On the Road: Capturing Lighting in a Bottle Twice
Much like Walter Salle’s The Motorcycle Diaries, The Open Road is a wonder to behold. It pleases the eyes as it travels across the United States in search of whatever the narrator craves at the moment. However, like all road trips that begin with jubilation they end with tedium and an urgency to get to the end. On the Road stays true to Kerouac’s writing but can’t capture the manic energy and becomes a slog through two hours of post war human discovery. The cinematography is beguiling because it masks the aimlessness of the story. The beautiful vistas, clubs and open roads are captured magically while keeping the viewer from realizing that not much is going on. So, as Sal, Dean and Marylou head towards the real world the beautiful open road disappears and the film encloses upon the domestication/fall of the adventurous heroes.
On the Road is based on Jack Kerouac’s travels across the United States and was published in 1957. Along the way he experiences life, liberty and copious amounts of sex and drugs. Kerouac and Co. traveled the world looking to find their way outside of the mainstream and put it into prose. When the book was released The New York Times said it was “the most beautifully executed, the clearest and the most important utterance yet made by the generation Kerouac himself named years ago as ‘beat,’ and whose principal avatar he is.”
So, you have a classic book that is loved by many and you have to turn it into a film. Walter Salles and writer Jose Rivera made the wonderful 2004 movie The Motorcycles Diaries and worked for several years to bring On the Road to screen. They had their adapting work cut out for them as Truman Capote once famously reviewed the book as “That’s not writing, it’s typing.” The director/writer duo traveled the states looking to capture the spirit, look and vibe of a rambling mess. They captured the naturalism and style but failed to imbue the audience with the danger, self discovery and unhappiness that comes with the open road.
Adapting classical literature involving atypical characters (Great Gatsby, Catcher in the Rye, Confederacy of Dunces) will always be a challenge. The source material has to be revered but updated to today’s audiences. Salles once again proves that he can make literature beautiful to behold. However, despite the director/actor’s hard work you are never immersed in the world and all of Kerouac’s energy is lost amidst the open road. The love, sweat and direction is all there but lightning can’t be captured twice.
Share this post:
John’s Horror Corner: American Mary (2012)
MY CALL: I wasn’t thrilled with this film, but I remain very interested to see what the Soska sisters do next. Horror has plenty of remakes and recycled concepts. So I was happy to see this film for a nice change of pace and style. Fans of body modification should enjoy this for what it is. IF YOU LIKE THIS WATCH: Celebrate more exploitative female empowerment with Boys Against Girls (2012) and Bitch Slap (2009).
The scoring does a fine job enhancing the politely visceral tone as we first meet medical student Mary (Katharine Isabelle; Ginger Snaps, Freddy vs Jason, Being Human) practicing her incision and suturing skills on a store bought turkey. Talented, but finding herself in a difficult financial situation, Mary lets a club owner hire her to play “mob doctor” for cash. This slowly begins to resculpt Mary’s moral compass, transforming her from almost naively innocent to readily corruptible.
Shortly thereafter, we meet the surgically distorted Beatress (Tristan Risk; Darkest Hour), a cartoonishly weird character who pulls Mary deeper into her illegal medical practice. Beatress and her friends are interested in elective surgeries that are refused by doctors because of their extremity. As Mary accommodates these taboo surgical desires, she herself desires more novel modifications to stimulate herself. This swings into body modifications beyond what you’d find leafing through the latest issue of Taboo magazine and she even uses her unique niche skill set to exact revenge on those who have wronged her as she climbs her way into underground subcultural fame.
Needless to say, it’s hard to write about this movie without ruining the surprises within.
The acting falls short of the highly effective tone, the dialogue falls even shorter. It’s disappointing. I really wanted to take these characters seriously but I found it impossible. I was especially irked by the attempts to depict entitled, egomaniacal surgeons. It was as if someone started the background of a masterpiece with this especially taboo tone, scored and set so well with an underutilized premise, but then filled the foreground with poor writing and stale delivery. I thought Katherine Isabelle did VERY well in Ginger Snaps and her small role in Being Human, but now I’m left to wonder if this rigid performance was the fault of her direction or her own acting. I’d prefer to blame the direction, which failed to impress on several other accounts as well. And Katherine was not outperformed by any other members of the cast.
This film was written and directed by Jen and Sylvia Soska. They haven’t done much and I felt that it showed. The inclusion of elective genital modification surgery, rape and surgery addicts felt forced. These concepts are naturally shocking on their own; they don’t need to be over-sold. I really wanted to believe that this was meant to be more than another pervy exploitative shock flick. But once I saw how Jen and Sylvia Soska wrote themselves into the movie with over-the-top body modification extremists, it was apparent that they were more concerned with celebrating body modification than they were with telling an interesting story. They may have been passionate about this film. But it strikes me that they never considered how others would view the film without living life through the lens of their subculture.
