YAWN. FART.
I can't remember the last time I watched a film with such a promising storyline that I hated as badly as I did with this movie.
Diablo Cody needs to not do "horror" ever again. The acting was terrible, even from Adrian Brody, who I normally enjoy. No boobs or nudity of any kind, not that that's important, but for a rated-r movie that has a ton of females, we could've gotten something to make the time easier spent on this steaming turd. The camera always cuts away when the gore really gets going. In fact, most of the attacks inflicted by Jennifer are imposed (shadows on the wall, etc.).
The dialogue is the most atrocious assault in this whole crapfest. Chicks actually say things like "You give me such a wettie," as opposed to 'woody', and "He's so salty" when referring to a hot guy. The Juno-dialogue in a horror film just sucks. This whole movie sucks. Super-weak plot, lame line delivery, and an insultingly stupid "twist" at the end. Jackass:The Movie had a better story than this!
I would seriously administer a barium-enema to myself before watching this popped-zit of a movie again. Stay away at all costs, don't waste your movie-time on this butt-suckling, sack of phlegm-vomit.
Tuesday, November 10, 2009
Monday, November 9, 2009
The House of The Devil Review
Last night, I had a miserable cough that kept me awake all night. My day job requires operations of very heavy machinery in an unstable environment, therefore, I had to call in, not something I normally do, but it's not worth the risk of being drowsy behind the wheel of a 40 ton truck. Still hacking and coughing, I thought I could use the extra time to watch a few movies I have been meaning to catch up on. One of which is called "The House of The Devil".
I'm not exactly sure what possessed me (gettit? lol) to watch this little film in which a college girl named Samantha (played wonderfully by newcomer Jocelin Donahue) is desperate to get her own house and takes an unusual babysitting job for a creepy older couple. Sounds like you've seen it before, right? In some ways, you have. The movie is smartly set in the 1980's era, which drowns out cell phones and other technology that bogs down suspense films of today, which is way cool. However, the film does have it's classic moments of horror-cliches (girl runs upstairs, not down, victims retardedly oblivious to they're surroundings, etc.), but at the same time, is self-aware of most of them. What the film-makers denied us in this 80's set movie was nudity! I'm no perv or what-not, but that was the norm for these types of films, and we got nothing. So, sorry, boys (and maybe some girls), no boobies in this one.
Now for those of you looking for demonic possession with gruesome gore, you'll get it. Just not soon. The writer/director, Ti West, really channeled his inner-Kubrick for this film, and it's nothing short of awesome. The film has an incredibly slow pace, with good intents and purposes. Building tension is hard to do in a film, and while West does a good job, you can't exactly cut it with a knife. You will be bored through most of these scenes, which involves Samantha roaming through the big house, ordering pizza, dancing to 80's music, and shrugging off strange noises. I'm warning you, while there are quick scenes of "action" spliced throughout all that, this movie takes an extremely long time to get going. I myself didn't mind though, I was enjoying watching how well the production was set up for an 80's style setting.
When it finally does get going, it's quick. Real quick. And loads of fun. What's most interesting (to me, anyways), is that there is no copious amounts nerve-wracking screaming. That shtick gets old, fast. Most horror/suspense movies pride themselves on having a "scream queen", which is cool for most horror fans, but 70 minutes of nails-on-chalkboard-screaming (ala, House of A 1,000 Corpses) is really annoying to me. Yes, they are scared, move on, seriously. The chase sequences and most of action is well done, leading up to an ending that was, in my humble opinion, smart, but unsatisfactory. West could've gone several directions with his ending, all of which I'm sure would've either been predictable or a major let-down. While he choose to give us a somewhat happy ending, he also choose not to answer many questions. While some people like that certain element of mystery, this movie, in my opinion, needed some questions answered. I can't say which ones without giving away spoilers, but if you watch this movie, you will no doubt agree, at least in part.
Bottom Line? I enjoyed this weird little creep-fest, and I'm seriously hoping it will hit Blu-Ray, as this movie just commands hi-def treatment. This would actually be a good date movie for guys who have girls who enjoy getting the creeps from a film. Go into it knowing that is a slow moving film, and you should be quite happy with it.
