John’s Horror Corner: The Hazing (2004)
MY CALL: This Night of the Demons rip-off is one of the best direct-to-DVD horror flicks I’ve seen! The actors do surprisingly well, the scenarios are fun and the effects are decent. This gets an “A+” as far as straight-to-DVD horror goes. IF YOU LIKE THIS, WATCH: Night of the Demons (1988), Night of the Demons 2 (1994), and the recent remake Night of the Demons (2009), but maybe you should skip Night of the Demons 3 (1997). Also, while demon free, Sorority Row (2009) has all the 80s campiness of these demon flicks but with an updated cast and a trucker-looking Carrie Fisher. ALTERNATE TITLE: Also released as Dead Scared, a much worse title.
The Hazing was everything that most theatrical horror releases SHOULD be nowadays—yet this movie somehow was overlooked as a solid Halloween release in 2004. What beat this movie out of a major release slot? Was it Seed of Chucky?!!? An “amusing” movie without a doubt, but far inferior to this little-known gem. It’s just upsetting.
Now I must admit: this is a “silly” horror movie. Think the Night of the Demons series (part 2, in particular), and make it a little yet MORE silly, sort of like Nightmare on Elm Street 4: Dream Warriors. But this movie is much more similar to the former, taking place in “Hack House”, a name strangely similar to the “Hell House”, “Hill House”, and “Hull House” of various other nearly identically-premised films. But you know what? I don’t care that it’s a serially violated and re-packaged premise because this time it paid off in full!

“Whoa, look, an evil-looking book”
“We should read from it!”
So a bunch of college kids are doing a scavenger hunt on Halloween. They end up at Hack House and decide to have some fun. Then weird things start happening as an evil force possesses them, one by one, using them as malevolent marionettes. The flick features cheap seductions, humorous kills, good one-liners, and the most memorable oral sex scene ever. As simple as it sounds, this movie was solid-gold awesome.

Gearing up to combat evil.
Most importantly, while this is a low budget flick, this went unnoticed after the first 20 minutes. The effects were tactfully simple but truly no less entertaining for it. The film quality, music and sound effects were in league with theatrical horror films (the ones that SHOULD actually be theatrical releases). The frequent humor was delivered with surprisingly good timing by little known, but unexpectedly good actors. Oh, and the pace of action was strong after the much slower character-developing start of the movie which, still, was rather entertaining. I enjoyed the characters a lot. Parry Shen is nerdily charming, B-horror scream queen Tiffany Shepis holds her own, Brad Dourif is creepy without make-up, and then there was Nectar Rose. This chick stole every scene!
A final note: nothing in this movie is scary, and if you jump it was due to unexpectedness and not actual fright. This is for those who love the style of horror of the movies referenced in this review. This was made to elicit laughs rather than screams.
Bad Movie Tuesday: Straw Dogs
I know why the Straw Dogs remake failed critically and financially. This film forgets about the journey and focuses only on the destination. The characters, plot and screenplay do not matter. They are all a device for good-looking people to violate other good-looking people.
I’m not going to get into the remake but I will show you two pictures that summarize the main characters.
You know exactly what will happen after looking at these pictures.
The original Straw Dogs incited rage, discussion and more rage 1971. The film starred Dustin Hoffman as a mathematician moving to Cornwall with his English wife. Hoffman wants to be the money-maker and his wife to be in the kitchen and bedroom. The only way she would agree is if he does all the male tasks. A culture clash occurs, their house is attacked, cats are strung up in closets and Hoffman puts on his Under Armour and protects his house. The film opened to mass protest and director Sam Peckinpah was blasted for the debasement of women. This film provided an important discussion and opened the same year as Dirty Harry and Clockwork Orange.
The violence was ugly. However, in the new film it is inevitable. When violence becomes predictable it loses the impact. However, people who remake films don’t understand this. They are remaking the films to be flashy junk where characters are secondary and violence is glorified.
This may seem like an odd example but I wanted to share a story. Forrest Griffin the former light heavyweight champion of the UFC wrote a ridiculous book in which he explains man etiquette (I bought it when a Borders bookstore was closing). In the book he talks how he and his meathead friends roughed up a seemingly timid nerd on the Georgia Tech campus. However, something surprising happened. No matter what they did the guy would not stop attacking them. He was a 150 pound wild man screaming “You will have to kill me!”
