This review will most likely be brief, cause there's not a whole lot to say.
"Gamer" reminds me of just about every other dystopian futuristic movie where a bunch of convicts are forced to play a game in which they either die or survive to play x amount of rounds for freedom. But, of course, freedom is just jokes. Oooh, didn't see that plot twist coming, did I?
The difference here is that the "avatars" of the game are actually people, like in the SOYLENT GREEN IS PEOPLE! sort of sense. Controlled by rich assholes. There's also a less violent game which is kinda like the Sims meets Second Life, but with people and fat assholes controlling them. See the theme? The moral to this movie is clearly "Remember how people warned you that you're either getting your ass kicked by a kid or that hot chick is actually a fat dude whacking off? Yeah, IT'S TRUE!"
So not a whole lot about this movie hasn't been done before, and in many cases, a hell of a lot better.

But you know where this movie kicked all sorts of ass? Random dance scene!! That's right! Why not? A bad movie needs an awesome dance number to confuse viewers into thinking it could have been good. Not just a dance number, but a dance number with killings!
(so, you know...kinda violent.)

Watch Gamer (2009) - Dance Scene in Entertainment

So there. I just saved you two hours and gave you the best part.

A conversation with my husband while watching a movie with Sean Bean:

Him: "What's that movie where he's beating up women and dragging them by their hair and shit?"
Me: "My fantasy."
Him: "..."

P.S. Lady hitting is wrong, people!

I had this utterly brilliant idea for a script and I want to pass the goodness to the world as a treat. Here world, have this nugget and savor it. Let it melt in your mouth as you inhale the sweet aroma. Let it drip... okay, I'm freaking myself out now.

I call this idea "Figgy Pudding". It's a slasher flick. Close your eyes. No, wait..you won't be able to read this if you do that. Pretend you are closing your eyes so you can pretend to imagine the structure I'm throwing at you. Let's say our main locale is a dorm. Eh, I know what you're thinking: "Dorms are SO overdone for Christmas slashers." True, my friends. But we need a single location of terror for this to work and "convalescent home" just doesn't have the same ring to it. That's a whole other issue of terror there.
Okay, so dorm-like setting. Enter the carolers. The carolers are the new mutant cannibal backwoods folks for 2010. Trust. The carolers seem oh so sweet and normal, but deep down they are some crazy bastards. They enter the scene singing at the dorm's steps. Maybe the dorm inhabitants poke a little fun, cause we all know that college students are all jackasses, right? Unfortunately for these jackasses, the carolers have picked them as their target for the evening's festivities (wink wink). As they get to their closing song ("We Wish You A Merry Christmas"), they get to the verse about figgy pudding:

But these freaks are serious. They want their figgy pudding and they plan on killing until they get it. Unfortunately for the college students, no one knows what the fuck figgy pudding actually is, so of course no one has any on them. Then the stalking and killing begins, complete with over the top death scenes utilizing any and all improbably mortal Christmas decorations, along with corny one-liners like "Your balls have been jingled".

So there. Take it, love it and give it a home. Just don't name any of the characters some stupid shit like "Maximilian Stead" and describe him as "the wealthy, playboy type" or this entire deal is null and void, I shit you not. It's important to have standards, even for shitty slashers flicks.

And check it out: flaming figgy pudding!

Image by tedkerwin via Flickr

I started writing this post several months ago and sat on it for a while until I had actually seen the movie in question. Being informed, yo!
Back those some odd months ago on a message board, there was an increasingly heated discussion over the upcoming film "Orphan" and whether it paints older adopted children in a bad light and furthermore whether doing so will affect the future of older child adoptions.

Yes, I'm being quite serious.

Although by discussion, I mean more like "OMG THIS MOVIE IS HORRIBLE THE CHILDREN THINK OF THE CHILDREN!!!11!!". And yes, I'm grossly exaggerating.

It's a bit difficult for me to wrap my head around this sort of knee-jerk reaction, but nonetheless, I try to be understanding, really, and respond rationally to thoughts like this. I guess some basic human genetic workings can allow me to see that yes, this could be a sensitive subject for some people. I realize that I'm biased, from someone who aspires to be more involved in the movie business and as someone that watches a hell of a lot of movies. And cause I'm just too incredibly awesome for words. YEAH!

But with that in mind, my approach to this topic is one of logic. You see, it's my belief that if a person is so impressionable to think that older children are evil because of something they saw in a movie and therefore not worthy of adoption, then that person is not in the right state of mind to be adopting a child anyway. This could be, perhaps, an unpopular opinion, but mine is that just because one has the capability of becoming a parent doesn't mean they should go ahead and do that.

One could argue that movies do provoke a visceral but sometimes subconscious feeling in us that can leave a lasting imprint on us. I, for example, still look at the crawlspace to the attic with some irrational trepidation because I think to myself that the Grudge could quite easily make her way down there and get me. But when I think rationally and without this emotion, do I honestly believe that? No way. No, really... I know it's fake.
When I had my youngest son, and I was in the hospital holding him in my arms, there was a marathon of none other than "The Omen" movies. Sure, I did eye him a little suspiciously, but did I really think he was going to be a Damien? No way.
So I would hope that anyone looking to adopt a child would think through the idea rationally and not allow a movie to influence that decision. To me, that's the normal response to have.

Now, like I said, I watch a hell of a lot of movies. Some are very violent or some can be grossly misogynistic -- a topic that tends to get my fires o' wrath burning -- or they deal with uncomfortable subject matter. But I still see those movies as a story someone felt the need to tell. More importantly, they should be allowed to tell that story, regardless if people's feelings can get hurt, and we should have the choice to listen to their story or not. Life is not a comfortable existence where we all walk around placating each other. How unbelievably dull would that be, not to mention highly impossible?

My stance has been, and always will be, if you are offended, don't watch it.

I'm not referring to the complete "win" of a moment last week where I managed to completely forget parent/teacher conferences. I have plenty of excuses for that one. Actually, this has nothing to do with me cause I'm such a *cough cough* perfect parent and all. No, really, the forgetting of the conferences was SUCH a fluke.

Yeah, I don't buy that either.

Yesterday morning, I took over sick child watch to let my husband get some sleep. Our youngest was struck with a nasty stomach bug off and on during the weekend and had it come back "on" Sunday night right after we decided to go to bed. My kids have radar like that to detect when is the opportune time to get sick all over the place.
Anyway, after that lovely night, I stumbled out of bed and into the living room, where my son had been up ALL night watching a variety of cartoons and kids movies. As I drifted in and out of early morning consciousness, he turned on "Dennis the Menace" on from Netflix. I know at some point in my lifetime I have seen this movie, but my mind likes to block it out. I never really cared much for the comic strip (which, by the way, 58 years old..sheesh!) or the movie, and as I lay there blinking at the tv, it occurred to me why: Dennis's parents really suck at the whole parenting thing. Now I get that Mr.Wilson actually likes Dennis deep down, but think about the whole situation. What parent in their right mind would allow their 7 year old child run amuck throughout the neighborhood and terrorize a poor retiree? Sure, Dennis may "mean well" with his antics and such, but the relationship dynamic between Mr. Wilson and Dennis is still odd, to put it lightly. Now, granted, I don't know if the dynamic is significantly different between an old dude and a girl vs old dude and boy, but I don't remember being too friendly with the Mr. Wilson-esque characters in my neighborhood growing up. There were actually two of them. First was Ralph, the blatantly racist war veteran whose main fear rotated between someone walking in his yard and someone of the "wrong" skin color moving in the neighborhood. On a side note, I always thought his name was "Rowlf"..like the muppet.

not Ralph the neighbor

Okay, I feel better having really stuck it too the fictional comic strip parents! Yeah! In your face, fake parents!

