Does Lovely Molly suck?

A lot of people have been saying this movie is stupid, doesn't explain anything, has a confusing ending, etc. but I have to disagree. They could've easily written in your typical paranormal expert to spell everything out for the audience (like Sinister, Dark Skies, Paranormal Activity, Insidious, etc.), but instead they give you clues so you have to piece things together yourself, and at first, I was a little confused since you really do have to think for a little bit about what they show you versus what Molly thinks is happening. That said, it isn't that hard to figure out once you've seen the whole film, because the big clue is the last shot, and I won't spoil it, but it's awesome.

I'm just surprised so many people say it's not worth watching, didn't have a script, etc. That's ridiculous, because it's extremely well done with great performances, atmospheric cinematography, excellent sound design (I love the creepy feeling they establish right away during the opening credits), etc. I wouldn't say it's perfect since I like the Deputy Sheriff character a lot, but they forget about him after the first act, and I almost feel like the movie would've been better received if they didn't try to make it ambiguous to where you can interpret it in different ways when really it's pretty obvious what's true after you think about that ending (as well as a few other clues). I haven't gone to the website (or seen the extras on the DVD), but there are a ton of little videos on there to explain things too. I don't think watching those is really necessary to appreciate the film. A movie should really stand on its own in my opinion, and some will argue Lovely Molly doesn't, but I think it does (even if the director did intend for people to check out the website and look at the extras). It creeped me out a lot more than any other horror movie I've seen lately, and I would argue it's actually very smart.

Spoiler time. For anyone who has seen it, I've got to talk about the ending. I really thought the ghost of her dad came back to torture her and possess her or that she was just insane until I saw the last shot (and actually the earlier bit where Molly walks out completely nude to a demon in the woods, which really looked pretty frightening). But after seeing her sister stand at the closet and raise her hand in the same exact way that Molly did earlier, I think it's obvious Molly was possessed by a demon using the memory of her father to get to her, and that her sister was next in line at the end. You could say it was all psychological and Molly's sister went through a similar trauma, but come on, the hand motion was weird and exactly the same. Plus, of course, Molly taped horse heads over her father's face in the photo album. Anyway, I think the idea of a demon using something like that to get to a person is very creepy and clever writing on the part of the filmmakers. It shows how the demon could really control Molly and play off her fears and past.

Read more »

Sinister is perfect until...

(spoilers throughout so don't read any of this if you haven't seen the movie yet)

... the ghost kids start running around in slow motion. That is ridiculous. Actually, the first one is a little shocking, but then they go overboard and show them everywhere with Ethan Hawke searching the hallway. It's beyond stupid. You don't have to explain why there are sounds all over the house. It's scarier when we don't know. It's a shame too, because I love the look of Mr. Boogie (that name sounds so stupid when you type it, but it makes sense in the film since a kid came up with it) and the home movies aka the murder tapes are extremely well done with some great sound design (I love the lawn mower bit). But for me, it all falls apart at the end. The reveal of the kids doing the actual killings is silly. Mr. Boogie is far more frightening than the children. The Exorcist is the only movie that made me afraid of a kid, and Regan didn't look or sound like a child anymore. I hate it when they try to make a little boy or girl scary. It's more phony and absurd than anything. Of course, if it was real life, it'd be completely different, but almost always in a film, it looks dumb like they're trying way too hard. I've read some other reviews where people complain about the setup (author recklessly moves his family into a home where people were murdered in the backyard), but I can buy that if he's really, really desperate. Plus, his wife said he did something similar before. I just hate the ending. I'd still recommend it since a lot of the movie is excellent with some great tension and atmosphere, the performances are good, the cinematography is outstanding, etc. But as soon as they show the ghost kids everywhere, it started to lose me, and then it just got worse and worse from there.

Read more »

How is Wrong Turn 2 so good?

I didn't care much for the first film. I was excited to see it because of Stan Winston's involvement (producer and FX studio), but I ended up very disappointed. Didn't care for the characters or story, the cannibals weren't scary or well designed, etc. It was easily forgettable so when it came to the sequel, I had no interest. Then I saw a clip online of the opening scene, and I was impressed. After I watched the whole film, I couldn't believe it. Not only did I like it, I loved it. The premise sounds so stupid. Like Halloween: Resurrection, it's about a reality show, but unlike that awful exercise in pain, Wrong Turn 2 is smart, well-directed, and unpredictable. Right near the beginning, you get one of the leads wearing a Battle Royale shirt. That's your first sign (aside from the excellent opening), that you're in good hands.

