MFF debates: Gore, what is it good for?
MARK, HERE! I was in the midst of a writing a review for the tough guy fights the devil movie called Solomon Kane and I had extreme writers block. The only thing on the page was “Too much gore” and “I dislike medieval peasant extras.” The micro-budget movie was decent but incredibly slight and I felt that the gore kept the producers from hiring extras to fill out the battle scenes. I mentioned the need for less gore to Co-writer John and he strongly disagreed. He proclaimed “Gore makes everything better. Mary Poppins would have been better with gore.”
I thought about the comment and Poppins killing zombies sounds fun but it would be shoehorned in and take away from the rest of the film. Gore is okay in spurts (sorry). Saving Private Ryan was understandable and any movie featuring this song. gets a pass. Gore = laziness and many film have suffered from more gore (Saw sequels…pretty much every sequel). I didn’t like the lost limbs and following blood geysers in Kill Bill, Evil Dead (remake) and the Saw Sequels because the story was lost.
So, because of this comment we decided to resurrect the MFF debates. In our last debate John made an impassioned plea for The Vow’s right to be called a good movie. However, I dismissed his argument with well-timed pithy comments and expect that from him this time around.
Sidenote: John loves horror movies and I’m writing this while watching The Iceman.
What do you think John? More gore? Less gore? Less is more Gore? Less gore needs more gore?
JOHN, HERE! MY OPENING ARGUMENTS…
First off, gore does NOT equal laziness. Gore ALWAYS requires more work. If Saving Private Ryan had less gore it would have been cheaper and easier to produce. I can’t help but to feel that you’re targeting uninspired filmmakers who happen to use gore to cater to a niche audience. Bad 80s horror, or bad horror from any decade for that matter, often used loads of gore because they knew they had a hardly serviceable script of an overdone and heavily borrowed story concept, no name talentless actors whose best attribute was their willingness to take off their clothes, and a director who hasn’t done anything more than what I just addressed. For these people it’s niche work. But the addition of gore, more gore, and yet boatloads more gore simply draw additional smiles to its fans.
Take Final Destination 5 (2011), Tucker and Dale vs Evil (2010), Drag Me to Hell (2009) and The Cabin in the Woods (2012). These movies were well-written, staged to perfection (even though not always so serious) and had their share of well-crafted scares. Do you feel the gore cheapened them? I’d hope not. No. It enhanced them. It made them more funny, outstanding and, at times, too gross or outright too difficult to watch for some.
I’ll freely admit that movies like Piranha 3D (2010) and its sequel Piranha 3DD (2012) basically relied on gore to justify their existence. But even in their case, more gore equated to more fanfare.
Now you suggest Mary Poppins shouldn’t have gore? I beg to differ. I’d like to point out the upcoming movie spun from the wildly successful book Pride and Prejudice and Zombies. If we had this argument years ago, you likely would have proclaimed that Pride and Prejudice couldn’t possibly have benefited from the addition of gore…or zombies. I mean, sure, we’d have a laugh about it over a beer. But that’s about it.
Well, sir, you have been weighed, you have been measured, and your goreless films have been found wanting (to modify a quote from another movie that needed more gore: A Knight’s Tale). Just the same, I’d say that removing the gore from Saving Private Ryan would reduce viewers’ sense of urgency and intensity. After all, gore doesn’t have to be slapstick or released in Anime-esque Evil Dead eruptions. It just so happens that the majority of gore-heavy movies happen to do that–because they’re niche films. Saving Private Ryan was no niche film but a major release and, as such, film crewmen weren’t throwing rubber guts in front of the camera like in the Tokyo Shock sensation Tokyo Gore Police.
No, they were tactful.
Now I’ll play Devil’s Advocate a bit here. I maintain that any movie can be improved with gore. Any movie! Again, take Pride and Prejudice as an excellent example. But, like Pride and Prejudice, the addition of gore will have the tendency to transform the movie into something entirely different. So, Mary Poppins would likely become Mary Poppins: Hell-Spawned Nanny or Governess of Hell: A Spoonful of Satanic Entrails or something…certainly nothing fit for children. But I hate Mary Poppins and never liked it. Throw in some scenes of her ripping open someone’s ribcage with their bare hands and you’ll have my undivided attention and fanfare.
So, all be it in a strange, roundabout argument, I think I’ve made my point. Gore makes everything better and there is never…NEVER…too much gore when handled appropriately.
MARK’S CROSS EXAMINATION…
Solid points. You know what movie would be better with gore? The Vow. Imagine the terrible parents, that sleazy guy and the hipsters on a spelunking vacation and BOOM! Subterranean monster death!