I'm not exactly sure what possessed me (gettit? lol) to watch this little film in which a college girl named Samantha (played wonderfully by newcomer Jocelin Donahue) is desperate to get her own house and takes an unusual babysitting job for a creepy older couple. Sounds like you've seen it before, right? In some ways, you have. The movie is smartly set in the 1980's era, which drowns out cell phones and other technology that bogs down suspense films of today, which is way cool. However, the film does have it's classic moments of horror-cliches (girl runs upstairs, not down, victims retardedly oblivious to they're surroundings, etc.), but at the same time, is self-aware of most of them. What the film-makers denied us in this 80's set movie was nudity! I'm no perv or what-not, but that was the norm for these types of films, and we got nothing. So, sorry, boys (and maybe some girls), no boobies in this one.
Now for those of you looking for demonic possession with gruesome gore, you'll get it. Just not soon. The writer/director, Ti West, really channeled his inner-Kubrick for this film, and it's nothing short of awesome. The film has an incredibly slow pace, with good intents and purposes. Building tension is hard to do in a film, and while West does a good job, you can't exactly cut it with a knife. You will be bored through most of these scenes, which involves Samantha roaming through the big house, ordering pizza, dancing to 80's music, and shrugging off strange noises. I'm warning you, while there are quick scenes of "action" spliced throughout all that, this movie takes an extremely long time to get going. I myself didn't mind though, I was enjoying watching how well the production was set up for an 80's style setting.
When it finally does get going, it's quick. Real quick. And loads of fun. What's most interesting (to me, anyways), is that there is no copious amounts nerve-wracking screaming. That shtick gets old, fast. Most horror/suspense movies pride themselves on having a "scream queen", which is cool for most horror fans, but 70 minutes of nails-on-chalkboard-screaming (ala, House of A 1,000 Corpses) is really annoying to me. Yes, they are scared, move on, seriously. The chase sequences and most of action is well done, leading up to an ending that was, in my humble opinion, smart, but unsatisfactory. West could've gone several directions with his ending, all of which I'm sure would've either been predictable or a major let-down. While he choose to give us a somewhat happy ending, he also choose not to answer many questions. While some people like that certain element of mystery, this movie, in my opinion, needed some questions answered. I can't say which ones without giving away spoilers, but if you watch this movie, you will no doubt agree, at least in part.
Bottom Line? I enjoyed this weird little creep-fest, and I'm seriously hoping it will hit Blu-Ray, as this movie just commands hi-def treatment. This would actually be a good date movie for guys who have girls who enjoy getting the creeps from a film. Go into it knowing that is a slow moving film, and you should be quite happy with it.
Sunday, November 1, 2009
Some Thoughts On Quarantine
In light of 'Paranormal Activity', the mad-popularity of 'Cloverfield', and the upcoming Milla Jovovich starer 'The 4th Kind', first person-shot "big" movies are getting more and more popular. I can't even begin to say why, though.
Now, wait. This is not a negative review. However, it's not exactly a positive one, either. I actually enjoyed Quarantine, an American remake of a Spanish film called 'REC'. And to be fair, I have not seen Rec, despite hearing many good things about it. I was not at all interested in watching Quarantine, until I found the gorgeous and multi-talented Jennifer Carpenter is the lead star. Being a huge fan of Dexter, and having first noticed her (like most everyone else) in 'The Exorcism of Emily Rose', I had to see how she fared in her first real headlining role. She actually surpassed my expectations. Carpenter put a lot of effort into her role as a T.V. journalist, Angela Vidal, following a local fire department for a night for a video editorial she was putting together for her station, accompanied by her loyal cameraman, Scott.
The beginning of the movie is excellent. There are some genuinely funny scenes as the writers set up character development and future plot details. Here, we are introduced the fire crew, Angela's cameraman, and some minor plot details that will serve their purpose later in the film. Right as these scenes start to drag, the fire house gets a call and off they go to the most unforeseen hellish night of their lives.
