John’s Horror Corner: Episode 50 (2011)
MY CALL: Not worth my time. Sadly, this film used a great model— one that I’ve seen before and hope to see redone again—but it failed in all forms of delivery other than a few of the earliest introductory points. WHAT TO WATCH INSTEAD: White Noise (2005), Poltergeist (1982), Paranormal Activity (2007-2011), Grave Encounters (2011), and maybe The Last Exorcism (2010) or Insidious (2010). Also Session 9 (2001), although there are no “investigators” in it.
Episode 50 opens with what I consider an effective strategy. With hardly any background noise you are presented a taxonomy of paranormal activity increasingly ordered from least to most dangerous—naturally, you’re saying to yourself, oh it’s gonna’ be the that last one. Already I’m reminded of movies like White Noise (2005), Poltergeist (1982), Paranormal Activity (2007-2011) and Insidious (2010).
Paranormal investigators recognize four classes of hauntings:
1. Residual—unaware of the living; no interaction or physical contact; not dangerous.
2. Intelligent—possible physical contact and interactions with objects and people; generally not dangerous.
3. Poltergeist—trickster spirits with objectives; deceiver; possible physical contact and interactions with objects and people; moderately dangerous.
4. Inhuman—a spirit that was never human; makes physical contact with objects and people for the purposes of possession, mental manipulation or bodily harm; extremely dangerous.
In the style of Grave Encounters (2011), The Devil Inside (2012) and The Last Exorcism (2010), our story within the movie is being filmed for TV show or documentarian purposes. It’s presented much like an actual episode of the show. We are introduced to our team of skeptical paranormal investigators who are young, sharp, and are trying to comfort a couple that was hustled by a previous team of people.
Hilarious sidebar: In some surveillance footage the husband, when spooked, hits his wife in the face with a hammer. The injury make-up is somehow hilarious and really quite good at the same time (until seen up close).
Anyway, their routine and delivery is one part hokey, one part cute, one part well-done. What do I mean by that? Well, if you hate Ghost Hunters you’ll probably be reminded of that and dislike this for the same reason—that’s the “hokey” that I don’t like. Thankfully this is a movie, so even you aren’t a believer you shouldn’t be too bothered.
“Hmmmm. Well, unless our middle school science class has taught us nothing, this can’t be a ghost.”
Our skeptics meet some terminally ill, rich ex-con. He’s played by a terrible character and, along with his two attorneys, will likely diminish this movie’s credibility with their deadpan acting. Their playing lawyers, but I doubt they could argue their way out of a parking ticket—really, like special-ed jocks taking pre-algebra in 12th grade stupid. Anyway, our team is offered two days of unfettered access to a previously inaccessible location: “The Gates to Hell,” the West Virginia State Lunatic Asylum considered the most haunted locale. Why does a rich, dying ex-con care about this? Because if they can debunk “Hell,” then maybe he won’t spend eternity burning there.
“Hmmmm. Could there be ghosts?”
At first, I thought that most of the bad reviews of this film were due to random actors with little screen time (e.g., the rich guy’s lawyers). But I found additional legitimate complaints.
“I’m stickin’ to the no ghosts policy.”
We see expert testimonials from doctors and computer analysts delivering realistic fact-based explanations for paranormal phenomena and pointing out the things we can’t solve. This montage felt very effective if, and only if, I ignored the clips with these twin psychology students who—despite delivering good information—had completely hamstrung the credibility of the whole scene. Really, they were awful and clearly the result of a small casting pool or hiring a friend as a favor. Bad call!
Our team meets a rival team. Our apparent protagonist team of skeptics (the “Paranormal Inspectors”) expects to debunk the landmark haunting of this most haunted site whereas the other team (amateurs of the Academia Spirit Searchers Club, the ASSC or “Ask”) hopes to confirm the presence of a demonic spirit—that was stage 4 on the paranormal danger scale that opens the movie. The leader of ASSC is an over-enthusiastic zealot and is a character of questionable credibility.
Now the screen cuts to black and the following caption is presented:
“During the shoot, something went wrong. In an unexpected move, the parent network of the show cancelled the series before airing episode 50. Nobody knew what actually happened during the filming. Until now.”
They arrive on the scene. I was hoping for a little more Session 9 (2001) in terms of site eeriness. The “show” footage scenes earlier in the film were quite good, but the “behind the scenes” acting involving real interactions (i.e., not using Paranormal Investigator TV show personas) degenerates rapidly. Then there’s a slapstick Scottish dude who, like so many other additions to this flick, further cripples whatever credibility the film had left—if any.
Top shelf production quality. This film had a great model, but simply too many flaws in its execution to be passable, or even forgivable.
I really don’t mean to belittle the intelligence of youth, but this movie would be better suited for middle and high schoolers. Having generally less life experience and, more importantly, having seen considerably fewer movies, it will be harder for them to catch the outlandish tactics used in this movie. Like how quickly the two teams go from hating each other to getting along, the ridiculousness of the rich guy who got them access, the first “odd encounter” at the site involving the mysterious movement of some duct tape. There’s no slow build-up or increasing tension, but rather the team members immediately encounter numerous unsubtle sounds, voices, slamming doors and objects moving about. There’s really no sense of tone as was done so well in Session 9, Grave Encounters, White Noise and the Paranormal Activity movies. The storytelling feels like an adult version of a campfire ghost story told immaturely.
