Prometheus (2012) Vivisected: Part 2: The sea of questions regarding the mysterious black goo
I hope you enjoyed Prometheus (2012) Vivisected: Part 1: The Unacceptable Discontinuity between Alien and Prometheus. If you didn’t, then go post a complaint or disagreement; start some fires. I really wanna’ hear it! If not, then sit back and enjoy my rabble-rousing second installment.
Again, as a friendly reminder, I did not dislike this movie. I rather enjoyed it very much. Despite that, I have numerous complaints about the movie and, like any blogger, I feel empowered by my newfound “voice” and exploit the fact that my friends often give me pity-reads. So here’s more about a movie that I loved watching and love to hate analyzing.
Another disclaimer, I am on the tail end of my second graduate degree—I’m an insect phylogeneticist. Given today’s topic, you’ll notice the science geek in me truly emerging within some of the justifications of my complaints. In future installments of this unending series of rants, you’ll see the bug geek emerge, too.
In today’s installment I will address the sea of questions immersed in Prometheus’ mysterious black goo…
The Prometheus-movie.com website: Various online fora have attempted to provide answers regarding technical aspects of Prometheus. But so much is left in the hands of the writers’ and directors’ use of artistic license and their weighing what we “do see” versus what we “don’t see” between the scenes and beyond the camera angles of “the story.” However, the black goo comes off as “a thing that should come with rules.” As such, the Prometheus-movie website forum co-administrator (handled “Snorkelbottom”) contributed to a forum called “The Secrets of the Black Liquid REVEALED.” How legit is this website? Very. How legit is his forum poster? I’m not really sure. Is Snorkelbottom just “some dude” with some random ideas like me? Not sure again. But he is more than just a random “member” of the movie’s official website (and hype/propaganda machine). As a biologist (my day job), I find a lot of holes in Snorkelbottom’s explanations—not that I could perfectly solve them without an elaborate treatise and a few more doctorates. However, his answers represent a serviceable effort in making sense in the writers’/director’s decisions about the goo to the general population—however I’d ignore his sections “The Dark Truth” to “Conclusion”… simply not enough understanding of evolution, genetics or genomics in this forum discussion. I’ll attempt to my own extrapolations about the goo but encourage you to check out his forum post. Like me, he clearly put a lot of thought into it.
What does this stuff do? Let’ try it out on a friend…
My issues regarding the question “What exactly does the black goo do?” The effect of the goo seems to vary as wildly as the results of casting two dice on a craps table? Further confusing is that no two people or things come in contact with the goo under the same circumstances. And yet more perplexing is the case of whether or not the black goo and the stuff in the glass vials (in the urns) have the same properties, completely unrelated properties, or if they had to mix. I am deliberately treating them as the same substance for now. Case by case from the movie, I present my questions and suppositions. So let’s skip the anesthesia and get this Alien autopsy vivisection going!
Super tiny constrictor eggs. [FYI—Here I operate under the assumption that the snaky things develop from the tiny worms in the goo.] The goo is a zygotic muck that spawns little vermiform worms which, evidently within hours, become three-foot long boa constrictor leeches that bleed acid and love go spelunking in human digestive systems (e.g., down biologist Millburn’s throat).
This is what you get! You’re a biologist who treated a snake thing from another galaxy like a damned puppy. You deserved this.
What nutrients they consume to reach this size this fast, I do not know…let’s just pretend they get all the carbon, hydrogen, oxygen, phosphorus and nitrogen they need for the cellular building blocks of life from the air. At this point, we’ll ignore the extremely low atmospheric density of these elements compared to a four pound organism (assuming there was only one of them). Otherwise, recalling Chemistry 101, we’d realize that if that room were a closed system no one would be able to breathe in that room anymore after this critter developed.
Oh, look, it hisses. Let’s pet it. Stupidest biologist ever!
And just how and why did these things develop in the first place if, indeed, they developed from the little worms? Was it just because the goo triggered some developmental response when exposed to atmospheric changes (somehow from the human presence)? Lots of blogs out there have lots of answers. We’ll never know.
Fifield’s transformation into a rage zombie. After getting a face full of acid-melted glass (or plastic or whatever from his helmet)—during the encounter with biologist Millburn and the snake thing—geologist Fifield apparently dies (or nearly so) and falls melted-face first into the black goo-mucky ground (or maybe it was just the alien’s blood that induced his “changes”). The next time we see him he has a mutated hate, super strength and some serious rage issues. But how did he get this way? Would his eyes even function anymore after the whole melted glass in the face event? Or does he regenerate now? He basically comes off as a mix between a “Zerg-infected” human from Starcraft and a 28 Days Later rage zombie. Why even have that rage zombie scene at all?
Now for the big question: What induced his transformation? Was it because the alien DNA in the acid blood affected his system? Was it because of the fluid on the ground? Was it, perhaps, a combination of the two?
Why not a virus instead of a rage zombie? If indeed this use of the black goo was to create an infected unit (or a decoy as in Screamers) to infiltrate target populations, then how about infect him, then make him a decoy to allow him (infected and all) back on the ship? If the goo transformation could first heal/regenerate him (i.e., if injured at all) but keep him human (with his mind intact), then he could make it back onto the ship (or into a human colony, etc.), in which there would be the delayed transformation and he could infect others in the general population the same way. Hell, it could even be a deadly virus (like an Ebolavirus) with a 48-72 hour incubation period. Wouldn’t that be a better plan on the Engineers’ part? After all, they have plenty of other toys (like the xenomorphs) to do any necessary killing. A viral agent (to which Engineers are immune) would be a good start to any spirited human genocide. Don’t you think?
