Ong Bak 2&3
The Ong-Bak Trilogy: My, how far the mighty may fall.
By John Leavengood
MY CALL: I feel like Mark really had the right idea. His comment: “First one is great, Second is ok (if you fast forward through story), Third is soul crushing.” They really do run the gamut from greatness to wretched. Absolutely see the first one, about which I raved (https://moviesfilmsandflix.wordpress.com/2011/04/07/ong-bak-2003/), maybe skip part 2 even if you loved the first, and outright blacklist part 3. No joke. Not even on a rainy afternoon.
FOLLOW-UP: After seeing the first, and only the first, Ong-Bak, please continue your Thai action-cinemacation with The Protector (2005) and Chocolate (2008) (https://moviesfilmsandflix.wordpress.com/2011/02/25/chocolate-2009-not-the-charming-2000-chocolat-starring-johnny-depp/), then move on to District B-13, which is a French action movie. Oh, yeah. French action movies are a thing now.
I don’t know where to start. I enjoyed transcribing my chicken-scratch notes about the original, but these sequels really just unloaded a shotgun in the kneecap of my soul. If Ong-Bak is “the fleck of gold you pray to find amid weather-worn pebbles and sand in your sifting pan”, then part 3 is the unexpected baby birthed in Wal-Mart by a woman who had no idea she was pregnant. I’m just going to give you the bad news in chronological (i.e., worsening) order starting with Ong-Bak 2…
This movie was way different from part one. Although I was considerably less entertained by this sequel, some aspects of it were in fact superior to the original. The cinematography was, well, considered. In the original, only the opening scene seemed to receive any artistic perspective. In part 2, this was clearly a priority and was well-complemented by set design. Part 2 also must have left its “how to look like a Hollywood movie” checklist at home, because there was no terribly-executed taxicab chase scene (perhaps the only bad part of part 1). No sir, this sequel was authentic, gritty, primal, and dated. Yes dated. Because this sequel is a prequel in which Tony Jaa plays Tien.
Tien, a would-be prince, was stripped of his nobility when his parents were murdered and he lived on the streets where he was trained in dirty combat and thievery. When his parents’ killer, the current monarch, holds a competition for his servants to prove who serves him most efficiently, Tien takes the opportunity to enter so that he can win, get close, and have his revenge.
This is where you’re probably wondering what happened to Ting, Jaa’s character from part 1. Good question. Perhaps Tien is a past-life Ting or an ancient ancestor who was one of the first defenders of Ong-Bak. This isn’t really explained for us. Why? No clue! Also somewhat confusing is how much culture is shoved down our throats while we watch this. Architecture, fine. Elaborate wardrobe, okay sure. But long dance scenes? That’s going too far. I grabbed a movie which no one can deny would be in the sub-genre of “martial arts movies”. The presence of authentic culture tactfully woven into set design and the like is good movie-making. Adding this long dance scene made me think I was seeing footage from the Travel Channel.
But why is this happening to us? What changed since part 1? The answer: Tony Jaa co-directed the sequels. Love Jaa for his physical prowess, but damn him for loving his home country’s culture and history so much. [SIDEBAR: Check out my review of Devil. It’s the same scenario reversed. Take away Shyamalan’s right to direct, but still let him come up with the story idea, and you have a decent movie. Let Jaa knee and elbow people into smithereens, but keep him away from the damned script!]
Part two had very entertaining combat. Some people might even argue that it is more different than inferior to part 1. While I respect the opinions of others, that doesn’t mean they’re any less wrong. The flashy moves were fun, with a streetfighting dirtiness at times, but I miss Jaa’s roots—back before he made you sit through sluggishly-paced courtship rituals. If you’re going to watch this, watch it before part 1.
* * * * * * *
Dare we move on to Ong-Bak 3? Okay then.
The movie opens with an imprisoned Tien. He’s about to endure his public execution, which I’m sure is 100% historically accurate for that era: a 12-man bo-staff beatdown squad. This initial action sequence is good, yet somehow the choreography and pace of combat continues to change from the first movie, to the second, to this one. Why is he changing things? You know the old saying? If it ain’t broke…keep your $%&@ing hands off!!!
Part two had some lengthy lulls without combat (but oooooh, the culture). I hope you’re ready for more downtime. After the nifty chain-fighting action sequence in the opening scene, Tien needs to heal. Set your cooking timers for about 20 minutes. Okay, now that he’s healed, set your timers for another 10-20 minutes while he continues to do stuff other than kicking ass. If you stayed awake through all that, then you now know that way too much effort was spent on a really lame plot. Maybe the plot wouldn’t be lame if this was a proper period piece. But it’s not. It’s an action movie! If Jaa wanted to direct a cultural saga, then the first two words of the movie title damn-well shouldn’t have been Ong-Bak!