Meet the Soska sisters.
This review comes with its share of negative criticism, but I’m also very interested to see what else the Soska sisters can do and what kinds of projects they’ll pursue. Horror has plenty of remakes and recycled concepts. So I was happy to see this film for a nice change of pace and style.
Share this post:
Trance: Danny Boyle is My Hero
Danny Boyle is an unpredictable maestro of style. Heroin, severed arms, rage-infected humans, beaches, game shows, millions and sunshine have all had their day in Boyle’s world. He is a quick editing dynamo of suspense, glorious images and ground-breaking ingenuity. Sunshine is quite possibly the most underrated film ever and he invented new types of zombies, perfected the voice over and made an arm stuck by a rock innovative.
Boyle shot Trance before the 2012 Olympics, created the opening and closing ceremonies and finished editing it after it was over. Boyle stated that working on this noir kept him sane amidst the endless meetings and politics of uniting the Queen with Bond. I love how Boyle found solace in deceit and death while in the drudgery of pleasing every corporate sponsor. The time away allowed him to strategically edit and leave clues that are not obvious or too obscure.
Trance is the story of an art theft gone wrong. James McAvoy, Rosario Dawson and Vincent Cassel make up the lead trio who double cross, triple cross and double cross each other again. Trance has more twists and turns than a roller coaster planned by M. Night Shyamalan and constructed by Michael Bay. If would be a shame to spoil the plot because I went into it blind and never witnessed anything like this. When the film ended I felt elation at what unfolded because it felt so new. The movie feels alive and exciting even as familiar tropes (murder, revenge, theft) appear in front of you.
Trance keeps you glued to your seat and hypnotized as Boyle’s colors and clues wash over you. The film is a puzzle that gives you enough clues to not be annoyed yet keeps you guessing till the end. It plays out like a modern noir in which nobody can be trusted or should be trusted. Motives are impure, fingernails are pulled off and nudity is strategic. It is an old school heist turned up to 11 by modern day effects and Boyle’s frantic pace.
Watch Trance. Watch Trance again. Watch Sunshine on Blu-ray. Watch Trance again.
Trance
Share this post:
John’s Horror Corner: The Last Will and Testament of Rosalind Leigh (2012), a horror film that manages to stand out as unique
MY CALL: A solid success for a writer/director with a small budget on his first feature length film. I’m excited to see what this guy does next. Amid the constantly recycled concepts and axioms that both plague and serve as hallmarks for the horror genre, this film manages to stand out as original. The story is nothing wowing and the horror elements are technically not unique. But the approach was! Because of this, I struggle to compare this to any other horror.
After her passing and leaving everything to her only son, antiquities dealer and atheist Leon (Aaron Poole) visits his estranged mother’s (Vanessa Redgrave) home which is neatly, but densely decorated with all manner and medium of Christian–and not so Christian–artifacts, making it somewhat unsettling. The house is also littered with stitched and framed religious adages formed into strange warnings.
The recently deceased Rosalind Leigh (Vanessa Redgrave; Nip/Tuck) narrates, explaining her distance from her son, her deep religious beliefs and Leon’s resentful distance from the faith. In this modern approach to a classic-style ghost story Rosalind, haunted by her past, learns what it will be like to remain forever alone.
There is plenty of creepy in this house of angel statues and forces which would prey on the non-believers dwelling within. As we question where Leon’s soul will fall on the counterbalance weighing Leon’s lack of faith against those powers that would claim his ungrateful soul, he his hunted by some manner of beast outside the house.
In a well-lit church? Fine. But anywhere with suboptimal lighting angel statues are just plain creepy! There. I said it!
This film features only one character that we “see.” There are many represented by video or voice (as by phone call), but we watch only Leon interact with his surroundings. His therapist girlfriend remotely leads Leon and us viewers to question if Leon is going mad, or if he really is being hunted by an other-worldly evil.
Writer/director Rodrigo Gudiño shows us some proficient camera work. Nothing spectacular, but he serves his film well. The CGI effects are better when they’re not the focus of the shot. Briefly animated statues elicit expected uneasy jumps and the beast, when framed in a shadowy corner, is scary and of off-putting form. But when it comes to fully revealing the creature via close-ups or action, it’s just some anorexic werewolf-looking thing from a ScyFy movie-of-the-week.
The poor quality CGI and use of a single on screen actor help inform us of the small budget Gudiño had at his disposal for his first feature length film. Being the lone actor, Aaron Poole faced an unusual challenge having no one with whom he could directly interact. So don’t be too quick to criticize his performance or Gudiño’s story staging. I’d love to see what Gudiño could do with even a small studio budget for a theatrical release. He has good ideas and a proficiency that exceeds most horror filmmakers of such limited experience.
