Only God Forgives: Expectations and Eccentricity
Only God Forgives is another chapter in Nicolas Windin Refn’s eccentric book of film. It is brutal, soaked in red hues, lovely to look at and certain to alienate. Men are tortured, women are beat and the stuff that comes out of Kristen Scott Thomas’s mouth would make Mr. Blonde blush. You are spending time with the scum of humanity and asked to watch torture, depravity and geysers of blood. Only God Forgives takes us into the damaged psyche of a man who grew up with a psychopathic family. In true Refn tradition he doesn’t say much and occasionally makes people bleed. He is scared to use his hands and knows what happens when he does.
Only God Forgives is a misunderstood story of consequences. The film was lambasted at Cannes and the critics seems to have forgotten that Refn made films before Drive. When looking at the top critic section of OGFs Rotten Tomatoes page words like pretentious, overwrought, disaster, preposterous, shlockfest and barf appear frequently. There are several critics whom favored the film. Damon Wise of Empire magazine gave the film five stars and wrote
“The surest way to differentiate Only God Forgives from its predecessor is to say Drive was a Ryan Gosling movie directed by Winding Refn, and this time the tables have turned: Gosling is making a guest appearance in a Winding Refn movie.”
Critics should not be surprised by the hyper-violence, religious tones and blatant mysticism of OGF. Valhalla Rising focused on the crusades and suggestions that the lead character was from Hell. Ryan Gosling’s jacket in Drive was an unsubtle play on the Scorpion and the Frog fable. Refn’s themes have always been in the open so it was interesting to read the criticism. Critics scoffed at Refn’s quote that “The original concept for the film was to make a movie about a man who wants to fight God.” In the film Gosling’s older brother peruses Bangkok doing whatever he wants. He has money, muscle and a superiority complex granted to him from his insane mother. A sociopathic murderer with delusions of grandeur has no fear of the supernatural. However, the brother pushes his luck via murder, annoys a supernatural karaoke lover and ends up with a smashed head and revengeful mother.
Gosling’s character in Drive would make short work of the quick-tempered young man in Only God Forgives. Gosling’s character Julian lives in a world similar to hell. He is his mother’s unbeknownst pitbull who literally asks a godlike being “wanna fight?” He is plagued by his conscience, surrounded by evil (cue red lights) and controlled by his mom (He will have the spicy chicken). Julian has no problem hurting drunk bar patrons but when told of how his brother died refuses to kill the culprit. He knows the father was avenging the murder of his 16 daughter and allowed the man to walk away. However, his mother arrives and chastises him for not avenging the loss. She says “I’m sure he had his reasons” in regards to the crime and her actions ignite 90 minutes of violence.
The film has been pummeled for being too violent. The violence is impressively nasty but no different from Refn’s other works (Christina Hendricks head blows up in Drive). It has been interesting reading the critics dogpile the film and it reminded me of the reactions to Oblivion and To the Wonder. The film left enough of an opening and the critics pushed open the door with their complaints. Critics saw the film as vapid and pretentious. I saw an incredibly messed up family and a guy who hasn’t gone to the dark side yet. It is a struggle of conscience and masculinity that occasionally gets so violent I had to look away. If Valhalla Rising can accrue 71% on RT than I’m not sure why Only God Forgives was rotten. I understand the complaints but I find the inconsistencies in criticism to be fascinating.
Only God Forgives suffered from expectations and critics expecting a more mainstream friendly director. It is not an easy to recommend and I’d wager the majority of the population looking for a Drive/Crazy Stupid Love hybrid will turn the film off early. However, the violence, static shots and color should come as no surprise and thus be more palatable to Refn completists. I’m not sure what that the critics were expecting but it certainly wasn’t Only God Forgives.
Share this post:
John’s Horror Corner: The Curse (1987), another satisfying melty mutant zombie movie
Just FYI, this movie poster has no business looking this cool!
MY CALL: Low budget melty mutants get cranky and start killing things. That’s all I needed to hear to know I wanted to see this. If you feel that’s not enough to make an informed decision, then I assure you, this movie is NOT for you. LOL. IF YOU LIKE THIS WATCH: I was quite pleased with the much more “Lovecraftian” Lovecraft adaptations Dagon (2001) and The Resurrected (1991). Also try Hellraiser (1987) and The Re-Animator (1985) for serious gore and weird tones. And if you enjoyed watching Zack’s mother’s transformation in The Curse, then try Flesh Eating Mothers (1988).