A worm-based disease with an elaborate life cycle. Remember when David goo-ruphies Holloway’s drink? This elixir of—I guess—parasitic eggs can be ingested, infiltrate the blood stream and pop up in places like, oh I don’t know, Holloway’s eyeball…not unlike a form of filariasis (e.g., onchocerciasis). For whatever reason, these worms don’t develop into anything snake-like and affect Holloway more like a rapidly degenerative virus which, again for whatever reason, fails to infect others by any means other than fluid exchange like when he impregnates the barren Shaw with what turns out to be a chest-bursting facehugger. Now THAT reverses everything we thought we knew about Alien biology. Sure, maybe she was going to have a conventional vaginal delivery—it did, after all, have an umbilical cord. But still, she was impregnated with an alien by someone who had an alien-borne disease without contracting the worm-based infectious disease, then she gave birth to something we’re accustomed to seeing hatch from an egg, and this thing’s purpose is to impregnate yet another host with yet another alien which, presumably, will burst from their chest and then develop into a big xenomorph.
That’s a worm host, then a chest-bursting facehugger host, then a face-hugged facehugger host. Three different hosts. ELABORATE! This may seem crazy, but this elaborate case also occurs in real life with the life cycle of the causitive agent of bird flu. But, would the Engineers really come up with something so elaborate. Why not skip a step? Their goal is genocide, not to make us suffer.
Another question altogether: Was Holloway on his way to transforming into a rage zombie like Fifield? Maybe it wasn’t a degenerative disease at all, but rather the beginning of a painful transformation. Changing genetic code in a living organism sounds like it could be painful.
Is the black goo within the urns’ vials different from the urn goo that isn’t in the vials? And does it regenerate tissue? Snorkelbottom suggested that the goo in the vials within the urns has the “effect of revitalizing dead/dying cells, seemingly resulting in re-animation (Shaw’s womb/Fifield)” and that this goo is different from the goo that wasn’t inside the vials.
This is why you should buy your own drinks at the bar.
But Shaw was impregnated by Holloway who ingested the goo from within the vials and Fifield fell face first into the floor which was wet with the goo that wasn’t in the vial…or was it there, too? On top of that, the inability to conceive is not necessarily the product of dead cells or damaged tissue and Shaw wasn’t actually exposed to the goo but rather body fluids of someone else who was infected–if that makes a difference. So that’s a double-tap to the head of questions for that theory–not that I can find an easy explanation as to why there were two different liquids. Perhaps the fertility of the host is irrelevant as long as there is a uterus, or simply, a living body! This stuff is pretty good at playing with DNA (as we saw with Fifield, discussed above) so I doubt that it would require a host ovum to develop. To say we would need one would also imply that the worms (or their eggs or whatever) actually functioned as sperm! See how this is getting silly fast? This shit is complicated enough as it is.
The fact that we see goo-covered worms in one place and sealed vials in another suggests that they should be two very different things. Perhaps all of the changes were somehow linked to the vialed fluid. Perhaps some of the changes were from the goo, but those were a product of an indigenous bacteria or virus brought to the barren planetoid by the Engineers–yet not necessarily “engineered.” See how the questions stack up pretty high with this movie?
SUPER GEEKY SIDEBAR: Back to developmental biology… As I questioned above in addressing the tiny worm turning into a constrictor thing, what are these things consuming? Let’s address John Hurt’s chestburster in Alien and Shaw’s fetal facehugger. When they are inside their hosts, what do they feed on in order to grow? It takes about 285-300 calories a day for nine months (that’s 77,000+ calories) to fully develop a human fetus—[That’s right. Only about 300 calories a day. So YES, your wife IS taking advantage of her pregnancy and NO an extra 1000 calories a day isn’t necessary to ensure a healthy baby. Eating for two? Yes. But one of them starts out smaller than a pin head and rarely exceeds 10% the size of mom.]. These things were ready to plague the world after under 24 and 12 hours, respectively. This gets a bit abstract because maybe the aliens are WAY more efficient in their energy use and development. But to make a 6 to 8 pound facehugger, Shaw had to feed it with something! It wasn’t 77,000 calories of body fat (adipose tissue). Anyway, those triglycerides have only carbon, oxygen and hydrogen—nothing else. Also, she’d look a lot more wiry after losing about 20 pounds (~77,000 calories)! She also didn’t seem weak until the baby was “kicking”, so she didn’t take a big hit to her muscle tissue, body fat, blood sugar, blood period, or anything.
If it just fed on blood plasma or something, despite the lack of nutrients, she’d be quite anemic and sickly. Even a combination tissues thereof is far-fetched considering the amazing speed at which that much poundage of alien critter is produced—no matter how well they we engineered! Speaking of which, how did the chestburster in Alien put on 300 xenomorphic pounds in a day!?! Was the Nostromo transporting bins or ProWeightGainer powder, steroids and whole milk loaded with growth hormones? If it was then, no argument, I get it. If not, then I’d like an explanation.
Yeah…this doesn’t happen over night.
GEEKY SIDEBAR CONTINUED: Then there’s the acid blood… Continued from above, these critters at least began their development in a human host. Well, the critters being discussed did. But even the little snake things, which had acid blood as well, needed to get the appropriate elements for the acid. I doubt they’re simply hydronium ions. Typically we require nitrogen, chlorine or sulfur in addition to hydrogen and oxygen to form acid molecules. H2SO4 (sulfuric) and HCl (hydrochloric) are examples of common acids which, at high molarities, become quite dangerous. I’m sure these elements are present in humans, but are they present in appropriate concentrations to provision their parasites’ needs without noticeable, if not fatal, side effects? I guess I don’t know. So if you plan on harboring a uteral or alimentary fetal Alien perhaps you should consult your physician…or a nutritionist…or maybe even a biochemist?