Spoilers. Usually, in a film like this, Mara is your final girl. She is set up as your typical lead: sympathetic and innocent (cheated on by her boyfriend), shy at first but with an inner strength, etc. So when she gets brutally fuckin killed by ax to the head 39 min in, it's quite a shock. The filmmakers knew what they were doing. They even have the cannibals tie Mara's body to the hood of their truck to rub it in. Next up, Dale Murphy played perfectly by Henry Hollins. Again, this movie toys with your expectations. An awesome character like Dale would usually be butchered early on, leaving with you a bunch of dimwit annoying teenagers you couldn't care less about. Just when you think that is about to happen here, Dale escapes and blows away a cannibal with a shotgun. It's a badass scene and one the audience can cheer at. Plus, only a few minutes in, you get Dale berating an idiot about not stereotyping all the people who grew up in that area since Dale was raised two counties from there. Obviously, the filmmakers know how dumb a film like this can be (they even mock how all reality shows are the same), but they use that to their advantage, making something incredibly fun and exciting out of it. Even the opening that has your typical moron not paying attention and hitting someone with their car is done exceptionally well. The actual part where she looks down at her phone and then hits the pedestrian is all one continuous shot so it's a lot more effective than if they just had a ton of cuts. Then you don't know the guy she hit is a cannibal, and they don't reveal that until he attacks her. Joe Lynch really did a phenomenal job directing this. I love how they tie in the paper mill, showing something like this isn't entirely impossible, and you actually meet the cannibal family's normal-looking father. And the black guy actually lives! End spoilers.

They really made an outstanding horror movie with great characters, intelligent writing, a lot of fantastic practical gore FX (only one shot of CGI I remember), and you even get some nudity. It's a million times better than the original, and I'm sure it blows away the fifty other sequels that have followed (stop already... seriously). Even if you hate the first Wrong Turn, you should really see this.

Read more »

I thought I'd love The Collection, but I don't.

The Collector was pretty damn good so of course, I was looking forward to the sequel (yes, I still love a good sequel... Terminator 2, The Dark Knight... even if they are rare). Then people started comparing it to Aliens, the greatest sequel of all time in my opinion. I should've known it couldn't live up to that, but the idea of it going in that direction was interesting, and I liked that Arkin was back. The opening was rather excellent despite seeing a lot of it in previews. Even the credit sequence had a great style that reminded me of Seven without blatantly ripping it off, but when the Aliens aspect kicked in, the problems began. I love Cameron's masterpiece, and I was really curious how this movie could be similar. Unfortunately, it's quite obvious, and it's even more obvious they didn't understand why Aliens works so fuckin well. Yes, it has heavily-armed badasses underestimating a foe that will utterly annihilate them, but the characters are what matter. You care about Hicks, Hudson, Vasquez, Drake, Apone, Bishop, Newt, even Gorman! You don't want to see them die. They all have unique personalities, traits, etc. Even their armor was decorated individually by each actor. The Collection forgets to make you care about its characters. The team that asks Arkin to lead them to the masked psychopath is just a bunch of people with guns. Beware there are spoilers from here on out. Even the tough guy who convinces Arkin to go with them has only the barest of development: he always protected the kidnapped girl, and he is loyal to his employer, but you really don't know shit about him. Why is he so loyal? Who the hell is this guy? When they get to the psycho's lair, why didn't he phone the cops just in case something went wrong? Or at least, tell the girl's father where they are so if he fails, all isn't lost. He could've brought more guys too.