My excuse for the hiatus is a legitimate one: been too wrapped up in working on a movie with Monkey Ltd Productions.
All this week has been shooting the actual film. It's been hard work; in fact, it feels more like actual "work" than anything I've done in awhile. I come home physically exhausted and have absolutely no problem falling asleep. Who would have guessed hiking around all day would cure insomnia? Ha!

And speaking of movies, I've gotten in a few, but I seem to be on a kick of watching strange and/or disturbing films. Not on purpose either...it just seems to be happening that way. Visitor Q was one of 'em. No matter how weird that movie got, no matter what taboo it threw at you, it somehow managed to trump itself with something even more taboo.
Another one I just finished is Calvaire, which had both animal loving and unintentional homosexual rape. You'd have to see it to understand the "unintentional " part.
I've come across one of the stranger scenes on Youtube. There is nothing I could possibly say to set up this clip to have it make anymore sense than what you see. There is no context to understand. It happens, and the viewer observes it helplessly.
It really captures the 'wtf' feeling of the movie:

I need to find some "normal" films..

I hate to follow up a movie post with another movie post, but so be it. (And I'm aware of my lack of rating for that last one. I just couldn't justify a rating.)

I attempted to watch Blindness this afternoon because I'm either a sadist, or I have a weird Julianne Moore nekkid fetish that no one told me about. I say attempted, because it really did take some effort to sit still, but unfortunately shiny objects won in the end. I think I even left to take a shower at one point.
My problem with this movie is that it was a combination of shit that I hate: weak and stupid characters, and this air of being so deep and powerful. The Julianne Moore character is just smack-worthy. The character's lack of action at so many different points in the film where she clearly had the upper hand was maddening. The whole plot of the movie rests on the fact that she, amongst this quarantine of blind folk, still retains her eye sight. Now had that been me, you could guarantee that I'd be fucking with people and using that to my advantage. But as stuff continued to unravel and play out, she did NOTHING.
And I'm not a prude by any stretch of the imagination. I love me some nakeds. But the sex scenes in this movie were almost unbearable to watch. And I'm not just talking about the weird rape orgies either. It was like watching a porn, but being tricked cause it's not really a porn. It's making a statement! To that, I say 'fuck you and your supposed statements'. I get it. People will go Lord of the Flies when given the opportunity. The government is shady. Yada yada yada. Show more angry fucking to really drive your point home.
It's a shame, cause the movie started off rather interesting. It's a slow-mover. I'll accept that my dislike and disgust of the main character could be preventing me from taking in all the film and maintaining focus. So I'll withhold a rating yet again.

It's been a while since I did a movie review, but I had to comment on this one. And it's not horror! Variety!

From IMDB: Mattress salesman Brian Weathersby (Paul Dano) finds his plan to adopt a Chinese baby augmented by the arrival of a young woman, Happy (Zooey Deschanel), who comes into his workplaces, falls asleep on one of the beds, and starts to affect his life upon waking up.

This movie was pegged as an "Indie Comedy" as Netflix. I'm beginning to realize that translate to "bullshit".

I would like to recreate the movie in my own words. Ahem.

Brian: I'm Indie. Look at my lack of emotion. So indie, it's comedic.
Happy: I have an awesomely indie nickname. And I'm just like every other woman in an Indie movie. I am so upfront about sex that it's so Indie-licious shocking. And comedic. Commitment issues? INDIE!
Brian: You know what's funny? I want a Chinese baby. Cause that is Indie.
Me: Wait a minute...shouldn't you just be with an Asian woman and driving a Volkswagen like all the VW commercials want you to think white guys with an Indie-hip edge do?
Random Person: I... I don't think you're supposed to say that. Isn't that kind of offensive?
Me: How the hell should I know? Ask Volkswagen. THEY started it.
John Goodman: What the fuck am I doing in this movie?
Director: It's cool. Just act quirky like you do in all the Coen Bros movies. It'll be Indie. And comedic.
Me: Okay, I get the indie thing. But you guys have to admit, this really isn't funny.
Director: What about Zach Galifianakis? He's funny.
Me: That he is. But you know, throwing him in bizarre scenes and acting like it has some really deep meaning, while being pretentiously Indie, is not completely comedic.
Director: ....
Me: You see where I'm going with this? Overly quirky and weirdness does not a comedy make.
Director: Did I mention the Chinese baby plot line? COMEDY! INDIE!
Me: STFU.

/Fin/

Enjoy this short.

I went into this film not knowing too much about it other than it was a thriller and it was French. I was somewhat hesistant as my experience with French thrillers thus far ranged from the quite good ("Ills") to the completely overrated/I want those hours of my life back sort of way("Cache"). But I figured what the hell? Honestly, I really just wanted to take a walk to the theater and enjoy a film and this seemed like the best option. Scientific, I know.
Back to the film. Basic synopsis is that a man and his wife are out nekkid swimming. She goes back to the shore, he hears her scream and goes towards her. Unfortunately, he's knocked unconcious by an unknown assailant before he gets to her. When he wakes up, he's informed that she is dead, the apparent victim of a serial killer. Six years later, he receives an anonymous email with a link to a webcam. As he is watching, a woman appears on screen who looks a hell of a lot like his dead wife. He receives an email infoming him to "tell no one." The rest of the movie follows him as he tries to piece together what really happened 6 years ago and what is happening now.
This movie sets up the atmosphere perfectly. Despite running over two hours, I felt engrossed the entire time, waiting for all the pieces to fall together, which they do within perfect timing and context of the story. I also was struck how visually the movie built up tension and atmosphere to work along with the story. The cast worked well in their respective characters, especially the leds. As I've seen on other sites, this movie feels like a combo of "Vertigo" and "The Vanishing". This movie was what Cache should have been, but stick figures aren't too frightening really. (If you saw Cache, you'd know about the stick figures.)

Omg, I am, like, soooo goth. You can tell because I'm wearing black lipstick and I have severe daddy issues. Oh, and I'm a haxor who gets all my hawt hax goodies from sites that look like they were designed circa 1998. I will make them all pay for sending me to a school for the overprivileged. Bastards. And when obscure characters who may or may not have been previously introduced die, I will be running around giggling like a 14 year old girl at a college and be making awkwardly timed googly eyes at a guy who I may or may not have some sort of accomplished relationship with. But the chef will live at least.