During a storm, young Zack (Wil Wheaton; The Big Bang Theory, Eureka) witnesses a meteorite landing on his stepfather’s farm. This meteor brought with it an other-worldly ooze that gets into the local water supply. After exposure, the local produce immediately grows to look appetizing, but is filled with what looks like blood, guts, bugs and gook; the chickens become mangy and violently carnivorous; the cows become explosive reservoirs of rotten flesh and pestilence; and Zack’s mother slowly becomes a psychopathic, drooling, open sore-covered pulsating mess!
This actress moved on to play the head orc in Lord of the Rings.
Zack’s stepfather is a no-nonsense, “our God is a vengeful God” kind of Bible-toting, God-fearing farmer who disciplines his kids with the back of his hand. He is in denial about everything that’s going on around him (even as his wife turns into a warty, stabby monster), thinking that God is punishing them all. Being the only one to avoid exposure to the water, it’s up to Zack to save his kid sister from the strange malady that has struck his family and their land.
Zack’s stepfather and stepbrother start looking like Klingons that spilled acid on their faces.
The story follows the same (simplified) trends as Invasion of the Body Snatchers (1978) and The Stuff (1985), and helped gestate the similar Slither (2006). Although allegedly an adaptation of H.P. Lovecraft’s “The Colour out of Space”, I hardly find any Lovecraftian satisfaction in this–although it’s still a dumb-fun movie.
Here’s something totally random and symptomatic of terrible writing. At some point a water treatment investigator (John Schneider; Smallville, Super Shark), who has nothing to do with the recent meteorite sighting, randomly comes to Zack’s aid. The movie would’ve been fine if that character was completed deleted–no one would even notice.
It is blatantly obvious that this movie had a super-low budget, and with that comes its share of major filmmaking and writing flaws. For example, the local doctor is somehow also the only scientist investigating the meteorite and its potential dangers. The general randomness of the scenes in which we see new mutations just substantiates the lack of thought that went into this screenplay.
The gore and make-up work is entertaining. Whether a blood-gushing head of lettuce or the pulsating forehead of Zack’s mom, I was constantly smiling. As the movie progresses, so do the pus-oozing make-up jobs on Zack’s parents and stepbrother…who eventually “melt” away.
A not so appetizing head of lettuce’s guts.
I think that’s why we decided to watch this in the first place, right? To watch melty mutants kill people. I certainly didn’t expect much from the writing, nor did I care that it sucked.
Share this post:
Bad Movie Tuesday: Lee’s Major Mustache
I’ve been hearing about a mythical film called The Norseman since I was a little kid. My dad would regale me with stories about a viking movie starring Lee Majors that for reasons unknown he was unable to finish. So, for years I’ve been searching for a copy of the elusive movie so my dad could finally figure out what happened to the intrepid vikings . The problem was that I couldn’t find the VHS/DVD/Blu-ray anywhere. I wondered if the movie was a myth perpetrated by IMDB and my Dad’s wonky memory. However, several weeks ago I was reading Ain’t it Cool’s weekly DVD updates and I saw a double pack of Barbarians (obviously starring the Barbarian Brothers) and The Norseman. I immediately purchased the DVD and we watched it together over the labor day weekend.
As movie starts we were greeted with a lusty hoard of blond giants (Sans Deacon Jones) with furry earmuffs rowing a ship shrouded by fog towards North America. As the men expertly move the streamlined ship a man takes off his helmet and reveals an immaculately trimmed mustache. Lee Major’s steps forward and we meet our mustachioed hero who will rescue his father, woo a Princess, do like 17 flying high kicks and pinpoint EXACTLY where his kin are being held hostage on a massive continental coast line.
Sidenote: Iroquois leagues weren’t formed for another four centuries.
