Million Dollar Arm: Nice at 90 MPH
Now that the dust has settled and Million Dollar Arm has proven to be a rare Disney sport’s failure. It will be interesting to look back and see what went wrong. Theoretically, a true sports story from Disney should be box-office gold. They have a tried and true system that made Cool Runnings, The Rookie, Miracle and Invincible money machines. I think the competition, lack of awareness and source material (man is jerk, man becomes less of a jerk) doomed the film to only break even.
Million Dollar Arm has its faults. However, the “cliche” angle that most critics are using is too lazy. Every sports movie features cliches. Actually, every genre borrows from everything else. Recent well received films like Godzilla, X-Men Days of Future Past and Captain America: Winter Soldier are all good films that tell a familiar story. To say movies are riddled with the familiar is lazy. You could do that with every film nowadays. The movie theaters are bombarded with the familiar yet when a nice sports film is released it gets the worst of it. Neil Pond of American Profile wrote a great quote about the film:
More cynical viewers might wish for a more cynical movie, but for anyone who wants to bask in a ray of early summer sunshine, this uplifting, spirit-boosting tale could be just your ticket.
Million Dollar Arm is a nice tale of an agent training two Indian men to become MLB pitchers. Instead of focusing on the sport aspect it centers around the search for international superstars. Yao Ming proved to be a cash machine in China and that is what takes Jon Hamm to India. He has one year to take two Indian cricket players (the two men don’t actually play cricket) and turn them into prospects. It is daunting, complicated and a huge responsibility. Of course, a selfish man who only wants to make money will screw up. Imagine being a supermodel dating bachelor who suddenly has to watch over three men who have never left their villages. He probably couldn’t have handled a fish and is no way equipped to deal with homesick guys who need guidance.
Will he overcome his selfishness and become a caring man? Yep. However, his motivation to become a better man is handled really well and not shoehorned in at the final moment. He has a fantastic love interest played by Lake Bell (watch In a World). Bell is such a funny and relaxed actress she rises above the “stock girlfriend” role and makes it organic. Also, costars Pitobash, Suraj Sharma and Madhur Mittal are so kind, intelligent and wide-eyed you can’t wait for their inevitable success. You like spending time with the characters and even when Alan Arkin is sleeping you want to give him an Oscar.
Million Dollar Arm won’t garner a Cool Running following (Great Empire article here) or convince anyone to strive for more (Invincible struck a chord with me). However, it gives us a neat success story. When the big speeches are made and hard work pays off you cheer with delight. To not like this film would be be highly cynical.
Million Dollar Arm dares to blast you with sunshine amid a world of comic book films. The story of redemption and baseball never gets old and should be celebrated and not picked apart. The stakes are never high yet some moments carry a beautiful weight. Sit back, relax and enjoy an interesting story that one day will be appreciated.
Share this post:
MY CALL: Worst of the franchise. I wouldn’t recommend this. MOVIES LIKE Wishmaster 4: Wishmaster (1997) and Wishmaster 2: Evil Never Dies (1999) are both much better, largely for Andrew Divoff’s ability to appear credibly pleased with his Djinn’s evil. Wishmaster 3: Beyond the Gates of Hell (2001) was nothing special by comparison to the earlier installments. For a totally zany and great bad 80s movie try the evil genie flick The Outing(1987)–loads of fun.
Director Chris Angel (Wishmaster 3: Beyond the Gates of Hell) returns to bring us the dreaded fourth installment in this series. Some may be shocked that he’d be asked back after seeing part 3. But, much like the Matrix sequels, parts 3 and 4 were filmed back to back with hardly a weekend’s break in between. So don’t be surprised that the make-up for the Djinn looks exactly the same since, well…it is.
Bro: “So you basically had your ruby randomly found and rubbed in part 3, you tried to open the gates of Hell and got defeated, and got banished back to your ruby prison…and THEN, like a day later another girl accidently found and rubbed your ruby AGAIN and released you AGAIN?”
Djinn: “Pretty much, bro.”