The crew arrives at an apartment complex that had residents call in due to one their neighbors, an elderly woman, screaming bloody-murder. This is where the jump-from-your-seat scares begin. Now, unlike Paranormal Activity, this is all you get for scares. There is no real feeling of dread, and the spooky atmosphere the film tries to convey just doesn't work. It is set in an apartment builing, and as rustic as they try to make it look, in the end it is just an apartment building, and let's face it, apartments aren't scary. But if it's jump-scares your looking for, this film is loaded with 'em.
The razor-sharp wit that floated the first act of the movie is also nearly completely gone once they are in the complex as well, which is a real shame. The tenants and the rest of the cast fall into seriously familiar survival-horror territory as they begin to panic, despair, curse eachother and fight. Most of the film actually goes into formulaic horror storytelling from here. But don't let that fool you or stop you from watching this seriously entertaining movie.
As I said, this movie is absolutely chock-full of scares, and really good ones, too. If your a gore-hound, though, don't look here. It does have it moments of gruesomeness, but if you're seeking 'Hostel' type blood 'n guts, prepare to be disappointed. The first person camera aspect is done really well, too, as it should be: it's being shot as if a professional news cameraman is filming it, so there hardly any shaky-cam scenes, and the audio is always well placed, just like a real news cameraman.
What hurt this movie the most is it's star power. Okay, so we aren't exactly dealing with A-list celebrities here, but c'mon. Almost every fan of horror films is a fan of Dexter, the huge Showtime T.V. hit in which Jennifer Carpenter plays the sister of the title character. The lead firefighter role is played by Jay Hernandez of Hostel fame, and the apartment caretaker is played by Rade Serbedzija, a man who has been in countless movies, a few of them horror/thriller titles. What Paranormal Activity, Cloverfield, Blair Witch, etc., got right in their casting is what Quarantine got wrong: casting unknowns for the sake of anything could happen to them, without the viewer guessing, and it helps keep that 'it's real!' aspect. I spent half of the movie trying to figure where I had seen some of the other tenant's faces.
Another thing that hurt this movie for me is it's God-awful ending. Seriously, how predictable and unoriginal could you get? While the last 5-6 minutes are the most dread-filled (not to mention, Carpenter's best acting in the whole movie) the last 10 seconds had me so upset I wanted to put an axe through my screen. They seriously could not think of anything better other to follow the footsteps of every other "cam" movie before it? It was lazy writing, pure and simple. So much more could have been done. Oh well.
Bottom line? Quarantine is fun, in-it-for-the-scares-only movie. Don't read too much into the plot, expect a typical horror movie ending and you'll have a blast. As one IMDB reviewer said, "It's definitely not boring."
Thanks for reading.
Now, wait. This is not a negative review. However, it's not exactly a positive one, either. I actually enjoyed Quarantine, an American remake of a Spanish film called 'REC'. And to be fair, I have not seen Rec, despite hearing many good things about it. I was not at all interested in watching Quarantine, until I found the gorgeous and multi-talented Jennifer Carpenter is the lead star. Being a huge fan of Dexter, and having first noticed her (like most everyone else) in 'The Exorcism of Emily Rose', I had to see how she fared in her first real headlining role. She actually surpassed my expectations. Carpenter put a lot of effort into her role as a T.V. journalist, Angela Vidal, following a local fire department for a night for a video editorial she was putting together for her station, accompanied by her loyal cameraman, Scott.
The beginning of the movie is excellent. There are some genuinely funny scenes as the writers set up character development and future plot details. Here, we are introduced the fire crew, Angela's cameraman, and some minor plot details that will serve their purpose later in the film. Right as these scenes start to drag, the fire house gets a call and off they go to the most unforeseen hellish night of their lives.