See this, be mindful of Gudiño’s financial limitations and get stoked for the day this guy gets a budget and some more actors to direct.
This is a misleading poster, but it looks cool.
Share this post:
Hello all. Mark here.
With the release of The Marine 3: Homefront this week I decided to assign contributor VJ to write about all three films. He recently wrote a brilliant post about the original Tank Top horror queen that managed to be insightful and incredibly random. I wanted to hear his thoughts about a WWE trilogy focusing on many explosions and bad dialogue. Here it is! Enjoy! Comment!
VJ: I’ve recently watched the first two Marine movies. Now, John Cena is a much more well known public figure than Ted Dibiase Jr. Even though Dibiase is a former tag team champion, Cena has won multiple belts and been the World Champion multiple times. I’ve personally watched Cena get bludgeoned by steel chairs, sledge hammers, steel stairs, 2X4’s, chains, and his very own championship belt. Not a single one knocked him out for more than a few seconds. He was able to rally after these fierce shots to the face and defeat his opponent. Enter a fire extinguisher in The Marine. One shot to the face with a fire extinguisher and he is out cold long enough for the bad guys to have a pow wow and eventually drive away in his own vehicle? I guess without 30,000 screaming fans, even the great John Cena can get knocked unconscious for an appropriate amount of time. Which brings up a timeless question, if you get blindsided in front of enough people will the shot knock you out?
Mark: One thing I do appreciate about this film is that it knows what it is. It knows Cena can’t act and thus allows him to punch many people in the face in various ways. There are no monologues and I cannot remember a single line of dialogue he spoke. All I remember is he runs a little and then looks around then runs more. Eventually, he finds a bad guy and hurts him real good then runs goofily while fireballs erupt in the background
Also, everything explodes in The Marine world. During gunfights I kept expecting random twinkies and pieces of wood to explode with the ferocity of an atomic bomb. At one point the bad guys blow up a car with a rocket launcher. Awesome! I’m pretty certain they blew up a gas station with a rocket launcher too. This bombastic tendency is not very smart because any detective could just follow the explosions. When the bad guys blow up that detective the other detectives could just follow that explosion. Also, does water explode?
VJ: How classic was the self made slow motion duck under a branch by Cena while he was running through the woods?! Do you remember what I’m talking about? I wanted to laugh but was so baffled by him going from full sprint jumping over everything in sight, to all of a sudden slowing down and doing some sort of reverse limbo move to get around a tree? Better yet they didn’t slow-mo it. Cena did that all his own. He just thought you know what I need to slow motion this tree and flex at the end just in case you couldn’t already tell how massive my arms were…
Mark: Your “self made slow motion duck under a branch” observation got me thinking. I developed a theory involving brawny action heroes and woodland areas. Arnold covered himself in mud in Predator, Hard Target’s JCVD punched a snake in the face whilst in the bayou, Sly Stallone hiked through the woods in Rambo and The Rock battled monkeys in The Rundown. Every action hero must have their signature Wood/forest/jungle/bayou moment. It is a rite of passage and if accomplished successfully they will have long careers. I’m not sure if the slow motion tricep flex will stand the test of time.
Mark: I just finished the Marine 2 and here are some thoughts.
1. When Diabiase Jr. stabs the bad guy at the end it makes the squishiest stab noise ever.
2. Everything explodes in this film. I think ice explodes.
3. The bad guys brother was very very very angry.
VJ: Marine 2 went all out on the explosions. I was watching and for some reason thought of 21 Jump Street where the expected explosion was always a bust. Marine 2 said to hell with that we are blowing up everything. I think eventually Vince McMahon had to step in and say look enough is enough how many explosions can ya’ll have?! The director decided to stick it to Vince by creating a different kind of explosion…enter the bad guys brother. No flames, no shrapnel, and no one diving to safety. This explosion was released from the very depths of the bad guys brothers raw emotion. Forget you Vince McMahon if I can’t have real explosions then I’ll have over the top acting explosions!
Mark: I want you to take a long look at the Marine 3 poster.
1. He never wears that vest
2. That gun never makes an appearance
3. His aim cannot be accurate because sprinting, looking another way and shooting an automatic machine gun is never a good idea.
4. It looks like there are two separate explosions in the background.
5. Is he grabbing the gun barrel? That would burn like crazy!
I have some observations about The Marine 3.
1. 30 minutes in and zero explosions.
2. There is an angry henchman on par with the angry brother from Marine 2.
3. There are a plethora of unnecessary F-bombs.
4. Lots of Nu-metal
5.Neal McDonough from Band of Brothers and Justified is in it which means the bad guy is a better actor than the good guy.