What exactly is that black goo? Does the goo contain little slimy black worm eggs? Does the goo contain the basic engineered DNA of the xenomorph and/or the different castes/species of xenomorphs? Does it contain both and are they separate entities? Does it contain both, but one is the organism’s eggs and the fluid medium is a DNA mutagen that hybridizes/transforms its host? Is there a viral component added to the goo? Is the xenomorph based on a real creature they found on another planet and then modified into their creation? Is there something about the administration or the host environment of the goo that dictates the life cycle of the produced xenomorph? The answer is, evidently, almost all of the above.
Here’s a recap of what the black goo does…
Circumstance Result
Change in atmosphere Eggs hatches into worms (then snaky things)
Contact w/ dead/dying tissue Rage Zombie
Ingestion Degenerative disease
Sex with “diseased” male Facehugger baby (uteral)
Sex with “diseased” female [unknown]
Lady on “diseased” lady action [I’m dying to know]
So if the goo exists and does all this stuff, the result is that the laws of chemistry, physics and biology cease to exist.
Do I think about this a little too much? Sure. But if you read all the way through this article to read this line then you’re surely just as geeky. The only question at that point is whether or not you judge.
STAY TUNED FOR PART 3 OF THE VIVISECTION…
Share this post:
Not Safe For Work:
Folks, let’s be real. No article called The ABCs of Death should be considered suitable for workplace viewing. In my horror entries, you just may encounter images of graphic gore or evil babies tearing out of their mothers, melting flesh, gaping wounds with hanging entrails, and other disturbing, gore-slathered imagery that you don’t want your boss to see on your screen when looking over your shoulder. The same applies doubly for the TRAILER, which includes nudity.
THANKS FOR READING!!
http://elultimoblogalaizquierda.blogspot.com/2012/07/mas-terror-para-sitges-2012.html
Now THAT is an amazing poster!
As a fan of gross-out gobs of gobbledy-gook horror and creative and/or funny and/or just plain awful twisted death scenes, this movie will NO MATTER WHAT be a big pleaser for the darker side of my soul.
CLICK HERE TO SEE A MORE RECENT TRAILER
I’m super excited about the claymation short (T is for Toilet) and “D is for Dogfight.” The trailer shows us a wide range of filming styles, varied and creative special effects, some nice use of slow-motion and all manner of gore.
http://tonypulp.blogspot.com/2011/10/abcs-of-death-spelled-out-in-new-red.html
This is the best thing to hit film since Faces of Death. Only with this, there are no issues of conscience since it’s all fake—so just plain old fun! Like a child’s ABC books, the film is comprised of 26 individual chapters, each helmed by a different director assigned a letter. Each director had total freedom to choose a word to create a story involving death; 26 directors from around the world have contributed all manner of random death clips. Mwahahahahaha.
Video On-Demand Release Date: January 31, 2013
Theatrical Release Date: March 8, 2012
I’m a huge fan of horror anthology movies. They get a little flack because they come from a range of writers, directors and production quality–but that’s what I like. It also makes horror shorts available to those of us who do not attend film school or genre-geared film fests (e.g., Fantastic Fest). If you don’t like a film in Creepshow (3 stories) you’d wait 20-30 minutes for the next story. With V/H/S (5 stories) one need wait only 10-20 minutes. However this has 26 stories, so you’d only have to wait what? Maybe 5 minutes? Yup. This is going to be like a highlights reel of Fangoria favorites!
Below is an ABC guide to the shorts, their directors, and their past work…
“A is for Apocalypse” by Nacho Vigalondo (Timecrimes, The Profane Exhibit)
“B is for Bigfoot” by Adrián García Bogliano (Penumbra)
“C is for Cycle” by Ernesto Díaz Espinoza (Mandrill, Bring Me the Head of the Machine Gun Woman)
“D is for Dogfight” by Marcel Sarmiento (Deadgirl)
“E is for Exterminate” by Angela Bettis (Roman)
“F is for Fart” by Noboru Iguchi (The Machine Girl, RoboGeisha, Mutant Girl Squad)
“G is for Gravity” by Andrew Traucki (The Reef, The Jungle)
“H is for Hyrdo-Electric Diffusion” by Thomas Cappelen Malling (Norwegian Ninja)
“I is for Ingrown” by Jorge Michel Grau (We Are What We Are)
“J is for Jidai-geki” by Yudai Yamaguchi (Meatball Machine, Yakuza Weapon)
“K is for Klutz” by Anders Morgenthaler (Echo)
“L is for Libido” by Timo Tjahjanto (Macabre)
“M is for Miscarriage” by Ti West (The Innkeepers, V/H/S)
“N is for Nuptials” by Banjong Pisanthanakun (Shutter)
“O is for Orgasm” by Hélène Cattet (Amer) & Bruno Forzani (Amer)
“P is for Pressure” by Simon Rumley (The Living and the Dead, Little Deaths)
“Q is for Quack” by Adam Wingard (You’re Next, V/H/S)
“R is for Removed” by Srdjan Spasojevic (A Serbian Film)
“S is for Speed” by Jake West (Evil Aliens, Doghouse)
“T is for Toilet” by Lee Hardcastle (claymation TV show Done in 60 seconds. With Clay.)