I looked over at my dad who had the expression of “Hey, it was 33 years ago when I watched this. Seemed legit at the time. ” The Norseman is not epic but it is memorable. It is stuff of Mystery Science Theater’s dreams. I’d wager it took six days to film in the Florida swamps that stand in for Newfoundland. They probably got the Hillsborough River State Park location for cheap and quickly realized how hot, sweaty and remote it was. Major’s wanted to get down to Miami so it was filmed in six days as opposed to the budgeted 27. The script flew out of the window, beards thrown on everyone and history was dammed (The Guardian gave the film a D- history grade).
The Norseman is filled with exasperating moments of charming ineptitude. It has zero research, weird accents and Lee Major’s refusing to shave his mustache. I was astonished as Major’s walked around his ship flaunting his well manicured facial hair. His crew had the obligatory beards but Major’s shimmered with his outstanding stache. Who trimmed the thing? Were there mirrors? Had they invented scissors? Who dealt with the constant upkeep? My theory on the “stache” was that the studio could only make the film with Major’s and he refused to shave so they were stuck with an uncharacteristic viking who loved high kicks.
The Norseman centers around Lee Majors attempting to rescue his father from the jealous Iroquois nation. One of the Iroquois leaders was mad that a Viking was putting his lusty albeit respectful advances on a native so he and a gibberish spouting woman (Kathleen Freeman. You will recognize her) capture the Norsemen and blind them via hot pokers. So, Lee Major’s has to battle the native’s, rescue 20 blind people, spout monotone dialogue and pretend palmetto bushes existed in the north.
It has been a long journey to watch The Norseman. However, as Major’s character Thorvald says “It will be written that the name of Olaf shall live on in the land of the Norse,” I will rework the quote and say “It will be written that the name of The Norseman will live in the land of wonderful bad movies for eternity.”
Enjoy! Grow a mustache! High Kick some natives!
Share this post:
John’s Horror Corner: Mother of Tears (2007), the final act of Argento’s “Mother Trilogy”
MY CALL: This very brutal, very gory evil witch demon film brings to an intestine-tangled close Argento’s “Mother Trilogy” in blood-soaked form. IF YOU LIKED THIS WATCH: This film tried to be brutal and largely succeeded. Fans of this wincing style should try Martyrs (2008).
Sarah Mandy (Asia Argento; Land of the Dead, Demons 2) is an American art student in Rome. Unfortunately for Sarah, her supervisor opens an ancient container filled with ancient things and reads some ancient words…and we all know that reading ancient words scribed on ancient things is a death-dealing no-no. I mean, did you see Evil Dead (2013) or The Cabin in the Woods (2012)? So terrible evil immediately converges upon her and, if for no other reason than proximity or contact with the box, that evil subsequently aims itself at Sarah.
“Hey, an ancient cask with ancient writing on it. Let’s open it and read some ancient words off of ancient things. What’s the worst that could happen?”
THIS!!! This is the worst that could happen!
Oh, wait! It actually gets WORSE!!!
Opening this ancient cask has unleashed The Mother of Tears (Mother Lachimarum), the demonic spirit of a long dead witch, upon the city–resulting in a wave of suicides and violent behavior. Also serving as a dark arts homing beacon, gothy witches in outrageous Harry Potter-chic fashion and loud eye make-up from around the world are gathering in Rome to celebrate the return of Mother Lachimarum and bring about the “second fall of Rome”…basically Witchageddon.
Looking for answers, Sarah seeks help to learn about a spectral “voice” that guides her to protection from the invading witches and how she and her deceased mother are linked to the witches. Sarah meets an exorcist, Father Johannes (modern horror forefather Udo Kier; Iron Sky, The Lords of Salem, Blade), who explains much of this mystery.
Director Dario Argento (Suspiria, Tenebre, Phenomena) brings us a dark story with gothic scoring (which is at times perfect, and at others poorly rendered). This is the third and final installment in his “Mother Trilogy,” which he began 30 years prior with Suspiria (1977) and Inferno (1980). This is not a fraction as eerie as its trilogy predecessors. However, the gore is deliciously over-the-top from the beginning, including images of flesh-tearing torture, smashing heads (repeatedly and to gut-oozing malformation), BDSM, blood-spewing gashes, dismemberment, eye-gauging, disembowelment, gushy cannibalism, wading through a pit of partially liquefied human offal and being strangled by one’s own intestines. There is even a scene in which a woman is speared in her…ummm…reproductive system–it’s all pretty brutal.