Also, the Miz is very similar to Zoolander in that he is a man of many looks:
VJ: I’m just so pissed The Miz never got shirtless…I mean Cena shirtless, Ted D. Jr. Shirtless. Guess the Miz didn’t want his man boobs exposed.
Mark: I would say that the first Marine is the best. It makes zero sense, features the world’s longest lady fight and everything explodes unnecessarily. I do appreciate the trifecta of explosions in the second (literal explosions, anger explosions, fireworks) but Ted Jr. doesn’t have the charisma that the bewildering John Cena does. In the end the Marine series has never phoned it in. I feel like they’ve tried to bring in good actors and they hold the record for “World’s worst siege.” I’ve learned a lot from these films.
In conclusion, here are my final thoughts:
1. Bullets don’t hurt Camaros.
2. Rocket Launchers are easy to find.
3. Action heroes must run through the woods.
VJ: The Marine movies left me a bit confused. I know Marine’s are what most people would consider “bad asses.” Not a single one of these marines were any sort of special ops and from what I gathered had no other special training other than that of a normal marine. Ted Jr. was an explosive expert, but still didn’t seem like he had the James Bond credentials if you will to take down a terrorist organization. Can we make a movie called The Infantry and have one guy who has been through basic army training take down a group of thugs or terrorists? If that’s the case I’m joining the military tomorrow! One thing I will say is the Camaro is without a doubt the toughest car ever. First Transformers and now The Marine. There is nothing more invincible than a good old Camaro. I hate to say it but The Marine movies were so forgettable I can only remember bits and pieces of each. Cena self slow motion duck/bicep flex under a tree, Ted Jr. escaping from under tons of rock by simply doing one push up, and the Miz being pissed at anyone and everyone as soon as he got home from the line of duty. I say skip watching the movies and go buy a Camaro
Share this post:
John’s Horror Corner: Would You Rather (2012), the most family-friendly torture porn flick ever released
You see this poster and you think “this is gonna’ be SERIOUS!” But it’s not. And the scene depicted above…easiest eye injury to watch on film EVER.
MY CALL: Intended as a brutal, cruel installment to the torture porn subgenre, it felt like the intensity was declawed, domesticated and rendered family-friendly. However, at times the character dynamic in this ridiculous scenario makes the movie at least watchable, although still falling short of recommendable. IF YOU LIKE THIS WATCH: Red Room (1999) and Series 7 (2001) both pit regular people, some more reluctant than others, against one another–to do heinous things to one another.
Here’s another poster. This one looks as hokey and unserious as the movie therein.
Iris (Brittany Snow; Prom Night, Nip/Tuck) is a good person with a good heart who finds herself in a difficult situation. Her parents are dead, she has no money and no job, and she is left to care for her terminally ill brother. Philanthropist Shepard Lambrick (Jeffrey Combs; Lurking Fear, The Pit and the Pendulum) offers Iris an opportunity to change her life in the form of an invitation to a dinner party that offers a solution to all of her foreseeable problems, financial or otherwise. Upon arrival, Iris finds herself among similarly desperate individuals all looking to make some money. Basically, this is Dinner for Schmucks if the schmucks were financially desperate and the hosts wanted to morally bankrupt them one sadistic challenge at a time.
The guests include a mix of transients, gamblers, young and old, able and wheelchair-bound, friendly and unfriendly. Completely out of left field, one of them is played by porn star Sasha Grey. But the real wild card in this rated-R truth or dare is going to be the sweet, naive old lady in the wheelchair. What is she going to do to people? What are people going to do to her?
It starts out with mean-spirited intentions–masked as helping people–in the form of paying a vegetarian to eat steak and fois gras and coercing an alcoholic to binge drink fine scotch. But they quickly graduate to things like “would you rather electrocute yourself or Iris?” Then lashings, stabbings, drowning and some other seemingly mundane, poorly executed, unshocking punishments. Even things that should have been hard to watch (in the hands of a different director) were presented in subdued, PG-13 form. Really, I could watch this with my grandmother. She’s seen Goodfellas and The Godfather, both of which have more scares, shocks and brutality than this.
No. Actually I’d rather not.
Iris is clearly meant to serve as the audience’s moral compass. But I never found myself rooting for her, nor caring about her or any of the other characters…except for maybe the transient, selfish Amy (Sasha Grey), the first one who realized how to get out of this alive. In fact, from the start Amy really embraced the concept and celebrated the challenges as a malevolent force.