The situation became ugly as no matter how far they threw him he would not give up. He never stopped attacking them. They had to run into their car and drive away while a bloodied weakling chased them away.
This situation was a turning point in Griffin’s life. It proved that even the smallest man can become primal if pushed far enough. The situation was ugly, sad and unnecessary.
The original Straw Dogs was not pretty. It was a powder keg waiting to explode. The world was changing and men and womens roles were reversing. The material was timely and worthy to be explored. Peckinpah knew the time was right to push buttons.
New York Times writer Terrence Rafferty sums the button pushing well when he said:
“It was Sam Peckinpah’s nature to want to show his audience what it didn’t want to see, to make it feel what it didn’t think it could feel. When you watch his “Straw Dogs,” you come out knowing more about yourself. Or perhaps less. All you can tell for sure is that it hurts.”
Have you heard anything about the remade Straw Dogs? The film was directed by a famous film critic and stars Oscar nominated thespians, heart throbs, super heroes and television stars. A movie about rape, murder, violence, sex and manliness has been forgotten quickly.
The reason is that there are no surprises. I’d compare it to the unnecessary shot for shot remake of Psycho. You are watching ugly for no reason. If I hadn’t been writing I would have fallen asleep. My self-defense mechanism for bad remakes is sleep. The new Texas Chainsaw, Nightmare on Elm Street and Jason films had me snoring by the 30 minute mark.
The 1974 Texas Chainsaw didn’t make me fall asleep. Much like the 1971 Straw Dogs Chainsaw was edgy, dangerous and cheap. I watched it with five of my friends over ten years ago. We were a bunch of punk kids who terrorized our town (in fun ways) and always had something to say. After the film we all walked quietly to our cars. None of us said a word or thought the terror was awesome. It beat us down. We were all disturbed at the journey we had just taken. I guarantee we all checked our houses for chainsawing behemoths that night before we tried to sleep.
I’m not saying that the original Texas is a good film. I will never watch it again. However, it was effective and shut up five cocky teenagers who thought they were tough. The reason this film is still brought up in discussion is because it hurts. A tiny film had a big impact with audiences around the world.
Audience were not kind to the new Straw Dogs. The film made only $10.3 million. This is not a new trend with remakes.
The remake of The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo is underperforming at the box office. The studio was predicting huge numbers but instead were left debating if they should make the sequels (they are). One of the reasons I think it has underperformed is because the marketing stressed sex and violence. The tagline was “the feel bad movie of Christmas.” Sex and violence can only get you so far. If the two mattered than Showgirls would have been the biggest film ever. TGWTDT should have marketed the strong female lead and its unique Swedish look. The movie is good but the marketing may have kept viewers away.
Don’t watch the new Straw Dogs. The film is unnecessary. Watch the original instead. At the very least it will provide a discussion.
We did a horror movie remake and the eight finalists were films that improved upon their originals. the violence of Evil Dead 2 and The Thing are great because you are invested in the characters and care what happens to them.
.
Don’t Be Afraid of the Dark
John already wrote an earth shattering review for this film but I’ve decided to put my two cents in due to an interesting text message exchange.
Mark – “The creatures from Don’t Be Afraid of the Dark are jerks.”
John – “They sure as sh** are. But, in this economy you just do what you have to do to feed your tribe of diminutive monster fairies.”
The reason to watch this film is for the diminutive monster fairies. They are creative looking little buggers who have a neat mythology. The reason the creatures are so cool is because Guillermo Del Toro (Hellboy 1 & 2) produced and wrote this film. Del Toro’s creature effects and attention to production design are reliably stellar and the angry monsters look beautiful.
The biggest problem is this film should have been part of a spooky double-header. The premise is stretched so thin the film lags to the finish line instead of sprinting. Afraid of the Dark could have been a lean mean thrill machine instead it feels like a decent flick with too much fat. However, this remake of a TV movie tries to expand a cool story and create a neat world of monsters and mythologies. In a world of remakes you need to appreciate the people who create new creatures.