I’m still not a fan of gore but I understand your appreciation of entrails exploding in interesting and capable ways.
I have a question for you. You mentioned Mary Poppins ripping open a rib cage with her bare hands. If you were a director and had to make this scene work how would you do it? Alien style? Original Dawn of the Dead style? You are not that director who thinks more “blood, boobs, brain and blood” will help because you have a script about a giant vampire sloth lesbian. You are Neil Marshall the wonderful director of The Descent, Doomsday, Dog Soldiers and the Blackwater episode of Game of Thrones. Give me a gore Poppins scene with story that I might like!
JOHN’S CLOSING ARGUMENTS:
To answer your question, I’d have Mary Poppins rip open the ribcage of an H. R. Giger Alien in Dawn of the Dead style. However, then a facehugger would leap out on to her face and use her as a host to develop a giant vampire sloth lesbian which would later chestburst out of her ribcage to a musical number extravaganza featuring oodles of “blood, boobs, brain and blood”–and PRESTO! We have a Broadway success. Eat your heart out, Evil Dead: The Musical!
LOL.
In many aspects we’ll never completely agree on the inclusion of gore for the improvement of ALL THINGS CINEMA. LOL. But in the most important aspect we are: I also want story and character development with my gore. But since gore is a crutch for those who can’t deliver on the others, I take what I can get.
Share this post:
The Best Horror Film of the Last Ten Years: Round 2
VOTING FOR ROUND 4 HAS STARTED! CLICK ON THE LINK TO VOTE FOR YOUR FAVORITES!
VOTING HAS ENDED FOR TODAY. CHECK BACK IN TOMORROW MORNING FOR ROUND 3
THE ELITE EIGHT WILL BE FANTASTIC!
Hello all. MFF here.
The first round of the tournament was a huge success and the 32 have become 16. The voting was passionate and some battles were determined by one vote (Sorry Hatchet. Piranha got the vote). If anything it proved how loyal cinephiles are to their horror favorites. I (Mark) was pleased to see my personal favorite The Descent make it through to the next round.
The battled hardened horror films are ready for a new challenge. Make sure to vote for each contest in order to get your movie through the murderers row of quality cinema. Don’t miss out! We want to make sure you don’t react like Tucker and Dale when your favorite horror film loses by one vote.
Comment. Share. Vote. Comment. Share. Comment on the comments we make.
Spelunkers Paradise Bracket
“British spelunkers and their pet Morlock vampires face off against a sexy lady werewolf pack and the Warrens investigate illegal British aliens. I was shocked that Attack the Block made it to this round. Martyrs was intense, thoughtful and well done. I wonder if most people didn’t just vote for the movie they recognized. Or maybe we just find those British accents so charming that even Love Actually would have beaten out Martyrs for best horror.” –John
The Descent vs. Trick ‘r Treat (2007)
The Conjuring (2013) vs. Attack the Block (2011)
Red Demon’s Lair Bracket
“After beating their comical opponents (Dead Snow and The Hazing), Jigsaw rigs a nanny cam death trap for the poltergeist we’d soon come to hate as Toby. But the real battle here is between Insidious and Evil Dead. Can the evil spirits of the Further survive the demons of Hell? Or will they be dead by dawn?” –John
Paranormal Activity (2007) vs. Saw
Insidious vs. Evil Dead (2013)
Upside Down Skyline Bracket
“I was disappointed that Grave Encounters didn’t make it. I’ll be even more disappointed if a possessed Patrick Wilson with some serious mommy issues beats out Sam Raimi’s gastrointestinal sensation Drag Me to Hell. I also figured that Final Destination would be here. But I guess the name recognition and brutality of Hills proves that a remake of a classic never dies. What’s funny is that the inbred hillbilly mutants of Hills are exactly what those poor teenagers thought Tucker and Dale were!” –John
Drag Me To Hell (2009) vs. Insidious 2 (2013)
The Hills Have Eyes vs. Tucker and Dale versus Evil (2010)
Merman Harbinger Bracket
“It should come as no surprise that Cabin beat the ass-to-mouth cult film The Human Centipede. I guess Cabin‘s story was just easier to swallow. Yuck. But how will the redneck zombie murder family fare against a school of Spring Breaker piranhas? As for Shaun of the Dead and a tween vampire I have no idea who will come out on top. Horror comedy or dark coming-of-age artistic film?
Check out the board. It seems Piranhas didn’t even make the list.
But merman…? Seems legit.
Without his Thor muscles I’m not so sure Hemsworth is up for piranhas.