Sasha Grey as Amy
Fledgling director David Guy Levy likely intended this to be a brutal, cruel installment to the torture porn subgenre. However, I felt that the intensity was declawed. I felt no suspense. But I did enjoy watching the character dynamic as people tried to rationalize their “would you rather” options. A task that, again, Amy really owned. So while I was disappointed by the near gorelessness, watching the “game” still offered sufficient entertainment.
A major shock was that the best performance wasn’t by horror king Jeffrey Combs or Pitch Perfect (2012) favorite Brittany Snow. The only convincing character was Sasha Grey’s coarse portrayal of Amy. But there were no shocks from schlock, gore, moral corruption, torture, cruelty or even the lame attempt a surprise twist ending. Oh, and the old, sweet naïve lady in the wheelchair? Totally under-, or even un-utilized; mishandled by too much restraint while directing a film in which there should be no restraint! What a waste.
If you are looking for jaw-drops, you won’t find them in Would You Rather. I would only recommend this to someone who watches no fewer than four horror movies per week. Really. Like four. As in, you probably systematically try to watch all horror ever anyway and won’t listen to me as I try to warn you away.
The worst movie poster I could find (above). I wish this was the advertised image on Amazon. Then I wouldn’t have watched it. I would have never watched anything with such a bad poster. Doesn’t this poster make you “want” the movie to awful?
Share this post:
John’s Horror Corner: Ginger Snaps Back: The Beginning (2004), teaching us that trilogies aren’t always a good idea
MY CALL: Apathy best frames my feelings about this movie in one word. I just didn’t care what happened. And I’d like to point out that I was totally “all in” for the first two and had every curiosity and worry as to what would happen in this pseudo-prequel. I won’t warn people away from this, but I’m not recommending it either. IF YOU LIKE THIS WATCH: Ginger Snaps (2000) and Ginger Snaps 2: Unleashed (2004) were both MUCH better.
This third and final installment of the Ginger Snaps franchise provides more of a period piece reimagining of the original story instead of a prequel. Set in 19th century Canada, sisters Ginger (Katharine Isabelle; American Mary, Ginger Snaps, 30 Days of Night: Dark Days) and Brigitte (Emily Perkins; Ginger Snaps, Ginger Snaps 2: Unleashed) take refuge in a traders’ fort.
It seems that every movie in this series takes a different approach and style. In the first we find two gothy sisters in a coming-of-age story using lycanthropy as a metaphor for the pains of puberty, sexual development (i.e., transformation) and the bond between two sisters. Part two examined only Brigitte through a lens of drug addiction, being the counterbalance to her “disease.” Now, in this prequel/reimagining we find the sisters together again, this time in a fort besieged by werewolves as Ginger slowly turns after being bitten.
After the bite Ginger’s change is slow, consistent with the first two films. Capturing the doomed fate of Ginger Snaps, an old woman prophesies that “one sister must kill the other.” Boorrrrring.
While I loved the first two, I was largely unimpressed with this film. I didn’t think it was “bad.” But I definitely didn’t find it good, stimulating, engaging, interesting or entertaining. For me, it was just kind of “there.” However, many fans of the franchise support this installment as enjoyable. So I’ll simply consider my view to be a strong difference in opinion and I won’t provide any reason for you “not” to see this–I’ll just leave you with the complete absence of good qualities on my part.
The effects were decent. I’ve certainly seen cooler looking werewolves, but for a total absence of CGI I think they did well…sort of. There was also a lot of screen time for the monsters as well as a lot of blood. Since neither aspect impressed me, I didn’t really care for this effort. Being less interested in this movie I also wasn’t very invested during the attack scenes. So, again, watch it and form your own opinion. Mine is burdened by apathy.
As a matter of fact, apathy best frames my feelings about this movie in one word. I just didn’t care what happened. And I’d like to point out that I was totally “all in” for the first two and had every curiosity and worry as to what would happen next.
Share this post:
John’s Old School Horror Corner: The Initiation (1984), an under-rated classic slasher that is under-watched for a good reason
http://lefthandhorror.com/2012/03/22/the-initiation-1984-movie-review/
NSFW WARNING: There is a single NSFW image at the end of this article.
MY CALL: This movie has all of the hallmarks of a classic 80s slasher flick hybridized with a plotty story arc from General Hospital. A lot of reviewers consider this movie to be underrated. Sure, I guess so. But that doesn’t make it worth your time. IF YOU LIKE THIS WATCH: If it’s dead college kids you want, then you could almost pick randomly from the history of slasher movies. I’d direct you to I Know What You Did Last Summer (1997) or Scream (1996) if you want to see attractive stars killed by a mystery murderer under much better plotty circumstances.