Lisa (Tara Spencer-Nairn) is in the middle of a pretty rough patch with her boyfriend, who suffered a crippling motorcycle accident. As with the previous installments she somehow randomly encounters the Djinn’s ruby prison, rubs it (really just touches it) and releases the Djinn (unbeknownst to her). Magically disguised as Lisa’s lawyer, our genie tricks Lisa into making her first two wishes, which include a healthy legal settlement and her husband’s ability to walk again.
This woman is literally orgasmed to death.
If Lisa makes her third wish then all Djinn–oh, yeah, Hell is just brimming with their kind–will be freed and they’ll create Hell on Earth. At this point it should be easy for the Djinn to fool her into making some whimsical wish. No clue why he doesn’t…she still has no idea that he’s actually an evil genie. But wait, there’s a weird twist. When Lisa wishes something the Djinn can’t grant himself, he most dote on her emotions to make her love him…in order to open the gates of Hell…romantic, huh? That’s right! Djinn’s can’t just make someone fall in love with someone else. Evidently the Disney Aladdin genie followed the same rules.
Djinn: “Why won’t you love me?”
Chick: “Dude, you are literally slimy, your hair tentacles look like an STD and you are way too old.”
The execution of the gore is iffy at times. But there are some satisfyingly gross moments like the “face peel” scene typical of the franchise and some genie-wish-induced self-mutilation. We also get to see other Djinn, which was neat I guess.
Overall…meh. I wouldn’t recommend this.
Don’t get mad at me for saying this, but isn’t the Wishmaster franchise about due for a serious remake/reboot? The original isn’t even 20 years old yet and, to this day, is very entertaining and a favorite to gorehounds. But I’d love to see this approached with a real budget (which none of the franchise installments have ever enjoyed) and a far more serious tone. Yes, serious. If it’s not serious then there’s no point in remaking it at all.
Share this post:
Chef: Inspiration via Food Truck
Jon Favreau’s Chef is a fantastic film about a man starting over. It is a refreshing piece of cinema that gives the viewer a cinematic high. Whether it be by the fantastic soundtrack, great supporting cast or massive amounts of beautiful food you get wrapped up in the proceedings and go all in.
When I heard about the film I was stoked that Favreau was coming back to indie cinema. He wrote the fantastic Swingers, directed Made and sat down for some great conversations on Dinner For Five. The man loves cinema and finds ways to make superheroes (Iron Man) or Christmas films (Elf) feel like revelations. After Iron Man 2 and Cowboys & Aliens this film feels like a palate cleanser that will lead to more interesting things by a reinvigorated artist.
Chef revolves around a talented yet increasingly selfish man who is tired of serving the same menu in a popular restaurant. Eventually, he is savaged by a popular food critic, discovers twitter and makes a mess of things. The rest of the film focuses on him becoming a better chef, father, husband, friend and twitter user. His unhappiness made him selfish and his new life gets him focusing on the important.
There is a scene I love where he and his son are setting up a Twitter account. The kid enjoys the learning experience more than any of the amusement parks or movies his father takes him to. The reason he likes this more is that they are simply hanging out and the father isn’t trying to pass the time via throwing money away. Favreau is terrific at finding realism in small moments and this scene encapsulates that.
My favorite part of the film is that John Leguizamo gets a solid role. He has long been one of my favorite actors and I’m glad Favreau wrote him a neat character that will hopefully spring board him back to the mainstream. If you haven’t watched his one man show Freak or read his book I totally recommend them. Leguizamo and Favreau have a lived in chemistry that makes the journey all the more interesting and real.
Chef is a feel good experience that never veers towards the cliche. You leave the theater happy, hungry and wanting a sequel where the characters just hang out in a kitchen and cook good food.
Watch Chef. Enjoy the experience. Prepare to be hungry and inspired.
Share this post:
MY CALL: Interesting, inspiring, and even soulful with Mickey Rourke’s narration, this film brings a modern day Pumping Iron to today’s generation. MOVIES LIKE Generation Iron: Well, of course Pumping Iron (1977). I’d also suggest the Jay Cutler Living Large series on Youtube. There are about eight 10-15 minute episodes. Rich Piana also has a lot of good Youtube webisodes. These Youtube videos take you deep into the lives of these pros.
