Reviews

First off, I have no experience with the BBC series that this is based off of, so this review is only for the pilot that aired on ABC.

What I was expecting after seeing all the ads for Mistresses was a steamy summer drama in the same vein as Desperate Housewives. What I got was a surprisingly low key drama series focusing on four women all affected by infidelity in different ways. While the title would suggest that all four women go on some super soft Skinemax affair romp, the actual show is not just about mistresses, but also the wives of cheating husbands, and even the wives who cheat.

The core stories follow a woman recently widowed who is having a hard time dealing with the loss of her husband, a psychiatrist who was having an affair with married patient, a woman whose marriage is starting to hit some major road blocks due to fertility issues, and a young woman who enjoys sex but not relationships. All of these stories have been done on soaps a thousand times before, and yet I found myself enjoying the first episode. Why? It moved quickly, all four leads were perfectly cast, and the writer and director all found small, emotional moments to help the audience connect with the characters on some level.

I have a feeling that the title, more then anything, is what is turning most people off of the show. That disappoints me, because the show is not condoning infidelity. It is not show the subject in a positive light. It's just mining it for dramatic material, just like any daytime soap opera or night time drama has for years.

Seriously, drop the judgments and give the show a chance. It's well acted and entertaining, with the same quality tech aspects you would expect from an ABC series. Is it high art? No. Is it an enjoyable night time soap that takes a high drama subject and handles it in a surprisingly low key manner? Yes. I enjoyed the heck out of Mistresses, and hope to see the series continue.

I put the spoiler warning on just in case. I'm not going to reveal anything major, but a few little things.

The first two films in this series are not very good. Part 1 was a total mess of a film that had no real focus. Part 2 was a very gory, but somewhat boring slasher that had no real story to it. Part 3 is the strongest of the bunch, and i don't mean that as a backhanded compliment. This film actually gets a lot right, but also a few things wrong.

Lets get the bad out of the way. The characters in this film are not very well written. They are not given time to develop, and because of that they fall into the cookie cutter college students. Now, with a movie called Boogeyman 3 one isn't really expecting great characters, but to be honest, if they had been given a little more depth, it probably would have pushed this movie from being a fun haunted house flick into a hidden straight to video gem.

Also, the characters are not very smart. Actually, they are very dumb. They hear a noise and instead of running the other way, they investigate it. Do you know how many characters willingly walk into closets or dark rooms? Yeah... not the brightest kids.

The third negative is a few of the effects. This one is actually pretty minor. Most of the gore and blood is practical, but when the digital effects pop up they stick out like a sore thumb. Luckily they are few and far between. Most of the effects are done on camera.

So, with the bad out of the way, lets get to the good.

This film is entertaining, it keeps a nice balance between blood and gore and being a haunted house, or in this case dorm film. It has entertaining kills, and a few decent jump scares. The Boogeyman costume is a little weak, but it is kept in the shadows enough where it doesn't stand out.

The film is also very well made. This director knew what he was doing, and created a very nice look with the film. The pace moves quickly, and the story is very clear, with a strong ending. Actually, character stupidity aside, this movie probably has the best script out of all three. The story is fully developed, and has a clear reason for why things are happening.

This film wisely drops the practical explanation from the second film, and returns to the supernatural roots of the first film, but avoids all the child psychology that the first film seemed to hold on to. Instead we have a clear cut reason for the Boogeyman's actions, and it makes the world of difference.

Over all I went into this film with the lowest of expectations. The first film was watchable, the second film was a total bore, but this film surprised me. It kept me interested and entertained through out, and at no point did I feel cheated by the pay off. Don't expect the next great horror film, but just be ready for a decent movie that hearkens back to the 80's slasher and monster films.

This film is offensive, but that isn't the problem. The problem is the tone. The film starts with a very sarcastic and sometimes funny tone, but when the violence starts things get so dark that the movie almost becomes unwatchable. It never earns the dark shift that the latter half, the massacre requires. The audience is suddenly asked to feel bad for these rather idiotic characters (I'm using that term loosely), but instead we really feel nothing, and that is what makes this movie so disgusting.

*Spoiler* The death of the Bible Girl, played by Misty Mundae, is probably the worst out of the bunch. Suddenly the killers get this hard, sexual edge, and things just get to dark. When she is finally asked to insert the barrel of a shotgun into her mouth to simulate oral sex, the movie just went to far. The comedy and wit is gone, replaced by a very unnerving and perverted shock. I can normally handle this stuff, but these characters are meant to be high school students, and Misty can actually pass for one.

If you want to be offended, you will be, but this film is a mess when it comes to tone. The shifts are to drastic, and in the end, the film just feels sleazy and cheap. I love exploitation films, but this one is a bit to much.