I think Jaa needs to stop thinking of his childhood and start thinking of Van Damme before he gets involved in another action movie with a “plot”. He needs a little less dance and meditation, and a little more Kickboxer (which also takes place in Thailand but doesn’t have a slow-paced plot that makes me want to eat the smoking end of an assault rifle). Van Damme danced and meditated in Kickboxer. But when he danced, he did it drunk at bar and then got into a bar fight. When he meditated, he was under water or did some mad-crazy flexing Tai Chi. Here is all of the text the script needs before it goes to a screenwriter: Brother trains other brother. Other brother fights, loses, gets paralyzed. Trainer brother is sad, sits by hospital bed, then finds trainer for himself. “Training montage”. Awesome revenge fight. That’s 28 words and no plotty intermissions between fights.
Okay, back to Ong-Bak 3. After the opening fight and an eternity of uneventful healing and training, we have a long combat finale which is ignited when Tien sees the bad guys piling dead slaves three-high and mistreating elephants. To a Thai warrior this must be as bad as when a small animal-abusing teenager has premarital sex while recreationally abusing drugs when Jason Voorhees or Freddy is in town. This is Jaa’s chance to redeem himself! Unfortunately, for the grandiose number of opponents Tien faces, the choreography is rather uninspired—like the rest of this movie was.
I’m a bit of a wine snob, so here’s a themed final analogy comparing Ong-Bak to Ong-Bak 3. If these movies were both wine bouquets, then Ong-Bak would be a rich, spicy, black and boysenberry fruit-bomb, with notes of plum and chocolate, and an overtone of lingering smoky mesquite. Ong-Bak 3 would be like someone dumped five-day old Chinese food in the bottom of a birdcage.
Don’t watch this.
Share this post:
Animated Football list: Drawing Up the Best Plays
Animated Football list 2011
Amazing list! My cousin Jonny Moore played D1 football for UTEP and regularly comments on the blog. I’m glad I let him make this list.
The 2011 Animated Football Team is a blend of size, strength, speed, attitude and work ethic to form the most elite fantasy football team ever assembled.
Head Coach:
Charles Francis Xavier (X-Men)
Strengths: Two words….. Mind Control
Weaknesses: Does not know a thing about football
Defense: 3-4
CB: The seagulls from Finding Nemo
Strengths: Pick City! With their speed and attitude of “mine mine mine”, makes them uncanny in their ability to go up and contest jump balls.
Weaknesses: Weak bone structure and lack strength; well…..they are seagulls.
CB: Mighty Mouse
Strengths: Super hero speed and strength. Plays with a chip on his shoulder using lack of size as motivation.
Weaknesses: Disease carrier.
Security
SS: Goku (Dragon Ball Z)
Strengths: He’ll go Super Saiyan 13 on your ass. His combination of hard hitting and no shit lightning fast speed are the perfect combination to counter any challenger.
Weaknesses: Despite popular believe Goku doesn’t speak English. This creates a language barrier between him and his teammates. He stated in an interview “chang chong pang chang paaaaaaai”. Translation, “The voice over in the American version was horribly done”.
FS: Pepe Le Pew
Strengths: Surprisingly, Pepe has a nose for the football. Has great passion for the game.
Weaknesses: He is French and is known to hang out with and be a huge inspiration to Ben Roethlisberger.
OLB: The Genie (Aladdin)
Strengths: You get 3 wishes!
Weaknesses: Everyone on the team is exhausted trying to keep up with Robin Williams’ “comedy”.
OLB: Gaston (Beauty and the Beast)
Strengths: Great athlete . Brother of Brian Bosworth giving him access to all the steroids one could want.
Weaknesses: A total douche bag. Everyone hates this jack ass.
MLB: The Thing (Fantastic Four)
Strengths: NO ONE is running between the tackles, PERIOD.
Weakness: No flexibility in hips due to being made of stone.
MLB: Megatron (Transformers)
Strengths: Decepticons are perfect to put on this side of the ball, especially Megatron. Strong and hits hard.
Weaknesses: Needs more heart. Bent on world domination….not football domination.
DT: Shrek
Strengths: Defensive tackles are the meanest position in all of sports. This is especially the case in a 3-4 defense where the battling of double teams on every team requires the right combination of size, strength and attitude. Shrek possesses every one of these.
Weaknesses: Horrible hygiene and refuses to move out of his home in the swamp. Teammates often complain about the smell.
DE: Kronk (The Emperors New Groove)
Strengths: Great at getting up field to disrupt passing lanes. Most people don’t know this but Kronk played D-end for UCLA earning all conference honors his sophomore and junior year. Ruled ineligible his senior year due to grades.
Weaknesses: Not smart at all. Fortunately, not a lot of thinking is needed to play D-end.
DE: Tasmanian Devil (Looney Tunes)
Strengths: You think Dwight Freeney has a good spin move?
Weaknesses: Tasmanian Devil’s are endangered leaving a gapping hole in the depth chart.
Pro Offense:
QB: Bugs Bunny (Looney Tunes)
Strengths: Natural born leader. Arm strength is questioned but makes up for this with his decision making. Great at deceiving the Blitz by convincing them that it’s not football season.
Weaknesses: Needs to put on weight and add strength but Bugs will only eat carrots.
RB: The Road Runner (Looney Tunes)
Strengths: Speed kills. Due to avoiding Wile E. Coyote’s traps the Road Runner has developed great skills which translate into running great routes out of the back field, running in open space, great ball carrier vision and outrunning Acme rockets.