I care about Arkin because of the first film, but even he bothered me a bit when he seems so chicken shit to "go back out there." I can't help but be reminded of Ripley. Yes, you knew she was plagued by nightmares, she was deeply afraid, but she was still brave as hell (remember her phone call to Burke? how she stood up to Gorman?), and I think they compromised Arkin a bit to try to underscore how intimidating their villain is. They do fix this later, but by then, it's a little late and seems too abrupt of a switch. I have to say I love the beginning and the end. There are a lot of cool ideas in the middle, but the fact you don't know any of the characters really hurts the film... I actually got a bit bored. More is done with the kidnapped girl, and that's pretty good although her loss of hearing never really pays off at all, and they forget to continue developing her beyond the first few scenes (she becomes the helpless crying victim who must be saved). But what about the ultimate badasses who get butchered? They may as well be faceless mannequins, because they have no defining qualities. There is a bald asshole, a black guy, a freaked-out white guy, and a girl. When they bite it, it means nothing. They are just there to add to the body count and show more gore. It's really a shame and a missed opportunity in that way.

I keep going back to the Aliens comparison. I think it's cool and inventive they tried to take a slasher sequel down that road. They even have a way of adding more "monsters" for one sequence in the bad guy's hideout, but still, I'm disappointed. Ripley hesitated to go with the marines just like Arkin does. Ripley agreed only to be an adviser. Arkin agrees only to take them to the place. Not go inside. Arkin lacks a good motivation for even doing that though. Ripley's life was really ruined by her first experience with the Alien. Besides the horrible nightmares, she couldn't get a good job, she needed psyche evaluations, etc. If she went back out there, the company agreed to reinstate her license. It was a second chance. For Arkin, maybe it was a way to guarantee his family's safety if the lunatic was caught or perhaps it was a way to redeem how he left the girl earlier, but they don't really play any of this up or give any real motivation aside from a general "catch the bad guy and kill him," which they forget to show how much that should matter to Arkin. Then when they're at the killer's place, Arkin has to be forced at gunpoint to go inside. I get that he is different from Ripley. He is a thief, which is part of what made the first film so unique, but I would think he would want revenge on the sick piece of shit that tortured him and threatened to go after his family. Instead Arkin comes off as a coward who is hard to root for. When Ripley goes against Gorman to save the marines, she is a courageous hero. There is a huge difference between these scenes.

They really forgot to include actual characters in The Collection, and that is its biggest flaw. The team that goes in to rescue the girl really needed to be developed more so you care when they die, so there is more tension, etc. Otherwise, it's just watching random faces get hacked up, and after you've seen so many horror movies, that does nothing for you. Still, I wouldn't say it's a complete waste. I love the opening and the ending. The ending is a little strange in that they save so much for those final few moments (and I'm frustrated they still don't reveal someone's identity although maybe that was the best choice to not disappoint the audience even more), but regardless, the last scene was the best part.

Read more »

The Problem with Remakes Today

It's the sheer number of them. Sure, there have always been remakes, and of course, supporters are quick to point to John Carpenter's The Thing or Cronenberg's The Fly. Yes, those are amazing films, and if every remake was like them, no one would complain, but then you get heartless eyeball-crushing disasters like the 2005 version of The Fog. Even the poster is about to vomit on you. A few misfires would be acceptable, but when you look at how many have been pumped out every year since The Ring remake, it's astounding. In 2004, you had three horror reboots. In 2005, two. In 2006, five: The Omen, When A Stranger Calls, Night of the Living Dead 3D, Black Christmas, and Pulse. In 2007, three. In 2008, SIX! Mirrors, The Eye, One Missed Call, Prom Night, Day of the Dead, and Shutter... not even one of those was close to being good. And these are just horror remakes. 2009 had five as well. 2010 had four. Every year now, we are getting flooded with piles of their rotting corpses. This wasn't the case before when we got Carpenter's or Cronenberg's masterpieces, and it's pretty obvious why they're doing it: dollar signs. Maybe 1 out of 20 is actually good. I was really impressed by The Crazies remake, but still, that doesn't justify all the other face-sucking abominations. It's like they think horror fans are idiots, and they can keep feeding us the same recycled shit over and over. No thanks. I've had enough. I don't see these things in theaters. I don't support them. Yes, it seems like the Evil Dead remake may be another rare exception, but I'm still not rushing off to see it. The genre needs new ideas, not our classics regurgitated in puke form.

Read more »

Has anyone seen Martin?

