Change Your Image
DistantJ
Reviews
Showgirls (1995)
Brilliant sleazy cult flick, unpredictable and engaging
The ultimate boys' movie? I'd say so, but then that'd be denying it to any women who like to see powerful female characters who put every sleazy, heartless male character in the film in their place.
If I could sum up Showgirls in one sentence it would be "Not what you expect it to be". From the word go, Showgirls surprises you and refuses to play to any of the clichés. There are a number of scenes which will have you beginning to predict an ending which any other movie would have gone for, but this flick rejects the Hollywood templates and tells it's own, surprisingly compelling, story.
That's not to say that there aren't some hard to believe moments, most characters in the movie seem to have the mood swings of a person with bipolar disorder - the smallest unfortunate event sends the characters to tears while a little good news sends them into jumping, giggling madness. It's not necessarily a bad thing in the unusual, illogical world the film creates, but a lot of the time you're watching one-liner spouting cartoons rather than people you can believe and relate to. Like many cult classics, though, RoadHouse comes to mind for example, within a few scenes you'll be immersed in the world of offbeat, sassily- scripted wise crackers.
Of course, this paragraph is inevitable in this kind of movie, and my apologies to any females reading this who may find it sexist, but the real star of this movie is the large amount of female skin on show, and it most certainly delivers. While I don't believe any actor or actress should be cast for their body, Showgirls never fails to deliver some really stunning female figures. Usually, this isn't of importance to me but Showgirls makes a thing out of it's nudity in powerful and impressive dance routines which will fascinate and excite more than they will titillate; the bodies on show here are treated with an almost feminist level of respect, where the heroine's sexuality is shown as something awesome and powerful, to amaze, not to be whistled at by builders.
Indeed, contrary to what may be implied by the film's poster (or even the name), Showgirls portrays some strong, powerful and unpredictable women with deep and interesting histories, particularly the protagonist, whose character development outcome and ending you will not even begin to predict. Nomi (Elizabeth Berkley) takes no prisoners and for once a movie doesn't end in apologies and reunions.
Showgirls is incredibly daring. Much like the film's recurring theme, it gambles. Unfortunately not all gambles pay off and I believe this was completely slated by the mainstream critics, but if you're anything like me, this cult classic hits the jackpot.
A Nightmare on Elm Street (2010)
Like Marmite - You'll Love it or Hate it. I love it.
2010's A Nightmare on Elm Street is a remake/re-imagining of Wes Craven's supernatural slasher classic about a group of teenagers being tormented by badly burned killer Fred Krueger in their dreams, with wounds inflicted in said nightmares manifesting themselves in the real world.
There's a good reason that (as of the writing of this review) this movie's average IMDb rating is smack-bang in the middle, a perfect 5/10. This is as much of a re-imagining and re- thinking of the series as Rob Zombie's Halloween was. Unlike the recent Friday the 13th, A Nightmare on Elm Street has been taken back to the drawing board, to it's very basic premise, and re-thought for 2010.
To put it simply, we're not looking at the same movie with modern day effects here. We're looking at Wes Craven's idea coupled with today's growing concern about paedophiles as well as what we now know about dreams, insomnia and repressed memories. In fact, until the end of the movie, one might be lead to think that the characters are in fact being killed by their own repressed memories, and not some kind of supernatural dream-killer.
Fans of the original will remember the intentional ambiguity of Freddy's past, starting off as a child killer who got away with it, killed by angry town folk taking the law into their own hands, and becoming more and more bizarre as the series went on, involving the strange circumstances of his conception, and a lot of religious undertones. This time around, Krueger's past is made a little more clear, and this is what will make or break the movie for a lot of people. Many were upset by Rob Zombie's choice to explore Michael Myers' past in Halloween, as they felt that a mysterious, faceless enigma is scarier than somebody you know everything about.
I beg to differ... The slasher genre has slowly become a parody of itself, especially after the ingenious Scream quite literally stating all of the rules and clichés, and even if we can block out their knowledge of the 'rules', the killer still often becomes the protagonist in our minds as we become more interested in how they will pick off the next dumb, drunk teenager than who will survive.
This is where Freddy's backstory comes in. Once you know what he is (though still ambiguous through most of the movie, it does start to become pretty clear eventually), you will hate him, fear him, and most definitely root for the heroes of the picture. Freddy's backstory is more disturbing than the original version, and things which Craven may have intended, but never outright said, come to light here.