Weaknesses: Whenever asked if he understands, the roadrunner always replies with “beep beep”. No one knows what this means.
FB: Manny (Ice Age)
Strengths: A tank! Natural run blocker who is comfortable in his roll.
Weaknesses: Has trouble with ball control due to no hands and a trunk severely limiting his productivity.
TE: The purple Monstar (Space Jam)
Strengths: Antonio Gates type player. Didn’t play football in college but supreme athletic ability makes up for lack of experience. Also, surprisingly good at making opponents miss in the open field.
Weaknesses: Not football smart or smart at all. Focus is also questioned. Often caught starring in the stands and skipping while picking flowers during time outs.
WR: Dashiell ‘Dash’ Parr (The Incredibles)
Strengths: Speed to stretch the field.
Weaknesses: Immature. Often plays pranks on Goku risking his and everyone else’s life on the team.
WR: Jack (A Nightmare Before Christmas)
Strengths: Great athletic ability. Tall frame leaves room for growth. Ran a 4.41 at the combine and shined in the interview by breaking out in song and dance to win the scouts over.
Weaknesses: Doesn’t have soft hands due to being a skeleton. As a result, tends to catch the ball with his body instead of his hands.
T: Po (Kung Fu Panda)
Strengths: Great balance and footwork. Pass protection is an art of manipulating and moving your opponent’s body making Po great at protecting Bugs’ blind side.
Weaknesses: Only motivated by food often leaving Po overweight.
G: Man Bear Pig (South Park: Imagination Land)
Strengths: Half man, half bear, half pig. Great combination. You need three yards? Run behind MBP.
Weaknesses: Too many unnecessary roughness penalties after eating opponent’s DTs and LBs.
C: Fred Flintstone
Strengths: Strong hands and great footwork. Just watch his Tippy-toe bowling approach.
G: Barney Rubble
Strengths: What makes Barney so great is his chemistry with Fred. They are on the same page every play.
Weaknesses: Lacks height.
T: Popeye
Strengths: All he needs is spinach
Weaknesses: Reaching the tail end of his career with only a few years of productivity left.
Share this post:
Ong Bak (2003)
I asked Movies, Films and Flix contributor John Leavengood to write-up a review for the Ong Bak trilogy. 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 parts two and three in a couple of days.
PLEASE WATCH THE CLIP JOHN INCLUDED. CRAZY AWESOME AND FUN STUFF!
Ong-Bak (2003)
By John Leavengood
MY CALL: When a martial arts move does not deliver something totally new to your eyes, then you wasted your time and money and were 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 better. [A-]
IF YOU LIKE THIS, WATCH: The Protector (2005), Chocolate (2008) (which I reviewed), District B-13
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 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 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!
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.
(Ong-Bak chase scene clip)
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 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.
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.
Share this post:
John’s Horror Corner: Devil
Hello all. Mark Here. Read this great review then watch Devil. It deserves a chance. You will not regret it.
Devil (2010)
By John Leavengood
MY CALL: When a movie can seize our attention during the opening credits and maintain it throughout—well, we’re in for something good. An impressive score, ominous but beautiful cinematography and exquisite camerawork transform this movie from “decent” to a very different and enjoyable experience. It strikes me as well-written and well-acted by a team of underrated actors. It’s not gruesome or horrifying, but it kept me on my toes and, more importantly, kept my attention continuously. This expanded one-act is a gem in an era where moviemakers place more attention in trailer-editing than movie production. [B+ ]
IF YOU LIKE THIS, WATCH: Quarantine, same director, scarier, eerier, even less plot.
FOR THE SUPERFANS: This is the first film of three in Shyamalan’s Night Chronicles Trilogy.
Folks, let’s give credit where it’s due. If you skipped this movie just because Shyamalan’s name was attached to it then you made a mistake. I’ll start by pointing out a key difference between this Shyamalan movie and all others: Shyamalan wrote it but did not direct it. All of his other movies, which admittedly went downhill after The Sixth Sense and Unbreakable, were both written and directed by him. I’d also like to point out that the ideas for all of his movies had the potential to be great—really great. But for any movie you need not only a proven director, but the right director for the movie in question. I think they got the director right on this one: John Erick Dowdle, who directed Quarantine, the American adaptation of the Latin phenom [REC].
The movie opens with a cautionary tale about the Devil, who occasionally gathers a group of ill-fated humans to torture them one by one before stealing them away to Hell. Cut to the opening credits we see an impressive metropolitan cityscape showcased in a distorted, upside down view to set a mood of unease—or excitement for movie thrill-seekers. The score, as if architected to accelerate heart rates, compliments the visual overtones well. I am immediately on my toes, waiting to pick out the wolf-in-sheep’s-clothing before a single hits the screen.
The characters include a bereft, alcoholic detective who doubts his ability forgive, two elevator-surveillance security guards, two attractive twenty-somethings (a man and a woman), a floor security guard, a testy old woman, and a well-dressed mattress salesman. The game starts when we see the latter five step onto the elevator. From this moment on, a talented movie analyst might be auditing each character’s wardrobe for red or anything “diabolical”. But red is found on the attire of a few of them, as well as hints of red on the fabric walls of the elevator, one character’s hair, the lit buttons and the digital floor number display. Nothing is obvious, which makes random suspicions free game!