All of these images are meant to shock and provoke cringes and winces. Regarding this suspected goal they are often successful, especially during the finale as we are bombarded by what could only be described as the Devil’s orgy. After all this successfully provocative imagery, Sarah’s defeat of Mother Lachimarum is abruptly lame and anticlimactic. At least it occupied but a minute of a 10-minute gross-out montage full of activity.
The story was alright, but suffered a painful slowdown at about the halfway point. But what fueled this movie was a shock and awe campaign of gore and brutality. With that, Argento was quite successful and I was pleased.
Share this post:
John’s Horror Corner: Puppet Master: Axis of Evil (2010)
MY CALL: This franchise just isn’t getting any better. WHAT TO WATCH INSTEAD: Puppet Master (1989), Puppet Master II (1991; the most slapstick crazy of the first three), Puppet Master III (1991) and Puppet Master 4 (1993). Also try Ghoulies (1985) and Ghoulies II (1988). FRANCHISE TIMELINE: Retro Puppet Master (1999) introduced us to young Toulon in 1902. Puppet Master III (1991; set in 1941 and having the highest production value of the first three franchise installments) comes next, then Axis of Evil, and prequel Puppet Master (1989), which occurs decades later in present day and is seamlessly followed story-wise by Puppet Master II (1991; which was the least serious, most zany installment). Puppet Master 4 (1993) returns us to present day following Puppet Master II. Puppet Master 5 (1994) picks up right where part 4 ended and marks the most noticeable drop in quality of any other franchise installments. Then, presumably taking place after part 5, Curse of the Puppet Master randomly happens and is difficult to link to the others. Lastly, Puppet Master: Legacy (2003) takes place in present day and does nothing for the storyline.
We return to the Bodega Bay Inn in 1939, when Andre Toulon (William Hickey; Puppet Master) commits suicide before being captured by the Nazis who have so desperately sought the secret of eternal life which animates his puppets. A young fan of Toulon’s puppet work, Danny recovers Toulon’s puppets and learns how to animate them with the magical serum.
Director David DeCoteau (Curse of the Puppet Master, Puppet Master III: Toulon’s Revenge, Retro Puppet Master) hasn’t done much good for this franchise since its third installment. Here, he directs a less zany story than parts 4 through 7, which serves as a promising return to the original franchise standard. Danny finds himself protecting Toulon’s secrets while trying to prevent the Nazis and Japanese from destroying an American weapons factory. This is all fine, but far too much time is spent focusing on Danny, the Nazis and the Japanese and far too little screen time is afforded to the puppets, which, last time I checked, is why I’m watching this! I’d rather have a terrible story and more puppet action…like in Curse of the Puppet Master.
Here our Japanese yakuza spy mistress is comforting a Nazi in her theater safehouse. “You’re such a pretty Nazi…”
Our hardly featured puppets include Blade (parts 1-2, 4-8), Leech Woman (parts 1-3, 6-8), Pinhead (9 movie veteran), Tunneler (9 movie veteran) and Jester (9 movie veteran).
Pinhead just doesn’t look right, here.
When Danny opens the puppet chest we see a few others (not featured in previous movies) that receive no screen time or explanation. Danny also creates a new puppet with the soul of a loved one–it’s a little ninja with throwing stars. The effects (or lack thereof) behind the puppets’ movement is perhaps the worst in the franchise. When the 20 year old franchise opener has better special effects than the most recent entry (part 9), something is terribly wrong. Folks are getting lazy! Worse yet, they stopped using stop-motion and/or real human hands for Pinhead! Now he’s just “some doll” and his iconic hands have been rendered indistinct.
So, were there any cool puppet-driven scenes? Eh, not really. Leech Woman pukes a leech into a yakuza’s sushi dinner. After he eats it (chewing it up–which clearly doesn’t bother the leech–and swallowing it), it is evidently unharmed and lacerates his throat, leaving him spewing blood. That was probably the highlight.