George Romero is famous for his zombie films (and for good reason), but two years before Dawn of the Dead, he also made a little vampire movie. One quite different from any other. A much more psychological, character-driven piece with very little blood in sight. And unlike Bruiser (sorry I hate it), Martin is absolutely phenomenal. The synopsis may sound a little boring, but don't let that fool you. It's good. Really good. In much the same way as Guillermo del Toro did with Cronos, Romero approaches your typical blood-sucking lore from a completely unique angle, building up his main character as a very sympathetic young man who may or may not be utterly insane. Claiming to be an 84-year-old vampire, Martin struggles with his desperate loneliness and his intense desire for human blood. His uncle takes him in and tries to keep an eye on him, but Martin's thirst only grows stronger.

The music, the performances, the cinematography, the excellent storytelling, etc. It's all flawless. Yes, the bright color of the blood does bug me a little, but that is what they always did back then. It's the same kind of thing you have to accept when you watch the finale of The Wild Bunch. For a budget of only $80,000, Romero created another instant classic that really deserves so much more attention especially with what has happened to the sub-genre lately.

Read more »

Hot Girl of Horror #12: Maria Ozawa

The Japanese version of Elisha Cuthbert except she is primarily known for a different type of film (smileyfacethingiegoeshere) but horror as well. For example, Tokyo Species. Yes, that's a real movie, and it's pretty much what you expect. You can see a trailer for it below... it looks awful and awesome at the same time. I want to see it. There's another by the name of Erotibot. That seems pretty weird, but she's topless with two swords. Count me in. She also did some Indonesian horror film called Hantu Tanah Kusir aka Carriage Ghost, which might be the only one she isn't naked in. So I probably won't see it... I mean, uh, nobody likes nudity. No one. Especially not guys. Ssssshhhhh. She is perty.

Read more »

Scariest Horror Movies List

Of course, you're bound to disagree so let me know what you think!

The Ring / Ringu

I actually prefer the American remake since it ditches the psychic stuff, the cinematography is absolutely amazing, and the way the victims look is a million times better, but of course, Ringu is what started it all so it deserves the credit. Be sure to check out the Japanese prequel Ringu 0, because it's also outstanding.

A Tale of Two Sisters

This really got me hooked on Korean cinema. It has some unbelievably terrifying scenes... watch it by yourself at night with the lights out and the sound cranked up to see what I mean. But it's also beautiful to look at too. I never bothered with the remake. I love the poster too. Pretty simple, but extremely effective, and I don't know why.

John Carpenter's The Thing

Yes, this should be at the top of the list. I love this film so much though that it isn't scary to me. It is frightening and foreboding, unnerving and creepy, tense as hell (anybody want a blood test?), etc. It is a masterpiece, but like Alien and Aliens, I love it to the point that I just stare in awe at how perfect it is. And damn, I love that Japanese artwork.

Ju-on

Yes, I really like Asian horror. As far as actually being creepy and scary, American films really haven't come close in recent years. Don't get me started on the remake by the same director, which is pretty much the same movie except with some shitty and completely unnecessary CGI. There is no point in watching that, but the original is excellent, and I think it's different enough from Ringu to earn a spot here.

The Shining

Again this list really isn't in any particular order, because this should obviously be higher. The atmosphere and Jack Nicholson make this chilling story unforgettable. I am a huge fan of the book too, but what Kubrick did deserves so much praise. Sure, his film is different from King's novel, but I think it benefits from those changes, and the TV mini-series really doesn't hold up well in comparison.

Shutter

Another Asian horror movie? Afraid so, but this one is Thai, and it's quite different from the others I've mentioned. In fact, I was really surprised at the twist with the main character. I won't spoil it, but I didn't see it coming at all. Twists are common now, but very few films would have the guts to do what this movie does to its star.

Paranormal Activity

Yes, it's easy to beat this one up since it was a no-budget film, but there's a reason it got picked up by Paramount. After you watch it and you're trying to sleep alone at night in your bed, the movie can really work on you, making you think you hear something. So much so that you question every sound in the dark. It's brilliant.

The Blair Witch Project

It SUUUUUCCKKSS! I disagree. It's not the greatest horror movie ever made, but how can you not love the ending? This is a tiny, tiny independent film that somehow managed to make it big, capturing everyone's imaginations and actually fooling some people into thinking it was real. That is a remarkable feat, and I think it really is a good film. The atmosphere when they're alone at night, and they hear the sounds out in the woods...