If you haven’t watched Devil or Insidious you should check them out. They are inexpensive experiments in horror. Both films succeed and look beautiful.
Trailer Talk: Red Tails
By Sweet Sugar
Man, I really hope this movie doesn’t suck.
The website and trailers say the movie was “inspired” by true events, which is scary to veterans who hold the Tuskegee Airmen in incredibly high self-esteem. I hope it doesn’t do to the Tuskegee Airmen what Michael Bay did to the Navy and the Doolittle Raid in Pearl Harbor.
The Tuskegee Airmen are some of the greatest men ever to set foot on this earth, and there’s no need to fictionalize any part of their story for the sake of an action movie. This story deserves a production on the level of Saving Private Ryan or Band of Brothers.
However, I agree that a big studio movie is long overdue. There was the Golden Globe-nominated PBS video “The Tuskegee Airmen”in 1995 starring Lawrence Fishburne that did an admirable job trying to correctly capture the historical context and obstacles they overcame.
The Red Tails trailer did give me chills, the aerial action sequences look great thanks to LucasFilm, and the casting looks solid. We could have gone without Cuba Gooding Jr. I think the studio snuck Cuba in there to try and atone for the stinker Men of Honor (2000) with Robert De Niro, which nobody watched. And the scenes with the racist Army general look painfully formulaic.
Overall, hopefully it will get people to learn more about American history. I can’t wait to see the RottenTomatoes.com results.
If you watch the movie and want to learn more about African American contributions in WWII, check out the massive logistical effort known as the Red Ball Express.
John’s Horror Corner: Witchcraft (1988), and only witchcraft could compel me to watch this movie again.
MY CALL: Only witchcraft could compel me to watch this movie again. This isn’t bad 80s horror. It’s just plain bad. [D] WHAT TO WATCH INSTEAD: Witch movies have a terrible tendency to suck. But there are a few gems out there. For children there’s the Roald Dahl adaptation The Witches (1990) or Hocus Pocus (1993), the young crowd should appreciate The Craft (1996), and the more mature will enjoy The Witches of Eastwick (1987). If you want something fun, decent and campy with that 80s feel, then you want The Kiss (1988) or Warlock (1989) and Warlock: Armageddon (1993).
After enduring this “classic” I was overcome with the urge to flee, as if such future movie experiences were avoidable as a result of previous insufferable misjudgments. This film was wowingly poor. Not unimpressive, nor mediocre, but just POOR. While I have a special place in my heart for most circa-1980’s horror series part ones, this little piece of Hell scarred me with boredom. So, here’s why you should take this to heart and NOT EVER WATCH THIS…
When you think of a 1980’s horror films what pops in your head first? Gore? Cheap scares provoked by sudden scene changes and loud sound effects? Gratuitous nudity? You’ll find none of these things here. Not only did this movie suffer a complete lack of even remotely eerie scenes, the producers didn’t even have the common decency to force some fledgling actress bare her scantily clad body. No kids are doing drugs or having premarital sex either—so, by common law of horror, no one deserves to die in this movie! (And almost no one does.)
The greatest gore effect involves two robed figures hovering over what could only be described as roadkill in a birdbath. The figures chant some incomprehensible syllables while kneading mashed organs in their hands and then <<GASP>> putting it in their mouths. This scene made me tremble no more than when I eat a poorly prepared meatloaf. The other effects, if we’re elevating them to such a descriptor, were limited to sketchy visions through a mirror that were probably meant to feel like a spooky oracle.
I suppose I could address the plot. Scene One: some people are killed. All the rest of the scenes, those people were somehow reincarnated into a mother and son (though lovers in scene one) who are obsessed with the son’s new child. Why? Well, clearly that child is a reincarnation of their unborn child when they were burnt at the stake. Oh, and this is the “child of the devil” as well. Far from compelling stuff.
So we have a lame plot festooned with poor attempts at effects, a total absence of scares, some unexplained motives, no nudity (for those of you who care), and an unsatisfying ending. Though, to the ending’s credit, it was no more disappointing than the rest of the movie.