The crew arrives at an apartment complex that had residents call in due to one their neighbors, an elderly woman, screaming bloody-murder. This is where the jump-from-your-seat scares begin. Now, unlike Paranormal Activity, this is all you get for scares. There is no real feeling of dread, and the spooky atmosphere the film tries to convey just doesn't work. It is set in an apartment builing, and as rustic as they try to make it look, in the end it is just an apartment building, and let's face it, apartments aren't scary. But if it's jump-scares your looking for, this film is loaded with 'em.
The razor-sharp wit that floated the first act of the movie is also nearly completely gone once they are in the complex as well, which is a real shame. The tenants and the rest of the cast fall into seriously familiar survival-horror territory as they begin to panic, despair, curse eachother and fight. Most of the film actually goes into formulaic horror storytelling from here. But don't let that fool you or stop you from watching this seriously entertaining movie.
As I said, this movie is absolutely chock-full of scares, and really good ones, too. If your a gore-hound, though, don't look here. It does have it moments of gruesomeness, but if you're seeking 'Hostel' type blood 'n guts, prepare to be disappointed. The first person camera aspect is done really well, too, as it should be: it's being shot as if a professional news cameraman is filming it, so there hardly any shaky-cam scenes, and the audio is always well placed, just like a real news cameraman.
What hurt this movie the most is it's star power. Okay, so we aren't exactly dealing with A-list celebrities here, but c'mon. Almost every fan of horror films is a fan of Dexter, the huge Showtime T.V. hit in which Jennifer Carpenter plays the sister of the title character. The lead firefighter role is played by Jay Hernandez of Hostel fame, and the apartment caretaker is played by Rade Serbedzija, a man who has been in countless movies, a few of them horror/thriller titles. What Paranormal Activity, Cloverfield, Blair Witch, etc., got right in their casting is what Quarantine got wrong: casting unknowns for the sake of anything could happen to them, without the viewer guessing, and it helps keep that 'it's real!' aspect. I spent half of the movie trying to figure where I had seen some of the other tenant's faces.
Another thing that hurt this movie for me is it's God-awful ending. Seriously, how predictable and unoriginal could you get? While the last 5-6 minutes are the most dread-filled (not to mention, Carpenter's best acting in the whole movie) the last 10 seconds had me so upset I wanted to put an axe through my screen. They seriously could not think of anything better other to follow the footsteps of every other "cam" movie before it? It was lazy writing, pure and simple. So much more could have been done. Oh well.
Bottom line? Quarantine is fun, in-it-for-the-scares-only movie. Don't read too much into the plot, expect a typical horror movie ending and you'll have a blast. As one IMDB reviewer said, "It's definitely not boring."
Thanks for reading.
Friday, October 23, 2009
Paranormal Activity Review
If you know anything about movies, I am sure you had heard the buzz on this 'little film that could'. Shot over two years ago with just $15,000 (that's half of what Blair Witch was shot for), with unknown actors and no studio to back it up, Paranormal Activity has made quite the journey, all on word-of-mouth technique. I'm here to say that the "buzz" you might have heard about it is very, very real. This is a top-notch, bury-your-face-in-your-han
One of the things you might have heard about this movie is that it starts off slow, and this is kind of true. Realize, though, that this is a low budget film, and the creators didn't have a whole lot of money to blow on character exploration. That doesn't mean you don't get familiar with the two leads. The entire movie takes place at their house, with a scant few scenes shot outside. 90% of it is shot inside the home, which provides a very cool atmosphere for the movie. So even though it does start a little slow, it does not hurt the film in any way.
The actors in the film are unknowns, and this is also essential for the scare factor. Casting unknowns is common for low budget movies, and in this case, the producers did their casting well. The leads are quite good, to my surprise. The movie does not just contain your average 'scream-and-run-away' tactics. The couple try to face their fears as bravely as they can, and when they can't, the anger and frustrations they must portray is felt. There was a certain scene in particular in which I actually felt quite bad for the female lead. In a section of the film the couple is deprived of precious sleep, and they can't perform their day jobs as well, they take their frustrations out on each other which leads to quite an emotional scene where you can actually feel for these two, something that's not so well done in movies such as this.