Cabin in the Woods (2012) vs. Piranha 3D (2010)
Shaun of the Dead vs. Let the Right One In
Share this post:
The Best Horror Film of the Last 10 Years
HEAD OVER TO ROUND 4 AND VOTE! CLICK HERE AND ENJOY THE AWESOMENESS!
VOTING HAS CLOSED. THE NEXT ROUND IS UP MONDAY 10/28/2013.
THANKS!
Hello all. Mark here.
We are back with another spectacular tournament. So far we’ve figured out the best remake (The Thing) best bad horror villain (The Shark Who Ate Sam Jackson in Deep Blue Sea) and Best Worst Sequel (Blade: Trinity).
Now, we want to know what is the best horror film of the last ten years. John the Horror Czar and I came up with 32 films that we enjoy and probably talk about too much. We had some overlapping films and we differed entirely on some (We shall not talk about John’s dislike of Insidious). How can you not like this guy? He is the scariest thing since the Troll in Ernest Scared Stupid.
The 32 films cover unique MFF viewpoints and run the gamut of zombies, demons and centipedes. We understand that hundreds of horror films have been released in the last ten years and these 32 do not necessarily represent the cream of the crop. These movies represent our opinions and I (Mark) understand that Devil probably does not belong on the list. However, I love the intro and atmosphere of the film.
This week will knock the 32 down to 16. So, vote, comment, share and vote tomorrow.
John has added some cheeky commentary about each face off.
First Round
Spelunkers Paradise Bracket
“Subterranean Morlock vampires face a serial killer; a Korean Kaiju sea monster battles Pumpkinhead‘s hellspawn son and his sexy lady werewolf pack; the Warren’s try their ghostbusting skills on a naked zombie woman; and some tough-as-nails tortured young girls aim their vengeance at the British invasion.” –John
The Descent (2005) vs. Behind the Mask (2006)
The Host (2006) vs. Trick ‘r Treat (2007)
Ed: “My readings indicate the presence of decaying breasts.”
Estelle: “Ed, this is no time for jokes.”
Ed: “No, really, honey. I read the MFF review and this zombie lady is LEGIT NAKED throughout the entire movie!”
Estelle: [silence and a glare of disapproval]
The Conjuring (2013) vs. Deadgirl (2008)
Martyrs (2008) vs. Attack the Block (2011)
Red Demon’s Lair Bracket
“A camera shy poltergeist distracts Nazi zombies by subtly moving objects around in the kitchen; demon-slaying college kids try their wits against Jigsaws GRE questions; a red-faced Darth Maul demon from The Further gets marooned in a shopping mall during a zompocalypse remake; and our favorite “dead by dawn” demon dream team floods some evil teenagers with blood geysers.” –John
Paranormal Activity (2007) vs. Dead Snow (2009)
The Hazing (2004) vs. Saw (2004)
Insidious (2010) vs. Dawn of the Dead (2004)
Evil Dead (2013) vs. Them (2006)
Upside Down Skyline Bracket
“A Lamia and Lucifer arm wrestle to pass the time when an elevator on a non-stop trip to Hell gets stuck; an evil mean old ghost lady fights a bunch of mean insane ghosts; Death tries to settle the score by killing inbred mutant monster people during a gymnastics meet; and two lovable guys who can’t read fast enough to keep up with subtitles get scared and accidentally kill their way through a possibly haunted Spanish orphanage.” –John
Drag Me To Hell (2009) vs. Devil (2010)
Insidious 2 (2013) vs. Grave Encounters (2011)
Final Destination 5 (2011) vs. The Hills Have Eyes (2006)
Tucker and Dale versus Evil (2010) vs. The Orphanage (2007)
Merman Harbinger Bracket
“Carefully selected good-looking 20-somethings navigate a corporate horror gauntlet knowing that failure places them on their knees behind the Merman in the most disgusting medical experiment ever; a satirized disfigured man-child tries to cleave his way through mountains of bikini D-cups in and a sea of crotch-biting piranhas; a British competition pits English ne-er-do-wells against a much more game-faced rival team in this week’s 28th episode of “Survivor UK: Zombie Island”; and Spanish zombies trap a Swedish tween vampire and her awkwardly young love interest in an apartment building.”
Cabin in the Woods (2012) vs. The Human Centipede (2009)
“Whoa! She’s cute. And is that Ei Roth?”
But as he stared at this, wading in the water…
This was aimed at his swim trunks below the surface.