This is a cheesy movie, and it's a cheesy movie everyone has seen before. It's got every cliché in the book, but you know what... I don't care. I don't mind clichés if they are done in a way that I can overlook them, and enjoy the story at hand. Well, thats what Take The Lead became. As I was watching this I could tell that this was every single old musical I had ever seen, but set in modern day New York. You have the ugly-duckling story, the forbidden romance, and even a little My Fair Lady. This movie is a musical, but the actors never sing. Instead they dance. And man can they dance. This is not a drama, this is a musical. Now... have I beaten this into your head enough? Good. When you watch this movie, think of it like that. The perfect example is the Waltz at the end. The scene is shot, directed, and acted as if it were from an old musical. The only difference here is that, instead of the typical love lorn white folks, we have lorn lorn African American teenagers, and the beautiful thing is... it doesn't matter. The scene is so beautifully handled, so beautifully shot, that I was able to see past the casting (which, honestly, was perfect, with both actors giving their shallow characters a good deal of depth.) The thing people miss when they look at this film as a typical teen drama is that the depth of the characters is not in the dialog (which is okay), but in the dance scenes. Every single relationship is built within those scenes. You see the characters interact, grow, and the plot moves forward... just like a musical. The plot is the dancing. The character's motivations are brought in, the actors glow, and you get the jist of it, and without any corny music to go with it. The movie blends the classic musical with the urban teen drama, and actually does an amazing job of it.

I know my rating seems a little high, but... well, I actually enjoyed this movie. I was drunk at the time, and that might explain why.

Camp Fear has very little nudity, and almost no blood. What it does have is a surprisingly well written script being performed by actors who have no idea that what they are reading is a comedy. Yes, this movie is a comedy. The director and the actors play it totally straight, and guess what, it's even funnier because of it. Now, this is a "so bad it's good" funny.

*Spoilers from here on out* Let us go through the highlights off this movie. You have two random shower scenes (one with Michelle Bauer and one with porn star Savanna). Both girls have a total of about five lines, show their breasts, and then vanish. Next you have a random song and dance number. I'm not joking. For a good five minutes this movie goes musical with a full lambada. It's hilarious. The song is terrible. The dancing is decent. Well, except for Tiffany, who looks like she's having a seizure. After this you get a half decent women in danger movie. This part actually worked. The bikers that attack the girls are silly, but there are a few scenes where they are actually menacing. It stays like this for a while until... a giant rubber looking lake monster (well... a sea monster in the lake) eats one of the bikers. You see this head float towards the guy, open it's mouth, and then the guy goes under water. You never see the monster again. Right after that we are introduced to his servant, the Giant Druid. This guy had me laughing the entire movie. It's all so random, that I just kind of stopped caring about the plot and enjoyed the silliness. So, apparently the thing in the lake needs four female virgin sacrifices. Well... the thing in the lake eats two bikers and a homeless man, and then Tiffany is sacrificed (more on this later). So I guess they all were secretly young, female virgins. Oh well...

Oh, and why do they have to be sacrificed? To stop the end of the world of course. Well, kind of. You see, the movie takes place in 1990, and the end of the world happens at the end of the second millennium. So... the druid and lake/sea monster thingy are getting a head start.

Now, did I mention there is no blood in this movie? There really isn't. The most extreme violence is during Tiffany's death. This is the reason I have th spoiler warning people. She gets her throat cut. When she does this huge geyser of red paint floods out of her neck... kind of. It more or less comes out next to her neck, and then runs over her face. And the entire time... Tiffany is laughing. Yes, she is laughing. Oh what acting.

So, is Camp Fear a good movie? NO! It's terrible. It's from RetroMedia people. They put out bad movies on purpose. This is a classic midnight movie. Camp Fear is a funny movie. Get a few beers, a few friends, and pop this baby in. You'll have a blast. Trust me.

It's true. This both applies to the movie and the story. In the case of the movie, well... it's no where near as nasty as the previews would lead you to believe (although it is still pretty violent/cruel/disgusting). It's not the amazing piece of horror film making that the fans would lead you to believe either. It's still good, but it's not the second coming of horror.

In the case of the story it has to do with the Hostel in Slavakia (sp?). These three guys think they have found heaven, when in reality, it's hell. I won't get into the plot to much, because if you don't know it already, then stop reading. The surprise of what happens will be great. If you do, then why should I have to tell it to you all over again.

Basically this movie can be broken into two halves. The first is the teen comedy half, which is the first half. I am not joking when I say that during this section of the movie there is non-stop nudity. Barely a minute goes by before another pair of breasts pop up on the screen. This is also where the characters are established. You have the Icelander who just seems to always be getting laid. You have the sensitive guy who may possibly be questioning his sexuality (more on this later), and you have the jerk, who is the main character. Pretty thin characters, but they work. You never really care about them in the first half though.