I'll admit it; I only saw this movie cause Naveen Andrews was in it. Imagine my disappointment when he ended up much like the Sean Bean character in "Flight Plan". (really capable actor horribly wasted on a crap role with very little screen time.) The story is developed around a couple who get the crap kicked out of them one night, ending in a tragic way (go on, guess) and the vigilante actions the woman undertakes. My problems began with the fact that no one could possibly beat down Sayid's ass like that. Yes, I realize it's a different character, but c'mon. (Just try to watch the dance sequence from 'Bride and Prejudice' without giggling. I dare you.) Next, there was a scene in which Jodie Foster's character is trying to get a gun and upon hearing there's a 30 day waiting fee, she blurts out something like 'I won't survive 30 days". So she's lived in the city for a number of years and now is convinced death and danger await on every street corner? Oddly enough, it does in this movie. It was just hard to swallow. The movie just felt like a weak attempt with no emotional pull to it and a whole lotta wasted talent. But there is a scene involving Sayid and a nip. (okay, naveen...sheesh)

I gotta tell you, I felt a little bad for this flick. It seemed like it was getting the shaft from Lionsgate, as it got a limited release into second run theatres. But in retrospect, I'm glad it only cost me $3 to see it.
This is your basic 'guy in the wrong place at the right time' sort of story involving a photographer who thinks he may know who is behind a slew of missing people. It really doesn't get much more complicated than that until the last 20 mins or so.
The pros of this film lie solely in the effects and gore. As sick as it may be, my penchant for horror films and the after effect of a slightly jaded sensibility when it comes to gore, I find myself often giggling in delight over how extreme some filmmakers go. It's a profound appreciation for the work involved in creating those effects. How many times do you get to see an eyeball pop out of the skull and towards the camera, really? If gore is really the only thing you need from a film, this will satiate you.
However, if it's strong plot and character development you need, you are sorely out of luck. This movie switches gears right near the end, which was a little tiring. Even more tiring was the absolutely lack in likability of the characters. I get it, he's a photographer who wants to be edgy. That is about as deep as he goes. There's a very awkward exchange between the photog and his woman. She's tired of his obsession and says to him "Photograph what you love." *cry, cry* He responds, equally sappy and looking like a strung out crackhead, "I love you". Then she proceeds to remove her clothing and he attempts to take pictures, but alas...he can't. So she runs half naked into the bedroom crying and slams the door.
My reaction was "What the hell?"
If there was an actual relationship built there, then maybe that scene would have played out better. Instead, it was just an uncomfortable moment in the film, trying to understand the dynamic.
I will also say that this film had some of the dumbest folks ever written doing things that you would hope normal people would never consider.
It is a shame as I was holding out hope for this one. See it for the visuals, but don't expect anything beyond that.

It took me about 20 mins before I figured out why Kate Beckinsale was looking so odd. (Because it was not KB, but Rhona Mitra).
So what do you do when a deadly virus gets out of control? Close the country of course and accept your losses. (Duh.)
And what do you do when you're in the country that has been cut off from the rest of the world and abandoned to die?
Well...you either become all Thunderdome, cannibalistic, get some tattoos, and dye your hair...or you decide to go old school. Really old school. Medieval old school. Complete with medieval outfits.
Talk about clashing.

Story-wise, this movie isn't the strongest. (That seems to be a reoccurring theme in my reviews tonight.) The issue may just be from the dubbing though. Where this movie shines (and earns 4 delicious nanas) is the actual camera work and cinematography. It is absolutely gorgeous. The colors, the lighting, the atmosphere...just perfect. And the first death in the movie...yeowz. I watched that scene several times just to take it in. Classic!

It's like the Blair Witch, but without the Blair Witch. And an interesting story. And quality. Actually, it's nothing like the Blair Witch, but people keep making comparisons between the two. (You see, each movie involves people going into the woods. And some video cameras. And disappearing bodies.)
Honestly, the ending is what completely and utterly trashed this movie for me. I don't know where the filmmakers were going with it, but it would have been half a nana better without it.

Best.Shit.Ever.

A documentary on the man who held the top Donkey Kong score, and the guy who decided to beat it. Sure, on the surface, it may seem like a total nerdfest. But this is a really captivating documentary. I found myself rooting for Steve Wiebe and deciding that Billy Mitchell can suck an egg. It's like a simple good vrs evil tale...only Billy Mitchell isn't really evil. He's just painted as the 'bad guy' in this movie. I think even for a non-gamer, this would be an entertaining flick.

I guess I missed what the fuss was about this movie. I was quite disappointed after reading/hearing some good reviews.
Honestly, when it comes down to it, mockingbird-like ivy that crawls all up in people doesn't seem like such a solid story line after all. Who would have thought?

Let me preface this by saying I have not seen the other movies in the Rambo series...or if I have, it's been so long ago that I can't remember.
So I'm not a rom-com kind of chick in the least bit, in case you failed to notice the complete lack of reviews in that genre. I enjoy the spooks, the sci-fi, the dramas, and a good ol' fashioned action flick. Best Christmas movie ever? Die Hard, hands down. So Rambo was looking pretty appealing, what with the guns and the explosions and all.
My officemate told me that I would be laughing at the sheer over-the-top approach of the violence in this movie, and he was right. I had meant to watch this more than once just to count how many times a head got blown off. It was really insane. Story-wise, it didn't get too fancy, and that was not a negative thing in this case. It was still entertaining to the very end. (You know...as entertaining as people getting blown up can be.)

To simply put it, I hated this movie. Hated it. I don't care what sort of social statement the director was trying to make, it was a poorly made film overfilled with gimmicky shots.
You know when you find yourself saying 'Oh just kill them already so I can go to bed', it's not a gripping film in the least bit.

Pflt.

That's what I think of it.

I may be a bit generous in giving The Strangers 3 nanas, but you know...I did like it. It's a fairly simple story line - a couple goes to a vacation house in the middle of the night when some masked folks start effing with them. Terror ensues.
One of the things that struck me about this film (and similarly, Ils) was the lack of character development on either side of the spectrum. As an audience, we're exposed to very little back story on our couple. It's evident from the get go that there is some tension between them, and we get to see a handful of flashbacks, but it is bare bones at best. I think it's the sort of awkwardness of the situation that adds to atmosphere once the creepy stuff starts happening. The creepy stuff, by the way, was something else I enjoyed. Sure, there is a definitive suspension of belief that three people can randomly pick a house and be able to maneuver about as if they built it themselves, but hey, who cares? I like to think that crazy people have some sort of super crazy powers anyway, so mental blueprints of a property they've just been staking out seems entirely feasible to me.
A complaint I read quite often about this film is how it's not an original idea. Well, what the hell is? We live in the decade of remakes, and people want to complain about a fairly common fear being revisioned for a film? How about all the good Asian flicks being made into 'merican versions, hmm? That seems like a much better complaint to have. (I may be biased, considering my grumpy disposition to remakes.)
Anyway, I did enjoy this film right down to the really uncomfortable ending. (That sounds messed up. I didn't enjoy the ending per se, but the rest was good.)

I've been dancing around this one for a while cause frankly, I'm not sure what to think. Half of me didn't want the series touched with and the other half couldn't wait to see Indy again on the big screen. Sitting in the theatre, I felt like a kid again. My mom was the Original Pirate. The O.P. Back in the day, she used to smuggle in bags of candy in her purse along with a tape recorder to record the movie's sound, which we would later listen to at home. I'm not talking about a mini recorder. I mean a full-on recorder that could easily slip into her behemoth mom-purse. And if you were to listen back to those recordings of "Temple of Doom" or "Raiders...", you would no doubt hear me whining at various parts. You see, I was a pansy-ass as a kid. I was terrified of Scooby-Doo to the point where I'd be hiding on my parents' steps in tears because no one would watch it with me. Yeah, lovely, right? My own kid mocked me when I told him that one.
So, yes...the delicate balance of the Indy movies. Like I said, I'm still undecided as I only saw it once and not, oh I don't know, three times like my brothers. (Because they are NERDS. HAHAHA! I'm joking.Really, I am.) I had some problems with it. Shia Labeouf can go suck an egg as far as I'm concerned. Not that I don't like him. I enjoyed "Disturbia". But this is Indiana Jones and I do not appreciate getting set up here for a replacement Indy. I had some issues with the flick, but I did enjoy it. Maybe I need a few more viewings to make up my mind completely. I feel 3 nanas is a safe "middle of the road" rating. Not completely against it, but not in love with it either.