“U is for Unearthed” by Ben Wheatley (Kill List)
“V is for Vagitus” by Kaare Andrews (Altitude, Cabin Fever: Patient Zero)
“W is for WTF?” by Jon Schnepp (Metalocalypse, The Venture Brothers)
“X is for XXL” by Xavier Gens (Hitman, The Divide)
“Y is for Youngbuck” by Jason Eisener (Hobo with a Shotgun)
“Z is for Zetsumetsu” by Yoshihiro Nishimura (Tokyo Gore Police, Vampire Girl vs Frankenstein Girl, Helldriver)
Share this post:
The Raid: Redemption (2011)
MY CALL: More throat and joint strikes than in Taken. If you like martial arts movies you’d be a fool to pass this up. [A] IF YOU LIKE THIS WATCH: If you enjoy seeing truly innovative choreography that actually manages to make sense of small fighters demolishing larger and numerous opponents then you should really turn to movies by Jeeja Yanin (Chocolate, Raging Phoenix) and Tony Jaa (The Protector, Ong-Bak but not Ong-Bak 2 or 3). But don’t watch Merantau(2009)—it has the same director and star as this, but neither of them do comparably well with the movie. ALTERNATE TITLE: Originally titled “Serbuan muat,” The Raid is directed by Gareth Evans (Merantau, and writer in the upcoming sequel to horror anthology V/H/S).
Rama (Iko Uwais; Merantau) and his SWAT team infiltrate the dangerous, goon-ridden lair of a criminal Demigod, Tama (he’s like an Indonesian Javier Bardem). Tama’s building is festooned with dangerous tenants and Tama’s bodyguards. Like Dredd 3D, this movie is basically set up like a 90s videogame. The SWAT team enters the building and conquers it one “level” (i.e., floor) at a time until they reach the “the last guy.” For whatever reason this building is basically unguarded and without surveillance on the outside, but loaded with danger on the inside which, again, adds to the videogame appeal.
Led by SWAT Sgt. Jaka (Joe Taslim; Dead Mine, The Fast and the Furious 6), the first few levels offer no challenge as they essentially just restrain (for future arrest) drug dealers, junkies and petty criminals. But when somene hits the alarm, all criminal hands on deck are alerted to the police invaders. We also learn, much to Jaka’s surprise, that this mission is off the books and they can’t call for back up.
Initially, the action focuses on gunfights. I was less than thrilled with the occasional shaky camera-work during gun fight scenes, but it didn’t terribly interrupt my enjoyment and this never happened during the martial arts scenes—and martial arts are basically all we get for the next hour!
Brutal, technical, graphic and gory. There’s some good use of slow motion footage, glorious axe-impaling action, close-up gun shots to the face, and more discharged ammunition than the Morpheus rescue scene in The Matrix. Iko Uwais truly shocks and impresses during his first fight, a wide-shot tonfa-knife fight with about ten opponents and we get to see every single stab, kick and crush as he unleashes a flurry a supremely fast and elaborate, but clearly observed techniques. VERY IMPRESSIVE!!! The best part is that if they used any tricks, like wire work or 1.2x film speed, I can’t tell. They also kept the choreography, while utterly brutal, practical. No jump spin kicks or gratuitous acrobats. Just a flood of flesh-lacerating strikes including one of the most unique neck breaks I’ve ever seen! Iko Uwais doesn’t look like much, but he has truly proven himself to be a martial arts movie star!
Then there’s Mad Dog (Vayan Ruhian; Merantau). This guy is tiny. I mean like young boy who doesn’t play sports tiny, by American standards. However, when he and Jaka (who is MUCH larger) fight you find his power shockingly credible. They both handle complex choreography very well, Mad Dog much better than Jaka, and they produce a fight with techniques executed from realistic positions that I doubt I’ve ever seen on film before.
When Rama gets to the drug prep and processing floor, every single drug handler could have been the master of a martial arts school. While this would be comically annoying in most American action hero-driven releases, I didn’t mind a bit. Why? Because it added yet more action to a movie that seems to be non-stop action and the fight quality never majorly dropped with the insignificance of the opponent (i.e., those stunt men cast as drug handlers #1-12).
Mad Dog versus Rama and another tough guy…that was a treat. Mad Dog may be small, but he fights like a rabid Chihuahua on steroids that just won’t die! Despite his tiny size, very clever choreography permits him just the right stance, credible momentum and position to throw or unbalance much larger, stronger opponents. Rama is also small, but notably larger than Mad Dog.
This movie was AMAZING! The Hof also loved this movie. Here’s his review [click here].
This is Iko Uwais (Rama). At first glance I’d think I could take on five of him. Having seen what he can do, now I think maybe he could take on five of me!
Share this post:
Skyfall
Exciting, refreshing and beautiful to look at. Skyfall guarantees Bond will live on to drink martinis, seduce beautiful women and jump over komodo dragons for years to come. The film is dark, foreboding and features another sure to be Oscar nominated turn from Javier Bardem. Skyfall focuses on new beginnings, characters and introductions. It also brings back the Walther PPK which has been tweaked in the 2012 age.
It hinges on a serious tone that occasionally allows glimpses of cheeky humor associated with the Roger Moore era of 007. The film focuses on what happens when Bond gets old and the world isn’t so small. It also proves that Daniel Craig loves being shirtless.
Sam Mendes provides a confident directorial presence as he guides the film from character moments to huge explosions. The characters are believable and new additions are introduced to carry Bond into the next generation. The new Q is neat, The new M is inspired and the women are strong three dimensional characters who may or may not be killed by the charms of the super secret agent.