The second half is where things get good. This is the balls to the wall horror half. The violence in this section is surprisingly restrained when it comes to the actual torture of certain characters. More is implied than is actually shown, and it works. It makes you feel bad for these characters, even if you hated them before. The stuff that isn't shown is what makes this effective. You can hear everything, you can see glimpses of what is happening, but it's never hardcore in your face. The real gore comes when (Spoiler Warning) the bad guys (and girls) get what's coming to them. That is probably what I loved the most. The audience isn't left just feeling terrible. We are given some form of justice. It's during these scenes that Eli Roth's dark humor emerges, and it works. I was rooting for the hero, and you get to see how these people are dispatched in full detail. It's not as gut wrenching, because these characters deserve what they get, but it's just as fulfilling.

Now, the reason I mentioned the one character who might be questioning his sexuality is because of a review I read. The review went off on how homophobic the film is. The film itself isn't homophobic, but the characters are. The word fag is thrown around constantly, and there are several jokes made at the above mentioned character's expense. Still, as a gay man I wasn't really offended. Why? Because I know how guys like this act, and guess what, they act exactly like that. The sensitive guy is shown being extremely homophobic in one scene and then in another he's returning the same flirtatious gesture with the man he had been yelling at before. It's interesting the way this is handled. It's not done to be cruel or degrading to the character. It's just done to give the character some dimension. The review also mentioned that most of the killers are portrayed has homosexual. That isn't true. The sexual aspect of the killers has nothing to do with the gender of the victim, but instead the violence of the act. Male or female, what turns these men on is the violent nature of the crime. So yes, while the film does frequently use derogatory terms towards homosexuals, I have to say, it's more because that's how these guys would realistically talk than anything else.

So, now that my little rant is over, I'll wrap this up. Hostel is a good movie. It's violent, it's darkly funny, and it has a pay off. It's not amazing, but it's good, and it gives you exactly what you would expect. I would recommend it, but with a warning: I've seen tons of violent horror movies, and I'm a bit jaded. The average movie goer would probably be very disturbed by the themes and portrayals of violence in this film. So, if you have a weak stomach, can't stand nudity, or flinch at extreme violence you should stay away.

And one note to parents. Obviously this is not a movie for children. The adds point this out perfectly. It's rated R for a reason. Still, this doesn't seem to be getting through to many of you. When I saw this movie a father brought three children, all of which had to be around 10 or under, to see it. Please, use the rating system. It's there to help you protect your children from films that they are probably not ready to see yet. This film contains extreme violence and some very dark sexual themes. Be smart, and think twice before taking a child to this movie, because in the end you are responsible for your children.

I have to start this by saying that I am not a fan of the first "Saw", but the second one looked interesting, and I liked the set up, so I gave it a shot. Man, I'm glad I did. For starters, the one thing that I hated in the first film, the acting, is a lot better here. Donnie Walhberg has his moments of hamming it up, but for the most part he keeps it restrained. Dina Myer is given a much bigger role this time around, and impressed the heck out of me. The stand out though was Shawnee Smith as Amanda. Her character was fairly well developed, and I was rooting for her the entire time. The rest of the cast also did a great job. The actor who played Jigsaw did an amazing job. The same goes for the actor who played Donnie Walhberg's son. The rest of the victims in the house aren't given much to do other than scream and cry and run and die, but for what they had to do, they did it well.

The acting was better, and so was the pacing. The first film dragged in the middle, but this movie... no chance. There is non-stop action the second the story moves to the house. At no point was I thinking "just get on with it" already. Everything moved quickly, and there are some great edge of your seat moments.

And the violence in the movie is what you would expect. Unrestrained, nasty, and mean. The traps are no where near as complicated as the first film, but are still very effective. There are some moments that just had my jaw on the floor. The movie is very brutal, and doesn't cut away (well... I'll talk about that later). The effects are also very well done, and very realistic. So, this baby earned it's R rating. For gore fans, this is a plus. For the weak stomached viewer... you already know to stay away. I mean the tag line is "Yes... there will be blood." Come on! The ending of the movie (which I will not mention here) also impressed me. It tied the first film in perfectly, and had that nice little bite to it that I was expecting. That's all I'll say about that.

On the negative side... well, the editing is insane. I mean, when something violent is happening, it goes nuts with cuts so quick that I was worried that someone would have a seizure from the rapid rate of the images flashing on the screen. It doesn't really detract from the gore, but at the same time, it makes no sense. Also, the script isn't always the best when it comes to dialogue. Still, no where near as bad as the first film.

So, this is probably the first time I've ever really loved the sequel and hated the original. If they do a third (and I have a feeling they will), then I hope they continue to improve. Maybe they should take a little more time developing the next one though. Cause while I loved this one, it was kind of obvious that it was rushed.