Interspersed with the director’s attempts to bait us into snap judgments as to who is “the Devil” are elevated shots of the city, some with views looking straight up or ominously down the side of their reflective, windowed surface and others shuttling through the elevator shaft. The devout, Hispanic security guard (who has been doubling as an effective narrator) chimes in with his theological fears or additional details to the story which opened the movie. As tension rises, we are left to wonder if the five on the elevator are the only people gathered by the Devil, or if the detective and surveillance security were carefully chosen as well.
Suspicions shift readily and regularly. We periodically learn new details about the characters which could be hints or red herrings. Expressions of fear, accusation, anger and disgust festoon the faces of our elevator players. In screenwriting they say that you don’t put a gun on the wall in Act One unless it’s going to fire in Act Three. Let’s just say it feels like this wall belongs to the NRA president.
This movie was fun and unique. As serial-moviegoers isn’t that what we want? Something different and enjoyable? Something that doesn’t feel like a recycled idea with a new director and different actors? If you feel the same way, then give Shyamalan a mulligan and try this movie out!
Share this post:
Die-ner (Get it?)……..actual title
Hello all. Mark here. I asked my friend VJ to write about a terrible film we watched last Tuesday. If you look at the pic above you will see the BMT crew was skyped in. VJ is on the right. BMT started in Tallahassee over a year ago and it blossomed into an epic night of badness. Megan and I may have moved but we keep the tradition alive. We have watched such classics as Sharks in Venice, Creature of Darkness and every Dolph Lundgren flick. If you look through the Bad Movie Tuesday archives you will see that many of these movies are covered. Check out Vj’s review
Die-ner (get it?)…………actual title. I wasn’t adding the (get it) to be funny
Ok for this review I’m going to go out of the ordinary and copy a real plot summary of the movie “Die-Ner”
“Homicidal Ken (Josh Grote) makes quick work of graveyard-shift waitress Rose before storming the kitchen to dispatch with cook. Ken stuffs the two stiffs in the walk-in freezer, and finds his escape thwarted by the sudden arrival of Rob and Kathy, A tense situation turns downright volatile when Sheriff Duke Purdett arrives shortly thereafter, and Ken’s previous victims come stumbling out of the freezer in search of some fresh flesh to munch on. With the zombie uprising in full-effect, Ken does his best to devise a plan that will allow him to flee both the law and death in one foul swoop.”
From reading this the movie sounds like it could have potential, but don’t let that fool you! This is Patrick Horvath’s only movie for a good reason. This is my version of the meeting that took place between Patrick and the other “filmmakers”
Random friend of Patrickhey Pat, I just found $20 on the street!
Patrick hey random friend that’s great, why don’t we use that $20 and go eat at John’s parent’s diner. (John walks in)
John-hey guys look at this Panasonic gs500 video camera circa 1995 I just bought from a garage sale.
Patrick-hey wait, $20, and a Panasonic gs500 video camera from 1995, I’ve got a great idea!!
And thus Die-ner was born.
No actual description of the movie is needed, just imagine yourself back in high school, sitting in the class you hated the most, with the teacher you constantly wished death upon lecturing to you, all while trying to deal with the worst hang over you’ve ever experienced…then multiply that by 11 and you might be able to come close to the opening scene of “DieNer.”
After what might be the worst opening scene in movie history our serial killer finally gets to work taking care of the lone waitress and turns a butter knife into a deadly throwing weapon wiping out the guy eating pie, and the cook soon after.
Quick nod to gun control…Guns don’t kill people, butter knives used as throwing knives kill people!
Enter our bickering couple.
The movie has already taken a turn for the worse…but now it makes a U-turn back to double badness. The serial killer slaps on an apron and proceeds to take the couples order! That’s right, murders three people and decides to take over for the recently slain waitress.
We get more horrible dialog from the couple for a while, and get to meet the dopey police officer. The police officer ends up having a highly heightened sense of smell. He constantly asks “what’s that smell?” I assumed he was referring to the dead bodies in the back. Now I’m no expert and I’m not on CSI, but I am fairly confident that bodies don’t start to smell two minutes after they are murdered. The serial killer uses the excuse the cook burnt something, but nothing was cooking…your guess is as good as mine.
Now what we have all been waiting for! Some mascara and Halloween costume makeup, and boom our waitress and cook have come back to life. These two acting as zombies is without a doubt the best acting done in the movie.
The only other highlight is that the serial killer somewhat resembles Ed Norton.
To sum up the rest of the movie that I was able to sit through, the dopey cop is the only one to get bit by the zombies…not sure what happens to him, assuming he dies. The bickering couple and serial killer spend a few minutes pushing the zombies with broom sticks and eventually duct tape one to the floor! After that it just became too much and the only solution was going 500 years into the future to watch Jason hack up some people from the future…if you haven’t seen Jason X it is a must watch. Everything you would expect from a Jason movie and even a few things you didn’t see coming.