Now. Onto what everyone wants to know. Yes, this movie is very, very scary. What is really bringing this movie down is it's common reference to the decade-old movie, The Blair Witch Project, and this, in my opinion, isn't fair. Paranormal Activity was shot so much better than Blair Witch. There are hardly any, if at all, shaky-cam scenes, and if there is, they aren't crucial to plot, and they don't last more than 5-10 seconds. Plus we are 10 years ahead of Blair Witch, and the cameras available for home usage are much more sophisticated. The script is much more real than Blair. The couple react kind of like they are on a reality show at first, then they slowly progress to relying on the camera as a safety net. Which, I know, they did this in Blair Witch, but the difference here being, the girlfriend in Activity always displays a certain disdain for her boyfriend's camera, throughout the entire film, which adds a really believable amount of realism. The events in the film is named for are phenomenal. As with real life, in the day time, your safe to feel fear-free, but at night, look out. This applies to this movie head-on, and this was your warning. Paranormal makes no apologies in it's dread it instills in you while watching the couple sleep. While there aren't really any 'jumpy' scenes, the intensity level brought to the screen is unreal. I kind of pride myself on not fazed by horror nowadays, but this one actually made me watch a comedy afterwards, to soothe my jitters. I meant what I said in my Facebook update: if you can watch this movie alone in the dark without stopping it or turning on the light, then your your on some major codones.
The ending left a lot to be desired, to be honest. While certainly not a bad ending, just very unfulfilling. I obviously can't explain why without giving it away, but really, don't let that deter you from this truly special scary, scary film.
Thanks for reading.
Saturday, October 17, 2009
Quickie Review of the New Trick 'r Treat Movie
Every Halloween, dozens of movies are released to gain the attention of horror enthusiasts. Most of them are seen, and lately, most of them are PG-13. Ugh. While most of them provide some mild form of entertainment, they are usually major let-downs (Drag Me To Hell was amusing, but could have shot to cult status if an rated R mindset during filming was pursued, and don't get me started on The Unborn). Trick 'r Treat is a major exception.
I'm not going to say much here, because this movie has already received much attention, and has already reached 'cult' status in it's two year run. That's right, Trick was made two years ago, under the studio of Warner Brothers. Warner shelved it for unknown reasons, then finally released it direct-to-dvd. It's for this reason why I'm writing about it, as most people don't hear much about movies that go straight to buy without being in theaters first. Written by X-Men 2 and Superman Returns scribe Michael Dougherty, it screened at a few festivals and reached high appraise from horror fans. And with good reason.
I bought Trick 'r Treat in a blind buy (meaning I hadn't even seen a trailer for it when I decided to buy it, much less seen it already before buying it) due to the simple reason that I heard an internet rumor that the blu-ray release might be limited. Being a collector of limited items, I thought I had better grab a copy before they (supposedly, this has yet to be seen,) sold out. Now on my days off from work, I decided to prep up for the season by watching some horror flicks, and it just so happened that my copy of Trick showed up in the mail. I hadn't really intended to watch this movie so soon, but none of my other titles were appealing to me, so I opened it and popped it in. I'm so glad I did.
The movie starts out in really familiar horror territory, setting up, going for the first kills, and roll opening credits. Yawn. It does take a while to get the ball rolling, but it is by no means is it boring. This movie is loaded with neat-o little twists, doesn't go over-board on the gore, and keeps the script sharp. There are no obligatory "Who's there?" or "This isn't funny anymore!" comments, which is so refreshing, I would've recommended the movie on that basis alone. There are some seriously disturbing scenes, most of them involving children, but that really adds to the creep factor in the movie. It does keep the old-school horror fans happy as well; there's boobs, blood, and cool music. And it's rated R to boot.
While certainly not the best horror movie, it is the best horror flick to come out in years. Like I said, smart, fun, and incredibly entertaining. A couple of small issues I had with it was the kids element, and not enough screen time for the most interesting characters. Children are prominently featured in the movie, and are involved with of the most disturbing/violent scenes, but don't worry, they never really take it too far. As far as the screen time for certain characters, this movie was labeled at one time as "The Pulp Fiction of horror movies", and that's very true. There are four stories that are intertwined with eachother that leads to a really cool end result, hence, only so much time can be allotted for each person. That being said, it does not retract from the final product.