I won’t give away “what” they encounter, but I will say that some Japanese-style horror tactics are used, and not done as well as the Japanese. The sightings are always caught on camera, often seen by the team members, and far too frequent to be at all effective.
SO WHO WAS THIS MOVIE MADE FOR? Sometime after graduating to pull-up diapers and training wheels horror hound pups should have “baby’s first haunting flick.” I think this is it. It’s way in-your-face, plot and points are blatantly drilled to a nub, the characters are immature and never really develop, and you don’t have to look too hard to “catch” anything. Most horror relies on observant viewers to “catch” the quick, unsettling glance of something. Here anything that happens, even if briefly, is accompanied by sound and then washed, rinsed and repeated seconds later. Like any such movie, the characters get killed. But the deaths aren’t very intense—nothing is hard to watch. Also, the images may be scary to some, but I would consider them hardly disturbing compared to so much other material out there even from PG-13 flicks. Lastly, all mysteries and questions are answered within minutes of their inception.
Share this post:
John’s Horror Corner: Piranha 3DD (2012), proof that some horror remakes are just plain gratuitous!
MY CALL: If you liked Piranha 3D then this is worth a watch and maybe even a blind buy. It’s every bit as funny or funnier in some ways, but the big finale is a big nothing compared to its predecessor and I believe that is the major reason the most negative online reviews strongly favoring the original. IF YOU LIKE THIS WATCH: Want funny and gross-out goretastic? Drag Me to Hell (2009), Piranha 3D(2010), Final Destination 5 (2011), Tucker and Dale vs Evil (2011), The Cabin in the Woods (2012). SIDEBAR: This is a sequel of a remake of an original (1978’s Piranha) that has a sequel (1981’s Piranha 2: The Spawning), but this sequel is not a remake of the original sequel (which, by the way, was about piranhas that fly!). TRAILER: Click here to go to the Piranha 3DD Trailer Talk.
Taking place in some other lake in Arizona, this sequel begins with a foreboding reflection of Piranha 3D (2010) and a cameo by the crazier-than-life Gary Busey. As if that wasn’t a slap in the face to taking a movie seriously, then enters David Koechner (Final Destination 5) and his double-D T’n’A advertisement for “The Big Wet,” his unsubtly named water park for adults lifeguarded by sexy, string bikini’d Cuervo girls. The sloppy innuendo-rich commercial would likely disgust even the pioneers of Girls Gone Wild. If there was a movie Freakonomics calculation called breast time it would be measured in breast seconds—the total number of breasts in a movie times the number of seconds that each breast is bare—then this movie’s breast second tabulation would result in a breast time of 300% of the movie’s actual running time. It’s truly shameful.
While the above image does not continue to the “Breast Time” calculation…well, you get the point.
We transition from Girls Gone Wild to the opening scenes in American Pie as a bunch of just-out-of-college-aged friends are seeing each other for the first time in a long time (last summer, I suppose), romantic interests and tensions are introduced along with the gawky guys who never get it and the hunky ones getting all of it, and every chick is doable and playfully DTF. These girls include Maddy (Scream Queen Danielle Panabaker; The Ward, Friday the 13th) and Shelby(Scream Queen Katrina Bowden; Nurse 3-D, Tucker and Dale vs Evil ).
This scene represents the stupidest moment in the entire movie–and, yes, there was a distinctly stupidest moment. Here Maddy (Panabaker), a grad student in marine biology, goes swimming in the dark water alone at night with plenty of exposed skin to see if piranhas have infested the lake yet. BRILLIANT!
Prophesied by the opening scenes, some very, very inappropriate shit happens in this movie—aside, of course, from the fact that a guy in a movie with “DD” in the title actually says “I’ve never been into girls with big breasts” in an effort to get lucky with a cute chick with small ones (Katrina Bowden). People pray before sex in what can only be described as a van called “the sin bin” (and then, of course, die before getting it in), piranhas swim into vaginas, Bowden [imaged below] says “I think something is really wrong with me [because that would turn anyone on, right?] and if it is I don’t want to die a virgin”
and then a dude goes for it, then the piranha in her vajayjay eats his dick and we see waaaay too much during this scene which lasts longer than you’d expect, a piranha goes up a guy’s ass, David Hasselhoff refers to a small boy as a little ginger moron after the kid is killed in the face by a piranha, and a David Koechner’s severed head gets some bloody double-D motorboat action.
The best movie moment had to be the following quote: “Josh cut off his penis because something came out of my vagina!” I had to rewind that one IMMEDIATELY to see cute little Katrina Bowden say that line with a straight face again.
Have no fear, the cameos don’t stop with Gary Busey. Christopher Lloyd is back! He cracks the code and figures out why the locals are at risk—it has something to do with chlorine by-products and…wait a minute! We have a huge, STD-filled water park; that’s a LOT of chlorine.
And Ving Rhames gets a double-piranha amputee cameo and he says (to the water at a water park, mind you!) “I’m not afraid of some punk-ass water” over and over again like a mantra. When the bloody eruption of piranha gore arrives, Rhames goes all gun-legged Grindhouse and we get to see Hasselhoff’s double-Ds bouncing in slow motion.
This attempt at gross-out gore overkill is nothing when compared to the echelons-better Piranha 3D. It’s still fun, but it fails the franchise and even fails the earlier scenes of this movie.