Like so many other 80s slasher movies, The Initiation feels a bit on the haphazardly random side, writing-wise. It isn’t exactly like those WTF crazy acid-trippy movies (e.g., Deadly Blessing, Xtro), but I get the feeling that someone sat down one day, started writing this while drunk, then continued to write more and more sanely while sobering up towards the end.
http://scarina.wordpress.com/2012/08/20/the-initiation/
Daphne Zuniga (before she was famous) as Kelly
Kelly (Daphne Zuniga; Spaceballs, The Fly II, Melrose Place) is a new sorority pledge who’s just trying to get through her initiation and prank night. While prank night turns out to be the main focus of this movie, it takes the writer about an hour to get us there…so just bear with me as we review a bunch of details that allegedly make sense of this story. So….bear with me here…
http://lefthandhorror.com/2012/03/22/the-initiation-1984-movie-review/
Kelly has a recurring nightmare in which she is a little girl witnessing her mother engaging in some infidelity and a fight breaks out between two guys–presumably the husband and the co-cheater, one of them lights the other on fire. Whoa! She even has a few visions from the dream while she’s awake. Perhaps linked to the nightmare Kelly as also amnesia, remembering nothing before age 9 (about the age she appears to be in her dream). This nightmare preoccupies her to the point that she is writing a paper on dream analysis for one of her classes. I guess she thinks that she, a college freshman living in a catty sorority, can master the field psychology while writing a single paper and solve all of her problems.
Perhaps realizing that this is a bit beyond the research capabilities of a teenager, she enlists the help of a some doctoral student who evidently specializes in everything pertinent to her problem: parapsychology, dreams analysis, hypnotherapy and sleep pattern analysis. Sounds to me like this guy is working on four concurrent PhDs. But that’s okay since the writer of this movie balances things out with his complete apparent lack of education. Or so, I’m guessing based on the writing quality. As it turns out the writer (Charles Pratt, Jr.; All My Children, General Hospital, Melrose Place) moved on to a 30 year career in soap opera writing immediately after this movie. So he clearly learned how to capitalize on his flair for melodrama and found his niche. I mean…amnesia, infidelity, traumatic childhoods, privileged families, visions and the gross over-glorification of doctorates? Yeah, he started writing a soap and then turned it into a slasher movie.
http://scarina.wordpress.com/2012/08/20/the-initiation/
It’s always the guy with the scar.
As if the nonsense wasn’t piled high enough yet, Kelly’s parents are talking about things suspiciously vaguely, her mother (Vera Miles; Psycho) is always mettling and controlling, and her father (Clu Gulager; The Return of the Living Dead) is making weird phone calls; there are a lot of red herrings to grab at in this soapy slasher story. All this plotty background is delivered at a slow soapy pace and with little sense of urgency. It’s a bit boring really.
All of the sudden (about an hour into the movie) our attention shifts back to prank day, Kelly steals the keys to a shopping mall from her father (who owns the mall) so that they can sneak in overnight for prank night, and all of this soap opera nonsense is left behind. The tempo really shifts gears when they arrive at the shopping mall. These college kids start wandering around, the killer is there skulking around and picking them off one by one with various sharp implements, and it takes forever for the kids to realize what’s happening. FYI, the kills are all BORING!
http://lastroadreviews.wordpress.com/2012/10/01/the-initiation-1984-review/
http://lastroadreviews.wordpress.com/2012/10/01/the-initiation-1984-review/
The acting isn’t nearly as bad as most 80s horror fare. But, despite some of these actors’ ability to carry a few lines, this movie has all of the hallmarks of a classic 80s slasher flick hybridized with a plotty story arc from General Hospital. There is an obligate shower scene (Hunter Tylo, future star of The Bold and the Beautiful) accompanied by girls in their underwear. Kids split up and are picked off by the killer. There’s even a guy in a great penis costume–not that this has anything to do with 80s horror. I just think it’s awesome–easily my favorite part of the movie.
http://lefthandhorror.com/2012/03/22/the-initiation-1984-movie-review/
A lot of reviewers consider this movie to be underrated. Sure, I guess so. But that doesn’t make it worth your time. I didn’t feel it was worth my time and, if you read my reviews regularly, you know I can make the best of some really lousy S#!T.
Share this post:
Oblivion: A Case Study in Dogpile Criticism
Hello all. Mark here.
Oblivion Spoiler Alert!
The point of this post is to analyze why critics chose to dog pile on Oblivion and point out how unoriginal this original story was.
Nicolas Cage recently sat down with Empire magazine to record a podcast. In that podcast the great Roger Ebert came up in the discussion. Cage stated that he was one of the few critics who judged a film on it’s own merits and didn’t include pop culture references in regards to the film. He let it stand on it’s own and didn’t take actor’s personal lives into account when reviewing the film. The podcast got me thinking about the dogpile criticism heaped upon Oblivion.