Do yourself a favor, and rent or buy this movie. Even if your not really a horror fan, this should provide you with an excellent source for getting in the mood for Halloween. If you do, please let me know what you thought of it.
Thanks for reading.
I'm not going to say much here, because this movie has already received much attention, and has already reached 'cult' status in it's two year run. That's right, Trick was made two years ago, under the studio of Warner Brothers. Warner shelved it for unknown reasons, then finally released it direct-to-dvd. It's for this reason why I'm writing about it, as most people don't hear much about movies that go straight to buy without being in theaters first. Written by X-Men 2 and Superman Returns scribe Michael Dougherty, it screened at a few festivals and reached high appraise from horror fans. And with good reason.
I bought Trick 'r Treat in a blind buy (meaning I hadn't even seen a trailer for it when I decided to buy it, much less seen it already before buying it) due to the simple reason that I heard an internet rumor that the blu-ray release might be limited. Being a collector of limited items, I thought I had better grab a copy before they (supposedly, this has yet to be seen,) sold out. Now on my days off from work, I decided to prep up for the season by watching some horror flicks, and it just so happened that my copy of Trick showed up in the mail. I hadn't really intended to watch this movie so soon, but none of my other titles were appealing to me, so I opened it and popped it in. I'm so glad I did.
The movie starts out in really familiar horror territory, setting up, going for the first kills, and roll opening credits. Yawn. It does take a while to get the ball rolling, but it is by no means is it boring. This movie is loaded with neat-o little twists, doesn't go over-board on the gore, and keeps the script sharp. There are no obligatory "Who's there?" or "This isn't funny anymore!" comments, which is so refreshing, I would've recommended the movie on that basis alone. There are some seriously disturbing scenes, most of them involving children, but that really adds to the creep factor in the movie. It does keep the old-school horror fans happy as well; there's boobs, blood, and cool music. And it's rated R to boot.
While certainly not the best horror movie, it is the best horror flick to come out in years. Like I said, smart, fun, and incredibly entertaining. A couple of small issues I had with it was the kids element, and not enough screen time for the most interesting characters. Children are prominently featured in the movie, and are involved with of the most disturbing/violent scenes, but don't worry, they never really take it too far. As far as the screen time for certain characters, this movie was labeled at one time as "The Pulp Fiction of horror movies", and that's very true. There are four stories that are intertwined with eachother that leads to a really cool end result, hence, only so much time can be allotted for each person. That being said, it does not retract from the final product.
Do yourself a favor, and rent or buy this movie. Even if your not really a horror fan, this should provide you with an excellent source for getting in the mood for Halloween. If you do, please let me know what you thought of it.
Thanks for reading.
Saturday, October 10, 2009
Top Eight Things I Learned from IMDB.com's Message Boards
08 - ALL "guy" (i.e., Buddy-Cops, Action heroes, etc...) movies are subconsciously gay. - No, they aren't. You are.
07 - All Michael Bay films are useless, commercialized "boom" movies that have no merit. - Yeah, that's why he keeps getting hired, his movies make BILLIONS, and out of the 8 films he has directed, only one (The Island) was a box office failure, and even then, the home video sales made the studio's money back. Escapism, people, his movies aren't meant to be taken seriously.
06 - People that have no lives and sit behind a laptop all day are ten times the filmmaker. - Really? And how's your film doing?
05 - If a movie is popular, it's total and utter crap. If it sucks, it's the world's greatest "underrated" masterpiece. - Once more proving my theory on "Not being trendy is the trendy thing to do,". People want so badly to be the first to tell their friends and family about a good movie they saw. When they find out they weren't the first person in the world to see it, they get disillusioned for being "mediocre". I'm sorry you couldn't keep that movie in your back pocket, Timmy. Go cry some more in your bowl of obscure college-music that nobody likes but you because you think your "on to something special". 'Special', alright.