It is hard for me to write this review because I do not want to provide any spoilers. The film is a roller coaster ride that brings Bond back to his cheeky roots and but still manages to be a serious reflection on what Bond means nowadays. I don’t want you to know the twists and turns because they are what make it such an unexpected ride after the painful Quantum of Solace. It has a similar vibe to The Bourne Legacy which introduced characters with care and occasionally ended up on dirt bikes. The movies are completely different but you see the care taken to provide an intelligent script which doesn’t pander to the lowest common denominator of action fans. There are big chases and quiet moments that show a firm understanding of what made the other films so popular.
The supporting cast is loaded with people I want to see more of. Javier Bardem better receive an Oscar nomination. Ralph Fiennes is great but I kept wishing he would channel his character from In Bruges. I will watch Naomie Harris in anything after 28 Days Later and Tristram Shandy. Finally, Ben Whishaw is a welcome Q after Jon Cleese effectively put the role in a headlock of cheeky death.
Check out Skyfall, Forget about Quantum of Solace, Watch out for komodo dragons
Share this post:
John’s Horror Corner: The Kindred (1987), tentacle monsters done right!
MY CALL: I loved this movie since childhood, back when it mildly unnerved me around age 11. Classically simple story, good deaths, a cool monster and serviceable effects leave this movie dying for a worthy DVD release. Very satisfying 80s horror! Every bit as good as I remember from 20 years ago. [B] IF YOU LIKE THIS WATCH: Slither (2006).
John’s geneticist mom (Kim Hunter; The Planet of the Apes movies) is on her death bed and demands that he go to her cabin and “burn the Anthony journals” and all of her research to “end the experiment” because “who knows what he will become.” Who is Anthony? His brother!?!
John (David Allen Brooks; Manhunter, Jack Frost 2) is also a researcher doing something with “rogue proteins called prions.” He works in the same building as his mother and Dr. Lloyd. He seeks Dr. Lloyd’s advice about “Anthony,” probably a mistake, and mentions cleaning up his mother’s experiments. Dr. Lloyd is suspiciously interested…dun dun dunnnnnn. Then Dr. Lloyd confronts mom. He’s a bad guy who wants to finish her experiments, which he has just discovered to exist.
Dr. Lloyd (Rod Steiger; The Amityville Horror, Mars Attacks!) conducts weird experiments on skinless cats and gets other subjects (i.e., human brains) by shady means. We find that his work results in the creation of ugly, slimy, blistery-oozy skinned mutants that happen to love to eat fresh, screaming human flesh. The nasty gore effort is clearly already evident in the first 15 minutes. Sadly, for whatever reason, we never see Dr. Lloyd’s mutants again.
Yet another molecular biologist/geneticist Melissa (Amanda Pays; Leviathan, The Flash) was always inspired by John’s mom’s work and joins John to the cabin after meeting him at her funeral. She claims to be his mother’s biggest fan—because geneticists are known for the loyal fanbase. She and John really hit it off, so well that you wouldn’t know John had a girlfriend. Melissa turns out to be saucy trouble and she comes with her own intriguing secrets.
The house is nothing special. His old bedroom has been transformed into an elaborate Frankensteinian alchemy lab and he finds some old recordings (a la Evil Dead). His dog encounters a weird tentacle thing that is prehensile—poor dog. This long, thin tentacle evidently probes for food. The monster uses these tentacles to evidently impregnate a watermelon with a mass of slimy tentacles which later hatches and attacks one of John’s colleagues in her car by going all Evil Dead tree-rape-y on her; restraining her limbs and body and plunging tentacles into her orifices, down her throat and under her skin. This little, slimy squid monster reminds me of the tentacular assault from Species.
Facehugging tentacle monsters…because isn’t that what happiness is all about?
So who’s Anthony? We learn that Anthony is a “hybrid” of some sort, spliced with marine fish DNA. It turns out mom had a lot of this little critters. Anthony is awesomely ugly and we get to see quite a bit of him and his squidling little brothers. There is also a “bonus creature” with a nifty transformation scene. The death scene at the end comes with a grossly clever revelation and disgusts much as does Slither. There’s also an appropriate surprise at the end, which is action-packed as horror goes.
Very satisfying 80s horror. Every bit as good as I remember from 20 years ago.
Share this post:
Bad Movie Tuesday: The Amazing Spider Man
Likable cast, solid director and decent CGI save The Amazing Spider Man (John’s review) from being just another retread. However, I found myself bored by the current hijinks of the web slinger. Amazing is not a bad film. It does not belong amongst films like The Darkest Hour, X-Men 3 or Command Performance. However, those movies were memorable in their badness whereas the new Spider Man simply exists. This is a shame because Spidey is beloved by millions and deserves more than what this film gives. Thus, Amazing is bad because it isn’t good.
I was originally going to do a second review of the bad film The Tall Man but John summed it up with this quote:
“Instead of having a beginning, a middle and an end, this movie seemed to have a beginning, a middle, then a beginning to something totally different, followed by maybe two hardly related parallel middles and four to six endings—yuck.”
In a three part structure this film had 10 unrelated parts in what amounted to a nothing more than poor Jessica Beil getting:
“attacked by a dog—twice, dragged on the road from the bumper of a car (which would shave off her kneecaps!), headlocked, survives a car accident, gets mud in all of those wounds on her face, arm and leg, passes out from near hypothermia in the road in the middle of the night, beaten over the head with a pipe, tied up—twice, punched in the face, hit in the face with a rock…”
After the ineptitude and multiple endings I was confused, annoyed and pretty happy with the badness that just happened in front of me. When Amazing ended I felt absolutely nothing. I had just watched a well manicured money machine swing it’s way through two long hours.
