) will all continue to satisfy the hillbilly horror subgenre, and then maybe Cabin Fever 1-3 (2002-2014) for the gore hounds.
Director Declan O’Brien (Cyclops, Sharktopus, Wrong Turn 3-5) returns for his second Wrong Turn sequel to reveal the origins of our favorite inbred hillbilly cannibals. Everything started with Three Finger (Sean Skene; Channel Zero), One Eye (Tristan Carlucci; Channel Zero) and Sawtooth (Scott Johnson), whom we first met in Wrong Turn (2003) but now meet as kids in 1974. Incarcerated residents of a Greenbriar, West Virginia sanitarium, these boys were born with advanced congenital analgesia, resulting in their inability to feel pain. I guess that actually makes some sense of their superhuman behavior in these movies…and maybe Michael Myers as well.
Fast-forward to 2003. Heading out for a winter retreat to a family cabin, nine college students take a wrong turn and snowmobile out of cell reception to the now abandoned mental hospital in the snowy mountains. Oh, and of course, a blizzard abounds to maroon them in flesh-eating Deliverance.
Right off the bat, we know this is a “bad movie” for sure. It might turn out to be a lot of fun, but it’s bad. Meet our co-eds: Kenia (Jennifer Pudavick; Faces in the Crowd, Wishmaster 3-4), Sara (Tenika Davis; Saw VI), Bridget (Kaitlyn Leeb; Total Recall, Wolves, Bitten), Jenna (Terra Vnesa; 5ive Girls, Goosebumps), Lauren (Ali Tataryn; Curse of Chucky, Silent Night), Claire (Samantha Kendrick; The Exorcism of Molly Hartley), Kyle (Victor Zinck, Jr.; Grave Encounters 2), Vincent (Sean Skene; Channel Zero) and Daniel (Dean Armstrong; Heroes Reborn, Saw 3D, Joy Ride 3). Of, course, they’re all good-looking like they were plucked from a J Crew catalog. As we get to know them, their dialogue is atrocious. These twenty-somethings talk like they’re reading porn screenplays…and even act like it. There’s a lot of nudity and some rather graphic sex scenes.
From the opening sequence I knew this would be better than Left for Dead (2009) and at least as fun as Dead End (2007; which was trashy but playfully gory). The scenes exude a sophomoric atmosphere, as if Axe Body Spray produced this raunchy film that spot-lights its tropes with a “let’s explore” here to “great, we’re out of weed” there and throw in a “sex scene on an old mental hospital bed.” The guys try to joke their way into partner swaps and threesomes until the body count starts to accumulate.
The gore is abundant and, despite a moderately low budget, quite entertaining. The dismemberment in the opening sequence was a feisty little number, the delightfully gory barbed wire noose scene offers a solid mix of fun and tension, and then there was the butchering scene… yikes! Our mutant rednecks engage in some skin-peeling torture, just slowly flaying and yanking his skin off while the dude was still alive. It was legitimately tough to watch, but ooooooh did I adore it! This was graphic, brutal, visceral…even a bit giggly—a solid cruelly playful nod to The Texas Chainsaw Massacre 2 (1986). Definitely in contention for best death scene of the franchise along with the epic Kelly Clarkson death scene in Dead End (2007), that poor guy from Left for Dead (2009) and Emmanuelle Chriqui’s death in Wrong Turn (2003).
Here are the best Wrong Turn kills (top to bottom) of 2003, 2007 and 2009…
The quality of the kills is high for the hillbilly horror subgenre. The writing might be terrible, yet this sequel manages to do the franchise honor! You’ll feel more fun than fear, but you’ll wince and reel about as often as you gasp with a smile. I thought Declan O’Brien did a piss poor job with Left for Dead (2009), but he might have learned from some of his mistakes. I’m putting this right up there with the original Wrong Turn (2003) in raw entertainment value. It’s clearly a sillier approach, but it’s up there. And even if you consider Wrong Turn (2003) a “bad movie,” this is a “badder movie.” But it’s a really good “badder movie.” LOL. Enjoy.
Share this post:
MY CALL: At first, this film feels like a typical bad 90s movie. It’s not. Give it a chance and franchise fans will be pleased by the revelations within even though the effects were largely lacking. MORE MOVIES LIKE Phantasm IV: Oblivion: There is little out there that compares to these films, so I’ll just suggest starting with Phantasm (1979) and Phantasm II (1988)—both of which are far better—and only then perhaps should one venture the subsequent sequels up to part 5. Phantasm III: Lord of the Dead (1994) paled in comparison to parts 1-2, swerving away from original ’80s goodness right into ’90s bad movie-ville.