This is good, old-fashioned sophomoric bro-fun. Enjoy…
Share this post:
Bane must be wearing lifts, because Bale is much taller than Hardy!
The MoviesFilmsandFlix crew has been having a lot of fun with all things The Dark Knight Rises. It all started with a playful Round Table Panel Discussion and then The Hof’s original review of the film. Then I took a few jabs at Nolan and his trilogy closer in my Breakdown Part 1: All things non-Bane, to which Hofsey replied in quippy kind. Now we’ve started to pick on villains, beginning with The Unappreciated Bad Guy (a character profile of The Scarecrow) and leading us ultimately to my final contribution about Bane—both the DC comic version (DC Bane) and the latest imagining by Christopher Nolan (Hardy Bane).
The Bane of Bane:
It’s all too often that film-adaptations of books and comics make changes that upset the fans of the original storyline. I understand that fans can’t always get their exact little way and feel so hurt that they would describe Hollywood producers, writers and directors as “idiots who got all it wrong.” Conversely, I also understand that not all written stories translate well into the formulaic film framework of “a beginning, a middle, and an end.” Books can take as long as they like developing backstories and comic plot arcs endure until their popularity thrives no more, at which point an ending is architected (often in hindsight) based on what was allowed to happen thus far and this ending—made overly dramatic to resurrect sales and perhaps incite a spinoff or continuation of the series—is the final and largest climax in a long series of climaxes punctuated by itty-bitty beginnings, middles and ends, linked together by weak and convenient anecdotal evidence. I happen to be one who loves the originals, one who loves to see film-adaptations made of the original, and one who posts self-serving opinions online.
Not the body of a supervillain!
The original Bane was similar to our latest Bane in many respects…
Both were raised in a terrible prison which served as the mold for the monsters they become and both are exceptionally well-educated and well-trained. In fact, with minute detail aside, the movie accurately depicts Bane’s history with The League of Shadows and his intellectual capabilities—without spelling everything out. DC-Bane (as we’ll call the his comic book version) was, being in a more super-villainous context, a bit of an exaggerated form compared to Hardy-Bane (Nolan’s take on Bane). But I feel that they credibly translated this aspect of Bane well into film.
Both wear masks which enhance their performance—but in very different ways.
Based on a backstory element that does not match the DC universe, Hardy-Bane suffered from “plague” and his mask was crafted by doctors (fellow prisoners) to relieve the crippling pain which would otherwise forever afflict him. In this case, the mask allows him to be himself as if he was never afflicted by some plague. DC-Bane was the sole surviving subject of an experiment on prisoners. The experiment exposed him to “venom,” a drug to which he became dependent to similarly crippling extremity if he didn’t get his regular fix. But instead of allowing DC-Bane to be all that he can be, it rather enhances him with superhuman strength and healing capabilities. Later in the story arc DC-Bane swears off the use of venom, but not before crippling Batman and moving on to other things.
It looks like back-breaking would be much easier for “this” Bane.
Both break Batman’s back—but one did so much more plausibly than the other.
Size is my issue. Hardy gained 30 pounds for this role, increasing his weight to 198 lbs. Not bad for 5’10”. Although he was 205 lbs and noticeably more lean in Warrior (presenting him as a middle weight only weighing in the 170s in the film).
I think he’d have a tough time lifting a 180-200 pound Batman wearing 20+ pounds of body armor and gear over his head for a drop-to-the-knee back-breaking—but Nolan made it look like he could do a set of ten reps of Batman backbreakers. At least, he’d do it with much less authority than DC-Bane’s build—who, in properly exaggerated comic book form, is inhumanly huge. Here are some comic book images of Bane, some preternatural, some verging on biological impossibility. DC-Bane, varying from one comic series to the other, seems to range from 6’6” 300+ lbs to 8’ and 500+ lbs.
Why even cast Tom Hardy as Bane?
I liked watching Tom Hardy play Bane and I even liked the “masked” villain voice he adopted for him…a lot. But why cast an actor when no one would have guessed it was even him? If the trailers, posters, Access Hollywood and IMDB didn’t tell us, I don’t think we would have known it was him. He has never looked like that (not that we can really see his face anyway) and he has never sounded like that. In fact, you can really only “hear” his acting ability—and that was all voiced over. With the exception of shedding a few tears behind some sad puppy dog eyes, it’s not like we could infer much expressiveness from his face throughout the film, so his acting skill couldn’t be the reason behind his casting. This just feels like Christopher Nolan was playing the name recognition game to fill theater seats—as if the cast needed any more buffing. Why not just have Hardy voicing-over an actor with a more suitably menacing build? Here’s about where someone would ask “well who would you have picked that would’ve been better to play a ridiculously huge and muscled villain?” My answer: Nathan Jones. He’s 6’11”, a lean 360 lbs with a six-pack, and has a history of playing shirtless, over-sized brutes (e.g., Conan the Barbarian (2011), The Condemned (2007), Fearless (2006), The Protector (2005), Troy (2004) which made my Best Fights and Kills of Film, Jackie Chan’s First Strike (1996)). Since acting really isn’t a factor here, I’d challenge anyone—ANYONE!!!—to give me a better exemplar for Bane who has a filmography.
