Frankenstein's Army has some amazing FX but too much shaky cam and weak characters.

After the incredible trailers for Worst Case Scenario, I couldn't wait to see this, and as far as the practical FX monsters go, the film doesn't disappoint, but unfortunately, they decided to use a found-footage-style, first-person perspective. That wouldn't have been bad if they avoided a ton of shaky cam. Sadly, they did not, and particularly at the beginning, it gets old fast. It also takes 20 minutes to get to the first real creature, which would've been fine if they developed the characters beforehand and made you care about them, but they don't. You just get cliched outlines: asshole, old guy in charge, the good guy, the newbie, etc.

I love this guy, but I don't even remember him in the movie. I'm sure he shows up somewhere, but he doesn't really do anything.

Another great design that is largely wasted. I know you can't do something with every creature, but he should've killed someone.

I would still recommend it for the awesome monsters, but I wish it didn't have so much damn shaky cam. I really hate that. A couple people have also pointed out that the Russians didn't have film cameras with built-in microphones back then. They probably should've just ditched the whole found-footage thing and shot it like a normal movie with some occasional POV shots. At its best though, the movie feels like a ride through a kickass haunted house with a wicked set of nasty bio-mechanical creations. If only they gave us some real characters to care about or some more time with the mad scientist (he actually isn't in it very much). Regardless, I'm sure I'll watch it again just for the crazy creatures. There's plenty of gore too. I just wish they did more with the story and the characters.

Read more »

Why is The Crazies remake so awesome?

I didn't expect much from this one. I'm pretty burned out on remakes. They just keep coming and coming like an ever-growing horde of decaying zombies with more and more limbs missing so I was extremely surprised to find The Crazies worth watching. In fact, I loved it. For starters, the pacing is brutal. They don't drag shit out. Forget showing the ordinary world for 30 minutes. They turn that upside down 3 minutes in. Not only that but they establish likable characters, give you an authentic small town feeling, and hint that a lot of bad shit is going to happen. I haven't really liked Timothy Olyphant in the other films I've seen him in (although I don't think that is any fault of his own... an actor can only do so much with poor writing), but here he fits perfectly and his performance is great. Plus, you've got a fantastic supporting cast with Joe Anderson (I don't know him from anything else, but he's outstanding), Radha Mitchell (Silent Hill), Danielle Panabaker, Glenn Morshower (24!), etc. Even the guy playing a psycho husband (Brett Rickaby and he actually has a lot of credits) is outstanding. The makeup and FX are phenomenal. Same with the sound design, and you get tension throughout. I like how they flesh out the military a little as well. The movie also has a lot of replay value. I've actually seen it quite a few times, and I still enjoy it.

The only nitpicking you could do (and I guess it's valid for an infection movie) concerns how people get sick, because in one scene, the sheriff clearly gets diseased blood in a wound yet his wife who is a doctor doesn't seem to care, and it apparently has no effect on him (or maybe it does but we don't see it in the film's short time span). But hell, everything else is so good, I don't care. This film doesn't play nice either. It'll kill characters you care about in a heartbeat, and I love the three homicidal hunters. I was kinda shocked the director of this made Sahara. I don't remember anything about that movie except wondering why I wasted my time watching it, but The Crazies is superb. Dark and bloody with characters you root for.

Read more »

I grew up on The Green Slime.

Well, that and Aliens. And Predator ("I'm heerrrrreee... kill me nooooowwww!") and a ton of Godzilla movies. So yes, I love this movie, and I'm a little sad it has a 4.0 rating on IMDb. I guess a lot of people think it's cheesy and stupid. I suppose the opening song is pretty goofy, but I don't care. I remember seeing this as a kid and having it blow my mind then trying to figure out what the hell it was called as an adult. I rewatched it recently, and I still think it's awesome. Even if it's a little dated (ok, very dated), that is part of its charm. But really this story doesn't waste any time. Within the first few minutes, you find out an asteroid is on a collision course with Earth. They quickly put together a team to land on it and plant bombs. By the thirty min mark, they've already blown it up. So what took Armageddon 2 hours and 30 min to do, they've finished in their first act (by the way, Armageddon has a 6.4 rating on IMDb... what's wrong with this picture?).

Then of course, you get the best part: the monsters. And since this was shot at Toei Tokyo Studios with a Japanese director, they have tentacles. Alright, maybe not every Japanese drools over tentacles, but they seriously show up a lot. They even have a special subgenre of porn with them... yeah. I'm not joking, and it's weird. Girls wrapped in tentacles with the slimy things going in certain places... I don't understand the appeal. And it's basically an FX show since you need guys to operate the damn tentacles offscreen. What's worse is when I told my brother, he replied, "You didn't know?" I guess I shouldn't be surprised. Anyway, some might complain the monsters are ridiculous rubber pieces of shit. Yes, they could be better, but I love 'em. Sure, they don't compare to Giger's famous xenomorph or Stan Winston's skull-totin' space hunter (in fact, next to them, yeah, they look awful), but this movie was made in 1968, and it's easy to see the great imagination behind them even if they couldn't execute it perfectly. Yep, I'm probably the only person who loves this movie. What can I say? I have a soft spot for monster movies. But come on. This is a million times better than Armageddon.

Read more »

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 »