Generation Iron follows a group of professional bodybuilders from pro-qualifier competitions to the 2012 Mr. Olympia. Some make that journey rather stress free, others find it more tolling. The presentation of these men is appropriately down to Earth and humanizing. You forget that they are in the top 0.0001% in their sport and appreciate them for their flaws and struggles in the microcosm of this single competition in their career. When we see them fail, we understand the realities and that there can only be one winner. But when they triumph, we get lost in the moment and feel happy for them. By the end (when they named the 2012 Mr. Olympia) I was at the edge of my seat…even though I already knew who won! LOL
Mickey Rourke’s soulful and wizened narration breathes life into this work and allows the audience, who may have once viewed these athletes as steroid-abusing sideshow spectacles, to understand the level of determination and struggle of these men.
Pumping Iron (1977) introduced the world to bodybuilding which, at the time of its release, was just as unknown and fantastic to the general public as Harry Potter‘s wizarding world and Hogwarts. In need of a protagonist, they depicted the arrogant veteran and current champion Arnold Schwarzenegger as the hero while essentially vilifying the kind-hearted newcomer Lou Ferrignou. Here, we find Phil Heath filling the role of the arrogant champion and Kai Greene as his humble opponent. The dynamic, however, is rather different since Kai Greene is a veteran who never won a Sandow (the trophy) and Heath is a young champion. So it comes with little surprise that Heath finds comfort in his arrogance. He expects to win whereas Kai Greene expects only to bring his best. That said, there is no clear protagonist in this story. In a way, that may be the documentary’s greatest fault. But I still thought it was great!
Phil Heath (above) and the artistic Kai Greene (below)
All of the competitors presented have found their way to the Olympia in different ways. Branch Warren thrives on his instinct and almost reckless work ethic whereas Ben Paluski relies on science to track his progress and hone his training program. Kai Greene protests that his devoted training will earn him Mr. Olympia, but Phil Heath suggests that his natural talent provides a powerful edge. We get a taste of many bodybuilder philosophies, but we delve very shallowly into supplements, training programs or steroids. Although, they do make some strong statements about steroid use in general with respect to competitive professional sports and bodybuilding, especially the fact that steroids don’t make their jobs at all “easy.” Their development is wrought with pain and sacrifice.
Branch Warren
These powerful athletes, often considered dumb meathead hunks of chemically-developed muscle, reveal their vulnerabilities and what they can and cannot control. For some, their career is everything, for others it’s just a chapter in their life, and bodybuilding saved Kai Greene from a youth of delinquency and a likely troubled adulthood.
This is a fun ride for any fan of the sport. You’ll see the likes of Lou Ferrigno, Michael Jai White, Busta Rhymes, Phil Heath, Kai Greene, Dennis Wolf, Jay Cutler, Ronnie Coleman, Ben Pakulski, Roelly Winklaar, Bob Cicherillo, Branch Warren, Hidetada Yamagishi, Sibil Peeters, Victor Martinez, Dennis James and Jim Stoppani. Stick around to the end of the credits for a Mike Katz cameo paying homage to when he was pranked by Ken Waller in Pumping Iron almost 40 years ago.
As a weightlifter myself, I found this film inspirational and I’d beg anyone with waning dedication, discipline or interest to give this a watch. You’ll be re-invigorated!
Share this post:
MY CALL: This is truly a “great” bad horror movie and it has more integrity than others of its generation. Although I wouldn’t recommend it to gorehounds, fans of classic 80s slashers will enjoy it.
Remember the days when all horror was rated R? Yeah, I miss the 80s, too. Those were the good old days when everything was either good or “bad” good. I’d call this particular 80s film a “great bad” horror.
Let’s meet this movies spoiled brats… The one on the far right looks like Jeremy Sisto and Sean Pean’s lovechild.
Meet Virginia Wainwright (Melissa Sue Anderson). She’s one of the smartest and most popular kids in school, but she suffers from memory loss and blackouts. Now, in the days leading up to her 18th birthday, her hip clique friends begin dying one by one in strange ways and many of them begin acting strangely.
As her friends become defensive, aggressive and damn near homicidal, Virginia slowly regains traumatic memories from her past. However, she also seems to be seeing some things that her friends aren’t seeing. All the while we are left to wonder just who is killing all these privileged private school brats? After the first kills, all we know for sure is that the victims know their killer. Is the killer the now mentally unhinged Virginia, or one of her snotty privileged friends?