Hatchet (2006) vs. Piranha 3D (2010)
Shaun of the Dead (2004) vs. 28 Weeks Later (2007)
[Rec] (2007) vs. Let the Right One In (2008)
Share this post:
John’s Horror Corner: Growth (2010), a stupid movie about parasitic worm egg oyster pearls that give people powers
MY CALL: Stupid, stupid, stupid. Bioengineered oysters make special pearls that are worm eggs that infect people and give them super powers. Very stupid. MOVIES LIKE Growth: There are soooo many better “infection” movies out there: Cabin Fever (2002), Cabin Fever 2 (2009), Splinter (2008), The Ruins (2008), The Thaw (2009), The Thing (1982, 2011), The Bay (2012), The Dreamcatcher (2003), Night of the Creeps (1986), The Puppet Masters (1994), They Live (1988)…any of these would be better choices for movie night. Well, maybe not Dreamcatcher.
Off the coast of Maine festers the island of Cuttyhunk. 20 years ago this small island served as a Mecca for research in human genetics: “The Human Growth Project.” Somehow, ground-breaking studies of oysters and special pearls led to a “jump in human evolution”, but also somehow led to a biohazard that wiped out 75% of Cuttyhunk’s population.
Jaime (Mircea Monroe; The Change Up, Tekken, Magic Mike) grew up on the island and her father was involved in the research that created all the problems. She fled the outbreak which claimed her parents’ lives only to return 20 years later to sell her parents property with her boyfriend Marco (Brian Krause; Sleepwalkers, Charmed), her stepbrother Justin (Christopher Shand; Return to Sleepaway Camp, Hit and Run) and Kristin (Nora Kirkpatrick). It should come as no shock that there’s no phone reception on Cuttyhunk Island.
They uncover Cuttyhunk’s long suppressed secrets. Their experiments somehow created a new parasitic worm which is linked to Jamie’s past. There are town council members up to shady business, culty locals dressed in black and hooded strangers skulking around in the woods watching them. Jamie struggles to escape the pursuit of locals who know that she has inherited more than she could have imagined.
The parasites grant their hosts telepathy, heightened strength and reflexes and an accelerated sex drive. What’s that? Why the increased sex drive? Is that how the parasite is transmitted to new hosts? Nope. That’s just a typical staple that direct-to-DVD horrors rely on just like their 80s video-era predecessors. These worms bore through flesh as easily as CGI effects can illustrate. As for the enhanced strength, infected people can punch chunks of bark and wood off trees like Bane demolishes cement pillars every time Batman dodges his punches.
How experiments in human genetics generated mutant worms that grant humans powers is beyond my understanding and sounds like a 10-year old wrote this story. They’re also vulnerable to salt and the island is surrounded by salt water, which smacks of a child’s disturbing fascination with slowly killing slugs. Was this written by a child?
“Wait, what? Why would the worms be vulnerable to salt?”
So…Cuttyhunk, huh? Interesting name. Sounds like what your body looks like when the little wormy parasites of this movie are done with you. Speaking of which, the creature effects are largely obvious C-grade CGI when worms are encountered en masse, but they’re entertaining and the worms were given more personality than simply a “copy and paste”-generated blurry swarm. Shots of individual worms seem to be more B-grade CGI and reveal more intricate details of the parasite’s odd morphology, which look like miniature versions of the alien worm parasites from The Dreamcatcher (2003). The worms take many forms throughout the movie, even earthworms, and this is a sign on inconsistency and not creativity.
SPOILER ALERT! In the end Jamie discovers that her father is like “the head infected guy” on the island. How does she recognize him after 20 years? He’s wearing the same shoes he wore the day her mother died. You got that? He’s been wearing the same shoes for 20 years. Who does that? How old is your oldest pair of shoes?
So here are some big questions for the child-minded writer of this movie.
1) Since the worms (and subsequently their hosts) want to spread the infection, why didn’t they just leave the effing island? The ending suggests that our hero escapes by boat and cannot be followed by the infected. Can’t the infected just get in another effing boat? WTF?!?!? Has no one required major medical attention and needed to leave the island (perhaps while infected)? Evidently not! Not one broken bone in 20 years. Healthiest town ever.
2) We also learn that all of the human genetic enhancement stuff started with bioengineered oysters that make special pearls, which we later learn are EGGS for these worms. WHAT!?!?!?! So oysters compact sand from the sea floor into living worm eggs of a new species that parasitizes humans and gives them special powers and a repulsion for seamanship, leaving them bound on the island with the stupid name? Is that what happened? REALLY?!?!?! By what insane reasoning does that make any sense? It’s official. This stupid movie is stupider than any stupid thing I’ve seen this year by a stupid lot.
“Wait, what? The worms hatch from eggs produced by oysters, which live in salt water, and the worms are vulnerable to AND afraid of salt water? FML!!!”