Very creepy and beautifully shot flick. A woman moves with her husband and son back to the orphanage she grew up in to renovate it and open it as a home for disabled children. But slowly, her son starts acting odd and talking about invisible friends. And that's just setting the mood!
I find any movie that involves creepy kids to be especially scary, but this one really did it well. Watch it with the lights out!

The synopsis on Netflix reads "In this byzantine psychological thriller directed by Dario Piana, working stiff Ian Stone (Mike Vogel) finds himself trapped in a bizarre reality: Every day he dies a horrific death at the hands of a killer, only to be resurrected and murdered again. Can Ian get to the bottom of the mystery and break the recurring cycle of death and rebirth?"
My theory is whomever wrote that synopsis had been waiting patiently for years for the opportunity to use "byzantine" in a sentence.
Another of the After Dark series, this one just didn't cut it for me. At first it seemed promising, but then the story just got messy. Not to mention, I swear the main character had an accent in the beginning of the movie and lost it later on. What the hell? Nice effects though.

I caught this little ditty on Netflix. Ever since Cache, amongst others, I've been a bit hesitant to dive right into a French flick. (Sorry, but I did not find anything mysterious and deep about an hour's worth of cars driving by and a man getting a stick figure drawing. Ooooooh.)
Anyway, I decided 'why the hell not' and was pleasantly surprised how creeped the hell I out I got. The story is simple- a couple is in their remote house one night with a group of people start fucking with them. I think it's the simplicity that keeps it creepy. From the first scene, you have no idea who the antagonists are or what their motives are. It's just all kinds of freaky. It's a very straightforward flick with not a lot of time spent on character development or any other extra devices. It just takes the story and runs with it. Definitely worth a watch.

Last November, I did not see any of the After Dark Horrorfest movies in the theatre. Partly because I forgot (hey, it was peak season at work) and partly because I had no desire to spend the money on a ticket. Thank god for Netflix though. I've placed all eight movies in my queue, which allows me to indulge without feeling bad for spending money should the movie inevitably suck.
On a related/unrelated note, I will take this moment to state that the prior Horrorfest woman was way more hot than the blonde woman that's on there now. And I am completely comfortable in my sexuality to be able to point that out.

First on the list was Borderland. No real reason why, it just seemed like a good one to start with. To state it simply, I am a little tired of the "people go to [fill in the blank] to indulge in [sex/drugs/drinking]" set up in movies. But hey, I guess it is a formula that works.
We get that same setup in Borderland because apparently there are not enough drunk women in the US that men can sex up, and Mexico seems to be the logical place to get some. We have our three men stereotypes for this sort of set up: the "innocent" guy who you really want to find happiness, the jackass who has no regard for anything but himself, and the anti-hero who just barely passes as likable with his aloof charm. One of them ends up getting jacked by some Satan-worshiping cult members who, oddly enough, are in need of a human sacrifice. (Talk about timing, huh?) This means in the movie world that the remaining two must search out their friend despite the risks.

(Just an fyi to folks I know- should any of you suddenly go missing in a foreign country and there's a definite air of weirdness going on, I just want you to know that I will deal with it from the safety of my own country. Not to be selfish or anything, but I don't want the crazies coming after me as well.)

Gore-wise, the movie did not disappoint (assuming you are into such things). I had to look away several times cause there were some things with eyeballs that I just cannot deal with. Despite how closely to formula this movie followed, it was a good creepy film. It freaked me out on so many levels. Plus, it was a good (albeit small) role for Sean Astin as a creepy cult dude.
3 out of 5 nanas.

Once upon a time, there was an odd man who decided that he was going to camp with the grizzly bears in Alaska for months at a time. He did this for thirteen summers until the last summer, he was attacked and killed by a grizzly bear. There's irony in there, I'm sure of it.

This documentary follows the experiences of Timothy Treadwell, who may have had a screw loose or something. I mean, they're freaking grizzly bears. Besides that though, this offers a really intimate look into Treadwell's life with the said grizzly bears. Very captivating and sometimes surreal. And then there's those moments where the calm, seemingly passive bear-hugger breaks out the obscenities. Actually those moments were the most disturbing because they created such a juxtaposition of his character. Example "Hello Mr Fox. I love you Mr Fox. GIVE ME THE FUCKING HAT BACK!" Yeaaah.

There were some moments of eerie foreshadowing as Treadwell spoke about how he wouldn't die at the hands of a bear and how he figured out how to live amongst them. Gave me chills. the only issue I had with this film was that some of the non-footage scenes seemed over dramatic and not so much raw documentary.
And then there was the bear poop scene, which was unintentionally funny and disturbing and disgusting all at the same time.

And now I leave you with my favorite line from the film - "This will be the motherfucker!"

Ever notice in movies, people driving along the road are always capable of not looking at the road? They will have their head turned to the side engaged in a conversation with their passenger and just keep driving along merrily- well, until the passenger has to say "Oh my god, lookout!" or something. Maybe it's just me, but I am so accustomed to talking with the eyes straight ahead on the road with the occasional glance towards the person, but not a long lingering stare. I can't do it. I would drive off the road, no doubt. I understand they aren't "really" driving and all. The lack of seatbelts drive me nuts too. I feel naked without a belt and cannot understand how people can do that for long periods of time.
Then again, maybe I'm the freak here. Maybe this is like the pinky situation. (I always found long pinkies disgustingly freakish. Then one day, I realize that I have shorter-than-normal pinkies, and I am the one with the freak fingers. Gave me a whole new perspective on life. Mainly that I had freak fingers.)

Eastern Promises
My brother says this movie should be called Viggo Promises (to show you his balls). I'm inclined to agree. My only issue is that I never figured out where the hell they were located. I figured some place in Russia, but there was a ridiculous amount of British people there. Maybe England, but then the issue I just mentioned is reversed. I should probably look it up. I just don't feel like it.

30 Days of Night
I forgot this was out and put Grizzly Man on my Netflix first. Haven't watched that yet since I managed to forget where I put it in the whole 3 days I've had it, so we picked this up at Blockbuster. Damn fine vampire movie. Still would like to read the graphic novel. Gory, scary, and perplexing as to why there was not one, but two vampires that looked like Marilyn Manson. Remind me never to move to the northern tips of the hemisphere - unless there is a zombie invasion. Pretty sure the cold would slow them down.

Dan in Real Life
Cute little film. Had some absolutely hilarious moments. Also had an actress that I was trying to figure out where I had seen her before. I finally narrowed it down to "She was on a sitcom about a dude who was single...and she was one of the friends." (Oddly enough, the show was "The Single Guy")

No Country for Old Men
Crazy, crazy flick. Javier Bardem is incredible, but I absolutely cannot figure out how he's a supporting actor when it seems he gets the most screen time. I dunno. But well deserving of an Oscar.

I don't know why I do certain things- certain things that I know I dislike or make me uncomfortable. For example, there's my need to continue to smell something bad. I also try to force this on unsuspecting bystanders with a friendly "Oh my god, this smells disgusting. Here, smell this!" It's like I mentally try to dissect how something could possibly smell so bad.
But it's not a bad smell that has me in a fix tonight. It's the film Elephant. I freaking hate this movie. I loathe it. Despise it. And yet, every damn time it's on, I force myself to sit through it. Some of the scenes are excruciatingly laborious that it's not unlike sitting through a root canal. I just want it to be over, but I can't get up and walk away. Worst of all, I'm trying to figure out why oh why this has 3 damn stars according to my cable provider, not to mention how it won the Palme d'Or. I'm going to attribute all of it to the subject matter and not on the merits of the actual film. It can't possibly be the film.