One final note on Die-ner, the description of the plot I copied and pasted above says the serial killer has to find a way to flee the law and a fate worse than death. The guy is in a diner with two scared people, a cop who has had his neck ripped open by a zombie, and the zombies are either locked in a freezer or taped to the floor! Oh and did I mention he has the cops gun?! Yes, sadly gave up the butter throwing knife for a gun. This is an easily exit able situation, and yet he feels the need to stick around…
Patrick Horvath, thanks for ruining a perfectly good Tuesday night!
Share this post:
Session 9
Session 9 (2001)
BY John Leavengood
HOF’s CALL: This review was done on special request from the big guy…The Hof(meyer).
MY CALL: This movie is more about mind-teasing than story-weaving. Dreams, paranoia, voices of subconscious or insanity or ghosts or who knows, a creepy chair, flashbacks, and a group of guys who are all really efficient at keeping each other on edge stack up to fuel a barrage of red herrings. You viewers would be advised to watch this surprisingly mostly daytime-filmed creeper in the dark to keep you on your toes as you try to triage out the red herrings from the truth in this fog of madness.
It’s a nice ride, if you ask me. I give it a “B+” for a serious horror movie. I’d go higher, but the
scares didn’t make me jump. I’d even give this a “B+” as a movie in general, not just as a horror. Maybe not horror? Rather this is more of a cerebral creeper than a horror.
IF YOU LIKE THIS, WATCH: Hmmm. This is a toughie…Jacob’s Ladder, perhaps?
FOR the SUPERFANS: The director, Brad Anderson, was also responsible for The Machinist and the TV series Fringe. He’s good at paranoia and suspense.
This movie follows a hazardous materials crew on the job. In this case, the job is an historic site: a mental health facility that has been abandoned for almost twenty years. Abandoned loony bins make for good creepy settings. They’re filthy, they’re walls are decorated with schizophrenic collages, and the night security guard always has some creepy warning for whoever plans on going in. The guard warns that besides homeless squatters and vandalous punks, some of the hospital’s disturbed “residents” have tried to return to the only “home” they ever knew from time to time.
During a tour of the hospital viewers can breathe a sigh of relief that the set design, lighting and camera work are all A+ quality. During that same tour we learn that the crew leader is desperate, offering an impressive bid for the job that will get his team a $10000 bonus. I’d stick any one-week job out for that kind of bonus. I don’t care what creepy fare ensues.
We know the trail of bread crumbs has started when one of the crew (Mike) finds a box of recorded therapy sessions of a multiple-personality victim of terrible abuse. There are nine sessions, as they progress we meet new personalities, and each personality comes with an unsettling voice. He listens to them (in order) on his lunch break, after work, or for a little bit at a time when he sneaks off. As the movie progresses we learn that this crew member is a law school dropout who knows a little too much about the psychology of murder, lobotomy practices and the history of their work site.
Anyway, weird things start happening and Mike is not the only one arousing suspicion. Tension dramatically rises between two of the other crew members. Mike gets edgier, himself. The crew leader, Gordon, is getting strung out over his wife, pressures that come with recently having a child, a meeting the one-week deadline for the job. Before you know it accusations are getting thrown around like roman candles in a teenaged alley duel.
This movie has a great cast including David Caruso and Josh Lucas. Yet somehow it flew under my radar when it was released (theatrical release?). I first came across it in Blockbuster a couple years after it came out. Now, having seen it a few times, I can say that this unique creeper is something that EVERY horror/thriller fan should have on their resume. It’s SOOOOO different! While the ending left me guessing, it wasn’t at the expense of my enjoyment. I’d make it a point to check out some of the deleted scenes and director’s commentary. It’s interesting to see where the director was going with some recurring elements of this movie.
For sure, see this. It’s a must.
Share this post:
John’s Horror Corner: The Kiss (1988)
The Kiss (1988)
John Leavengood
MY CALL: For a B-Horror Movie, I’ll give this a “B”. This movie features two lovely ladies: Joanna Pacula, who played Val Kilmer’s prostitute main squeeze in Tombstone, and Meredith Salinger, who played the very cute deputy in Lake Placid. The movie was at times a little slow-paced and overdeveloped for a rather simple plot, but the production value was certainly competitive with horror movies of its time and damn does Joanna Pacula make a sexy voodoo witch! The death scenes are also pretty fun and creative. If you like 80’s B-Horror, then you’ll like this.
IF YOU LIKED THIS THEN WATCH: Lifeforce (1985)…In fact, I reference a lot of movies in this review. If you haven’t seen any of them, you probably should. Lifeforce is just the closest one in terms of genre. But, for example, The Hidden and The Re-Animator are absolute must-sees. Listen to me, kids, I’m giving you pearls, here!
* * * * * * * * * * * *
Why, why, why does all of the bad stuff in the world seem to come from the tropics? That ebola-ish virus from the Outbreak monkey, the zombie-ism-infected mutant rat thing in Dead-Alive, the nasty spider from Arachnaphobia, and now evil voodoo relics in this movie…all from South America, Papua New Guinea and Africa. Go figure, the birds of paradise must all be lethal to survive such wilds.