I truly yearn for the day that we get a horror-for-the-sake-of-horror witchcraft movie that doesn’t suck. Season of the Witch (2011) was a semi-action, genre-crossover disappointment. The Blair Witch Project (1999) really wasn’t a witch movie. I really like Book of Shadows: Blair Witch 2 (2000)—but it was a “haunting movie,” really no different from a typical “house movie” (aka haunted house movie; see Haunter). The closest thing to what I’m looking for has been The Skeleton Key (2005)… but that relied on one big incantation to drive the plot. I liked it, but it didn’t feel like a witchcraft movie. I’m also not counting séance-based movies like Lo (2009).
Come on, Hollywood. This is something that has not been overdone (not well anyway). Is it really so hard to throw together a good witch story without giving it a charming Harry Potter British spin or Disney make-over? Or do I just have to sit back and watch as the Witchcraft series pelts out a dozen T’n’A-driven sequels? Really, folks! I checked online. There is a “part 13” for God’s sake! Witchcraft 13: Blood of the Chosen (2008). I am proud that I have not seen any of these 12 sequels!
Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy
Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy is a sly espionage film told with style, mood and anxiety. Tinker is a game of chess made up of world-class chess players.
This film should be a lesson on how to make an intelligent thriller. The lighting is fantastic, the script is intriguing and Gary Oldman is a gangster with glasses. I love that one of the world’s best spies needs glasses. He can see everything but needs help doing it.
The film focuses on Gary Oldman hunting down a traitor who is giving information to the Russians. The problem is finding out which master spy has flipped sides. That is like Muhammad Ali trying to find a traitor by boxing Rocky Marciano, Larry Holmes, Mike Tyson and Joe Frazier. Ali is the best but it is going to hurt.
These spies are not going to box but there will be a lot of mental and verbal sparring. They will look for chinks in the armor and the smallest of clues. I loved every second of it. I can’t wait to see it again now that I’ve absorbed the initial experience.
Have fun watching Oldman hunt.
Tinker Tailor also has three of my favorite actors playing key roles. Benedict Cumberbatch (Sherlock, War Horse), Mark Strong (Kick-Ass) and Tom Hardy (Warrior).
The Adventures of Tintin
I knew nothing about Tintin before this movie came out. All I knew that Steven Spielberg and Peter Jackson were making a movie together. They were going to forgo live action to use performance capture in order to accomplish exciting set pieces not possible with actors.
My girlfriend and I watched Tintin last night and we had a fun time. We left the theater smiling and couldn’t believe the animation we had just witnessed. I’ve never seen better animation in a performance capture film.
The problem is that nobody is watching this film in the US. It has only made $65 million at the domestic box office while it has made $269 million overseas. I would love a sequel because this is a film that features some of the best chase scenes since Indiana Jones. There is a seven minutes tracking shot that follows Tintin as he and Captain Haddock (Andy Serkis) chase a flying piece of a treasure map. My jaw dropped as I watched the inventive scene that Spielberg and Jackson dreamed up.
The movie focuses on intrepid journalist Tintin and his faithful dog Snowy as they chase down clues to find a pirate treasure. Tintin is aided by an incredibly drunk Captain named Haddock and the two Thompsons (Nick Frost, Simon Pegg). The villain is the ultra angry Rackham (Daniel Craig). Along the way they crash planes, escape ships, speed on motorcycles and punch many people.
Tintin also features one of the funniest scenes of the year between the Thompson twins and a wily wallet thief. I dare you not to laugh at the bumbling cops and confused criminal.
Watch this movie while you can. It is a total treat to behold in 3D. Enjoy, smile and smile more.
Google Reader and Organizing Your Blog Reading List
Time Saving TIP: If you have Gmail and you aren’t following your favorite blogs on Google Reader you should check it out. It is, in my opinion, the most simple and convenient way to check in with all of my favorite blogs everyday. If you have Gmail there is a link to your reader at the very top left of your screen. Once you are in your reader you just add the urls of your favorite blogs and then it pulls all new posts into the reader. Now you’ll never have to visit 20+ sites every day just to stay in the loop.
You can stay updated on everything Movies, Films and Flix.