You couldn’t even look to the men of World’s Strongest Man unless they went on a crash diet to get some abs and grew another 3-6 inches in height. Not to mention that they likely lack the flexibility, range of motion, and cardiovascular conditioning that this film’s choreography demanded (on which Hardy couldn’t deliver) and that Nathan Jones has demonstrated. Again, I enjoyed watching Hardy. But when Bane is demonstrating unreasonable strength by punching concrete chunks out of a pillar or lifting Christian Bale (who is 2 inches taller than Hardy and heavily suited) aloft in a one-handed chokehold while casually pacing forward and lecturing him as if the feat was effortless, this is just a big Hollywood-fail.
I should add that the last live-action Bane (Batman and Robin) was played by the 80s-era wrestler Robert Swenson. At 6’4” and 405 lbs, he was a truly menacing. Really, several wrestlers would fare well as Bane—Dwayne Johnson, Batista, etcetera.
What was Ra’s al Ghul’s teaching in the League of Shadows?
Wild, drunken haymakers fueled by blind rage—by the looks of the fight choreography. In Batman Begins, Bruce Wayne emerges as a damned certified ninja! Evidently Bane was also a student there. Where’s the ninja-like technique in this movie? Ugh…this is too upsetting to dissect. I just hope that the next franchise-rebooting director learns from Nolan’s combat victories in Batman Begins and The Dark Knight, and considers The Dark Knight Rises’ fightsto be akin to the products of a divorce-induced bender.
In the history of all ninjas these are the biggest punch wind-ups EVER. And, hey, is it me? Or does Batman’s suit look like plain old rubber and not a thing like Kevlar in this action still?
Share this post:
Bad Movie Tuesday: Hijacked
Writing about the faults of Hijacked is like bowling a strike from three feet away with an exploding ball. It is too easy , unnecessary and detrimental to your health. I’ve decided to do something much harder and write about the interesting aspects of this film.
First, take a look at the poster. It introduces the sideways view of the main character. It is saying “I am not watching you but all eyes are on me.” You get a good look at Randy’s cauliflower ear and it seems like the explosion isn’t bothering him. This establishes that he is a tough SOB. Then, it falsely promotes Vinnie Jones being on the plane which is a smart marketing move. It makes you believe that he is not killed off five minutes into the film and he will add his British toughness to the airplane hijinks. Next, you recognize the two guys (Dominic Purcell, Holt McCallany) on the bottom right. Which is always a good thing on direct to DVD films. Then, you see that there will be some tough women with interesting hat choices joining the action. The most exciting aspect features two men shooting machine guns in an airplane. Have they invented planes that cannot be breached by bullets? How can a person locked in an airplane survive 50,000 bullets spraying at them? This poster makes you believe action is imminent and often.
Hijacked is a vehicle for MMA legend Randy “the natural” Couture to bust heads, punch heads and do other things that hurt heads. This is a great thing because Couture is a likable badass whom Stallone admits would beat up all the Expendables in the real world. However, 50 minutes goes by before Randy punches a guy in the head. Then, three or so people get shot, some punches land and there is a guy who gets stabbed in the shoulder. It is quite baffling that a fighting legend would star in a movie where he does zero fighting. The greatest thing about this film is it proves that Randy can suitably deliver terrible lines and still be likable. He will survive this shlock fest and star in more shlock fests. to be fair he did get into the action game late. He also didn’t start fighting in the UFC until he was close to 40 and he was able to achieve these amazing feats of head punching.
The second greatest thing about the film aside from Randy Couture looking sideways is Dominic Purcell’s moustache.
If Hijacked had as much life and personality as Purcell’s moustache it would have had a chance. The moustache implies that he never wanted the moustache. However, I bet he grew a beard and as a joke kept the moustache when he shaved. When he looked at himself in the mirror he noticed a living/breathing force of nature on his face and decided to keep it. Gone are his bald days from Blade: Trinity and Prison Break. The moustache has been stealing scenes recently. It even overshadowed heart-throb Clive Owen’s stache in Killer Elite.
I love how this movie involves zero brain committment and is perfect to watch while doing something else. I managed to work out, write a review and look for Dominic Purcell’s moustache pictures while watching this movie. It actually makes you motivated to do something else because you don’t want to suffer through the 100 minutes of B movie badness. If I had watched a better film I wouldn’t have been able to multitask.
Hijacked is a bad film. However, it will be forgotten quickly and not do any damage to the actor’s film careers. Instead of watching this film go on Youtube and watch Randy Couture highlights. Or, check out The Expendables or Executive Decision. ED is an airplane movie where Steven Segal dies, Kurt Russell woos Halle Berry and John Leguizamo plays a normal man and isn’t forced to do drugs or act like a pest.
Don’t watch Hijacked. Look at the poster and imagine a better film involving exploding airplanes and punched heads.
Share this post:
Scarecrow: The Underappreciated Bad Guy
SPOILER ALERT! Do not read if you have not watched The Dark Knight Rises.
The majority of the Batman coverage has revolved around the greatness of The Joker and the banality of Bane (sorry). I am not using that word to be cheeky. I feel like Bane is just another bad guy who wants carnage and achieves this with physical might and an endless army. He is the kind of boring, brawling and badass villain that quotes philosophy whilst hurting vertebrae. To be fair Christopher Nolan was looking for the complete opposite of what he and Heath Ledger created. Thus, he put a baboon mask on a great actor and had Batman go out against a physical rival as opposed to a psychotic soul mate.