I will also tell you this - a newcomer to Freddy would probably do better watching this film than a hardcore fan of the original series. Firstly some of the strongest moments in this version are lifted straight out of the original, but more importantly the story is told in a completely different way. Surprisingly, this is not a teenage slasher flick. None of the stereotypes appear here - there's no token black guy, no cheerleader, no geeky do-gooder girl - and there are no house-parties or scenes of characters getting drunk and sleeping with one another. In fact, I don't recall any 'happy' scenes in at all, since we begin the movie with all of the characters already affected by these nightmares.
This, in the long run, leads the movie into much more of a mystery-horror like The Ring, where the primary concern of our remaining characters is staying alive and awake long enough to find out the truth and possibly shed some light on how to save themselves, rather than who is going to die next. On the down side, this does mean we have to spend the first twenty minutes trying to relate to the characters as they get stalked by night and attend funerals by day, and it can be difficult to pick which to try and follow as they are slowly picked off. It pays off once the cast has been nicely 'pruned' though as the few remaining characters really hold your attention and there are none of the "he just went in there on his own, I can tell he's going to die" moments.
So how is Freddy? Robert Englund kept in the role for such a long time that it does become hard to imagine anybody else with the striped sweater and finger-blades, but equally hard to imagine him becoming scary again after the 'wise-cracker' character he became. If you ask me, the only way to have truly brought back Freddy's terrifying nature from the original movie was to re- cast and re-design him, and that's exactly what has been done. Englund has been replaced by Jackie Earle Haley - that would be Rorschach from the brilliant Watchmen - and his make-up, rather than being based on Englund's look, is what, in anybody's imagination, a horribly burned murderer would look like. It will upset some fans, but will scare newcomers in the same way that Englund did in the 70s. Make-up aside, Jackie's acting is, as usual, brilliant, both as burn victim Freddy and as the past Fred Krueger.
I could go on all day about how anybody with an open mind should ignore all of the fan-boy hatred, but there is a 1,000 word limit here. 'Elm Street recreates a brilliant idea from the 70s in a way that is relevant to 2010 and once again scary and believable. Like I will say about Rob Zombie's take on Halloween, this is by far the scariest the series has been since the original movie, and the perfect way to keep such a brilliant idea alive. As such it's probably better for newcomers, but fans will smile at the number of references to the classics, with character names and lines from movies all across the series, even Freddy vs. Jason.
Tunnel Rats (2008)
Incredibly intense
Another unfortunate film meeting "we hate the director because the internet told us to" preconceptions, 1968 Tunnel Rats is a complete success in what it sets out to do - create an overwhelming sense of fear and claustrophobia.
There are war movies, and there are horror movies. This is both. Yet, there is no Predator creature jumping around, no crazy virus, no hallucinations, no. The war is scary enough itself.
There's no patriotic propaganda here, neither is there any political anti-war message, the movie just shows us how scary life as a soldier could be. This is the kind of fear which is felt by real people, every day.
A highly recommended film if you like tension and suspense. More accessible than SEED, more mature than Alone in the Dark.
BloodRayne II: Deliverance (2007)
Enjoyable straight-to-video wild western vampire flick.
To continue my Uwe Boll season, I managed to see Bloodrayne 2: Deliverance - the second "prequel to the games" movie in the Bloodrayne series. This time Rayne is hanging out in the wild west.
It seems to be a common problem in Uwe Boll movies that things randomly slow down at the mid-way point and you can start to lose interest a little. This was my only real complaint about Deliverance, otherwise it had everything which makes a good spaghetti western - a quiet town being terrorised by bandits, a mysterious Clint Eastwood-like hero(ine) who shows up and quietly kicks a lot of ass, an "in jail" segment and a final duel, but adding vampires into the mix was rather cool in my opinion and reminded me of the game Darkwatch. Having Billie the Kid as a centuries old vampire who just happened to hang out in the wild west was pretty cool, too, and Zack Ward was surprisingly good as him.