Warrior (2011) [a second opinion]
MY CALL: MMA fighters are tough, but those who face life’s most trying dealt hands are tougher. Between the exquisitely written characters, engaging fights and solid guy-cry, I can’t remember feeling so affected…and it felt amazing. I don’t give out many A’s without caveats, but this gets an A+! IF YOU LIKE THIS, WATCH: While considerably less intense, Mark Wahlberg and Christian Bale brought The Fighter to gritty life. As did The Wrestler. Then get back to the root of it all with Rocky, Rocky IV and Rocky Balboa! CAST: Joel Edgerton (Animal Kingdom, The Thing 2011), Tom Hardy (Inception, Bane of The Dark Knight Rises, Charles Bronson of Bronson), Nick Nolte (Tropic Thunder, Hulk, Cape Fear). SIDEBAR: This is a second opinion. The Hof reviewed this movie when it was in theaters. Here’s his review.
This story follows an emotionally scarred family trio. Brendan Conlon (Joel Edgerton) is a high school physics teacher who returns to his former profession (MMA fighter) for extra money to keep his home afloat from foreclosure. When this financially desperate decision results in his suspension without pay, he has no choice but to engage in mixed martial arts full time. Meanwhile Brendan’s brother Tommy (Tom Hardy) returns home from serving with the Marines, arriving at the doorstep of his father (Nick Nolte as Paddy Conlon) and eventually seeking him out as a trainer for a grand prix MMA tournament which will recognize the toughest middleweight fighter in the world…the tournament is called Sparta!
This already has all the trappings of a good sports fighting movie. However, we soon learn that Tommy has not a warm ounce in his heart for his alcoholic father, who trains Tommy desperately hoping to find some vestige of reciprocal love in his unflaggingly resentful son. Paddy also yearns to reconnect with Brendan, who shuns his destroyed father despite the fact that one of his little girls has never met her grandfather. As if this wasn’t enough, the enmity Tommy feels for his older brother is yet more vicious than that reserved for his father.
By composition this is an anti-fight-movie, but somehow it strikes me as the greatest fight movie since Rocky! The standard formula of a boxing movie relies on several key elements, all such rules of which are broken in Warrior. 1) Extensive training scenes demonstrate the fighter’s hardship and devotion—training scenes in this film are minimal and seem more informative about mixed martial arts than demonstrative of the hardship or devotion. 2) The fighter turns to his family for support to overcome the training and insecurity of the upcoming fight—the only family under the lens here is a sundered father and sons who all turn to the fights to escape their family’s general paucity of love and forgiveness. 3) The fighter has a resistant loved one and his relationship is tested—Brendan’s wife, while clearly not a fan of the idea, makes no concerted effort or threat to keep her husband out of the ring. 4) The actual fights are few in number and serve as highlight montages, building up to post-victory catharsis—these fights are extensive, numerous, and view reel-to-reel as if complete, with most catharsis delivered “during” the fights! 5) The fighter faces an unlikeable (or at least very arrogant in the case of Rocky’s Apollo Creed) or even evil antagonist—the antagonist in this film is the Conlon brothers’ unwillingness to forgive. The single major element that the classics have in common with Warrior is that Brendan is the ultimate underdog and, like Rocky Balboa, fights from the heart. You never think he should be able to defeat his opponents, but you believe it when he does it!
While this movie is not so much about who wins the fight, it is still very much about victory. Nick Nolte plays the damaged, AA-devout, alcoholic Paddy to perfection. He drove his family apart and crumbles whenever he is reminded of the monster he once was and is horrified by the thought of becoming that monster again. He serves as the bone on which his children sharpen their fangs. Amid this loveless viciousness, this film manages to pull the audience from feeling irreparably beaten, to excited and motivated, and ultimately inspired—perhaps awestruck. The fights were thrilling, shocking and technically stunning. On the softer side, my throat tightened up more times than I care to admit and culminated in some serious guy-crying in the same five minutes that I was screaming at the screen during the final fight as if I had money riding on it. I can’t remember feeling so affected…and it felt amazing.
This movie isn’t for MMA fans, it’s for everyone. As long as everyone is old enough, make a family movie night out of it.
Don’t miss this one. Don’t you dare!
John: out!