Cillian Murphy and his creepy intelligence provide a backbone to the series and a perfect representation of the Gotham villain. He is a survivor that will always be a thorn in the side of Batman and JGL. I am paraphrasing and rephrasing in dude speak an excerpt from a Viking history book. King Charlemagne supposedly wept as he spoke about the Vikings. He said “They will never destroy the empire but they will always be a pain in the ass.” He knew that they would always be chipping away at his empire. They wouldn’t destroy it but they were crafty enough to be an annoyance to a powerful man.
The Scarecrow is a survivor. He threatened Batman in Batman Begins. He escaped from jail and became a crafty criminal in The Dark Knight. Then, he rose to great heights as judge, jury and executioner in Bane’s Gotham. Also, you don’t know what happens to him after the film ends. My guess is that he will continue to be the thrifty bad guy who will no doubt battle JGL’s new crime fighter.
I love this type of villain. He is not all-powerful or too snarky. He is good enough to stay alive and prosper in the craziest city in the world. He does not have any fight training or great resources. He gets by on being a Viking. Instead of slick boats and axes he uses his intelligence/insanity to survive. It says something when Ral Al Ghul the worlds supreme bad guy trusts you to do his dirty work.
His character reminded me of Loki. Loki is smart enough to almost destroy planets and rally naive armies to attack Earth. However, he never thinks his plans through and he ends up defeated but never caught. He manages to escape precarious situations and lives to fight another day. With Loki around the world will never be destroyed. It will just be annoyed. He leaves the planet killing to Thanos and Galactus. The Scarecrow takes second fiddle to The Joker and Bane.
At the end of the day The Scarecrow will never get the appreciation he deserves. However, he is what Gotham is about. A constant threat that justifies a man in a bat suit.
Share this post:
Norwegian Ninja (2010)
MY CALL: This is a risky blend of odd, stylistic comic devices that didn’t work for me at all. However, risky movies are for risk-taking movie-goers. So give it a try if you’re a fan of the ridiculously different. For me, this movie was an intolerable “F” and I consider that I like all sorts of all genres. IF YOU LIKE THIS, WATCH: I have no idea. Maybe Buckaroo Banzai or Flash Gordon? They strike me as similarly ridiculous. WHAT TO WATCH INSTEAD: Simply something else. Anyone looking for comedy and martial arts should clearly be turning to Jackie Chan classics or Kung Fu Hustle. Even the lousy Kung Pow was better than this in my opinion.
Like a middle school health class video, Norwegian Ninja is way off-kilter but delivered with a straight face. Arne Treholt and his team of pasty ninjas live on an uncharted island and wage “invisible” war to protect Norway’s way of life. They’re well funded as well, with underwater snowmobile-looking crafts which make them impervious to “physics” (e.g., water resistance, pressure, the bends, buoyancy).
In the spirit of Monty Python the ninja force’s island lair is a diorama model and it is guarded by a feng shui force field produced from well-placed foo lion statues. But steering clear of Monty Python is the extremely dry delivery of what is meant to pass as humor. I love stupid movies. But I had difficulty enjoying this. Attempts at making Arne appear amusingly talented fail (for my taste). He adroitly throws cigarettes to his mouth, he throws a ninja suit and dresses it onto someone as part of the throw, and appears before people with gratuitous bursts of ninja smoke. I find myself moaning. The fighting is about the most painful part, not even so bad that it’s good, and there’s not much action at all.
Don’t let this movie or my review scare you away from other risky, uniquely stylistic Norwegian releases like Rare Exports: A Christmas Tale (2010), Thale (2012, upcoming), Trollhunter (2010) or Dead Snow (2009). And don’t let me scare you away from Norwegian Ninja. I hated it and will never sit through it again, but a lot of people would say that about The Human Centipede (2009)or Tokyo Gore Police (2008)—which I really liked. This movie took some big risks and I can appreciate that. So if you consider yourself an adventurous movie-goer who seeks hidden gems among foreign and straight-to-DVD flicks, then maybe consider this oddity as a chance to find your new favorite flavor—even though it left a foul taste in my mouth.
At worst, it is a great out-of-left-field candidate for a drinking game.
Share this post:
Trailer Talk: Man of Steel and Skyfall
Hello all. Mark here.
There are a couple big films coming out and the MFF crew had a few things to say about them.
Man of Steel
Tony 9.5: This is going to be an instant classic. Even though this particular trailer could be a commercial for “Deadliest Catch”
Mark: How pissed would you be if you were a captain on a crab fishing boat and you found out Superman worked on your boat and didn’t use his powers?
Tony 9.5: If Nolan wasn’t producing it, I don’t think fans would give it much chance, I know I wouldn’t.
Mark: I am happy that Nolan is producing this film and keeping Snyder in check. His popular films have been remakes and adaptations. His latest (and huge) blemish is a film with robots, dragons and scantily clad women that managed to be boring….
O’Lasavath: I have nothing snarky to say about this. I’m really excited for this movie.
Mark: I am happy that Michael Shannon is the bad guy. He is probably the only human who could make Superman a little intimidated.
John: I thought this trailer was for a remake of The Perfect Storm all the while thinking “that dude looks like the guy playing Superman.” I was happy, but confused, that this was a Superman ad.