The movie follows the 2002 version beat for beat and offers little in the way of difference. The biggest difference is Amazing adds a mystery about the whereabouts of Peter Parker’s family and features a different spunky love interest.
I found myself twiddling my thumbs while the shiny and colorful things exploded in front of my eyes. I knew the plot and that Sony was close to losing the rights to Spider Man so they were forced to reboot a series that had only ended years ago. The good thing about rebooting is that Spider Man 3 was a massive turd with zero energy or logic so bringing in fresh minds and excited actors was a breath of fresh air. Paramount hired 500 Days of Summer director Marc Webb to helm and they cast incredibly likable actors Andrew Garfield and Emma Stone to be the good looking faces of the reboot.
The problem is no matter how many fresh faces you bring in you can’t help it from feeling stale.
You know the beats, you know the plot and most importantly the wonder is gone because you already have a frame of reference. I kept hoping that Rhys Ifans would become a wiry Lizard and punt Spider Man like he did the pigskin in The Replacements.
I suppose if you are new to the series you will have a blast watching Peter learn to swing (using a web and not big Bad Voodoo Daddy) or smooching Gwen Stacey for the first time. However, the film’s villain is too likable to root against and once he transforms he isn’t interesting due to the massive amounts of CGI. The same thing happened to the Green Goblin (Willem Dafoe), Venom (Topher Grace) and Sandman (Thomas Haden Church). Wonderful actors disappear and they become faceless CGI blobs whom look like CGI blobs. Spider Man 2 succeeded because you could see Dr. Octopus’s face and visualize him as a human and villain. His motives were murky and unrefined but so was much of the Spider Man series.
I know in a world where thousands of movies exist it is difficult to be original. I just wish this film would have tried something new. For instance, the scene where Parker is learning how to use his abilities it seemed like a mash up of Footloose and Indiana Jones 4 (Never a good comparison). The biggest improvement is the movement of Spider Man which now feels fluid yet unrefined. It also brings the hipster vibe to great heights.
I understand Sony wanted to keep it’s cash cow (700 million worldwide gross) and not let it revert back to Marvel. Fox recently lost Daredevil to Marvel because the studio was stumped as how to reboot the series. The problem is that rebooting Amazing felt like a money situation and not a creative experience. Marvel bet big with it’s phase one Avengers plan and that is why I loved it. They took a massive chance that paid off when the Avengers made a over a billion dollars worldwide.
Sony had a chance to create a new story like Christopher Nolan did with Batman. However, it played it safe and created a sure-fire hit that hit the right notes but does nothing to excite. I understand this from a financial standpoint but it frustrates me they played it so blandly. Marvel took a massive gamble and they managed to create memorable and visual delights. I’m hoping that with the back story out of the way the will widen the Spider man world and let Jaime Fox tear up the screen as Electro.
The Amazing Spider Man needs room to soar. Hopefully, the $700 million will allow Marc Webb to make a Spidey movie more to his style. A style where Hall & Oates is played liberally and Minka Kelly and Zooey Deschanel play a duo of hipster villains who were bit by radioactive fireflies.
Share this post:
John’s Old School Horror Corner: House (1986), good for childhood nostalgia and goofy monster effects but certainly not scary
MY CALL: Boring, dumb, random…but it comes with a few giggles. Unless this is a childhood nostalgia movie for you, I’d suggest skipping it. IF YOU LIKE THIS WATCH: I like “house” movies, but I prefer they take themselves more seriously like in The Amityville Horror (1979, 2005), the short from V/H/S (2012), Grave Encounters (2011) or Poltergeist (1982). Even Paranormal Activity 2 (2010), although we later learn it’s less of a “house” movie and more of an evil spirit movie.
Roger (William Katt; Carrie, House IV, Mirrors 2), a divorced and son-bereft writer hitting a slow point in his career, moves into his aunt’s house after her suicide. This transition calls difficult memories as his son disappeared while he had lived in the house years earlier and his aunt had suspected that “the house took him.” He also has visions of his aunt warning him about the house. Uninteresting visions of his son and his time in Vietnam also punctuate the slow-paced fist act of the story.
Whether it’s The Nesting, The Amityville Horror, The House on Haunted Hill, Night of the Demons, The Haunting, The Shining or this… ALL “house” movies simply MUST take place in a really big house. After all, no one wants to watch a movie about a haunted 1200 square foot 2 bed/2 bath now do they? Nope, we want a BIG house. Even season one of An American Horror Story–really big house!
The first hint of remote interest comes when he opens a gate to the unknown (i.e., a bedroom closet door) after midnight and an amorphous monster attacks him. As his next door neighbor gets nosy, a mounted swordfish comes to life, his tools become telekinetically homicidal and the house fools him into killing his ex-wife (appearing as a bloated slimy demon), things still feel slow and random—bordering on boring.
About halfway through the movie the soundtrack marks a significant tone shift to something somewhat silly. We meet Roger’s beguiling neighborhood fox (Mary Stavin; Octopussy, A View to a Kill) who, I feel, is only in this movie so that the director could show us her body in a swimsuit. She dumps her son on Roger to babysit. Of course, two super-ugly house demons try to steal him.
Scariest monster in any closet ever!
Why Roger doesn’t take stock of the situation and sell this evil house and forget about it is beyond me. He simply tries to “deal with it” as if it were a domestic nuisance. I guess he wants his son back. What about hiring a medium? Nah. He’s a writer and a veteran; he’s got this.