Unless I’m mistaken–and I’m not!–there has been a major error in the story’s timeline. This is set in 1939 and Toulon commits suicide. But Puppet Master III takes place in 1941 with Toulon in Berlin…and he’s ALIVE…before he ever even escaped to America’s Bodega Bay Inn.
What can I say about this? It was better than Puppet Master: Legacy, which was really just a highlights reel more than a movie. That’s about it. Just not good. Don’t watch it.
Share this post:
Riddick: A Tale of Three Movies
Riddick is the tale of three movies. It starts off with Riddick stranded on a planet that unfortunately is “not Furya.” Then, he disappears for 40 minutes while we watch two groups of mercenaries argue, fight and chew bubble gum. Eventually, Riddick reappears and it becomes a Pitch Black rehash as Diesel survives the improbable and murders many poisonous water lizard type things.
Pitch Black was a low-budget marvel that looked great and gave the world a fantastic anti-hero. The $23 million dollar movie came out of nowhere and became a cult classic. The CGI was used sparingly, the monsters were intimidating and the characters were interesting creature fodder. Riddick was not an invincible killing machine. He was a badass dude who didn’t want to die via night loving winged beasts. Vin and director David Twohy (Perfect Getaway) followed up Pitch Black with the massive turd known as The Chronicles of Riddick. The massive space opera was critically defiled and bombed in the theaters. The night visioned character was thought to be dead until the massive success of Universal’s Fast and Furious 4, 5 and 6. Universal is happy with Vin being happy so they ponied up $38 million and let Twohy and Vin resurrect the character.
The first 30 minutes are wonderful as Vin fights to survive, finds a friend and battles a poisonous water monster. It is scarce, fun and focuses on character building. It reminded me of Cast Away mixed with Bear Grylls Man vs. Wild. However, things go awry after he finds a mercenary outpost. He triggers an alarm then disappears while we are stuck with muscular caricatures, murdered women and lots of gum chewing (the really bad guys chew gum). The movie gets stuck in a slog while people we don’t care about do things that nobody cares about. The lone stand out from this bunch is Katee Sackhoff who rises above her underwritten role and delivers a convincingly tough character (Sharni Vinson did the same thing in You’re Next). Eventually, Riddick allows himself to be imprisoned and things get good again (Monster mayhem and decapitations!).
When buying a ticket for a film called Riddick the viewer expects to watch the titular hero inflict pain on necromongers, creatures and jerky mercenaries. We don’t want random folk telling us how evil he is for 40 minutes while waiting for him to beat them all up. Vin’s Fast series has excelled because it knows what the viewers want and gives it to them ten fold. Riddick starts off intelligently then proceeds to boggle the mind with lack of Riddick. I can’t wait to listen to the director’s commentary to know why they made the swap.
Watch Riddick. Appreciate a passion project. Watch A Pefect Getaway. Get ready for Fast Seven. Buy the Riddick Blu-ray, watch the first 30 minutes, skip 40 minutes then watch the finale.
Share this post:
Deathstalker II: Duel of the Titans (1987)
MY CALL: Not nearly as epic of a guilty pleasure as the original nor as outrageous, but still LOADS of bad, bad, so very bad fun. This sequel focuses more on comedy than it’s more serious-toned and much more breasty predecessor. IF YOU LIKE THIS WATCH: Deathstalker (1983).
Back by popular demand comes the long-awaited sequel to Deathstalker (1983)!!! Leaving some big shoes to fill, Rick Hill did not return to reprise his lead role as Deathstalker. I guess after the raging success of the seminal Deathstalker film he was busy working on Hollywood studio pictures–but evidently none of them ever got made (just check him out on IMDB). Attempting to do justice to the role is newcomer John Terlesky (Vampirella, Chopping Mall).
Always stumbling his way into adventure, Deathstalker meets Reena the semi-cute seer (Monique Gabrielle; 976-Evil II, Evil Toons, The Return of Swamp Thing), his main squeeze for the movie–while he’s being faithful anyway. She foresees his upcoming adventure and knows some of the bad guys he’s supposed to face.
For someone who sees the future, Reena was pretty shocked by these zombies.
Hey, Reena? Did you foresee the threesome Deathstalker was planning while you were…JUST IN THE OTHER ROOM!!!