This was writer/director Gabriel Cowan first solo non-documentary directorial debut. His fledgling status is clearly evidenced by his childishly uncreative choices regarding the symptoms of infection, the inconsistent depiction of the monstrous parasites, and his outlandish story. Don’t watch his stupid movie unless you’re in the mood to laugh at what he apparently believed to be a credible horror movie.
Share this post:
MY CALL: 77 minutes of impressively nuanced Halloween anthology goodness with diverse effects and expertly interwoven stories. This movie blows away expectations. MOVIES LIKE Trick ‘r Treat: Some other fun, decent and/or clever anthologies include (in order of release date): Black Sabbath (1963), Tales from the Crypt (1972), The Vault of Horror (1973), Creepshow (1982), Twilight Zone: The Movie (1983), Stephen King’s Cat’s Eye (1985), Creepshow 2 (1987), Tales from the Dark Side: The Movie (1990), Necronomicon: Book of the Dead (1993), Campfire Tales (1997), 3 Extremes (2004), Trick ‘r Treat (2007), Chillerama (2011), Little Deaths (2011), V/H/S (2012), The Theater Bizarre (2012), The ABCs of Death (2013), V/H/S 2 (2013) and The Profane Exhibit (2013).
This fun little Halloween romp includes several interwoven stories. Unlike most anthologies, all of the stories herein share the same writer and director (Michael Dougherty; only feature film as director). So, also unlike most anthologies, there is a more consistent level of quality as we move from one short story to the next and there is no obvious beginning or end to each segment–instead they all overlap one another quite well. So much so, in fact, that some would even argue that this isn’t really an anthology film. Like in Creepshow, comic-book text boxes flag-post story shifts as light comedy and some downright silliness shine through to keep us smiling. After all, who said Halloween couldn’t be both gory and light-hearted? Mixed among the stories is a nice variety: vampires, werewolves, zombies, serial killers and midget monsters.
Here is a brief summary of the stories:
1. Four girls in cleavage-rich fairy tale costumes go out on Halloween night seeking manly fare. The girls are played by Anna Paquin (True Blood, Scream 4, Darkness), Rochelle Aytes, Moneca Delain (Lost Boys: The Tribe) and Lauren Lee Smith (Pathology). Paquin plays the shy virgin among a pack of experienced man-eaters.
Well, as we know, Disney always has been generous in the cleavage department.
Whoa. There’s a change up. From innocent school girl (above) to R-rated Van Helsing extra (below).
2. A bus driver attempts to kill a bus full of mentally disturbed children and sort of succeeds. This event (which is told as a scary story) is linked to a mean prank that some kids pull. The kids include Britt McKillip (Mission to Mars) and Jean-Luc Bilodeau (Piranha 3DD).
3+. The overarching intro-to-closing story observes trick-or-treating and trick-or-treaters or all ages in a pleasant neighborhood. Pleasant, that is, until people start dying at the hands of a strange diminutive murderer and a kid-killing school principal. This “story” features really more than one story of its own and the cast features Leslie Bibb (Hell Baby, 7500), Dylan Baker (The Cell, Fido) and Brian Cox (Zodiac, The Ring).
While not “maturely” or seriously presented, the writing felt sound, credible and free of any flaws that would provoke criticism. Great, in fact, for this kind of movie. A finer detail in this film is the effective use of jack-o-lanterns as a symbol of death. Pay attention to what happens after someone blows a jack-o-lantern’s candle out. Also note that the bus driver and the principal each find themselves in more than one story. Also pay attention as a murderer’s child dresses as the murder, complete with a blood-stained shirt after murdering someone earlier in the film! Now that is META!
A fine job was done with the special effects. There’s no CGI (that I can tell) and every nuance worth showing got plenty of skillful attention. The gore includes geyser-like vomiting, bloody bodies, severed heads, rubber guts, broken legs with exposed bones, stacks of corpses and a breasty flesh-stripping transformation scene. I really dug the artistic license taken on the werewolf transformation scene! It may seem a little dumb to horror fans at first glance, but it was done VERY well and it mingled fantastically with the “girls in slutty costumes” theme; they literally “stripped” off their human skin to reveal the wolf within. Given the tone of the movie and the scene, it felt perfect.
It saddens me that Michael Dougherty (the man behind this tactful movie) hasn’t done anything in years. I’d like to think he’s working on his next horror masterpiece. But I fear he’s fallen into obscurity.
This is far more worthy than any anthologies of the last 20 years in terms of overall quality. So take the time this Halloween to enjoy this light-hearted masterpiece.