Grin-worthy 80s lameness abounds. From the opening sequence we have a lame strangling which is salvaged by a most spirited struggle by our hysterical coed victim. The deaths range from ho-hum quality to laugh-out-loud hilarity. My favorite kill involves giving a mean spot while someone is doing bench presses, which of course reminded me of Killer Workout (1987; aka Aerobicide) and Death Spa (1989).
And the deliciously macabre birthday scene at the end smacks of The Texas Chainsaw Massacre (1974).
The gore was definitely adequate for its time, but nothing special. This film is clearly more for classically bad 80s slasher fans than sloshy gorehounds, and this lacks the level of zany gore suggested by the DVD cover art. Fans of the 80s will be pleased to see Lisa Langlois (The Nest, Phobia). And by the way, this was directed by J. Lee Thompson (the original Cape Fear, Conquest of the Planet of the Apes)!
Not as sensational as I expected this scene to be.
Maybe what sets this 80s slasher most apart from the rest is that it is filled with red herrings. Virginia’s flashbacks, blackouts and possible hallucinations combined with her friends’ changing behavior offer ample opportunity to misdiagnose the killer. The ending packs such a twisted punch that it would make the plot of a Mexican soap opera seem plausibly reasonable.
This 80s slasher maintains a great deal more integrity than its peers as well. There is no nudity and some effort was clearly placed in constructing the twist-rich plot. I’ll say that again, this is a low budget 80s horror/slasher flick with a thoughtfully made plot. That never happens! That’s reason enough to consider it worth seeing. But, plot aside, this is fun in its own right anyway. I really enjoyed it.
Share this post:
MY CALL: This semi-art house, semi-perverse film is only for lovers of true indie horror. That said, this was well-done considering its shoestring budget. MOVIES LIKE Night of the Tentacles: Lo (2009) was another bare bones budgeted film that had a lot to say. Dagon (2001) is another tentacular horror love story. The Boogens (1981) and The Kindred (1987) provide some classic 80s tentacle movie monster fun. And Grabbers (2012) offers about as good a time as a ball of tentacles can deliver.
After suffering some serious heart complications, fantasy erotica artist David (Bath Salt Zombies, Easter Casket) strikes a deal with the Devil for a new heart. He didn’t turn to Medicaid or venture to Canada for cheaper solutions…nope. The Devil had just what he needed. And with that David’s heart is replaced by a tentacle monster in a wooden chest. Just one problem: the monster needs to be fed living flesh in order to survive. The monstrous heart is eloquently voiced by an Bill Nighy sound-alike.
So, yeah…this is what the Devil looks like in this film.
Writer/director Dustin Mills (Bath Salt Zombies) clearly made an effort with this script. His writing is far from brilliant, but he definitely deserves credit for delivering far more than I’ve come to expect from the vast majority of direct-to-DVD horror. Theatrical devices like overt melodrama, narration and asides add an irregular flavor to this film. Whereas this flavor may please the art house crowd, some may find it over-the-top and distasteful.
Speaking of distasteful… Is there a lot of sexuality and perversion? Yes. But I see it as being used more as an exploitative “device” than purely as a crutch to cover the film’s shortcomings. There’s masturbation, which seems to reveal our protagonist’s desperation, and nudity, which does not utilize the typical stripper-cast actresses. There are also several sex scenes with little to no nudity.
Some of the acting in this is real crap (sorry, but I’m referring especially to Dustin Mills’ cameo) and the effects are about as cheap as they come. But considering this film had a budget of about $1500, I think I’ll let it slide. If you can make anything that entertains me for that cheap, then you’ve succeeded as a filmmaker. The closing action sequence is awful and fun and, for the few dollars left in the budget, they tried to do a lot with the gore.
I should note that whereas this film is not nearly as deep or art house-ish as Lo (2009), the style is similar enough to warrant comparison. Those who love true indie horror will likely enjoy this film. But just because you consider yourself an adventurous horror-goer, that doesn’t mean this is for you.