The Exorcist

I love how little music there is in this film. It stands the test of time perfectly. This is one of my top favorites, and it needs no justification. It gets under your skin and stays there. Like so many of these other films, the ending is flawless but so is everything else: the acting, the cinematography, the storytelling, the dialogue, etc.

Poltergeist

The clown scene alone proves its merit, but it doesn't stop there. This is another classic of the genre, and I hope we never get a worthless remake, but I'm sure they're already trying. The drama behind the scenes about whether Hooper or Spielberg actually directed it is interesting, but the final result shows that it doesn't really matter. The film is magnificent. And that is one weird poster.

Read more »

Alligator (1980) is so much better than you'd expect from a Jaws ripoff.

For one, it has all practical FX. They even mix in some real footage of alligators. Yes, this wasn't a big deal back then, but since we've now all been eye-raped by the awful CG alligators in Eraser, this is important to point out. I think Robert Forster is also a big reason why this film works so well. He doesn't seem like an actor at all. Just an everyday guy you can easily root for, and he helps ground the film by giving such a believable performance. You get some excellent bad guys too that are easy to hate. Maybe it's a cheap trick, but having your antagonists heartlessly kill a ton of dogs is a definite way to make your audience despise them. Then you get Henry Silva. A name we should all know, but not enough people do. He was Steven Seagal's nemesis in Above the Law. Of course, he has been in a lot of other films too, but here he plays a hunter (aka Quint's role), and he does a fantastic job with it. Alligator is well directed too with a fast pace to keep you entertained. Even the pre-credit sequence, which has the obligatory flushing an alligator down the toilet scene (yep, it's silly, but that's the old urban myth), manages to be effective thanks to the opening of a real alligator attacking a guy at a Florida gator show. Good thing they didn't try to make this PG-13 either since all of the blood really sells the opening. Alligator bites are always pretty gruesome anyway so it's smart they use that to set up the threat. This movie even has something I'm so sick of in horror films: nobody believes the protagonist about the giant alligator, but they even make that painless and move past it quickly to advance the story. I'm really surprised just how good this film is. I always remember seeing the VHS cover at video stores and wanting to check it out. It's such a shame you don't get any good cover art these days. Anyway, I'm glad I finally saw this. If you're looking for a good '80s flick you might have missed (or don't remember), this is one worth revisiting.

Read more »

Review: Cronos (1993)

This is my favorite Guillermo del Toro film. I really like Hellboy and its sequel, but The Devil's Backbone didn't do much for me. Mimic isn't even really his movie since it got screwed with so much, which explains why it was disappointing, and I have yet to see his director's cut. I enjoyed Blade II though and Pan's Labyrinth had some amazing moments (like the scene with the Pale Man that preys on kids), but nothing comes close to Cronos for me. Maybe Pacific Rim will change that (I can't fuckin wait), but Guillermo's first feature is a masterpiece, turning the vampire movie on its head, and it also has my favorite Ron Perlman performance. He's so much fun in this movie. I was afraid Cronos might be a bit boring, but it wasn't at all. At 94 min, the time flies by, but besides the excellent pacing, what makes it work so well is you care about the characters. Essentially, it's the story of a grandfather and granddaughter finding a device that grants immortality but at a cost. Of course, they're not the only ones who want it. Soon two men come looking for it: an obsessed, rich madman who is dying and his psycho nephew. The real heart of the story is the relationship of the grandfather and granddaughter, but I'm sure I should emphasize again: it's NOT boring. It's just a damn good film with beautiful cinematography, an excellent score, outstanding performances, etc. Sure, it's not really scary, but that obviously wasn't the intention. Just watch it. This is the kind of movie Hollywood would never make now. You got to have young attractive stars especially in your horror films. An old man as the lead? Not happening. It's a shame too, because this is what we're missing out on. What's really ridiculous is the other poster for the film. Guess what it has on it? A hot semi-naked girl who isn't even remotely in the movie. That's marketing for you. I'm partly to blame too since I did think it might be boring, but in my defense, that is because The Devil's Backbone almost put me to sleep (I wasn't tired, and I was actually looking forward to it... the characters and the story just didn't hook me). Cronos is amazing though so if you haven't seen it, hunt it down. It might still be on Netflix although they screwed up the framerate when I saw it on there, but I'm definitely buying it the next chance I get.

Read more »