One noticeable thing about the lower budget is the Vampire effects - in Deliverance, the vampires are simply Dracula-style humans with fangs, the Buffy/Lost Boys-style uglified faces have gone, perhaps intentionally, but most likely from the budget. The action segments were a little toned down, also, with more cutaways (probably to avoid spending extra money on the impact wound effects et cetera) and much less use of the blades and fangs and a little more gun emphasis. It actually is a plus point for this movie as a "spaghetti Western" (was it shot in Italy? I don't know...), but obviously a slight step down from the non-stop slashing and biting in the original Bloodrayne.
It's a shame they weren't able to get Kristanna Loken back with her lady parts all popping out again, but the new chick is still a decent Rayne. I aught to mention how cool Rayne is, too. She passively wanders around the town of Deliverance in a long leather trench-coat and black cowboy hat (goes nice with her red hair, too), saying not a whole lot but beating everybody at card games and kicking the ass of anybody who insults her woman-ness. A female, vampyric Clint, you could say.
Think of it as High Plains Drifter with vampires. If Clint Eastwood kicking ass amongst 2 dimensional characters isn't good enough for you, neither is this, but if you're like me, it's a pretty fun film with some good Sunday afternoon western movie memories coupled with a wicked vampire theme.
Halloween (2007)
Amazing Remake
My trust in mainstream film critics is at an all time low lately, with more and more exciting new movies getting worse and worse critical reception, but I have finally been pushed to the point where I will never trust a mainstream critic again. I just saw Halloween...
Dawn of the Dead, The Hills Have Eyes and The Texas Chainsaw Massacre have been the most praised of the obligatory 21st century horror remakes, but I'd place Halloween high above all of these.
Rather than taking the basic idea and creating a whole new movie, or trying to recreate the movie scene for scene, Halloween falls somewhere inbetween. It tells the story of Michael Myers in a much darker, more down-to-earth way and spends a surprisingly long time on it's prologue. We get a very depthy look into the life of 'the shape' as a child, and then at his time spent in the sanitarium with Dr. Loomis. Some people will miss the mystery of the original film (in fact, I'd say 'the shape' was no longer a fitting name), but after the ridiculous backstories, motivations and explanations from the infinite sequels, it's much better to see him return to being an evil maniac for his own reasons.
Mikey Myers is bigger, badder and more frightening than he's ever been, and with his more realistic backstory and completely removed "mythical being who can't die" business, it feels so much more gritty and real. The killings are brutal, hard hitting and realistic. Not once do we see ridiculous cartoony disembodiments, exploding heads or amusing 'creative' killings - the murders in this film are genuinely frightening and the gore is as realistic as it gets. The mask is a surprisingly accurate recreation of that from the original film, and it's dirty, worn and torn look is reminiscent of the similar badassifying of Leatherface in 2003.
I especially liked one moment when, {spoiler}rather than killing off one character, big Mike mortally wounds her and leaves her for dead, crying in pain{end spoiler}. It was particularly nasty and it's something you rarely see in a slasher film (I mean, normally somebody will receive a small wound and die instantly from it in these films.), it really got me scared.
After being a little concerned about some of the acting in the early clips I saw, when I saw the full movie I was relieved, because it's top notch stuff. Malcolm McDowell is just as great at Dr. Loomis as Donald Pleasance was in 1978, and the girls are a lot more Hollywood and a lot less "the director's friends" this time around. As expected, the actress who played the little girl Jamie so stunningly well for a child actress in the old sequels did amazingly as Annie as well.
It seems to have devided it's audience in half between people who like different aspects of a horror movie. A lot of people seem to be upset because it's graphic, gruesome and fast paced as opposed to the ominous, suspenseful tone of the original. I feel that this indicates Rob Zombie's awareness of the fact that in 2007 a knife-wielding man wearing a mask just isn't going to work like it did in '78.
If you're a slasher fan and you can accept a few differences in tone, you'll love this twisted, darker, more gritty and more human take on the Michael Myers story for the Saw generation. Fantastic stuff!
Don't Go Near the Park (1979)
DON'T GO NEAR THE DVD (Unless you want a good laugh!)
I caught this (though not the whole film) on The Horror Channel (UK), and last month it came out on DVD. I got myself a copy (since it was cheap) to mock review for my upcoming website.
This movie is regarded by some to be the "best bad movie of all time".