Share this post:
MY CALL: A wholesome, cute, spunky, almost Disney-esque horror movie with none of the rated R-ness but just enough evil to take it seriously at times. MOVIES LIKE Odd Thomas: The “adultness” of this matches up well to the first three or four Harry Potter films. However similar in tone, this movie is considerably less wowing and lacks the enchanting world-building elements. The Men in Black franchise feels like a close sci-fi counterpart, despite having no younger actors.
“I see dead people?” Well, it’s been done. But it’s been a while since I cared. So I gave Odd Thomas a shot and I’m glad I did. It offers up something that may not be meant for me, but I appreciated it nonetheless.
So Odd Thomas (Anton Yelchin; Fright Night, Star Trek: Into Darkness), a boyish young man, sees dead people. Playing out with all the carefree background mood and pleasantries of an episode of Desperate Housewives–and all of the almost playful menace as well–Thomas lives in a nice California town surrounded by nice people where he solves crimes using clairvoyance. One day Thomas may be avenging a kind ghost’s wrongful end and the next, stopping a killer from continuing his latest spree. But when things are going to become really bad Thomas sees Bodachs, evil nether creatures which sense the disastrous upcoming events and feed on the death and suffering that ensue. Our story picks up when Thomas starts seeing a disturbing number of Bodachs invisibly lingering about a strange man who clearly has a doomed future and a dark past.
Is it me, or does this guy look like Edgar from Men in Black? Remember the Edgar suit?
Bodach (above); Dungeons and Dragons Bodak (below)
Thomas has a wholesome girlfriend named Stormy (Addison Timlin; That Awkward Moment, Californication) who has the Disney sitcom dream of owning her own ice cream shop in the mall. She’s spunky, brave and supports Thomas is all his odd dealings with the dead.
Thomas’ main squeeze, Stormy. Isn’t she just cuter than a puppy made out of kittens?
Another clutch comic book style role is the chief of police (Willem Dafoe; Spider-Man, Antichrist), who is a friend and confidant, and is also aware of Thomas’ secret . Like a crime-stopping kid show, the chief is on speed-dial and he trusts Thomas and Stormy’s word, sending police aid on request.
“Yes, this is the chief…oh, hi Thomas…sure, how many officers should I send to help you…no problem, I trust your dead-people-seeing judgment. Toodles!”
The special effects are not great, but feel strangely appropriate, if not perfect, considering the “Disney-goes-PG-13” feel of this film. I’m not making fun of it at all. This feels like Disney’s answer to the old Nickelodeon show Are You Afraid of the Dark (1991-2000).
As for the action, normally my answer would be “absolutely not.” As an adult, I did not find Anton Yelchin’s physical prowess in this movie credible. No matter how well-choreographed the fights may have been, and with all their cool slow-motion bits and chase sequences, I simply don’t buy this little guy as a fighter or athlete. But here’s the thing. It all looked so good and, again, empowering our smaller-statured boyish protagonist just seems to match the wholesome feel of this movie perfectly.
However often I reference Disney in this review, there was at least one scene that shamelessly brandished a common horror trope.
Director Stephen Sommers (The Mummy, Van Helsing) had some fun with this one, which feels like a PG-13 Disney Rom-sitcom horror stretched into a movie. It’s often charming and cute, the story is cohesive, and it all comes to a touching end. Watch it on family movie night if you have some tweens who aren’t ready for real horror just yet.
Share this post:
MY CALL: This fun, monster-driven B-horror movie follows The Thing‘splaybook. It’s entertaining, but I’m not going to suggest you break down doors to see it. MOVIES LIKE Blood Glacier: The Thing (2011). ALTERNATE TITLES: This Austrian film was released by the name Blutgletscher. This was also title The Station. TRAILER: CLICK HERE to see the TRAILER.
Finally, a film with a message! This film addresses the important questions, like “What will happen to us if the polar ice caps melt?” The answer: we’ll all be starring in a mash-up of National Geographic and The Thing (2011)! I figure this is the inconvenient truth that Al Gore wanted you all to think would happen as a result of global warming if you don’t start investing in more solar panels.
This film opens with blatant over-exposition “explaining away” why each character is important in a color-by-numbers format. Our story takes place at a climate research station in the Alps housing four people and a dog. Did you just cringe, thinking about the dog kennel scene in the original The Thing? Yeah…me, too.