Oh, Reena. How quickly you forget Deathstalker’s ways. When will you just learn to avoid frat bros with unearned nicknames like Deathstalker?
The cast of villains includes the extremely androgynous condescending and fabulously manscaped Jarek the sorcerer, his scantily clad head henchwoman Sultana (Toni Naples; Sorority House Massacre II, Sorceress, Chopping Mall) and the even more scantily clad soul-sucking Princess Evie (also played by Monique Gabrielle), who he made by cloning the soul of Reena. These villains bring Deathstalker boring fights, fun humorous villainy banter, and one awkwardly loooong sex scene.
Here’s Sultana–and she’s wearing some perfectly practical combat gear. It looks VERY supportive.
Hmmm. What shall I do today? Do we have any young boys left?
Here is Princess Evie thinking about sucking a lucky young man’s soul.
She sucked it. She sucked the soul right out of the guy. You can tell by the soul drippings coming down her lips.
But you don’t get good at sucking souls over night…it takes lots of practice.
Oh no! Now she’s going to suck Deathstalker’s soul! How can we stop the evil soul-sucking Evie? Simple. Blunt force trauma to the head.
During their adventure, which is much more aimless than the original, Deathstalker and Reena encounter a cemetery full of zombies, survive some Indiana Jones-esque traps, meet an Amazon Princess (Maria Socas; The Warrior and the Sorceress) and Deathstalker enters a wrestling death match with the plus-sized Amazon champion Gorgo (Queen Kong). The action is all pretty boring for action’s sake, but they have their funny moments.
Amazons come in all shapes and sizes, you know?
Yeah, this looks fair.
This sequel seems to lack much of the attempted high fantasy of the original. But what this lacked in Dungeons & Dragons ilk, it more than made up for with super cheesy one-liners. Sadly, this humorous approach to the franchise left little room for gore, as we find none of the festive battle amputations of the original except for one delicious finisher to the finale fight.
So Deathstalker and Jarek are the “Titans” that “duel” in this lame fight. A frat bro with a dumb nickname and this other guy who looks like he’s never done a push-up in his life? Yeah, this fight’s gonna’ be awesome!
[death gargle]
Some playful quotes include “What’s your name?” To which Deathstalker of course replies “Deathstalker.” “Is that your first name or your last name?” There are plenty of sex-based jokes as well. For example, “Is that your sword or are you just happy to see me?” I’m not saying the writing is clever. I’m just saying it made me smile, even if it was stupid.
To that end, I should point out that, despite the nudity, this sequel is not an exploitation flick like the original. Men aren’t forcing themselves on women, Deathstalker isn’t as much of a jerk frat bro, there is no rape, women are generally treated with more respect (as opposed to entirely with disrespect in part 1) and the female characters share in delivering the comedy.
Oh, right. In the end they crown Reena princess. She dresses in the same conservative wardrobe as her evil soul-sucking clone twin Evie.
This is a more “wholesome” TnA fantasy-adventure flick. Oh, and stick around for the credits. They show us some endearing bloopers.
Share this post:
John’s Old School Horror Corner: The Innocents (1961)
MY CALL: Not scary, not even a little bit, not even to a child. I would recommend this to no one who has seen and enjoyed a horror movie that released after 1970. As far as horror goes this is lifeless; regrettably stagnant. However, there’s an okay story behind it all. IF YOU LIKE THIS WATCH: The Good Son (1993) for kinder-horror and The Conjuring (2013) for a classic-style horror story involving kids.
Okay. So, normally I’d normally never watch a movie this old. I typically stick to the 70s for my “really old” horror. Why? Well, as someone who grew up in the 80s I was never–NEVER–impressed by the dated “classics” of the 50s and 60s with Christopher Lee and Vincent Price. I think they’re lame. They probably once were scary, back before people came up with much more scary stuff in the films of the following decades. But know this. It’s not about CGI or effects for me. It’s that these old movies were made in a time when people were soft to the likes of suspense and scares (in my opinion).