Mark: Tim Burton was planning on making a Superman film with Nic Cage. This is what that film would have looked like.
John: I am certain that there is no way–none at all–that you could possibly ever overpost this glorious clip.
Mark: Any chance I get to include Nic Cage gallivanting around the woods whilst in a bear suit I take
John: I’d like to see Joe Manganiello as Superman. Or is America not ready for a dude who just played “Big Dick Richie” with a Big’n’Tall supersavers card saving damsels and small children from dangerous falls? Hey, kid. Grab a hold of this! [followed by the sound of uncoiling] Hold on tight
Mark: People would still like that more than Superman Returns.
Skyfall
Mark: Who should be Bond after Craig hangs up his suit? Fassbender, McGregor, Tatum, Renner, Bale, Hardy, Bloom, Hemsworth or Downey Jr.?
Sweet Sugar: If anybody says JGL, it will be jab city.
O’Lasavath: Rowan Atkinson
John: I think Hardy has the best combination of age (for his franchise durability) and British-ness.
Mark: I’d love to see Channing Tatum get the role for two reasons.
1. Former Tampa stripper makes good.
2. I love to hear the UK reaction
John: Really like Tatum. But, like you, I’d be entertained by the nuclear fan fallout as well.
Mark: Maybe the movie could be about an evil producer (Sean Bean) looking to cast an American (Adam Sandler) to play 707. the famous English movie spy. James Bond has to stop the film from being made before the film causes mass riots and anarchy……………………………. It would still be better than Quantum of Solace.
Sweet Sugar: Instead of special gadgets, the Tatum Bond dances his way out of dangerous situations. And instead of a tuxedo, he just wears a bow tie and no shirt.
Dance like this? At :27 seconds.
Or like this?
I just like this clip
Mark: Christopher Nolan wants to direct a Bond film. Here is what we can expect
1. Michael Caine as Q
2. 1,700 monologues
3. Cillian Murphy as Bond and his evil twin Steve (awesome)
4. Marion Coitilard as a femme fatale.
5. Guy Pearce with short-term memory committing terror with none of the guilty memories.
This hypothetical list has become pretty sweet
Share this post:
John’s Horror Corner: The Nest (1988), Hollywood has only once yielded a better killer cockroach movie
MY CALL: Not to be confused with the completely dissimilar The Nesting (1981), this is a vermin gone monstrously wrong flick that starts out slow but ultimately does well for itself and gorehound horrorfans. While you’ll never see the scene depicted on the provocative DVD cover, this was a respectable and surprisingly nudity-free Roger Corman flick that really deserves a chance. After all, Hollywood has only once yielded a better killer cockroach movie (i.e., Mimic). [B-] IF YOU LIKE THIS WATCH: Humanoids from the Deep (1980), Of Unknown Origin (1983), Gnaw: Food of the Gods II (1989), Slugs (1989), Piranha 3D (2010), The Thing (2011).
It’s tourist season in a New England fishing town and, just like in Jaws (1975) or Piranha 3D (2010), the people are very concerned about their island community’s tourist season revenue. But Sheriff Tarbell’s (Robert Lansing; Empire of the Ants) recent missing person reports are becoming less than routine when roaches start killing people—after they tired of killing rats, cats and dogs, of course.
His old flame who just got back in town, Beth (Lisa Langois; Deadly Eyes (1982), Phobia (1980)), stumbles across a strange research prospectus and, like anyone cast in a cheap horror flick, investigates on her own. Near the town, she finds an old research site. Who’s research?
Kicked out of MIT for conducting illegal experiments, Dr. Hubbard (Terri Treas; The Terror Within (1989), House IV (1992)) was working on making a roach that would eat other roaches. I liked her from the start. She handles an oozy animal corpse like it’s no big deal and uses a live cat as “bait” in a roach trap—doesn’t end well for the cat. Just like in Humanoids from the Deep (1980), Dr. Hubbard knows far more than she tells the townspeople. There’s always someone who knows but doesn’t share the knowledge to save lives…ever since the days of Alien (1979) all the way to Prometheus (2012).
“Why are these fire extinguishers so damned ineffective?”
What Hubbard calls a Periplaneta hybrid has a “remarkable capacity for adaptation.” They become immune to chemical agents over the span of 15 minutes of running time. So evacuate, right? No. Dr. Hubbard has “everything completely under control” and thinks she can do it another way. These roaches are regular size but can bite through heavy duty rubber gloves, make giant slimy cocoons, and with every generation they evolve into more dangerous, chemically resistant, and intelligent roaches than their progenitors. These roaches start working together to eliminate their human pests and will even cut off the electricity to do it (which reminds me of the domestic nightmare rat pest from Of Unknown Origin).
All in good fun, these roaches instantaneously delete flesh and body parts on contact and, at one point, a guy sinks into them as if he were sinking in quicksand or, perhaps, a meat grinder. The fun really starts when we learn that they “become” what they eat. We meet a roach-cat hybrid-thing that looks like a skinned cat with antennae and mandibles leaping about and trying to kill people (reminiscent of The Thing). And a guy goes through an elaborately gross transformation and is turned into a grotesquely gored up, skinless, roach-human zombie hybrid which, with a strong but much less poetic nod to The Fly (1986), is killed by a shotgun to the head at point blank by a loved one.