Share this post:
Today I wanted to promote a friend and talented up-and-coming horror make-up/photographer. Her work will be presented in a series of posts. But if you can’t wait to see all of her work now, then you can find her on San Gato Photography (@SanGatoPhoto on Twitter) or her website http://www.sangatophoto.com/. You can read more about her in this article: http://folioweekly.com/Sick-Pics,7849.
Today I wanted to feature some of her photos. I thought I’d also give a made-up title along with my 100% UNsolicited opinion of each photo and hope that my jokes or comments don’t annoy the artist.
I should add that the lovely lady in the photos is, in fact, the artist and that I have been given permission to use these images.
I’m torn between calling this one The Siren and Siesta. But when I look into her eyes I feel that she is looking at me like I’m “dinner.”
Okay, so look at her hair in this one. It gives the feeling that she could be underwater. I like to think that this is a contemporary approach to a Siren. In Greek mythology, sirens are dangerous and beautiful creatures, portrayed as attractive women who would lure sailors with their enchanting music (the Siren’s song) to shipwreck on the rocky coast of their island, perhaps to then eat them. I’m not entirely sure. I’m not up on my mythology. But this could totally be a Roger Corman approach to a modern siren once her prey is within reach and she reveals her true man-eating form. The black voided eyes smack of evil, beauty and the abyssal depths of the ocean all at once, don’t they?
My other thought was that this looks like the photo could have been taken with the subject upside down. Like this…
So, with this in mind, it strikes me as a vampire hanging upside down from the ceiling after a meal. Perhaps she actually attacked her victim from this position. Why not? In either case, that victim was loaded with tryptophan and now she needs to take a vamp-nap from her ceiling perch. The powdery unevenness of the white foundation likes the skin to being paled with undeath.
A third option, which is just way too easy, is that she’s possessed by an evil spirit. But we’ve seen that in sooo many movies. I’d really rather she be a sexy siren. What do you think?
In similar style, this could just as well be a The Siren, Vampiric Baptism without the blood, or some manner of witch mid-ritual, to which end I would entitle this Water Birth, insinuating that this ritual harbingers the antichrist, the devil, or some evil force.
Sure, she could be possessed, too. But I like these alternatives more. Also, the white foundation make-up here is solid in tone. I’m guessing this was done with an oil-based make-up. The solid color, jet black eyes and crisply contrasting red lips create a more evil-chic appearance found in contemporary horror. Whether witch, siren, vampire, demon-possessed or generalized temptress, this make-up is sharp, attractive and commands attentions–and the water submersion with blaring reflections adds intriguing dimension.
This image leaves me feeling at first beguiled, then wondering what lies behind the expression of our artist. The eyes seem nearly friendly and the slightly parted lips insinuate a longing met with a hint of happiness (or the desire for it). As if in the distance she saw a figure and wasn’t sure if it was her love. Or maybe the transition is the opposite, from happiness sinking this very moment into defeat, with the eyes about to water.
A final thought is whether she is on her way into the water, or if she is emerging from it. The two could tell very different stories: death or loss versus rebirth.
The make-up and photography of San Gato Photography, Part 2
Share this post:
Jackass Presents: A Bad Grandpa With Heart
I am a Jackass completest. I like the crew because there is no animosity or smugness just an urge to hurt themselves for laughs. A lot of it is immature but they’ve encapsulated something that most people relate to. They all seem like good friends who genuinely appreciate the Jackass companionship. It is hard to replicate what they’ve got and that is why they’ve stayed relevant over the years. Not all of their jokes hit. However, when they do they are hilarious, inventive and always dangerous.
The latest film is a stylistically different beast with a complete narrative and few characters. Bilge Ebiri wrote a wonderful review of Bad Grandpa that struck a chord with me. I realize I should be coming up with my own thoughts on the film but his piece encapsulated everything that is right.
Knoxville & Co. go out and find a world that’s largely populated by decent, honest people: The onlookers here do express bewilderment, but it’s mixed often with concern or with joy. They even tolerate him when he rolls up, drunk, inside a shopping cart at a drive-thru window and starts asking for poontang. By and large, our nation’s unsuspecting bystanders come off pretty well in this movie. For all the fecal matter flying around, and all the dick jokes, Bad Grandpa turns out to be an act of redemption: It’s the anti-Borat. And for all its flaws, it might just be the most heartwarming movie of the year.