Oblivion is sitting at 56% on Rotten Tomatoes and that is understandable. It focuses more on style than substance. My problem with the criticism is the lack of imagination and dog pile mentality put upon this film. If you look back at the last five years, every single science fiction film has the DNA of prior films. Even the best films Source Code, Hanna, Attack the Block, Safety Not Guaranteed, Dredd, Chronicle, Sunshine, District 9, Jumper (yeah yeah I know), and my personal favorite Moon are familiar to a degree. I absolutely loved Source Code but it could be compared to Groundhog Day meets Twelve Monkeys. In a few short months Cruise will be back in the film Edge of Tomorrow (based on a 2009 Japanese novel) which is similar to Source Code and is about a solider who gets killed and resurrected everyday. Will critics compare it to Source Code not knowing it was written in 2009?
I read a lot of movie criticism. I appreciate the various viewpoints and occasional elegant prose used to review good, bad and classic cinema. While reading reviews for Oblivion I picked up on an alarming trend. The criticism ranged from lazy, mediocre to angry. Words like cover band, grab bag, derivative, cult religion, mishmash, clichés and to show they know big words GORMLESS. In the “gormless” review the critic gives away a massive plot point in the first paragraph in an attempt to be funny.
There are multiple religion slams and the reviewers simply seem annoyed by Cruise and the film. Rotten Tomatoes exclaims Cruise’s performance as solid while many other critics say he lacks chemistry with the actresses and he gives the film nothing. Also, more often than not the reviewers had no clue Oblivion is based on a graphic novel written in 2005. The lack of research and easy criticism boggled my mind as movies that are not nearly as ambitious get a pass due to likable actors and familiarity.
For example, the Amazing Spider Man. Amazing was a reboot of a series that ended six years ago. Watching the film felt familiar yet it had an RT score of 73% and featured this critical summary “A well-chosen cast and sure-handed direction allow The Amazing Spider-Man to thrill, despite REVISITING MANY of the SAME plot points from 2002’s Spider-Man.” The movie featured montages straight out of Footloose, repeated the Uncle Ben death and copied a similar moment from Spider Man 2 (Crane operators help Spidey in Amazing and Subway patrons help Spidey in 2). The only reason it was made was so the rights didn’t revert back to Marvel. So, we get a prepackaged and familiar film that was celebrated while a new idea was called “unoriginal.”
Dog pile criticism is nothing new. When an auteur or actor (Tom Cruise) shows weakness the blades come out. For instance, I never thought I’d see the day where critics blast a Terrence Malick film. The enigma of a director rarely makes films yet they are always beautiful. However, To The Wonder is getting harped on by critics who started sharpening their axes on Tree of Life. Maybe I am weird but movies like Oblivion and Tree of Life made perfect sense. I remember walking out of the theater and hearing people breaking down the cosmic world building of Tree of Life. They were looking into it too much because ToL is the simple story of a man pondering life, death and creation on the anniversary of his brother’s death. The dreamy camera movement signified memories brought up by the sad day. It is not confusing, I just think people don’t want to think abstractly. Tree of Life cracked the door for criticism and To The Wonder burst it open.
When you watch a science fiction film you know what to expect. Spaceships, robots, drones, clones, lasers, plunging neck lines, cool outfits, aliens and much more. So, saying Oblivion resembles other films is too easy. Mass critical reception lacked imagination and was oddly angry at times. It reminded me of the critical coverage that doomed John Carter before it was released. Wesley Morris of Grantland explained it like this:
This is what John Carter could have been, and yet Oblivion could have been so much more. Kosinski doesn’t build a new world. He’s just reupholstered a bunch of old ones.
How is that any different from whats comes out now? I’m not saying it is right, I just think the majority of cinema reupholsters old ideas and concepts. Here are the science fiction films from the last five years (Day breakers, Hot Tub Time Machine, G.I. Joe: Retaliation, Iron Man 2, Book of Eli, Iron Man 3, Star Trek into Darkness, The Crazies, Predators, Resident Evil: Afterlife, Skyline, Underworld 4, Tron 2, Hulk, Captain America, Thor, The Adjustment Bureau, Cowboys & Aliens, The Darkest Hour, Battle: Los Angeles, I Am Number Four, In Time, Paul, Real Steel, The Thing, Prometheus, Battleship, Never Let Me Go, Resident Evil: Retribution, Men in Black 3, Total Recall, I am Legend, The Road, AVPR, Superman Returns, Terminator Salvation, Gamer and Doomsday). All of these films share reupholstered ideas so why was Oblivion singled out so badly?
Oblivion creates a startlingly real world courtesy of on location shooting in Iceland and Kosinski’s background as an architect. He builds beautiful vistas and knows how to make them shiny and awe inspiring.There are moments in this film that make your jaw drop and those moments totally justify the price of admission.