The movie opens in the Belgian Congo in 1963. Early on we see that a young girl’s aunt has a weird rash and a creepy voodoo-ish objet d’art. This provocative antique seems to stare at the apparently possessed aunt as she awakens her tweenie niece, Felice, from a nap with a scream-muffling stranglehold and kissing her. Kissing her 12(?)-year-old niece. Nice. After this curious act the aunt’s body looks drained (suspiciously similar to the life-drained victims of the hot, naked space-vampire from LifeForce, which was released in 1985 and features Patrick Stewart—just FYI). Contrastingly, the young niece looks quite vibrant after the molestation.
Cut to present day (1988) in the United States. Now all grown up and an aunt herself, Felice (Joanna Pacula) calls her sister out of the blue. Afterwards the sister is inexplicably scared and dies in a freak accident while window-shopping for guns. After the funeral, Felice becomes a part of Amy (Meredith Salinger) and her widower father’s life. Shortly after her arrival, Amy’s BFF gets mutilated in a freak accident involving an escalator at the mall. While snooping through Felice’s things, Amy finds a voodoo starter kit and some evidence linking her to her friend’s “attack”.
Felice seduces the father and we see that Felice, like her aunt, has a weird rash. Amy’s boyfriend, who looks like he’d be a young fourth member of Color Me Bad, catches Felice conducting a naked voodoo ritual so naturally he dies next. Meanwhile Felice’s rash is spreading—Lord knows why.
It’s really no spoiler to inform you that “the kiss” transmits a wormy parasite that uses the host body until the body is all used up, then on to the next body. Does this sound similar to The Hidden? Both of these mouth-to-mouth evil worm transmission movies were released in 1987. The major difference is that Felice, unlike the wormy alien of The Hidden, didn’t care for sunglasses and red sports cars and that she had to transmit to someone of her own bloodline.
Okay, so now I’m going to try to sell you into renting this based on a way cool aspect of the movie. If you like super-nuts, badass cats then rent this! Felice’s cat is in a few scenes in the movie and is even used as a “hitcat”. I haven’t seen a creepier cat since the broken-backed back-to-life feline of The Re-Animator. This cat was so badass that I bet it could surely hold its own against the rabbit with big pointy teeth that murdered those poor bastards in Monty Python and the Holy Grail. It’s apparently rabid, puffy, evil-looking, and has a really fun demise near the end of the movie involving a rake and a bug zapper.
If you like 80’s B-Horror, then please add this to your queue! You won’t regret it.
Share this post:
Do Not Watch by John Leavengood
DO NOT WATCH: Neighbor (2009)
John Leavengood
If you find yourself perusing the new releases at Blockbuster or sifting through your Netflix recommendations, please avoid this movie . PLEASE! This is my first DO NOT WATCH recommendation. This does not make for a good review. I’m just thinking of you. You know who you are. You’re like me. You pick random, straight-to-DVD flicks looking for little-known gems and convincing yourself all the while that it’s worth a couple lousy movies to find the underrated or so-bad-they’re-good ones. Keep doing that. Just don’t do it with this one.
This lame flick tried to combine Hostel or Saw with…something, I figure. He makes some poor efforts at making audiences cringe including applying a powerdrill through a big toe, a foot and a thigh. Our villainess, the “neighbor”, drops an earthworm on an open wound—as if anything provocative could really come of it—and rakes the flesh off a guy’s shin with the back of a hammer. I love the Hostel and Saw series, but HATE this. You don’t need a budget to make someone wince, but this director failed at both mustering a budget AND making me wince. The only part that made me cringe was the closing credits, when I reflected on what I made myself endure.
This was unexciting, uninteresting and pointless.
The only neat thing about this movie was that the star vaguely reminded me of an older version of the Glee star, Lea Michele.
MY CALL: F. F! F!!!!!!
WHAT TO WATCH INSTEAD: Hostel, even Glee, just not his.
IF YOU LIKE THIS, WATCH: Anything. If you like this you’ll like anything.
DRINKING MOVIE STATUS: I award this movie “fatal overdose” status.
Share this post:
After Life
Your favorite niche movie reviewer John Leavengood is back with a thorough examination of the of the film After Life. My girlfriend Megan and I came across this movie at Redbox. We both Like Neeson and Justin Long and we decided to have a date night involving painting, wine and a scary movie. You can imagine our surprise as this movie turned out to be nothing more than Christina Ricci in lingerie and in the buff. I came up with theory that the director grew up with a crush on Ricci and wrote a movie specifically for her. The plot is muddled and kinda slow but must have been surprisingly easy to pitch.
After Life: By John Leavengood
So I stumbled across this movie which features Liam Neeson, Christina Ricci and Justin Long, all of whom have produced quality theatrical entertainment. So why on earth have I never heard of this movie until Amazon and Netflix were offering their recommendations? This feels like a red flag. I watched anyway…
The film opens with Neeson—playing a funeral director gifted with communicative abilities with the dead in order to usher them comfortably into accepting their passing—speaking soothingly to a body whose face was apparently prepared to appear such that he just got kicked in the nuts, then died and froze in place expression and all. The tone, however, seems serious. Next scene: Cut to Ricci’s nipple and I think the movie may already be worth it. At 2 minutes and 30 seconds we have a nuts-kicked-in-goofy-looking corpse and Ricci nips! I think that earned the first star of its rating.