I took a long shot chance on this film because someone wrote that The Exorcist (1973), The Visitor (1979) and this film were the three greatest horror movies he’d ever seen. I agree with the status of The Exorcist. The Visitor was truly awful, but so weird it was funny (unintentionally, that is, and not in a good way). And that leaves The Innocents to be judged…
A wealthy man inherits two young children. Wanting nothing to do with them, he hires a governess to replace the deceased governess before her to raise them. When we first meet the children, Flora is an angelic delight and Miles has just been expelled from school, but seems quite polite and charming all the same.
Like any modern spin on this story, weird things start to happen around the governess. Only, in this dated medium, the transpiring events and the uninspired camera angles filming them are in no way creepy. She sees figures, hears voices and the housekeeper slips and says a few suspicious things. But it never feels urgent or forewarning–even though I know it’s supposed to. Other things that would be terrifying or off-putting in the hands of a director today strike me as mundane…the boy asks if the governess’ house is “large enough to hide secrets,” unidentified figures pace in the shadows, Miles gives the governess a long and overly mature kiss, and the kids play a game of hide and seek (see The Conjuring to see this done well). Once we graduate to hints of violence and temper in the children, it’s not a fraction as eerie as it should be.
The housekeeper plays the role of the enabler. Like the children’s acolyte, she attempts to dismiss or belittle the governess’ increasing concerns regarding the children. It’s as if she wants the governess to question her own senses.
The #1 Amazon review stated “The Innocents is as scary as anything that’s come out of Hollywood in the last twenty years.” I couldn’t disagree more. Basically, EVERYTHING in the last 20-30 years of horror has been far scarier than this. For this, held to modern standards, is not at all scary or suspenseful. This feels no more “scary” than a drama about an overwhelmed single parent on the Lifetime Network or the Hallmark Channel. I struggle to believe that in 1961 this was considered scary until I realized how little of a horror education people had at the time, with no PG-13 or R-rated movies trying to push the envelope for the biggest scare, shock, reveal, tension or twist. No. Like the picture, this is black and white and just as plain. Even the attempts at jump scares were completely ineffective as if someone turned the horror dial to “mute.”
The only good thing I have to say about this was that the two child actors were spectacular! Not scary, but quite talented.
I would recommend this to no one who has seen a horror movie that released after 1970. As far as horror goes this is lifeless; regrettably stagnant.
Share this post:
John’s Horror Corner: The Boneyard (1991), it’s not your average hulking, evil, mutant zombie poodle movie
MY CALL: Asian children mummy zombies, an eight foot tall old lady ghoul and a roid-raging mutant poodle monster…yup, you’ve got to see this. Once this movie got going (about halfway through) it was a lot of fun and it managed to steer away from being “just another zombie movie” while maintaining all of the hokiness. IF YOU LIKE THIS WATCH: Other older zombie movies that successful avoid being “just another zombie movie” include Flesh Eating Mothers (1988) and Dead-Alive (1992). For some other horror movies that stand out from the same old recycled paradigms try The Abomination (1988), Leviathan (1989), The Deadly Spawn (1983), The Kindred (1987), Night of the Creeps (1986), The Thing (1982; not The Thing 2011), and Slither (2006).
A detective and a homely psychic go to a coroner’s office to investigate a Japanese man’s claim that his ancestors have been protecting humanity from zombie children. This sounds fun, but it takes over 40 minutes for anything to happen and those 40 minutes are painfully stale with wretched writing and talentless acting; it’s not even campy or cheesy, it’s just plain bad even by “bad horror” standards.
Meet your resident psychic. Hey, remember how horror movies always used to cast bikini models to play scientists, psychics and paranormal investigators? And how we’d roll our eyes out how lame that was…? Yeah, I’m missing that right now.
When she’s not using her second sight to hunt down Asian children zombies, she dreams about hugging dead children zombies.
Thankfully, at some point they realized they had to let the cat out of the bag. And in this case “the cat” is a trio of slimy, twitchy Asian zombie children. These zombies have a little more flavor than most. Being hundreds of years old, they look a bit like unwrapped mummies with sunken leathery faces and being children makes them a bit more creepy.
This looks like a paparazzi photo of Lindsay Lohan skipping out on rehab again.