Another Oscar party come and gone. I don't think I actually saw any of the movies nominated other than Juno (awesome & cute movie by the way), which made my voting choices tough. I think I only ended up with 6 or 7 correct guesses, which was pathetic.
All in all, not a bad Oscars. I mean, it is what it is. There's only so much they can do to jazz it up.
What did really irk me (and it appears quite a few people) was the omission of Brad Renfro from the "In Memoriam" piece. What the hells? I realize he wasn't some big superstar, but let's face it- a lot of people didn't know who the hell half of the people were anyway. Boo. Hiss. Yeah, like that.
Ah well. I think next year, I will make it a point to see a large percentage of the nominated movies beforehand so my choices are a lot less sucky.

Seems to be a new formula rule in movies lately:
If you call a woman that lovely c-word, she will inevitably kill you.
Sure, maybe you had a slight chance of getting off just badly injured and beat up. But if you let the c-bomb slip, you're done for. So far, it seems to be in a rather nasty manner.

I just watched the trailer for Alien vs Predator: Requim and I gotta say, it doesn't look like a suckfest. It looks like there's actual carnage galore and not containing a BFF moment that happened in the first AVP.

I could list all the issues I had with this movie, but who has the time? Bad acting, weak dialog, plot holes, and poor character development about sum it up.

And then there is the issue that Lindsay Lohan plays a stripper who never actually removes any clothes. Then there was the amputee sex, a phrase that will most definitely skew keyword searches yet again.

Anyway, I'm thinking the story wasn't half bad, it was just executed poorly.

For years I have proclaimed my absolute hatred for The Breakfast Club. I had seen it many, many years ago (way before my teen years) and it just didn't do it for me. I've always groaned whenever anyone said how good of a movie it was. However, I was beginning to consider that perhaps I was too harsh on the movie. I couldn't remember much about it after all, just that I hadn't cared for it.
Well, I just finished watching it and I have to say...wow...that is a damn fine movie. I'm not entirely sure what I hated about it. Frankly, I'm feeling kinda silly for hating it this long.

So I'm half-ass watching the remake of The Omen. And by half-assed, I mean it's on in the background and I have no interest in taking Julia Stiles seriously as an actress so I'm trying to ignore it.
Anyway...the scene where the nanny takes a swan dive off the roof of the house is perplexing. The nanny jumps and hangs herself...pause...a woman screams at...the dead nanny? And panic ensues. Where the hell were the people running to screaming? Why were they screaming? They weren't being chased down by anything. No one was threatening them. The person was already dead. I thought perhaps they were concerned parents trying to shield their children's eyes after the fact, but that still doesn't explain why they needed to scream to do it.

Who the fuck put Julia Stiles in this movie? I'm half expecting her to break out into hip hop moves.

Marie Antoinette
I have no idea how historically accurate this was, nor do I care. It was fun, stylistic, and entertaining. Plus, it had the weirdest damn cast I have every seen assembled.

The Return
Just...crap...I have no idea what the hell was going on most of the time, but I'm pretty damn sure it had nothing to do with the synopsis.

Shutter
While Art of the Devil made me question the Thai branch of Asian horror, this movie vindicated it. Completely scared the shit out of me.

Pan's Labyrinth
The fantasy aspects mixed a very grim background made this a fascinating watch. The makeup/creature effects were amazing. Oh, and don't get tricked into thinking perhaps this is a kid's movie, else the scene of a man having his face crushed in by a bottle will shock the hell outta you.

Penny Dreadful
Um..a horror movie with an Emo Philips-esque badguy? No thanks.

Christmas Evil
Not even gonna bother...

L'Enfant (The Child)
Wow. Very...french... Moving though. Although, the ending could have been better.

Monster House
A fun, enjoyable flick. And Steve Buscemi is in it. What more could you ask?

I'm watching the special features of The Hitcher (2007), and there's one bit where they try to pull off this whole news report to chronicle the killings. An interesting idea, but the execution was piss-poor. I believe that if a film maker has decided to do such a piece, they should get people who've ACTUALLY written, filmed, and read the news. It really comes off as just utter baloney otherwise.

I held the opinion that it was too soon to make a movie about 9/11. It seemed like more exploitation than anything else. But still, this movie peaked my curiosity and I decided to watch it from one of the movie channels this weekend.

One thing I really liked about this film was the sort of documentary type feel. It seemed to be going in real time from location to location. Unlike the A&E version, there wasn't a lot of character buildup. Which sounds strange to say...how can you build character on a person that existed and on events that are pieced together? Regardless of what it would be called, in the A&E, you got some extensive background on everyone, whereas in this, they're just presented as passengers. It's hard to watch something like this when you ultimately know the outcome. There's still tension. There's still the urge to tell them "Don't open the door!" But you don't, because you know what's gonna happen. And even with the sort of jumpy feel from location to location, it didn't disrupt the flow of the movie.
It was definitely worth the watch. It's interesting to watch something like this and just try to place yourself in that position. It wasn't preachy....just raw and real feeling.

Of course, if you're a conspiracy theorist, you will hate this movie and should avoid it.
Oh, and the moon landing was fake too, by the way. Soylent Green? People. Now you know.

What can I say about Smokin' Aces? Nice cast. Alica Keys wasn't bad. I didn't even recognize Jason Bateman. Well, I did, but it was in terms of "Why does that dude look familiar?" And Ryan Reynolds just kicks ass. Oh, and the stranger from When a Stranger Calls is in this. Considering you see his face for a whole 3 seconds in When a Stranger Calls, I'm quite surprised I was able to point that one out.

But the movie...hmmm... See, they advertised this movie as this sort of flashy, funny, action flick in the vein of the Ocean's movies. It's an action movie with some humorous parts, but it's not like the Ocean flicks at all. In fact, it starts of amusing and then goes all serious on you. And you want to make the jokes, but there is none to be had.

So, good for the action. Just don't expect the jokes.

One of the After Dark films, this one was actually one I wanted to see in the theater. Kinda glad I didn't now.

It's not that the story line was so bad. Corpse has bad juju. Juju kills people.
But the writing...oh dear lord, the writing. The dialog was just utter asstastic. Cringe worthy in spots, WTF in other spots. And near the end, it took a dark turn for the worst, complete with one of those "Blah blah blah, bitch!" climatic lines.

What gets me is the whole advertising behind After Dark. Films so horrible they couldn't get shown to the public. Only, they meant horrible as in disturbing and graphic, not as in a suck ass film. But with the exception of Rinne, what I've seen so far has been utterly horrible. This film was neither gory or disturbing. Sure, I hid a few times. But that's because I'm a wimp. I used to hide from Scooby-Doo for crying out loud.

Anyway...this is a definite miss.

And since when do ashes of human remains look like clumps of dirt?

I've seen marketing for this movie as "Scarier than Hostel". I'm here to say right here and now, it isn't anything like Hostel. It is the anti-Hostel. It is the suck. First off, it's easy to tell who is going to make it and who's gonna die. Second, there really isn't much in terms of tension, fright or story line. As for the gore, there's been worse things shown on the Discovery Channel.
All in all, this is a complete miss of a movie.