Where we left our ill-fated Reggie at the end of Phantasm III: Lord of the Dead (1994).
Writer/director Don Coscarelli (Phantasm 1-4, The Beastmaster, Bubba Ho-Tep) returns with his fourth (and his final directorial) installment to explore the mysteries of the dimensional fork. As Phantasm III: Lord of the Dead (1994) came to a close, Mike (A. Michael Baldwin; Phantasm 1-5) had fled the northwest and Reggie (Reggie Bannister; Phantasm 1-5, Wishmaster) was doomed. Yet now we find that the Tall Man (Angus Scrimm; Phantasm 1-5, Subspecies, Wishmaster) mysteriously chose to spare him as it was “not yet his time.” Meanwhile, Mike is having visions of evil dwarves during his cross-country Hearse tour, passing ghost town after ghost town, harvested of all life by the Tall Man over the last 20 years.
After the enigmatic and original foundation laid down by parts 1-2, Lord of the Dead (1994) really took a turn for the worse as a typical 90s “bad movie” and Oblivion seems to start out pushing that “bad 90s” envelope hard. So much random crap happens that makes no sense. And, no, I don’t mean it makes no sense now until they explain it later. No, no, no…this just feels like a bunch of random stupid scenes strung together. Sure, it’s clear that there are some really cool ideas behind them (let’s stress the really cool)—and I’d love to hear Coscarelli explain it over a few pints. But they seem wholly ill-explored, unexplained and prematurely forced on screen. We need a Netflix series to re-approach the Phantasm film story arc!
Amid all this, Mike’s ghost/sphere brother Jody (Bill Thornbury; Phantasm 1-5) warns Reggie that Mike needs his help (and then we don’t see him again for half the movie), Reggie encounters a skinless demon state trooper who pukes yellow blood into his mouth (and we never find out why or what it was), Mike taunts the Tall Man with suicide only to not die because (like Reggie) it wasn’t his time (but the ends don’t justify the means…even though this “sort of” makes sense later), and then a portal just appears at Mike’s convenience to escape the Tall Man who seems content to not even try to stop or follow him. Come on! This stuff is inexplicable even for a Phantasm movie! There’s even a scene featuring evil sphere BOOBS (Heidi Marnhout; Bubba Ho-Tep, Flight of the Living Dead)! Do you think we get any explanation for how that happened? Of course not. But, it was actually a pretty cool scene.
So now Mike is traveling through time to his own past in the 1970s (i.e., the Phantasm part 1 timeline), and even prior to that when we find a completely sane “Jebediah” Tall Man offering up fresh lemonade and southern hospitality. This probably isn’t making too much sense yet, and it’s not you…it’s Coscarelli. But, believe it or not (and much to my surprise), eventually some of this is actually going to congeal into a somewhat sensible storyline. Not all of it, but the important bullet points. However, one that they never clarify is how Lord of the Dead revealed that Mike himself actually is an evil metal sphere puppet of sorts.
As if the largely haphazardly disjointed (yet later somewhat comprehensible in hindsight) plot wasn’t problematic enough, I find great fault with the special effects in this movie. Sure, the “sphere boobs” scene was actually really cool. But most of the movie relies on a few spurts of bright yellow blood and ugly dwarf make-up. And we don’t have nearly enough flying sphere action! Fine for a random direct-to-DVD 90s horror film, but not a worthy follow-up of the demonic back parasite or melting death or hair-pull reveal or sphere-in-the-mouth death of Phantasm II (1988; $3 million budget). Even Lord of the Dead (1994; $2.5 million budget) had better effects than IV, but not II. But Oblivion had a mere $650K budget, hardly more than double the $300K of Phantasm’s (1979) in the 70s!
It hardly seems fair to compare the best effect of part IV (ABOVE) to the highlights of part II (BELOW).
It’s funny, I spent an hour watching this thinking it was mind-numbing garbage, but a lot of things really did come together. So…this isn’t garbage at all. Were there stupid 90s-esque rando-scenes? Yes, several, and they had no business being here. But this sequel accomplished something that no other Phantasm film yet had—it actually answered as many questions as it created whereas parts 1-2 answered almost nothing while only raising hoards of questions.
This “apparently bad movie” turns out, when truly watched all the way through to the end, to rather, in fact, be the most comprehensible of the franchise so far.
Share this post:
The MFF Podcast #100: We Loved Wonder Woman
You can download the pod on Itunes or LISTEN TO THE POD ON BLOG TALK RADIO.