Later he enlists his nosy neighbor’s help to ambush the closet monster. This goes very poorly and Roger is dragged into the closet and then apparently into the tropical forests of Vietnam where he bumps into an old ‘Nam buddy of his before being vomited back into his spare bedroom. Did that sentence make sense? Well, neither does this movie!
Continuing the search for his son, Roger creates a portal out of his bathroom medicine cabinet and is swiftly attacked by a tentacle monster. Unphased by the attack, Roger crawls into this alternate dimension and finds his son in a bamboo cage in a tropical swamp. He rescues his son and somehow finds himself in his swimming pool. Did that make sense? Still no?
Okay, now let’s make sense of this. You see, his undead ‘Nam buddy kidnapped his son to exact his revenge for not killing him when he was suffering during their war tour. Roger defeats this 6’6” war-seasoned soldier zombie with his cloth belt and a positive attitude. Pathetic.
So Roger is a hero for “finding” his long lost son and he wins back his ex-wife—who, evidently, he didn’t actually kill earlier in the movie.
Senseless. But it made me smile here and there.
Share this post:
John’s Horror Corner: Humongous (1982)
MY CALL: Ouch! This monstrous slasher film just hurt. Never scary, never suspenseful, only off-camera kills, dumb story and an aggravating theme…not even fun to laugh at. [D-] ALTERNATIVE TITLE: Dog Island—pretty dumb name. Not that Humongous was a winner either.
In 1946 a woman is raped at a cocktail party. Perhaps a little on the late side, she is rescued by a dog—that was random.
36 years later a group of five twenty-somethings go on a boat outing. They pick up a stranded seafarer and then, during a dumb fight between two of them, crash onto the shores of an island inhabited by a lone reclusive woman and a pack of wild dogs.
While on this island folks start to die one by one, they discover the reclusive woman’s house and try to solve the mystery of her seclusion. Eventually, they learn that she had given birth to a mutant son and isolated herself on the island to keep him away from humanity. This is delivered to the audience with no real flavor, creating the sense that any details of plot presented in this movie are basically futile.
Like Frankenstein, our shaggy-haired Wrong Turn mutant hates fire. Like a good psycho-killer, he just won’t die. But like all such monstrosities, he ultimately dies at the lucky hands of a scared girl—the chick who didn’t show her tits, get drunk or do drugs, that it.
What’s bad? Night scenes are gritty and it’s hard to see what’s going on. But with acting this bad, it hardly matters if you can see what the actors are doing. Then there’s the slow-moving grunty monstrous killer, through whose eyes we often see, but who we never see until the end. This movie is never scary, never suspenseful, we never see the killing actually happen (except for a bear-hug and a face-crushing), and I found the strong dog motif to be nothing more than distracting, even annoying.
What’s good? For me, nothing. But I read several reviews that considered the mood and its complimentary scoring very effective. I felt no such thing and found the simplistic 80s score to be little more than adequate. But, at one point, a girl accidentally sits in the lap of a dried up corpse. It wedges on to her and basically dry humps her. This was my only laugh during the movie.
This movie is deliberately exploitative. The opening rape scene is unnecessarily drawn out and, as quickly as we shift to present day (1982), we are greeted by gratuitous nudity—all in the first ten minutes. There’s even a scene where a chick bares her breasts to warm up an injured friend who was cold—presumably hypothermic.
Share this post:
The Man with the Iron Fists (2012)
MY CALL: This movie shouldn’t have been written AND directed AND scored AND starring Rza. However, the movie was still loads of fun and Rza has definitely proven that he has great cinematic vision. Expect many filmmaking imperfections, but enjoy the fun ride. [B-] IF YOU LIKE THIS WATCH: Shinobi: Heart Under Blade(2005), Croughing Tiger, Hidden Dragon (2000), Elektra (2005), The Warrior’s Way (2010) and Bunraku (2010)…all very stylistic with cool combat.
Thaddeus (director Rza) is a gifted blacksmith whose talents are contracted by local warring clans. He is pure of heart and wants nothing more than to purchase the freedom of his courtesan wife Lady Silk (Jamie Chung; The Hangover 2, Sorority Row) from the brothel madame Blossom (Lucy Liu basically reprising her Kill Bill role; The Tournament, Kung Fu Panda 2).
Thaddeus becomes mixed up in a plot to steal a large shipment of gold. The main villain is Silver Lion (Byron Mann), who betrays the Lion clan leader with the help of Bronze Lion (Cung Le; Dragon Eyes, Pandorum). Zen Yi (Rick Yune; Ninja Assassin), the son of the murdered clan leader, sets out to stop Silver Lion with his armor of retractable blades. Also in the mix is Jack Knife (Russel Crowe; Robin Hood, The Next Three Days), the most interesting and charismatice character (outside of combat) with an interesting taste for bachelor party shenanigans (i.e., Asian call girls, liquor and opium).
Russel Crowe as Jack Knife, rounding up his entertainment for the evening.
The fighting in the movie was a mixed bag that will largely disappoint martial arts movie fans. As the oddly bewigged lion clansman, Cung Le was sadly under-utilized. He never gets to looks good or show off. Not even in his finale fight against Lucy Liu. The choreography presents a mix of very cool and very silly kung fu combat maneuvers. Sadly, by and large the action is filmed way too close-up. For me, the combat highlights should all be credited to Bautista’s Brass Body. He seemed to have the coolest scenes, obviously the coolest F/X because of his ability, and some of the most fun choreography that was filmed so that we could actually see it.