04 - All kids movies are subconsciously telling your children to be gay. "Wall-E beeped and it sounded like 'cock'! He's gay! Pixar is telling our telling our children to be gay!!!" Okay people, if you looking and listening THAT hard for sexual innuendo, your bound to make something up in your head.
Children don't know what being gay is, but thanks to your self-stylized "innuendos", I'm sure they'll know soon enough, no thanks whatsoever to the movie, only to their homophobic parents. Get over yourselves, seriously.
03 - Everybody is a perfect historian. - Braveheart didn't do this! Things didn't happen like that in WW2! Who fucking cares?! Seriously, movies are ESCAPISM, folks. That's a form of entertainment, remember? If any of these 'historical' movies followed exactly what happened in real life, they'd be like watching paint dry!Watch the dramatic retelling, if it peaked your interests, go to the local library and research it! Better yet, stick to History Channel and just shut the fuck up, you pretentious piece of shit.
02 - If a movie has two guys, they are gay, no matter what the situation. - OK, I'm really sick of this one. Riggs and Murtaugh (ooops! I put Riggs first! I must be racist.) were not gay. It is possible that two dudes can be friends and not fill eachother's orifices with a giant cock. If your gay, or have homosexual fantasies about the way a couple of guys are projected in movie, that's fine. Honestly, not everyone else feels the same way. Stop trying to stuff your opinions down our throats (pun VERY intended).
01 - All movies that have a white person in the lead are racist. - Retarded. And projected self-loathing. Take a look at Spike Lee's "Inside Man", and tell me that movie wasn't very anti-caucasian.
Seriously, folks, if you can't handle watching movies, you shouldn't do it. Comedies are offensive for people like you, as well as sex, violence, etc. If you don't have another outlet for your time other than to point and bitch, go kill yourself. Make sure your naked when you do so, so you don't piss and shit in the clothes that are are worth more than you.
Signed,
Zeb Nipper, who loves to get on the internet and bitch about internet armed bitchers.
07 - All Michael Bay films are useless, commercialized "boom" movies that have no merit. - Yeah, that's why he keeps getting hired, his movies make BILLIONS, and out of the 8 films he has directed, only one (The Island) was a box office failure, and even then, the home video sales made the studio's money back. Escapism, people, his movies aren't meant to be taken seriously.
06 - People that have no lives and sit behind a laptop all day are ten times the filmmaker. - Really? And how's your film doing?
05 - If a movie is popular, it's total and utter crap. If it sucks, it's the world's greatest "underrated" masterpiece. - Once more proving my theory on "Not being trendy is the trendy thing to do,". People want so badly to be the first to tell their friends and family about a good movie they saw. When they find out they weren't the first person in the world to see it, they get disillusioned for being "mediocre". I'm sorry you couldn't keep that movie in your back pocket, Timmy. Go cry some more in your bowl of obscure college-music that nobody likes but you because you think your "on to something special". 'Special', alright.
04 - All kids movies are subconsciously telling your children to be gay. "Wall-E beeped and it sounded like 'cock'! He's gay! Pixar is telling our telling our children to be gay!!!" Okay people, if you looking and listening THAT hard for sexual innuendo, your bound to make something up in your head.
Children don't know what being gay is, but thanks to your self-stylized "innuendos", I'm sure they'll know soon enough, no thanks whatsoever to the movie, only to their homophobic parents. Get over yourselves, seriously.
03 - Everybody is a perfect historian. - Braveheart didn't do this! Things didn't happen like that in WW2! Who fucking cares?! Seriously, movies are ESCAPISM, folks. That's a form of entertainment, remember? If any of these 'historical' movies followed exactly what happened in real life, they'd be like watching paint dry!Watch the dramatic retelling, if it peaked your interests, go to the local library and research it! Better yet, stick to History Channel and just shut the fuck up, you pretentious piece of shit.