The movie progresses and I notice something. I know there are scream queens, but are there type-cast non-Bruce Campbell kings as well. We soon see that Justin Long intends to marry Ricci’s character, who is immediately revealed as distracted and damaged. Hmmm, does this remind anyone of a certain Alison Lohman character? It’s Drag Me to Hell all over again. If this keeps up, horror screenwriters are going to run out of actresses short enough to play opposite Long! I say this because I assume Ricci, like the previous Long-widowing Lohman, is going to die in this movie. Bah, no spoiler really. Ricci dies REALLY early in the movie. You would have read that in a synopsis online.
The pace of the movie is a bit slow, but not uninteresting, in the first half. It feels more like a book being portrayed as a movie. But books come with some intriguing fact-fare. For example, did you know that you can dream while in purgatory? Evidently so. Purgatory also seems very stressful. Ricci goes through phases where she is in denial, psychologically abusive, bargaining, depressed, a bit road-rage-y, larsonous…a bit of everything really. You can apparently go through a lot while in the afterlife interim.
Wake up call! Ricci’s breasts make an encore appearance a bit later to snap you out of the this-is-slow-but-interesting pace at about the halfway point. By this time, she has spent much of the first half of the movie in some nice red lingerie. Thanks wardrobe team!
The movie then shifts from why-am-I-here to a hostage-escape style flick to an acceptance-with-death phase. Then a series of scenes which are, again, naked-Ricci rich! Oh, wait, her wardrobe has now become no clothes at all. This “outfit” persists through the remainder of the movie. Thanks again team wardrobe for this budget malfunction. You just earned the movie its second star.
Is Ricci dead? Is she alive? This is the mystery of the movie. The ending will generate two camps among the audience. Arguments over scenes depicting artistic license from Ricci’s perspective versus that which is actually occurring in the movie fuel the confusion. I highly recommend this movie. Decide for yourself if Neeson is gifted, or just twisted.
* * * * * * * * * * * *
SPOILER ALERT:
NOW THAT YOU’VE SEEN IT…
Assuming Ricci was dead, I have a few questions about Neeson’s “gift”. Does he have rules to follow? Can he abuse this gift and have an affair with the recently-deceased cuties like Ricci? Can he keep them in this purgatory indefinitely? Ricci was able to trash his lab, steal his keys, and almost escape. Could she have seduced him? Killed him and wandered, or haunted, the area? There are a lot of possibilities here. If she tried to escape I feel that she’d have quite an advantage. I mean, she has no pulse yet magically generates energy to move her body about, pick up objects, break things, etc. She’d never get tired during a foot race. Ricci even manages to make a phone call to Long and he HEARD her! Seems to me this “gift” of Neeson’s is one hell of a liability—well, he did call it a curse later on. Is this the first time that some deadite wasn’t ready to call it quits? Get this chick to a blog and a video camera and the Ghost Hunters will have way more street cred. Neeson is missing out on a fortune!!! I mean, if some random kid can see her through a window, can’t anyone? Okay maybe the kid also has the gift.
Ricci’s capabilities as a “dead person” and Neeson’s need to pursue her attempted escapes serially lead me to suspect that Neeson is actually a serial killer utilizing heart-rate-slowing drugs acknowledged in one of the precinct scenes. Also noting the open-eyed bodies in some of his photos I wonder if they weren’t alive and slowly deteriorating from starvation…like Ricci? Why weren’t all of the photos open-eyed? Well, the guy has to have some legit business, right? But if he is a murderer, then he’s also stupid. He gave Ricci way too many opportunities. Then again, that could be a part of his mania. Some things obviously cue us that she is alive, but artistic license is a good tool for the director to deceive the audience. 1) Neeson’s injections to “relax her muscles” seem needless if she was dead. 2) Fogging up the mirror with her breath would seem impossible if she wasn’t breathing, and even if she was, her breath would not be warm if she was dead. 3) This one I’m not so sure about. But when she was clawing at the coffin…did that really happen? If it did, then we’ve cracked the case! But because it was all a part of the getting-Justin-to-get-himself-killed hysteria-plan, maybe it was a misleading device; a part of Long’s dream leading up to her rescue. But wait again, if Neeson wanted to provoke him to drive drunk, then he likely is the proposed nut case and is seeking his next client. Hold on again! Is some EMT dosing the would-be survivors. There’s just too much dirt here for Devil’s advocacy.
Oh, and was Jack (the little boy) a ghost? No. Did they set him up as one? I thought so. He had a mother who appeared as a shell of her former self, perhaps bereft, and who does not respond to her son’s words or pick him up from school. I also thought he was in one of the photos of Neeson’s past deadite clients. I guess not.
MY CALL: B/B+. No, not because of the nudity. Jerk!
WHAT TO WATCH INSTEAD: Nothing. In NO movie do you see her breasts so much.