![1988 Voyage au Bout de l'Horreur AKA The Nest - BDRip 1080p [RpK]_mkv_snapshot_01_22_25_[2014_02_08_00_38_51]](https://moviesfilmsandflix.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/1988-voyage-au-bout-de-lhorreur-aka-the-nest-bdrip-1080p-rpk_mkv_snapshot_01_22_25_2014_02_08_00_38_51.jpg)
So bad! You’ve gotta’ love it!
The “queen” roach is a ridiculously macabre masterpiece of combined human corpses, some mandibles, and I don’t even know what else.
I hope that last paragraph sold you. It sure would have worked on me. If you enjoy gore then you’d be stupid to skip this delicious flick.
SCIENTIFIC SIDEBAR: A few pieces of nonsense to dismiss. 1) This movie features many unrelated genera (and, by extension, species) of cockroach—Periplaneta (Blattidae), Gromphadorrhina, Blaberus (Blaberidae). 2) The town’s entomologist diagnoses oothecae (roach egg cases) as roach droppings even though the producers used real handfuls of oothecae as props. 3) Roaches do not have queens. 4) If a roach eats a cat and then lays eggs, I am almost certain that it will take longer than overnight before a mandibled, skinless, roach-cat hybrid-thing attacks you.
Here are a couple of less successful movie posters used to market this movie…
The one above just sucks. The one below looks like they’re trying to make you think this is like The Thing.
Share this post:
John’s Horror Corner: Deadgirl (2008)
MY CALL: A coming of age tale gone wrong is presented in this alternative zombie film which casts an unsettling mood while taunting moral limits. The violence is hard to watch–unlike much modern horror–as it should be, and the most horrific acts of the film are appreciably implied more than shoved down our throats like most cheap shock cinema. IF YOU LIKE THIS WATCH: If you seek another “real film” of a horror then turn to The Living Dead Girl (1982), another film which appears to be nothing more than an exploitation-flick at face value but manages to tell another, very different, moral story. SIDEBAR: Not to be confused with The Dead Girl (2006).
Right away we are introduced to some high school delinquent—Rickie (Shiloh Fernandez;
Red Riding Hood, upcoming reboot of The Evil Dead) and JT (Noah Segan; Cabin Fever 2). Bored while skipping school, they trespass their way into an abandoned mental hospital, drink, smoke and vandalize; essentially earning themselves an unfortunate fate by any horror standard. Wandering unadvisably deep into the unsafe building they make their way to a long rusted-shut room in the lower corridors in which they find “a dead girl.”
The dynamic between Rickie and JT is decently played. Although besties at initial face value, this thin veil is quickly drawn when JT becomes violently possessive of their “dead girl.” Naked, gagged, restrained and wrapped in plastic on as gurney—oh, right, and in a room rusted-shut and years (if not decades) separated from the world—the girl shows indications of somehow being alive. After some destitute acts, the moral bankruptcy of both boys becomes apparent, even if Rickie maintains the slightly higher moral ground throughout the story. Interestingly, we also learn that this girl seemingly can’t die.
As the mute “dead girl,” new-comer Scream Queen Jenny Spain produces some truly awkward, hauntingly pain-wracked, even quite disturbing (when not brilliantly menacing or unnerving) expressions. We find everything from hatred and fear to utter pandemonium in her eyes. On the down side, the film’s supporting roles are weak, even unnecessary. While many scenes take place at the boys’ high school or home, this could have been presented much more effectively as an extended one-act since all of the significant character development occurs, or could occur, in the abandoned mental hospital. However, the inclusion of the Joann character (Candice Accola; The Vampire Diaries) did, in fact, make for some interesting scenes that could not have been established with a one-act.
You need to check out this chick’s Scream Queen page. You can tell she wouldn’t be bad looking when she isn’t in “Deadgirl” make-up. But you wouldn’t expect her to be the reveleation that she is.
Given a circumstance that couldn’t possibly occur, this film examines sadism and temptation to the extreme. This serves as the most realistic approach to an undead movie I’ve ever seen, but includes psychological aspects that genuinely make a real film of it—even if presented with speaking parts that are heavily eclipsed by the story concept and the impressive, desperate emotions of “the dead girl.” Really, this is a great (though very sick) idea delivered—because of the maturity of the main characters—somewhat immaturely with an appropriate but unsurprising ending. But it is not without disturbing images, a new approach on questioning moral limits, and an alternative take on the undead. In that respect, this film was a unique success.
This strangely transitions from serious, disturbed and depraved, to borderline satirical. But with writer Trent Haaga and his long history with humorous exploitation cinema and Troma films, this shouldn’t be surprising. The inexperience of the directors is in some ways evident; inexperienced, but clearly proficient and with a gift for weaving this dark tone. But overall I’m surprised by the quality of the product, one which employed frequent nudity almost entirely for eerie mood setting above gratuitous presentation. Speaking of which, but not to objectify, why on Earth haven’t I seen Jenny Spain in anything after 2008? If someone didn’t see she was fantastic, then they couldn’t have been paying very close attention to the film or her character.
If you consider yourself any form of horror fan, then you simply must see this. Everyone has their own claim to why some movie is special or unique or what have you, but these directors and Jenny Spain have birthed a most graceful approach to the macabre while challenging our notions of youthful desire, jealousy and obsession.