The plot? Well, it's an incoherent mess, but here goes... *deep breath* Two cannibal people, one male one female, from a crazy tribe of cannibals in the past got in trouble so an old lady who thinks she's in charge cursed them. The curse causes them to live forever as immortals but constantly age, but they can retain their youth by every certain number of years eating the insides of a virgin who happens to be the guy's daughter, or something like that. So the guy gets married and raises a daughter called Bonnie. And then she one day runs away to the park which is like abandoned and lives in this abandoned house with an old lady (who is obviously the female cannibal), a little kid who swears, and a guy who they call 'cowboy'. The two cannibals want to do some ritual on Bonnie and eat her guts. WHAT WILL SHE DO?!!
The film does feature Linnea Quigely in her first ever role, and yes, she gets her bits out. Though obviously not quite as much as in Return of the Living Dead! Most of the actors do a rubbish job, though, and the camera-work, directing and effects are all absurdly bad for it's time - after the first time I watched it I was stunned to find out it was an early 80's flick, it barely passes as an early 70's low budget horror! - and absurd pointless ideas just appear now and then which will just get you laughing.
Oh and did I mention the SUPER CANNIBAL LASER EYES? That's right, when somebody ticks them off they can use their SUPER CANNIBAL LASER EYES on them. Doesn't kill them. Just makes them hurt a little, apparently.
The whole thing feels like something some students might make, only I doubt even students would include SUPER CANNIBAL LASER EYES.
Top notch if you want to see a really bad movie and laugh. If on the other hand you are after a decent horror movie, I would recommend that you DON'T GO NEAR THE DVD.
Suspiria (1977)
The only thing more terrifying than the last twelve minutes of Suspiria... Are the first ninety-two.
There was a lot of Hoopla about this film on all of the horror websites I've seen. The cover of the DVD says "One of the scariest movies ever made...", but I've learned it's wise to ignore that over-used line because it's usually bullshit and sets your expectations way higher for the film. But who could resist buying a fairytale film by Italo-lunatic Argento, especially one which is referred to as his 'masterpiece'? Our heroine Suzi Banyon, an American girl with a serious need for some eyebrow plucking, moves into a dance school in Germany, but grisly murders begin to occur there, and she discovers that the school has a dark, supernatural secret...
The film opens so well. Right from the beginning there's a sense of dread, the killer eerie music by Goblin feels amazingly ominous and may even remind you of the opening of Mike Oldfield's masterpiece "Tubular Bells", which was used so well in "The Exorcist", and achieves the same eerie feeling.
A few moments into the movie we are treated to an extremely frightening scene involving a window (but doesn't involve catching Rosie O'Donnell changing with the curtains open, there is a limit to how scary these films can be), which then breaks into what has to be one of the most original death scenes I have seen. A sign of things to come? Let's hope so.
For the rest of the movie we see some more stylised kills, though none of them quite living up to the first one. However, what drives this film is the tension and atmosphere. I remember years and years ago, seeing the sexy ass French lesbian Vampire film, "Shiver of the Vampires", and admiring the atmosphere, in particular the use of red lighting in some scenes, where you wouldn't really find red light. The thing is, coloured light effects are actually not very common at all in modern horror films - they're scrapped in favour of realism, but in the sexy Vampire flick, when I wasn't too busy staring at the nude 70's French chicks, they worked a charm. Suspiria proved to me that the Italians can do that even better, and has provided me with a film which seems to be entirely based around using that kind of atmosphere, to extreme lengths.
As with all of Dario Argento's movies, the acting and dialogue is, well, comedy genius. Of the unintended kind. Dario ain't great at English and it shows. He also likes to record the movie without sound and dub the voices on afterwards, which knocks the cheese factor up another 10 levels or so. He even allows some of his actors to speak in Italian to then be dubbed over in English, which causes some painfully bad lip sync.
"The only thing more terrifying than the last twelve minutes of Suspiria, are the first ninety-two", croaks the creepy voice-over man on the rather korny US theatrical trailer. There's actually an amusing irony to this little gimmick tag-line, as the end of the movie actually isn't quite as good as the rest. Just as the secrets are finally being uncovered, the final battle breaks out and is over before you know it. Questions are left unanswered, before you have even been given the time to ask the question. When our bushy eyebrowed heroine manages to destroy the 'final villain', you almost want to say "was that it?".
Other than the slight cop-out of an ending, the film was great fun, and the atmosphere wins hands down and this instantly gets to sit in my 'favourites' list.
Do yourself a favour and watch Suspiria in the dark. You just can't beat the atmosphere.