Change Your Image
rycke
Reviews
Beanbag (2007)
Watch where you sit...
Recently saw this at the Sedona International Film Festival, and it was one of the best entries in the short category. Funny, irrelevant and very nearly clever at times (in between the clichés), it's always nice to find a few "just for fun films" among the serious, often somber films of the festival circuit.
When a young couple moves into a new apartment, the go to the nearest furniture store, where they find a beanbag among the clutter. Though the owner is reluctant to sell it, the young man finds it among his delivered furnishings the next morning...and that's when the terror begins...
As long as you're not a film snob, "Beanbag" should be an entertaining way to spend twenty minutes of your festival day.
Phantoms (1998)
Waste of an idea!
While the book is among my favorites by Koontz, the movie is a terrible let-down. They should have shot for a 2 1/2 hour movie, and utilized this incredible creature, like Koontz did in the novel. Instead, they kept it to a few basic components (the giant moth--from the book!--a dog and humans), and only suggested the creature's potential. At one point the doctor poses that the thing could probably arrange itself into fictional creatures--and we see some fantastic creature drawings in a victims house shortly before she suggests this--then nothing. A great set-up with no pay off. At another time, a computer screen in the background displays something like the "genetic memories" found in the cells of the phantom, and morphs many pictures from human to bug to dinosaur to bear; again--big set-up, no pay off! While I usually can't agree more with the sentiment that CG is WAY overused, it could have really been a very effective tool in this film. After all, this is a MONSTER MOVIE! So show some monster!!!! This is one of the few times that it would have been helped, not hindered (like most), for showing more creature. Think John Carpenter's The Thing, or Spielberg's Jurrasic Park. The book was fantstic. The movie fell flat.
Night of the Creeps (1986)
Woefully under-appreciated '80s horror
The '90s presented a slew of tongue-in-cheek, self-referential horror movies that owe everything to writer/director Fred Dekker and Night of the Creeps. Not only does this SEEM to be the first to capitalize on the name-homage (characters named Raimi, Carpenter, Cronenberg, etc.) but it also appears to be one of the early forerunners in the self-parody vein--I'd spout off a line or two but I don't want to spoil it for you...
So...does it really deserve a 10 out of 10? Yes and no. The effects, while above average, still belong in a B-budget flick. The same can be said of the acting--great for a low-budget horror effort, so-so if held up against the likes of a Pachino or Brando. Ditto for story, dialog, etc, etc. Taken for what it is, you will be hard pressed to find a better effort-- especially from a first-time director.
The Frighteners (1996)
most original horror film in the past ten years **SPOILERS!**
Okay, The Frighteners has some flaws. Why such a low/sporadic body count by Johnny Bartlett until Frank Bannister gets involved, then there are nearly half-a-dozen in two days? Why is Johnny terrorizing Patricia Bradley in the beginning (unless it was "five years ago")? Why does the tunnel of light take so long to appear for Frank at the climax?
Once Johnny is revealed, why does he suddenly quit wearing the cape? BUT--in spite of this, I have no problem overlooking these flaws. Usually, stuff like this bothers me, but not in this case. The pacing, the acting, the F/X all come together in a magical blend of humor and horror that leaves me begging for more. Leave it to Peter Jackson to knock my socks off time after time after time. He is unquestionably the most original writer/director to come along in decades. Hope he stays (in horror/fantasy) for a long, long time!
Dawn of the Dead (2004)
Rethinking, instead of remaking, was brilliant
I'll admit I was VERY leary when I first heard the news. But first-timer Snyder hit the IL' zombie right on the nose... While I could never slam Romero's groundbreaking original, this update was well worth the remake, unlike the '90s version of NOtLD. The pacing and intensity of this new version certainly matches the frantic energy of today's lifestyle, and truly seems to update the story, bringing it into the modern world. I was even pleased with a number of the characters. CJ had a great character arc, and many of the others were reasonably well-rounded (especially coming from the Hollywood horror factory, if you know what I mean). Andy was an interesting touch. So--will Day of the Dead find a modern retelling?