Bad Grandpa has heart but it also features Knoxville sharting on a wall (Match that Phillip Seymour Hoffman), his testicles hang low and his penis gets stuck in soda machine. Despite the male strippers, penguin destruction and talk of sex the film remains friendly and doesn’t take advantage of the unknowing participants. Borat and Bruno went the easy route of lampooning idiotic Americans who wouldn’t look good in any light. Those movies were too easy and relied on Cohen pushing his subjects to danger/anger. In Bad Grandpa you watch as a funeral choir struggles to sing as the body of Irvin’s dead wife lies on the floor. Patience is accomplished.
The film revolves around recently widowed Irving Zisman taking his grandchild cross-country. Irving’s daughter is in jail for drugs and the only place for the boy is his deadbeat dad’s home in North Carolina. In true road trip fashion the two start off at odds but then become best buds. Together, they infiltrate a beauty pageant, destroy a wedding cake and fart a lot.
I am biased because I love all things Jackass. However, I enjoyed my time with Irving and laughed when he took out a blender to make margaritas whilst playing bingo. The scripted scenes play oddly with the hidden camera shenanigans but at least the Jackass crew were trying something new. Bad Grandpa was an experiment that paid off and I can’t wait to see what they do next.
Watch Bad Grandpa. Appreciate the patience. Enjoy the ride. Don’t shart.
Share this post:
John’s Horror Corner: Carrie (2013), a worthy remake that should stoke interest in the original
MY CALL: Today’s Carrie preserves the legendary performances of the original with contemporary actors and an updated setting. MOVIES LIKE Carrie: Only the 1976 original comes to mind.
Let’s just start by fending off critics who just troll for things to criticize. This is a remake of the 1976 film based on Stephen King’s first novel. Because the original was powerful an remains effective to this day, some may argue that this is a remake that has no business being made. I thought that about the 2011 remake (which they claimed was a prequel) The Thing (2011). However, unlike The Thing, Carrie was remade impressively, honors the original and brings all of the quality to a present day audience that may have never given the time of day to the 36 year old original.
Carrie White (Chloë Grace Moretz; Dark Shadows, Let Me In, The Eye, The Amityville Horror) is an awkward, sheltered, God-fearing 18-year old living with her fanatical zealot of a mother (Julianne Moore; Seventh Son, 6 Souls). She develops telekinetic powers after being humiliated at school as she comes of age (physiologically). As a result of her humiliating trauma, she becomes the subject of attention of some clique-y, over-entitled “it” girls leading to a cruel prank that gets way out of hand when after Carrie is asked to prom by a popular boy, they are crowned king and queen of the prom, and Carrie has the time of her life.
The changes from the original were few in this remake. But the major accomplishment here was modernizing a classic while preserving legendary acting performances with current actors. Everyone seemed to do a solid job. Carrie’s classmates were vicious, with a cruelty credibly fueled by entitlement. Chloë Grace Moretz was impressive, instantly capturing my greatest sympathies. And Julianne Moore made me shutter almost every time I saw her face; hauntingly insane, often psychotic. Moore commands most of our nervous attention until the prom scene, when Chloë Grace Moretz shifts gears from great to amazing!
At this point I’d like to pause and address a non-horror victory. The prom scene was enchanting. They did such a great job making Carrie’s date seem sweet and attentive. For about ten minutes we see Carrie coming of age mentally as a beautiful, somewhat confident woman. She makes friends, has her first dance, enjoys her first embrace from a boy, and feels safe and cared for perhaps for the first time in her life. I almost wanted the movie to have a happy ending. No, they really did that good of a job making this scene, well…just so…touching! It reminded me of my prom and simultaneously made me think “if I should ever have a daughter I hope she has a prom experience like this.”
Well, not entirely like this. This effectively sweet and tender scene primes us for what we all know happens next. The messy prom finale. It’s impressive. Carrie exacts her rage on her classmates to gory ends, sparing the few she knows to be innocent but indiscriminately rending all others. Her face mixes horror, revenge and, at moments, a karmically reciprocal satisfaction. The scale is large, the revenge is sweet, and the ending is appropriately sad. Although, the final few minutes felt forced.
If I had a criticism it would be that Carrie’s telekinesis comes out of nowhere. It may have justifiably emerged after a traumatic event, but how did this not happen before in her four years of high school or a lifetime with her incredibly psychologically abusive mother? She also seems to master the power to levels of shocking acuity, which diminishes the frightening rage-like abandon with which she wields her powers in the prom scene. It seems equal parts meltdown and calculated, instead of entirely meltdown.
But largely this film was AMAZING. This remake is not only worthy, but a must-see which should stoke young horror fans’ interest in the original.