If you get a chance please make sure to review, rate and share. You are awesome!
The MFF podcast is back and we are talking about Wonder Woman and horror movie sprinting. Wonder Woman was a breath of fresh air in the DC muck and we loved every second that didn’t involve CGI battles on airfields. Get ready for a rollicking discussion that centers around Gal Gadot crushing it, Leatherface sprinting and strategic giving up of high ground.
Some Germans are about to get beat up….
As always we answer random listener questions and ponder why someone would ask about saving time in a bottle. If you a fan of the podcast make sure to send in some random listener questions so we can do our best to not answer them correctly. We thank you for listening and hope you enjoy the pod!
You can download the pod on Itunes or LISTEN TO THE POD ON BLOG TALK RADIO.
If you get a chance please make sure to review, rate and share. You are awesome!
Share this post:
MFF Special: Movies That Feature Characters Being Swallowed Whole Are Really Expensive to Make
There is a moment in Waterworld that has stuck with me for years. It involves Kevin Costner killing a massive sea beast with ease and then feeding it to people for dinner. I’ve never understood how a person can be swallowed whole by a many teethed beast and survive. The odds are basically insurmountable but it just keeps happening to cinematic characters.
.
The following posts breaks down the numbers of the live-action films that feature characters being swallowed whole whilst engaging in battle and surviving with nary a scratch. Take a look at the Waterworld clip and you will see what I am talking about.
Sidenote: There are some films that features characters surviving a terrible ordeal. However, movies like Pinocchio, Where the Wild Things Are, Anaconda or The Empire Strikes Back don’t fit entirely into the criteria that I have set up. For instance, poor Jon Voight in Anaconda comes out on the bad side of things after being swallowed whole.
.
1.The Average Budget is $194,457,667
Movies that feature people being eaten whole and getting out of it with nary a scratch are really expensive. Five of the movies (Waterworld, Pacific Rim, Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen, Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2 and Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man’s Chest) cost over $200 million and the lowest budget was Land of the Lost’s $116 million. I’m guessing when you are featuring massive beasts you need a massive CGI budget and all of these films (sans Waterworld) have loads of CGI. Take a look at this scene from Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man’s Chest and you will see what I mean.
I know Captain Jack technically dies but he still comes back with nary a scratch in the third film….
2. The Average Inflated Domestic Box Office is $257,000,000
People love movies that feature people being swallowed whole by creatures. Compared to all my other data involving movies featuring Foghat, jet ski action scenes, Corona and pencils used as weapons the total is massive. I understand the majority of these films are summer blockbusters but I’m still really impressed with the haul. I’d forgotten how HUGE the Pirates of the Caribbean and Transformers franchises are. They both made over $450 million domestically which would be top five in any year. Too bad Land of the Lost and its $57 million haul kept the total from $300 million. I do love the T-Rex vaulting scene though.
.
3. Rotten Tomatoes Critics Almost Consider Them Fresh and Audiences Sorta Love Them
The 58% RT average is actually pretty good considering this list features Transformers, Kevin Costner’s ego and broad jokes. I was pleasantly surprised to see the high ratings for Men in Black (92%), Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2 (81%), Hellboy (81%) and Pacific Rim (71%). I love these three films and appreciate that some of my favorite characters survived being swallowed whole.
I wasn’t surprised audience scores were above average. The 6.7 score is legit and proves audiences love a lot of these films despite deserved bad ratings from critics. Only three of the movies (Men in Black, Pacific Rim, Hellboy) had higher RT scores than IMDb scores and that is natural considering IMDb scores never reach Men in Black’s 92% RT score and critics more often than not appreciate Guillermo del Toro (7.1 > 70%) more than the mainstream audiences.
.
There you have it! Movies that feature people surviving being swallowed are very expensive to make and are often profitable!
If you liked this post make sure to check out my series featuring random data and useless numbers. Start with my groundbreaking posts about Leatherface sprinting, Deep Blue Sea and Stellan Skarsgard and Halloween H20 then work your way down the list!
- Jet Ski Action Scenes Are the Worst
- A Closer Look at Movies That Feature the Words Great, Good, Best, Perfect and Fantastic
- An In-Depth Look At Movies That Feature Pencils Used as Weapons
- Cinematic Foghat Data
- Explosions and Movie Posters
- The Fast & Furious & Corona
- Nicolas Sparks Movie Posters Are Weird
- Predicting the RT score of Baywatch
- The Cinematic Dumb Data Podcast
- What is the best horror movie franchise?