During some sort of “weather patrol” with the dog (wink, wink) they stumble across a “blood glacier.” They briefly lose track of the dog and everyone somehow gets conveniently cut or bruised. From here, the auspiciously scored “infection sequence” is so obvious there may as well be smoke signals. But it’s not just the researchers we have to worry about. The blood from the thawing glacier infects the local wildlife with some hybridizing single-celled organism that mutates them into hideous monsters. HOORAY!
The effects are not exactly high-tech, but they get the job done and the clumsily-puppeted rubber creatures put a big grin on my face. There’s a beetle-fox mutant (think The Nest), a giant killer roly-poly (think The Bay), giant mosquitoes, evil mountain goats, insectoid birds of prey…see the grin forming yet?
There’s nothing in this movie you haven’t seen before many times over. The scene with examining and explaining the virus/parasite/mutagenic thing, the infected dog scene, watching the clock as infected people become a liability, pulsating parasitic infections housing brooding monsters… I mean, there’s basically even a facehugger scene. Speaking of facehuggers, in the opening scenes the strong female scientist character feels almost as if they were trying to make her reminiscent of Sigourney Weaver in Alien.
Yup…been there, done that.
Is it just me, or does this guy smack of the The Thing’s MacReady? Or Joel Edgerton’s “not Macready” character from the “not remake” prequel?
Yup…narrow eyes and beards across the board.
SO, WHAT COULD HAVE BEEN BETTER? Well, there is the bummer that this was not in English. This isn’t necessarily a “flaw”, but I don’t speak German. I saw it dubbed in English, so I wasn’t distracted from the effects by “reading” the movie or anything. But the dubbing quality was akin to a less-popular Anime and the characters’ mood and enthusiasm rarely seems to match the scene. You also get little appreciative sense of the acting and you can basically hear in the tone of the voice actors that they simply don’t get paid enough to care. I felt this especially detracted from the humor of the opening scene, in which the debilitatingly hungover technician Janek (Gerhard Liebmann) is called to fix a glitch in his underwear.
Director Marvin Kren (ABCs of Death 2, Rammbock: Berlin Undead) successfully delivers a trope-rich, predictable, fun monster movie that should please horror fans and gorehounds. I’d save this for the fanatical, though. Folks who watch “a scary movie” once a month will likely consider this terrible.
Follow me on Twitter: @MFFHorrorCorner https://twitter.com/MFFHorrorCorner
Share this post:
MY CALL: Very entertaining, but it’s not making any “top” lists this year. This film was good-but-mismanaged and found greatness out of reach due to weak story synthesis and character development. However, this movie is rich with charm, jumps and excellent production value. So watch it with a date instead of with a horror snob. MOVIES LIKE The Quiet Ones: Case 39 (2009), The Conjuring (2013) and Oculus (2014) all share some positive elements of this film.
Loosely based on a true experiment that took place in Oxford in 1974, this film delves deep into the notion that what we commonly consider “the supernatural” actually represents telekinetic and “teleplasmic” manifestations of the minds of disturbed believers. Led by Professor Coupland (Jared Harris; Poltergeist, Pompeii, The Ward), graduate students Krissy (Erin Richards; Open Grave, Being Human) and Harry (Rory Fleck-Byrne; Vampire Academy) and videographer Brian (Sam Claflin; Snow White and the Huntsman, The Hunger Games: Catching Fire) band together to investigate the psychic phenomena produced by the suicidal young Jane (Olivia Cooke; Bates Motel) with hopes of “curing” her.
That’s right, Jane. Put all of your psychic animus into the doll…becas
From Act One to the next weird things happen, Coupland’s methods are called into question as Jane’s health is placed at increasing risk, and Coupland shifts from methodical to manic in his obsession to cure her. Both Coupland and Brian share a competitive interest (almost a sexual fixation) in saving her, but go about doing so by conflicting means. Jared Harris’ psychological descent is impressive and committed whereas Sam Claflin embraces his character’s own brand of emotional fragility.