CRITICAL ACCLAIM: At the 2010 Fangoria Chainsaw awards Deadgirl was nominated for Best limited/Direct to Video, Best Supporting Actor for Noah Segan, Best Screenplay for Trent Haaga and Best Make-Up/Creature FX for Jim Ojala.
Share this post:
The Hof had long ago put me on assignment to review the Ong Bak trilogy. The Hof’s take was that “It pretty much goes the same way as The Matrix and Pirates of the Caribbean trilogies. First one is great, Second is ok (if you fast forward through story), Third is soul crushing.” Enjoy the review and stay tuned for reviews of Ong Bak 2 and Ong Bak 3.
MY CALL: When a martial arts movie does not deliver something totally new to your eyes, then you wasted your time and money and were most likely a victim of an over-hyped trailer. In a world where some of us grow tired of the same old kick flicks Ong-Bak is the fleck of gold you pray to find amid weather-worn pebbles and sand in your sifting pan. See this, then see The Protector, which I think is even better. [A-] IF YOU LIKE THIS, WATCH: The Protector (2005), Chocolate (2008), District B-13 (2004; but NOT the sequel).
This is the movie that unleashed Tony Jaa upon the world as a star rather than a stunt man. In clothes Jaa may look like a 15-year old school boy. But he fights like a wiry-muscled rabid Outbreak monkey and tumbles like a Soviet gymnast as he displays his utterly savage mastery of elbow blunt force trauma to the head. Jaa seems little different from his Hong Kong kung fu counterparts with a name (which is sometimes silly) for every technique. He plays a young lad named Ting, who was recently awarded some sort of village defender title as a result of covering himself with mud, racing other villagers up a tree in a capture-the-flag race, and pushing a few guys thirty feet to the ground like some teen bully who went to school with “The Situation” and Pauly D in Jersey.
We know we have a movie story when some bad guy steals the head of Ong-Bak (a Buddha statue). Ting volunteers to recover the stolen head armed with his muay thai skills, a vial of stale herbs and a crumbled up sandwich bag of cash (which is demonstrably the combined wealth of the entire village, whose poverty was way oversold). Ting starts by locating his city-convert cousin, Humlae, who makes a living as a small-time crook. Humlae quickly steals Ting’s “save Ong-Bak” cash stash and runs off to make some bets at the local fight club. Followed by Ting, Humlae wastes no time fooling Ting into the fighting ring where apparently American Spring-breakers are making bets. By the way, this fight club is owned by our resident Ong-Bak-head-stealing bad guy, a wheelchair-bound geriatric with an electronic voicebox who smokes through a stoma hole. Classic!
“Yeah! In the face!”
The movie takes a while to build momentum, but when some loan-sharks come looking for Humlae things get really fun with a chase scene in the city. After an impressive array of very creative hurdles over and through various moving obstacles, Ting further wows us with yet more jaw-dropping acrobatics. I’ve seen Jackie Chan do a couple of serious stunts over the course of a whole movie. But Jaa matches Jackie’s whole movie stunt quota in a few minutes during this chase. The choreographers and set designers must have worked together very hard to weave this obstacle course. For me, the “holy shit” moment struck when Jaa did an aerial cart-wheel between two panes of glass. Contrary to Chan, we see little humor. But there is one priceless moment that I don’t want to over-explain, so I’ll just give you three words: “Knives for sale.” Good timing and brutal irony give this single grinning clip of the movie a solid Bugs Bunny/Road Runner flair.
Jaa can execute stunts like no other.
Yes. He DID just leap through a three-foot coil of barbed wire.
(Ong-Bak chase scene clip that includes the above and below images in action)
And yes. Jaa “could” have gone around this. But aren’t you glad he didn’t?
Jaa’s level of integration of free-running and acrobatics with martial arts is rare and, frankly, he makes it look effortless. Stunts that I’ve never seen before are in no shortage in this movie. (I’m saying that after watching Jackie Chan movies for more than twenty years!) Like a good martial arts movie, it’s all about the stunts and fight scenes and we are only occasionally inconvenienced with the reminder of Ting’s duty to recover the Ong-Bak head.
The major fighting action takes place back at the fight club where we meet combatants with goofy names like Ali, Big Bear, and an ex-boybander who looks like Howie (seriously) from the Backstreet Boys. The boybander is named Mad Dog for his predisposition for getting “smashy” with random, improvised weapons. Here we see the bulk of the combat choreography, which is more brutal than carefully planned. Rather than having long technique exchanges with elaborate striking, blocking and counterstriking, we instead see a more abrupt, painful execution of elbows and knees to the head and chest. Then flying knees to the chest and double elbows drilling down on the skull.
Here’s one of the crazies that Jaa faces more than once in the movie. Look at this guy. He has the best damned “crazy eyes” I’ve ever seen! And, yup, that’s a saw he’s using to attack Jaa.
The third act (acts one and two being the chase and fight club, respectively) takes place at a cave lair of sorts where Jaa showcases his ability to perform tandem targeted 540’s, a couple of 720’s, and some 540 and 720 horizontal corkscrew-flair check-kicks. When you’re watching the last 20 minutes of the movie and see a whole lot of acrobatic movies you can’t name, that’s what those are.
Tony Jaa is the greatest gift that martial arts has given us in a long time. Watch this movie!
Stay tuned for a warning about the sequels.
Movies, Films & Flix 