IF YOU LIKE THIS, WATCH: Most movies of similar theme would be spoiled if I told tell you that they’re similar. Sorry.
DRINKING MOVIE STATUS: It would just be frustrating because of the pace of the movie. But it would make the T’n’A fest more fun.
Share this post:
Night of the Demons (2009)
My good friend John Leavengood is back with a review from the remake of Night of the Demons…or the fourth in the line of films. Either way it sounds like a gnarly film full of gnarly things. John is much more of a horror fan than I am. Freddy annoyed me cause he is a wimp. Jason is slow and boring. Pinhead is a Lame-O Head. However, I appreciate the genre and think some of the best and most inventive low budgets flicks have come out of it. I think of myself as more of a zombie fan though.
Thanks John.
Night of the Demons (2009)
John Leavengood
Okay, I know what you’re thinking. ..”They made ANOTHER Night of the Demons movie?”
The answer is yes. But what you may not have realized that the answer is yes twice. Most horror fanatics know about Night of the Demons (1988) and the way-fun sequel Night of the Demons 2. But when I talk to horror-junkies they are often shocked at the existence of a third installment. This one is the fourth. It doesn’t really feel like a remake, sequel or reimagining. It’s just another Night with another group of doom-drawn idiots.
We are introduced to the female leads first, most of whom are well-slutted up and looking…ample. No question about it. We’re in for some nudity. We’re also in for poor line delivery. The lack of precision in dialogue was suggestive of one-take guerilla-directing. Not that this is atypical for direct-to-DVD horror.
Next we meet Edward Furlong. He is no longer the lively, strong-willed youth from Terminator 2 or American History X, but rather clearly is in dying need of a paycheck. Looking worse than he did in the tabloids hanging on to Paris Hilton with zombie-like alcohol-induced motor malfunction we find him hungover in this movie. Whatever you gotta’ do to make rent buddy. Let’s all take a moment to act shocked that the director thought of Eddy for this role when in his first scene we find him baggy-eyed and slinking into a strip club to meet with some unsavory criminal who is in the middle of getting a blowie and is, naturally, less than thrilled to see him.
Like the other movies in the series, the catalyst is a party. The typical Halloween-horror-movie goings on are present. Spinning the same old web, the party is filled with lots of booze, some THC, and same-sex makeout sessions. Some fun costumes including a nod-to-Wrong Turn inbred hillbilly mutant with a cleaver, a giant penis, and the Jigsaw papier-mache tricycler entertain us as we are introduced to the beginnings of character developments (i.e., who dated who that’s at the party). Then the playing-it-straight, least slutty girl notices something isn’t quite right when an evil hand breaks through a bathroom mirror and tries to grab her. Begin movie? Cue evil presence? Not just yet. Must have had one to many. Riiiiiiiiiiiiiight.
Shannon Elizabeth, playing the classic Angela role, welcomes the party-goers and encourages the kind of behavior that gets you killed in horror movies. Then the police end the party and only the main players are left in the house. After being bitten by a skeleton, which strangely aroused no suspicion from the other characters, Angela is acting a bit funny. Naturally, a transformation/possession is taking place.
Now trapped in the house-with-a-history they decide to play some spin the bottle. As with previous installments of this franchise, Angela’s demonic kiss transmits a bit of demon-crazy and does so to one of the guy’s. Now what should you do with this, freshly infected dude? Uh-duh! Transmit it during a demon sex scene of course. The evil STD-toting guy then demons a chick in the @#$%…and then there were two infernal proselytes. Evidently a raging case of demon is more contagious than syphilis. Meanwhile, with no more subtlety than a desperate B-squad stripper, Angela encourages everyone else to continue drinking and tries to “get lucky” with every eligible male. When that fails, an ample, pussycat-attired coed seems to do just fine. By the way, EVERY female character is evidently bisexual—no complaints here, though.
The highlights include anal demon sex, a face being bitten off and spat to the floor, a breast being mauled, a lipstick tube being pushed inside of a breast (encored from a previous installment) and pulled out from her @#$% (the explanation of which was very funny), nipple tentacles (yeah, Species nod), and a brief demonic orgy montage. What can I say? I have to agree with one character’s assessment that these demons are “badass…they couldn’t even live by Hell’s rules”. Not that badass to the experienced horror-goer, though.
Attempts at action sequences (over 30 seconds) tend to go poorly but are thankfully low in number. The levity enjoyed from the general silliness of this movie allows me to forgive its faults. I enjoyed seeing so many recognizable faces and seeing the franchise continue. I say give this movie a chance. It’ll make you smile.
MY CALL: A typical B-horror, but less innovative. So really, like a C-/D.
WHAT TO WATCH INSTEAD: Earlier franchise installments. Parts 1 & 2 are much better!
IF YOU LIKE THIS, WATCH: The Hazing, Night of the Demons (1988), Night of the Demons 2…skip part 3 unless you’re completely taken by the franchise.
DRINKING MOVIE STATUS: Of course!
FOR THE SUPERFANS: Horror fanatics will love this: LinneaQuigley has a cameo.
Movies, Films & Flix 