Share this post:
Machete Kills: James Bond Told By a Madman
Machete Kills is bonkers. directionless, loaded with unnecessary cameos and more enjoyable than the first installment. I remember sitting in the theater bored while watching Machete. I kept checking my watch as the blood, guts, machetes, violence and profanity exploded onto the screen with a drab insanity. The film had a timely border message but never felt fun due to its conventional narrative.
Machete Kills drop the social context and becomes a James Bond spoof with much more decapitations. It has a tongue in cheek vibe that bounces between boring, hilarious, bloated and unnecessary. Celebrities pop up at random moments, Machete goes to space and Mel Gibson loves Star Wars. It has an anarchic vibe and I’d wager the negative reviews stem from the critical masses watching the film with their arms crossed. Machete Kills is not a good film but it strives to entertain and is a roller coaster of weird (Lady Gaga?), funny (blurry 3D sex scenes) and Mel Gibson chewing scenery.
The story revolves around Machete saving Washington from a madman. He has to battle cartels, chameleon murderers, tweeting, gangs, racist cops, clones, prostitutes, Sofia Vergara’s boob guns and Amber Heard’s legs.
Basically, if you get in Machetes way he will kill you in creative/repetitive ways. For instance, he takes out a guys large intestines and throws them into a helicopter blade. He is an indestructible force who can only be matched by Michelle Rodriguez’s She’ (Like Che) Nothing can kill them and that is evident in the beginning when two racist cops try to hang Machete. The plan doesn’t work as he simply hangs in the noose keeping his eyes on the cop who is annoyed by the lack of death. He is saved when President Rathcock (Carlos Estevez looking healthy!) assigns him to save the world. The rest of the film is low-budget, directionless and slightly too pleased with it self.
I understand the critical complaints but the film kept me entertained. I knew what Rodriguez was going for and laughed as it went so far over the top Sylvester Stallone couldn’t pin it down. It is impossible to take the film seriously. For instance, Machete dies and is put in a healing water bath while Michelle Rodriguez loses her other eye and still beats up “fish taco” Amber Heard. There are no rules, some plot lines go nowhere and Machete “loves everybody.”
Watch Machete on Blu-ray. Appreciate the anarchy. Hope that Machete Kills Again: In Space somehow happens.
Share this post:
Gravity: A Cinematic Visual Dream
Gravity is a visual masterpiece that sets a new bar amongst modern day auteurs (Li, Cameron, Boyle, Scorsese). The 3D rivals Hugo, Life of Pi and Avatar. The visuals match 2001 and Sunshine. Alfonso Curan (Children of Men, Harry Potter 3) has proven to be a visual maestro who makes other visual maestros jealous. All of these auteurs have adapted the impossible (Life of Pi, Trainspotting), Excelled at creating new worlds (Avatar, 28 Days Later) and most importantly directed memorable films.
Gravity won’t draw you in to it’s characters/story but it will drop your jaw with amazing visuals. Everything is beautifully seamless and sequences stretch out to 13 minutes. The amount of care, precision and time needed to create the world of Gravity is mind boggling (many many years). There are several moments that feel like showing off (3D teardrop so detailed you see reflections in it) but they are earned. Cuaron had to wait years for the technology (Great article about that here) and deal with a revolving door of actors (Natalie Portman, Angelina Jolie, Robert Downey Jr.). The finished product was worth the wait because Cuaron has created a meticulous exploration of space survival.
Gravity tells the story of a routine mission gone terribly awry. Cuaron wisely combines the helplessness of space with an inexperienced astronaut on her first mission. The two elements give us an intense exploration of the will to survive. Much like 127 Hours, Jurassic Park, Life of Pi and Terminator we witness good people doing everything they can to survive against great odds.
The A-list performances add credibility to the space chaos but are never flashy. Bullock is saddled with an unnecessary back story that raises the question of how she was allowed in space. Her performance is good but her character is nothing more than two-dimensional. She is so likable and gives everything to the performance (months spent alone in a green screened studio) you wonder why she had to have the troubled history. I understand the cinematic tool of creating an apathetic person and giving them self reliance and a reason to live. However, Sigourney Weaver wasn’t saddled with depression in Alien and her character Ripley became a classic science fiction character.
If you look at the classic trendsetters (2001, Jurassic Park, Terminator 2) there are visuals that withstand the test of time. Twenty years will pass and the movie will not look dated. Cuaron infuses the film with genuine awe which is lacking in today’s cinema. When was the last time your jaw was dropped in the last few years? Imagine 90 minutes of stuff this beautiful.
Watch Gravity on the biggest screen possible. Immerse yourself in a cinematic treat. Appreciate the years of hard work and see how it influences the great directors. Watch Sunshine.
Movies, Films & Flix 