02 - If a movie has two guys, they are gay, no matter what the situation. - OK, I'm really sick of this one. Riggs and Murtaugh (ooops! I put Riggs first! I must be racist.) were not gay. It is possible that two dudes can be friends and not fill eachother's orifices with a giant cock. If your gay, or have homosexual fantasies about the way a couple of guys are projected in movie, that's fine. Honestly, not everyone else feels the same way. Stop trying to stuff your opinions down our throats (pun VERY intended).
01 - All movies that have a white person in the lead are racist. - Retarded. And projected self-loathing. Take a look at Spike Lee's "Inside Man", and tell me that movie wasn't very anti-caucasian.
Seriously, folks, if you can't handle watching movies, you shouldn't do it. Comedies are offensive for people like you, as well as sex, violence, etc. If you don't have another outlet for your time other than to point and bitch, go kill yourself. Make sure your naked when you do so, so you don't piss and shit in the clothes that are are worth more than you.
Signed,
Zeb Nipper, who loves to get on the internet and bitch about internet armed bitchers.
Review of 'Antichrist'
About once every two years, a movie comes along and makes some noise in the film curcuit that upsets, confuses, and gets the stigma "controversial". While they usually wind up being cinematic bores that had no bearing on making any sense, Lars Von Trier's Antichrist is no exception.
When Antichrist premiered at Cannes last month, it made several people leave in disgust, Roger Ebert gave it a negative but thoughtful review, and most people that watched it, pretty much said the same thing: It doesn't leave you when you walk out of theater. That part they got right.
I had the chance to catch Antichrist last night. I have never seen a Lars Von Trier film before, so I didn't know what to expect. I have seen a LOT of horror films. I'm a fan of the "video-nasties" (films from the 70's that focused on woman exploitation and sheer delight in close-up gruesomeness, re; They Call Her One Eye, Cannibal Holocaust, I Spit On Your Grave) and have seen my fair share of brutal psychological thrillers. While Antichrist, in the end, didn't leave me scarred or even feeling like I needed a shower afterwards, it DID stay with me.
The story of Antichrist sounds simple: a married couple lost their young son in freak accident while they are making love, and the husband, who is a therapist, decides that a vacation in the woods would be ideal to heal their grieving. the film starts off slow, REAL slow. The opening sequence is just short of an operatic music video that shows what happens to lead the couple to their current state, and it is very hard to sit through. The pace of the prologue is excruciatingly slow. It then takes another 45 minutes or so for the couple to actually get to the woods.
When they arrive, the film picks up. The couple (Spiderman's William Defoe and Charlotte Gainsbourgh), who go unnamed by they way, the are simply referred to as "He" and "She", slowly start to degrade in mental stability due to some evil force in the woods.
Now this all sounds textbook, but when the "action" kicks in, you simply cannot take your eyes off the screen. The movie does more than push boundaries. It takes every healthy couples fears and shoves them into over-drive.
This movie is seriously not for everyone. It takes a strong gut to watch it all the way through. It features full-on penetration, a graphic female masturbating scene, genital mutilation, and an ejaculation shot that is so disturbing, healthy males will have problems getting it out of their heads. But that's the point of movie. Von Trier takes the horror genre and really stuffs it down the category's throat. Nothing here is shot for the sake of shock; it is all relevant to the plot, which is what makes it so brilliant. There are about a hundred different genres in this movie, and they all get twisted into a new form. Romance to sadomasochism, horror to terrifying gore, thriller to psychotic madness, it goes on. This may have been the most brilliant movie I have ever seen. It contains some of the striking visuals I have ever seen. Some shots are so extraordinary that I actually found myself wanting to rewind it just to see them again.
Now, for those of you who want to see it just to see what all the fuss is about, make damn sure there are no kids around, I don't care how liberal you might be. Antichrist is absolutely unapologetic and unflinching in it's visuals. I really liked this movie, my only complaints are that I cannot figure why it was called Antichrist, as there is very few references to God and Satan, it focuses more on the Salem Witch Trials and black magic, and the pacing could have been picked up just a hair.
I hope most of my friends get a chance to see this movie, and I cannot wait for their thoughts on it. Just remember to have a very open mind when you see it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)