This film was filled with entertaining moments including shocking effects, gripping jump scares and some long scenes tensed up with a solid creep factor. I’d add that the acting was very good; great, in fact, for a horror film. Olivia Cooke managed to capture crazy, disturbed, scary, dangerous and sympathetic all at once. The style of the film goes from something like a “house” movie, to a demonic possession movie, and then to something altogether different which I don’t want to spoil (not that it’s anything super special).
Jane has her good days (above) and her bad days (below).
However, as the story shifted gears from skeptical science and rational explanations to “what have we gotten ourselves into?” I found myself generally uninvested in the characters and the outcome. Don’t get me wrong, the movie is not without its charm, I enjoyed it and was entertained, and I really “liked” the characters. The thing is, their “development” didn’t lead me anywhere interesting. And whereas the facets of the story (and the scenes behind them) were independently interesting, they failed to find any of that effective and satisfying synthesis that makes us care if the protagonists succeed.
This actress really captures desperate, bewildered loneliness in a sort of Christina Ricci way, doesn’t she? Like a grown up (and psychologically messed up) Wednesday Addams.
Director John Pogue (The Skulls, Quarantine II) may not have wowed us with this film’s story synthesis. But, given his résumé, this represents a good step forward in his professional development and I must admit that it was very entertaining. However, the premise itself is more interesting than its execution. It won’t please gore hounds or story snobs who pine only for unique horror fare–and who, might I add, are almost never 100% happy with what they’re served–but it will please the popcorn “movie night” guys who just want to see good effects, enjoy acting that doesn’t hurt their soul, and laugh at well-placed jump scares. It would probably be a good scary movie on date night as well. Had it only balanced its writing with its quality scares, acting, ideas and filming with a better screenplay, this would have been quite good instead of good-but-mismanaged.
To the less-initiated and perhaps younger horror fan, this PG-13 film may serve as a great introduction to horror. Those who aren’t overly critical or “so tired” of loud-noise induced jump scares should get a real kick out of this. What it lacks in character development and cohesiveness it more than makes up for with jumpy scares, neat effects, minimal gore, great acting, solid production value and a cool premise.
Follow me on TWITTER: @MFFHorrorCorner https://twitter.com/MFFHorrorCorner
Share this post:
Sorcerer is a lost classic that pushes the boundary of cinema and holds up well because of its practical effects, timely plot and singular artistic vision. The 1977 remake of the 1951 film Wages of Fear revolves around four men who take the dangerous job of driving nitroglycerin through the jungles in order to put out a massive oil well fire. It is dirty, tense and you are worried for the actors safety as they wade through jungle water and drive over the worst bridge ever (which cost three million because of location changes and drought).
Directed by William Friedkin (Exorcist, French Connection) the film got lost in the 1977 hubbub of Star Wars. It was a disaster that went overbudget due to location shooting, drought and the unpredictability of mother nature. Friedkin’s hubris didn’t help as he wanted total artistic control and turned down actors like Steve McQueen and Robert Mitchum. His insistence on location shooting whittled down much of his crew and proved to be incredibly dangerous. Friedkin did an interview with Yahoo where he discussed the perils:
It was dangerous. I mean, it was way beyond what I would do today. I would never risk my own life and the lives of others the way I did on this film,” says Friedkin, who contracted malaria and lost some 50 pounds after the shoot. “It was extremely dangerous to do so much of it, and I had a kind of sleepwalker’s certainty that I could pull it off and that nobody would be hurt. But it was life threatening. The scenes on the bridge, a lot of the driving, much of which the actors did themselves.
The film disappeared and became a lost classic. Eventually, Friedkin won the rights back and now the film is becoming embraced. Sorcerer is one of Tarantino’s favorite 12 films and the Blu-ray release has been getting cinephile coverage ad nauseam. I had a sinking suspicion that Sorcerer is a classic case of the building up of a decent film over years of being mythologized. Happily, my suspicions were assuaged as I sat glued to my seat watching the primal man vs. nature tale. It is an unloved classic that might be one of the best remakes ever (The Thing is the best). Also, the cast is fantastic and you believe 100% they could succeed where many others would fail. Their all-in acting certainly wouldn’t happen today.
Watch Sorcerer. Appreciate an artistic vision. Never accept a mission driving explosives through untamed jungles.
Movies, Films & Flix 