Many swipes have been taken at Cruise and Riseborough’s high tech base camp. However, did they not realize it was the home of two clones who have been programmed to live a simple life. The sleek edges and apple store vibe are appropriate given the circumstances. Cruise’s spaceship is also a practical tool with it’s 360 view swivel mounted guns. There is nothing wrong with the ship but it didn’t stop critics from saying it looked like “sperm.” As much as I love film criticism it boggles my mind how inconsistent it is.
Oblivion stands alongside Tron: Legacy, Life of Pi, Skyfall and Hugo as the five best looking films of the last five years. Kosinski may have trouble creating three dimensional characters but he is only two films into his directing tenure. The characters might be empty but his films are full of grand ambition and senses pleasing imagery.
We live in a dull movie landscape of remakes, prequels, reboots, sequels, adaptations and reimaginings. Why not appreciate something familiar yet beautiful?
Share this post:
MFF Random Awards: The Best and Worst of Summer
Hello all. Mark here.
With the summer season winding down and the doldrums of August upon us I’ve decided to bestow the summers best with random awards of brilliance and annoyance.
Without further ado here are the winners!
Best Film Award
Four way tie between Spectacular Now, Before Midnight, Fast Six and The Way, Way Back. I’d love to see these films combined into an extremely odd blend of intelligence, violence and Sam Rockwell’s dancing.
Honorable mention: The Conjuring
Best Villain Award
Ben Kingsley’s Mandarin in Iron Man 3 is a wonderful blend of unpredictable habits and Shakespearean comedy.
Savior of Subpar Award.
Sharni Vinson in You’re Next. She is a credible, tough and believable heroine who hurts a lot of masked intruders.
AAAAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRGGGGHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Award.
Wow, The Wolverine poster is really intense.
Best Fight Award
Sung Kang and Tyrese battling evil henchman #7 in Fast Six. Han and Roman are the most likable of the bunch and to see them brawling with a spin kicking dynamo provided us with laughs, excitement and more laughs.
Honorable mention: The bonkers train fight in Wolverine featuring two tough yet unlucky Yakuza battling Wolvy.
Best Character Award
Sam Rockwell in The Way, Way Back. The dude is likable.
Best Facial Hair and Flannel
John Travolta and DeNiro in The Killing Season.
The most enjoyable moment of Hangover 3 was a man singing the incredibly sad “Hurt” by Nine Inch Nails award
Ken Jeong in the soul crushing Hangover 3
Good looking millionaires playing sexy eco-terrorists who terrorize those who terrorize nature Award.
Thanks Brit Marling for your eco-terrorist viewpoints via sexy actors.
“I’m too young for this sh** Award
Channing Tatum in White House Down
I can’t believe my white house explosion film beat Channing Tatum’s white house explosion film Award
Gerard Butler in Olympus Has Fallen
I wanted to see you but I never got the chance to see you now I have to wait till blu-ray to see you Award
Berberian Sound Studio. An indie that got away from me.
Biggest gut punch of summer Award
No Gisele No! Watch Fast Six you will see.
Please stop killing this guy Award
James Badge Dale in Iron Man 3, World War Z, Lone Ranger
Most gratuitous property destruction Award
Man of Steel. Blobs of CGI fighting blobs of CGI while things go boom.
Honorable mention: Star Trek Into Darkness
I want a minion Award
Despicable Me 2. Where can I buy one?
You added dings and scratches to your robots and monsters to make them super believable yet failed to give characters defining traits Awards.
Guillermo Del Toro and his Pacific Rim. I would pay to hear Del Toro read the phone book. However, the characters in PR were less than one-dimensional.
I thought it would be a stinker full of ant like zombies but really liked it Award
World War Z should have been soul crushing. However, it pulled itself together and provided 90 minutes of fun.
Sidenote: Read the book, loved the book. It is nothing like the book.
Ridiculously good looking Ghostbusters Award
Vera Farmiga and Patrick Wilson blue steel their way to horror fame in the wonderful Conjuring.
Dude you knew was gonna be a star and is now a star Award
Michael B. Jordan for Fruitvale Station. After The Wire, FNL and Chronicle he is finally getting his due.
Best film involving Irish villagers drinking to stay alive Award
Grabbers. Watch it.
I still don’t believe you are real Award
RIPD. Really? Did John make up his review?
Funniest Film of Summer involving a cannibalistic Danny McBride Award
This is the End. I love the Apatow ten year reunion end of the world film.
The movie that made a boatload of money because it dared to have fun and not be a sequel award
Now You See Me. Light, breezy and lucrative.
Movies, Films & Flix 