Despite my complaints about much of the action, the kung fu theater feel was maintained undeniably well. Rza captured that tone perfectly. There was also a festive display of spewy-fun gore.
The dialogue is dreadfully dry (except for Crowe’s delivery). Rza, God bless him for trying, can’t act or effectively narrate. His character was not only understated, but lacked the lines to justify his purpose. It seems that Rza was going for a mood-driven film with stylized combat like Bunraku or The Warrior’s Way. I could see his goal, but his meant-to-be-poetic blacksmith character was clearly the weak link in synthesizing this quasi-arthouse-ful conceptual grace. Rza tries to use a Shaolin Temple training flashback to corroborate Thaddeus’ focus and combat ability. Still, I found him to have zero combat credibility when facing Iron Body—a character who actually earned my respect on screen.
The score (also by Rza) was cool during the first scene (a fight scene). But I noticed less effective use of music later in the movie. I’m not hating, it was a neat score. But this was disappointing as I expected to have some awesomely rap-scored fight scenes, but some of them had combat volume drowning out the music, rendering it ineffective even at times that louder music would be appropriate.
Director Rza—of the Wu Tang Clan—was always a devout fan of Hong Kong cinema’s kung fu theater. While his direction is clearly fledgling and his scoring ability nothing to his own rapping talent, his passion for classic kung fu movies manifested the greatest strength of this film: the kung fu theater “feel” of it all. His excellent theatrical homage includes some classic kung fu movie components such as the iron body (brass body in the movie) focus style, techniques that are named after characters (e.g., the Gemini stance), the betrayal of one’s master and the revenge that follows, the house of mirrors fight (which was unfortunately brief), traps and poison darts, fighters exploding from the ground in ambush and semi-flying combat maneuvers. Perhaps the most fun was when all of the brothel whores turn out to be ninja-savvy combat-chic assassins. Rza also covered the bases of kung fu weaponry, including bladed fans, bladed sleeve extensions, chain-fighting, various blades and good-old kung fu.
This movie shouldn’t have been written AND directed AND scored AND starring Rza. However, the movie was still loads of fun and Rza has definitely proven that he has great cinematic vision. I’d like to see him collaborate with more experienced film makers before attempting another solo venture like this. But I am so glad that I got to see it anyway, imperfections and all. This was a good debut considering his complete lack of experience since yet more experienced hands have failed to produce such entertainment time and time again.
I also hope to see more of David Bautista. He worked really well in this!
Share this post:
The Tall Man (2012)
MY CALL: Featuring a story that is less reliable than the “pullout method”, this movie is an unsatisfying waste of time drowns itself in too many plot loose plot elements. Skip this head case of a movie. It’s not clever, it’s simply indecisive. [D+] SIDEBAR: This is one of very few movies bad enough to get hosed by both myself and The Hof, who will be featuring this movie for his next Bad Movie Tuesday.
Julia (Jessica Biel; Total Recall, The Texas Chainsaw Massacre) is a small clinic nurse in Cold Rock, a small poor town plagued by a rash of soul-crushing child disappearances. So troubling were these tandem disappearances that the mysterious “cause” was given a name: The Tall Man, which has wedged itself into the minds of the locals as a piece of folklore-turned truth complete with local sightings.
Julia is kind-hearted and strong, and is no stranger to loss either, having lost her husband. She doesn’t believe in The Tall Man, she dedicates all of her spare time to her young boy, and she never wears make-up.
Any sense of mystery is swiftly defeated as, when Julia’s child is taken, we see The Tall Man, the beat up UPS truck that he drives and his pissed off dog. He reminds me a good deal of Hollowface from Intruders (2011)—another generally ineffective boogeyman figure. Julia sneaks into his truck and gives him one Hell of a fight—you gotta’ watch out for those chicks who don’t wear make-up. But, alas, in order to make a movie of this The Tall Man needs to get away with her boy. So he does.
This movie quickly takes a unique turn as we discover that The Tall Man may not be just one man acting alone and that other citizens may be involved…or someone is just nuts and they’re imagining things…or something else.
Biel gets put through the ringer in this one. No make-up, attacked by a dog—twice, dragged on the road from the bumper of a car (which would shave off her kneecaps!), puts The Tall Man in a headlock, survives a car accident, gets mud in all of those wounds on her face, arm and leg, passes out from near hypothermia in the road in the middle of the night, beaten over the head with a pipe, tied up—twice, punched in the face, hit in the face with a rock…
Despite the Die Hard John MacClayne ringer she goes through, this movie had a stupid, generally insanely senseless plot. I seriously thought that this movie was “just about to end” four times, so watching this movie is like reading a poorly written book and never knowing how many pages are left. This isn’t necessarily because they drew it out to far, but rather because the plot and the message that the viewer was meant to take home from this simply took a long time to hash out the schizophrenic plot salad. Instead of having a beginning, a middle and an end, this movie seemed to have a beginning, a middle, then a beginning to something totally different, followed by maybe two hardly related parallel middles and four to six endings—yuck.
This movie would have been better delivered as a crime thriller where they draw the curtains on the “secret” much earlier and the shocking “motive” appropriately at the end—so that there would only be one ending. In the end I found this to be a generally ineffective un-thriller. The only tension is our own frustration as we go from thinking this is a supernatural thriller, to a real crime thriller, to a cult-driven story, to a conspiracy, to a crazy swap-mama story, to maybe a psychological thriller, and ending up as a crime-mystery drama. This process is never satisfying!
Movies, Films & Flix 