Like any good zombie, these zombies manage to infect others. Not by bite, but by contact with their slime. A despicably heinous old lady becomes infected and mutates into an eight foot tall, googly-eyed ghoul with menacingly clumsy long-limbed prosthetics. It was hilarious and awesome! Another fine infection greets us when the woman’s poodle licks up some slimy zombie secretions. This poodle transforms into a giant, roid-raging monster reminiscent of Dead-Alive (1992).
Here is our before picture of a crotchety old lady and her dog.
Once this movie got going (about halfway through) it was a lot of fun and it managed to steer away from being “just another zombie movie” while maintaining all of the hokiness.
Share this post:
The Day (2011), when big risks, low budgets and strong female leads produce greatness!
MY CALL: Believably tough women (and men) in a desperate situation fight for their lives…and I bought it! It’s a familiar premise presented in a gritty different way that works surprisingly well with actors capable of matching the grave tone. IF YOU LIKED THIS WATCH: The Shrine (2010) and The Last Exorcism (2010), both with extremely different premises but offer similarly unexpected surprises from low budgets. I hope the best for these risk-taking filmmakers.
A group of survivors in a post-apocalyptic world have banded together, pooled their resources, and are trying to survive. We know there were originally twelve of them and now they are down to five. But what caused the apocalypse and wiped out humanity, killed their seven friends, and whatever it is they’re protecting themselves from remains a mystery.
Our survivors include Adam (Shawn Ashmore; the X-Men trilogy, The Following, Mother’s Day, The Ruins), Rick (Dominic Monaghan; Heroes, The Lord of the Rings trilogy, Lost), Shannon (Shannyn Sossamon; One Missed Call, Catacombs, The Order), Mary (Ashley Bell; The Last Exorcism, The Last Exorcism Part 2) and Henson (Cory Hardrict; Warm Bodies, Return of the Living Dead: Rave to the Grave & Necropolis). As you can see, all of these actors have a fair bit of experience when it comes to supernatural and horror themes.
Whereas Mary comes off as the tough-as-nails survivalist right away, Shannon is much more compassionate, embracing her sensitive needs for her “family” above her own survival. But when things turn grave, both of these women grow a thick, gritty skin. They’re both tough and I found their actions and strength credible–which isn’t common in action or horror movies. Score one for good casting, direction, writing and solid acting for these two actresses (Ashley Bell and Shannyn Sossamon)! I hope to see these actresses getting more serious work in the near future! Of the two, Ashley Bell was most shocking–a breakthrough performance really–and her character had the backstory and motivation to justify her outstanding actions (and the acting behind them). In my eyes, she joins the ranks of Scream Queen Sharni Vinson for her work in You’re Next (2013).
Ashley Bell
With this strong heroine-emergent threat comes a double-crossing twist. As we identify their enemies, more enemies emerge from within. I’m intentionally not revealing what their enemies are because I didn’t know when I watched this (and I’m grateful I didn’t know). So I’d advise you not to read other reviews for fear of such revelations.
I must say that I am impressed with the action quality in this movie, a movie which I never even heard of until Amazon recommended it. Really impressed. There isn’t a ton of action, but what you get is heavy-hitting, brutal and not over-sensationalized with Hollywood choreography. Everyone isn’t a ninja or ex-special ops agent. Their tactics were smart, simple and appropriate to the situation and resources at hand. They’re fighting to survive and I believed they were fighting to survive. Only in a few brief moments did I question anyone’s combat prowess as a bit too much–but let’s just let them have their moments, right? I’m also happy to forgive some CGI use for blood spurts during the phenomenal action sequence at the finale.
The acting wasn’t amazing across the board. But it was often credible, much more credible than you’d expect given the budget. In its non-mainstream style and breakthrough overall quality (again, minding the low budget) this movie struck me much as did The Shrine (2010), which was also not like much else I had seen and also featured an Ashmore twin (Aaron, in this case). The black and white medium chosen by the director (who has 20 years of experience as a second unit or assistant director) struck me as risky, but it worked wonders for the pilot of The Walking Dead and it worked well here. Speaking of which, The Walking Dead season 4 writer Luke Passmore wrote this.
These filmmakers took some risks and it paid off in spades! Watch this and appreciate how no one else tries to do this and, when and if they do, they over-sensationalize and consequently fail.
Movies, Films & Flix 