- How fast can a fisherman clean a trunk?
Share this post:
I Know What You Did Last Summer made me ask a question that I never thought I’d ask. How long would it take a murderous fisherman to clean out a car trunk that was once loaded with a dead body and stinky crabs? After looking at the data and sun movement affecting tree shade I have a good idea.
Watch the clip and you will see the dumb scene that has forced me to do way too much research.
Initially, I thought Jennifer Love Hewitt was only gone for 15 minutes and that left the fisherman a limited window of time to clean. The reason I thought she was only gone for 15 minutes is she took off sprinting in the summer heat and came back totally sweat free. I assumed she only ran 50 yards and came back suddenly which left little time for sweat. However, after looking at the evidence featured in the clip there is a massive amount of tree shadow movement which means a decent amount of time passed (or it took the crew a while to reset the shot).
In an effort to figure out the shadow movement I found a similar tree and kept track of the movement of the shade (it’s weird…I know). I’m thinking she was gone at least two hours because the shadow I tracked moved the same distance. Why was she gone so long? Did she get lunch? Why didn’t she calls the cops? Should the movie be called I Don’t Know What You Did For Those Two(ish) Hours?
I don’t think the fisherman would steal her car and take it to a car wash so I had to assume the guy took a lot of cleaning supplies, followed her vehicle and hoped she would notice the sound in the trunk in a quiet area that is free of walkers, nosy neighbors or traffic. It takes a lot of guts to stay around a vehicle loaded with a dead body and clean it.
When watching the clip way too many times I’m thinking there are about 50 crabs stuffed into the trunk. I counted 42 but underneath the guy there is movement so I added an extra eight. Also, there is a dead guy who must’ve smelt something terrible and was literal dead weight (How did he get all that in there?).
This is where things get crazy. The fisherman knew for some reason she would be gone forever (getting lunch) so he backed up his vehicle casually next to hers and began the cleaning process. Here is how I see it playing out.
-
- 10 minutes – backs up the car, collects cleaning supplies, and opens both trunks.
- 15 minutes – collects all of the crabs (and the few that escape), then looks around for a bit and pulls the body out of the trunk and dumps it into his vehicle.
- 90 minutes – This may seem excessive but the fisherman did an expert job on that trunk. It must have been a stinky mess because the body and crabs had been there for a decent of time which means there was blood and other gross stuff laying around. After reading through the WikiHow on car carpet cleaning I learned it is a very in-depth process. He’d need a vacuum, interior cleaner, brush, rag, wet rag, laundry starch, cold water, borax and a lot of patience while everything sets and drys.
- Total time – 115 minutes
The fisherman must’ve driven away minutes before the gang came back to survey the trunk. The guy is a master killer and car trunk cleaner. What I love about this scene is how the killer had to do a professional/stealthy job cleaning a trunk. Much like Michael Myers using his blinker while driving, I think a murderous man cleaning a trunk destroys any fear.
If you liked this post make sure to check out my series featuring random data and useless numbers. Start with my groundbreaking posts about Leatherface sprinting, Deep Blue Sea and Stellan Skarsgard and Halloween H20 then work your way down the list!
- Jet Ski Action Scenes Are the Worst
- A Closer Look at Movies That Feature the Words Great, Good, Best, Perfect and Fantastic
- An In-Depth Look At Movies That Feature Pencils Used as Weapons
- Cinematic Foghat Data
- Explosions and Movie Posters
- The Fast & Furious & Corona
- Nicolas Sparks Movie Posters Are Weird
- Predicting the RT score of Baywatch
- The Cinematic Dumb Data Podcast
- What is the best horror movie franchise?
Share this post:
The MFF Podcast #99: Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2
You can download the pod on Itunes or LISTEN TO THE POD ON BLOG TALK RADIO.
If you get a chance please make sure to review, rate and share. You are awesome!
The MFF podcast is back and we are talking about some a-holes who got a big sequel. Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2 was a welcome blast of irrelevance and murderous montages that prove bigger sequels can be better. Get ready for a rollicking discussion that centers around Marvel, music and severed toes. Also, how awesome is it that Kurt Russell plays a living planet?
.
As always we answer random listener questions and ponder what would happen if Star Lord wasn’t such a great dancer. If you a fan of the podcast make sure to send in some random listener questions so we can do our best to not answer them correctly. We thank you for listening and hope you enjoy the pod!
You can download the pod on Itunes or LISTEN TO THE POD ON BLOG TALK RADIO.
If you get a chance please make sure to review, rate and share. You are awesome!
Movies, Films & Flix 