I always find it interesting when the protagonists of a film are folks you generally wouldn't root for. Go pimp! Woo! But Hustle and Flow does a damn fine job of getting you to really feel for the characters. I missed the first 30 mins of this but since it wasn't on ShoDemand and wasn't scheduled to air again until Thurs, I decided to watch where it started. Even missing those first 30 mins, it still managed to draw me in. Hell, I don't particularly enjoy rap music. But this was damn entertaining. Kick ass cast- Terrence Howard, Anthony Anderson (who I'm always expecting to say something funny. This was a more dramatic role than I'm used to seeing him in), DJ Qualls, and Taryn Manning. Oh, and Ludacris as "Skinny Black". He was a bit of a bastard.

Anyway, well worth the watch. And one day, I'll catch the first 30 mins.

I was watching "H20" today and thought "Man, "Resurrection" fucking sucks". And yes, it does. For a lot of reasons.
But my main reason is because it destroyed everything "H20" created. Yeah, it was a little f'ed up that "H20" expected the viewer to pretend that 4-6 didn't exist. I'm fine with that. I enjoy those movies, but they are quite inferior to 1 & 2. "Resurrection" wants the viewer to accept that the end of "H20" was all messed up. And frankly, I can't do that. Why Jamie Lee Curtis agreed to do "Resurrection" is beyond me. It was a total fucked up mess of a movie, even more than "Curse of Michael Myers" managed to be.

In other news, the Rob Zombie version has wrapped up shooting. I'm equally excited and dreading it.

This is the first Thai movie I've seen...and it blew my mind. Not the movie. But the Thai-ness. I don't think I've ever heard Thai spoken at any length and, to me, it sounded like a bunch of vowel sounds. I wouldn't be surprised if it's a very difficult language to learn, cause it sure the hell sounded like it would be.

So..the movie. It was a whole black magic revenge plot sort of movie. Except, it was hard to understand why the woman was plotting against everyone in the first place. It went like this: woman bangs dude, gets pregnant by dude, demands money from him. Dude has his friends get some cause he figured he paid for it. Woman asks for more money, dude says no. Dude's friends die horrible death. Dude dies horrible death. Dude's family (who had nothing to do with the woman) die horrible death. Then the woman starts all over with the dude's ex wife and her kids.
Why??
By the dvd cover, it claimed to be gruesome and shocking. Maybe I'm getting jaded from all the horror movies I've seen, but I didn't see it particularly gruesome or shocking.I found it kinda dull and confusing at best.
Bleh.

Sean Connery is just freaking cool in every movie he's in, and he gets those lines that no one else would sound right saying?
Like "Shit on a stick".
No one else could say that and sound remotely cool enough.

Silent Hill 2 Announced

I'm giddy. I really enjoyed the first one. I hope they keep Christophe Gans, as he seems to have a grasp of both the game and the necessity of not making the film geared towards the under 18 audience. But what I really hope is that they continue the story with Chris Da Silva's character and make it like Silent Hill 2 (the video game version). That makes the most sense in my head.

I was watching "The Fan" the other day. Nice crazy DeNiro. I hadn't seen it in a while, so it completely slipped my mind that the soundtrack was comprised of the Rolling Stones and Nine Inch Nails. Ah yes...THAT song...

Though I had initially liked it in "The Hitcher", a second viewing found that the same scene didn't have quite the impact it had on me the first time around. So, I had to reconsider my feelings on "The Hitcher" and take this time to make a desperate plea to music supervisors/directors.

Please, please stop with the NIN's "Closer". We get it. It's dark. It sounds "spooky" and "disturbing". The beat is very catching. And the whole fucking like an animal thing...it makes us feel all dirty inside. But it is not needed for every damn movie with a character that is seriously screwed up in the head. There are plenty of other good songs out there and, yes, other great NIN songs if that's the route you wish to take. But please...let's "retire" this one from the movie vocabulary, else it shall become a movie cliche much like the villain not really being dead (ie, the final "jump" scene) or the dumb pun for the kill cliche.

I was afraid when I picked this up that it would be the same old shit. I mean, honestly, how many times can you rehash the same setup? (Apparently, at least four.) Surprisingly enough, I thought they did this in a well enough departure from the other two films. The beginning of the films have been notorious for the gruesome scenes, and Saw III will not disappoint in that aspect. In fact, it didn't disappoint several times. After the first few minutes, I was feeling rather nauseated and doing the total girly hiding my eyes behind my hand trick. I wouldn't say this one had a twist of an ending per se, but I felt a little duped. Knowing what the whole premise of the Saw antics was supposed to be based on, this movie kinda lessened the impact of the other two and yet, the "lesson" in this one was more substantial than the others. First Saw I was like "Whoa, Shit!". Second Saw, I was like "Whoa ho ho!" This one, I was like "I knew it! Wait, what?"
But hey, that aside, I did like it better than Saw II. There were more cringe-inducing torture devices, and cringe I did. I'd say I can't imagine how they came up with some of this stuff, but from what I read, they did some research into medieval torture devices. Ew.

I saw this one opening night in the reserved seat, big cushy chair theater. I didn't have any expectations of it being an awesome movie. I was just there to see Sean Bean kill shit.
The movie had flaws, and I didn't care for some of the dialog between Jim (Zachary Knighton) and Grace (Sophia Bush). It just seemed a bit weak. But fuck dialog, we know the movie is about the killing. Some of the car rolls and crashes seemed very Michael Bay (who produced it), but hey...whatever.
I was worried that this would end up being the nice pleasant remake, but I'm glad to say I was disappointed in that aspect. There was one scene in particular that just made me say "Fuck yeah! Let's do this!" The hitcher pwned them all. (Should I even be rooting for the bad guy? Does that make me sick?)
Not disappointing as far as remakes go though I still think the original may still be the shit (I have to re-watch it. I fell asleep at the end but thanks to Bravo's Scariest Movie Moments, I knew what happened. Sorta.) I still want to kick someone about the remake part.

And let me just say, I would have picked him up.

Okay, I'm a fan of M. Night Shyamalan. The twists never got old for me. This movie is not in that "big twist" category, but still managed to keep me entertained. I was a little hesitant at first, as the movie opens when some narration and cartoons that I'm pretty sure I could draw. I suppose it served the purpose though, and I'm not entirely sure how the same message could be relayed in a light-hearted fashion.
One of the things I enjoy about Shyamalan is that nothing he introduces is in there by chance, and yet it's done in a subtle manner. You know how some movies, they'll do this dramatic closeup on an item and you think "Yeah, that'll come back later"? I don't feel that with his movies. Everything happens in the flow.
Now there are two criticisms that I hear about this movie. First is that the sort of "fairy tale" that the story revolves around seems very contrived and forced. I will give them that. It did seem a little convenient and made up as the story progressed, but I think that has to do with the fact that the story was told in pieces and not all at once.
Second, people like to call Shyamalan a narcissist for putting himself in his own movies. What the hell? He ends up in supporting roles, although his role in this one was significantly larger that previous films. But hey, Clint Eastwood does that shit ALL the time, in staring roles. Who cares? If I made a movie, I'd throw myself in it for shits and giggles. And I have to respect a person who manages to wear the actor and director hats simultaneously, cause you know that can't possibly be easy.
Overall, this was just a good movie. Nothing fancy. And I gotta admit, I teared up a bit, total pansy that I am.

Pulse (2006)
This movie sucked. Did we think it was actually going to be good? Why did I rent it? Just to say "Man, that sucked." And what is with the brazen claims of being the "Scariest movie of the year"? HA!

The Descent
Alright, now this is more like it. I feel the need to do a second run through of this movie. I watched it with the surround sound up and the lights off. Man, that was scary. The thing that gets me with cave movies (if they are done right) is that I tend to feel claustrophobic just watching them.

Little Miss Sunshine
I honestly didn't feel the strong urge to see this, but my husband was all into seeing it. Not a bad movie. Definitely had some hilarious parts. I thought Steve Carell's role was interesting for him, but I wish I would have seen more of it. Greg Kinnear and Paul Dano were excellent. And hell, the little girl was adorable (Abigail Breslin, who was also in Signs as the adorable girl).

The OH in Ohio
Honestly, I only half-assed watched that, and by that, I mean I listened to it while I killed things in WoW. It wasn't BAD and there were some funny moments. I just don't think I'd need to see it more than once. And Danny Devito kinda freaks me out.

Crimson Rivers
I think the second one may be better. Even Jean Reno couldn't make this any better for me. MAYBE if Vincent Cassel did some of that fancy footwork, ala Ocean's Twelve It started off good, but just seemed to get weak. And I'm still not entirely sure about the what's and the how's there.

Bunhongsin (The Red Shoes)
I'm totally lying when I say this was a recent rental. Maybe if recent means 2 months ago. My main issue with this movie was that the shoes were fucking magenta. And that I don't understand who would get their panties in a twist about shoes. Other than that, it was creepy, bloody, and not a bad story.

Janghwa, Hongryeon (A Tale of Two Sisters)
This was good. Creepy good. There were some moments where I thought I whizzed myself. It's definitely one of those movies that require full attention, and maybe more than one viewing to get all the pieces straight.

I'd have a problem for this if it wasn't for Sean Bean.

I still don't understand the whole remake fetish going on. And honestly, I'm getting the "we wanted a pretty face so we changed the story up a bit so the female character, which we will ultimately fill with a WB star, has more screen time" vibe from this.
But hey, SEAN BEAN!

To hell with it. I don't have the attention span to write a decent review with more than two sentences tonight. So I'll just compress the rest.

Thank You For Smoking Perhaps the last Katie Holmes movie ever?

Unbreakable Yeah, I know, I'm delayed. And I honestly knew barely anything about this movie. So when the intro about comic books came up, I had a "Is this the right movie? What the hell?" freak out. It is the right movie.

Winter Passing I dig Zooey Deschanel. Unfortunately, I'm not sure what the hell was going on in this movie.

The Chumscrubber Before doing this film, Justin Chatwin was in SuperBabies: Baby Geniuses 2 with Jon Voight and Scott Baio. Just a tidbit.

Art School Confidential I didn't go to art school, but I imagine this is what it would be like if I did.

I've liked Josh Hartnett more overall since he decided to fix his hair.

Anyway, the setup is a basic mistaken personality but mistaken by two crime bosses, which is a suck situation if you think about it. Boss A wants him to do a job against Boss B, who also recruits him for a job. Plus, your basic twists and turns along the way.

It was enjoyable, but I did get confused at first when I tried to multi task while watching it. The cast was excellent- Bruce Willis, Morgan Freeman, Gandhi, Stanley Tucci....

I loved Ben Kingsley as Gandhi. So much so that I refuse to acknowledge him as anything but. I gotta tell you, Gandhi is a bit of a hard ass in this movie. What the hell.

IMDB link To use imdb's summary,

"A teenage loner pushes his way into the underworld of a high school crime ring to investigate the disappearance of his ex-girlfriend."

What I enjoyed most about this film was that it was a very "grownup" story in a teenage setting. Yet it manages to still feel very adult. It's part detective, part gangster, part thriller, and part drama all wrapped up in a very solid package. And it was definitely one of those movies you have to pay close attention to. I almost wish I would have watched it a second time before returning it.I have to admit, I was a bit surprised seeing Joseph Gordon-Levitt being able to pull off a role that was so crucial to the film's structure. I didn't think he was a bad actor before, I was just to surprised to see that he was that good.It was also good to see Lukas Haas again, who I haven't actually seen in anything since Mars Attacks! (he's been in stuff, I just haven't seen any of it.)

Definitely an owner.

Poltergeist up next on the remake list

Total shit biscuits, that's what it is! Fuck a bunch of that shit.

Funny enough, I actually found an article dated last year saying Hilary Duff was going to play Carol Anne in a new Poltergeist movie. And Craig T. Nelson was reprising his role. I'm glad that appears to be fake, but it was worth a giggle.

Wolf Creek

Below is the old review I did for Wolf Creek:

I attempted to see this the other day. Granted, I didn't read much about it or really know anything in-depth about it. The premise is simple: three young folks go camping/hiking in the Outback and shit goes all fucked thanks to a crazy mofo. Think Wrong Turn, minus the inbred mutants. I like crazy mofo movies...usually. But before I get into that, I'll explain more on the actual film.

I've read people complaining that nothing happens in the first 45 mins. Basically, that's right. It's these 3 people and their shenanigans as they go on this camping/road trip expedition. I suppose the purpose is to give the audience a chance to somewhat get to know these characters. I say somewhat cause we never really know these characters' stories. I suppose it's irrelevant and the background that we have is enough to give us some sort of emotional connection for when the shit goes down. Right? Er...

The trio eventually makes their way to Wolf Creek, a meteorite park. It's a 3 hour hike to the crater and when the group returns their car doesn't work. Of course.

Note: If you are ever in some remote location backpacking, camping, etc., and your car suddenly doesn't work when you step away from it for a bit, take this as a warning that some crazy bastard is fucking with you.

Enter the crazy bastard. Sure, he seems like a nice guy. But we know he's crazy. They always are. He tows the group back to crazy town to "fix the car".

Another Note: If said crazy bastard magically appears out of nowhere and claims to not only know how to fix your car, but happens to have the parts at his crib, don't believe him. First of all, it's too coincidental. Second, real "sane" people don't actually have random auto parts laying around. (And if you're reading this and saying "Bitch please! I do!", you're probably a crazy car breaking mafucka in the making.)

Okay...crazy man...crazy town...broken car. This is when shit gets crazy. Not to spoil the element of surprise, it is soon revealed to the 3 guests that this man is fucking nuts. And then we get treated to various torture and killings and craziness.

Now this is precisely what caused me to walk out. I can handle the killings. But to see long, extended torture scenes is just too much. There was one particular scene that did me in. I felt physically ill. At this point, I no longer cared what happened to the characters. (Later, I did do a search for spoilers to find out what did happen in the end. I would have been disappointed. )

The film quality seemed grainy, which actually helped the feel of the movie. But for the lack of character development, extended torture and fucking pointless shots (such as filming from inside the car at the actors outside of the car) that were probably done to "look cool", and for the fact that there were 3 morons who sat by us and talked the entire time, I'm giving it one banana. ("That last one has nothing to do with the movie", you say. It sure fucking does. Obviously, the movie wasn't entertaining enough to distract those bitches from the shiny bright lights of their cellphones.)

I've given the movie another try while it was playing on Starz. Gore level, it didn't affect me as much. I still cringed at the scene, but I was a little more interested in seeing it all played out. Plus, I was able to watch this in the comfort of my own home as opposed to becoming embittered by fellow movie watchers and spewing out a diatribe. It got under my skin, which I think it really intended to do. I'd like to see more in terms of character, but to look at this as strictly a horror movie, did it fulfill it's purpose to disturb and scare? Yes, it did. I've adjusted my rating to 2 and a half nanas.

The Tooth Fairy Not sure what happened here actually. I got distracted. Very gory. You know, I remember during a certain scene thinking about how it was a trend to chop off the whole man bits, but they never actually show it other than blood in the crotch. At that precise moment, they showed the offended man bit and I thought to myself "Oh. That's why they don't show it. That's fucking gross."

The Notorious Bettie Page Not a bad film at all. I dug the whole feeling the director was going for (black and white in that 50s feel for the majority of shots, vivid Technicolor feel for the Miami shots). I just felt the film was lacking something, but I can't put my finger on it. Gretchen Mol gave a great performance. I spent the whole movie trying to figure out where I saw her from (The Shape of Things). Amazing what a different hairstyle could do. But I felt she really captured the character. Actually, what the hell do I know? I never met the woman (Page, that is).

The DaVinci Code I cheated. I totally intended to read the book first, but I fell into the temptation of being able to get it off my Netflix. The movie was still entertaining, so I can only imagine how the book is (cause I hear the book is better). Shit like this makes me wonder though.

Alright, so Friday I saw some flicks that were supposedly too graphic and horrifying or whatever. Actually, let's summarize the start of this adventure. I had to buy tickets in another state, which may as well be another country for me. Once I cross a body of water, my natural orientation gets fucked up and I become susceptible to getting lost. And then I convince myself that people in the other state speak some foreign language and have foreign laws...okay, I have issues. I'll admit that.
I'm lucky I leave my home ever. Anyway, tickets in the other state. Of course the lovely parking garage built for the enormous structure housing the complex was full, leaving us to find alternative parking solutions in this foreign land. I had to deal with one way streets and men of no authority giving me the "hand" as they attempt to direct traffic for their personal advantage. After a few quick turns, we found parking in a nice cozy lot across the street from a strip joint. I figured it was lit well enough, so it should all be good. And the theater was in walking distance. Plus, I got to try out my new coat. (I didn't mention the new coat before. So, here it is: I got a new coat and it's fantastic but it wasn't cold enough to wear up to this point.)
We get to theater, get the tickets, find the auditorium just in time. First movie- Dark Ride.

Dark Ride
This is your typical slasher film. A location with a shady past (a carnival in Asbury Park, NJ) + youths in the wrong place at the wrong time (staring that chick from The Sopranos and that one guy from The Sandlot) + vices (drugs, sex) + whatever else (mental patient). This movie started out good enough. The background killing was disturbing and I thought compared to bad movies I've seen, they usually don't start off this strong. I was wrong though. The acting was mediocre and some of the characters were just flat out annoying. Actually, pretty much all of them were. And I kinda guessed the ending on accident. The camera work was shaky and led to confusing scenes- confusing in "hey, wait a min...I thought they died 5 mins ago." Lame.

We followed this up with Rinne.

Rinne (Reincarnation) Now this was more like it. From Takashi Shimizu, this film was just creepy. We missed the first few minutes of dialog, thanks to the projection not being set up right (the subtitles were off screen), but it didn't affect the movie much. Another creepy back story here- It deals with a hotel setting in which a guy goes nuts and kills 11 people, including his kids. A few decades later, a man decides to make a film out of the incident, which is when all the creepy shit happens. Given the title of the film, it's easy to figure out that SOMEONE must be related to the incident in terms of past life, but that's all the details I'll give about that. There were several scenes that freaked me out (the truck driver's incident in the first few minutes of the movie, the library scene), and it was good to see that Shimizu can deliver a good story beyond the Ju-On series (cause I really did not like Marebito at all). And the doll? Just freaking creepy.

Of course, after leaving the theater at 2 AM and walking back to the car, we noticed cop cars all around the parking lot. Never found out what went down, but so much for my theory. I'm looking forward to the rest of the film fest movies being available on DVD. Hopefully that will happen soon.

That's right, this is the weekend for the After Dark Horrorfest

Most of the movies look watchable to me, but it seems to me that spending $160 to see 8 movies (2 tickets to each) is just damn silly. Especially with the holidays coming up. (Don't get me wrong, I totally would if I could. And if I could get a babysitter for all 3 days.)
Anyway, I narrowed it down to 2 movies, both which happen to be playing tonight. I wanted to see Rinne and Unrest, unfortunately I couldn't find a reasonable schedule for that. (I had a reasonable schedule. Then Rinne started selling out. So I had to rethink. It came down to Dark Ride and Rinne.
Hopefully, they won't suck.

One of the problems I have with this movie, other than the CGI wolves, or the fact that NYC once again is getting destroyed very prominently in a movie, or that the Americans once again will figure out how to save the world, is the lack of answers it provides.
1. What the hell happened to the Canadians? Were they and Alaskans just wiped the hell out?
2. And the Australians? What happened to them?

This is truly bugging the hell out of me.

I guess last night was the night of sequel/prequels. Thing is, my husband and I don't get out often to see movies in the theatre, so these late night double features are getting to be our thing. Before I get on about the movie, I would just like to mention the dumbass sitting about 4 seats down from us. People who need to talk about the movie while the movie is on are one problem. People who talk about the movie in terms of the mental lightbulbs going off in their heads (ex: "That was the dude from the first movie!", "That was the chick from earlier!"), should not be allowed to SEE movies in public.Perhaps at all. I didn't feel like leaving the film to have a manager kick out the moron and his woman, so I resorted to other methods. Like whispering "Cocksucker!" and "Dickhead!" every time he started. Surprisingly, the overall frequency and amount of talking diminished. My husband claims that there is something wrong with me, and that I wasn't raised right. Perhaps...

Okay, about The Grudge 2. Again, I liked The Grudge. It is still one of those movies that I cannot watch at night. It is also the reason I decided I couldn't adopt an Asian child because I would piss myself if I woke up in the middle of the night and said child was standing next to the bed. You know, wanting a glass of water or something. Or to screw with my head and meow at me. I also thought The Grudge was Bill Pullman's best role ever aside from Newsies. (I'm really forcing a straight face here, but man it's hard.) What I do regret is that I didn't see Ju-On first, but it did help seeing it before G2. (That's the new hip way to say it. What, you didn't know? Of course not. Cause I just invented it...in my head.)

G2, from the trailer, appears to follow a singular story line- Karen's (Sarah Michelle Gellar) sister Aubrey (Amber Tamblyn) goes to find out what's going down. The movie, however, does not follow this linear path and is done more in the format of Ju-On. If you've seen that and understood it, you'll be accustomed to the jumping from story to story (the second story being that of the school girls who go into the house and get grudged.) For some reason, I wasn't expecting a continuing remake, but a continous of the story established in the first movie. To me, this parallel story line did not translate well in this American version and I wonder how much of the younger audience (it is PG-13 after all) had the attention span to keep up with the flip-flop. That's not an insult, just an acknowledgment of the A.D.D. I did enjoy the little throwbacks to the original, such as the old man who can see Toshio and plays peek-a-boo with him.
I enjoyed this movie, but just not as much as Ju-On, and I would recommend to anyone wanting to see this to see the original first. (But only if you like subtitles.) Two and a half nanas. (Yes, I finally made halves. WOOT!)

Let me start off by saying I enjoyed the remake to Texas Chainsaw Massacre. I enjoyed the grittiness and feel of the film. And R. Lee Ermey is just creepy. It didn't capture that disturbing, insane feel of the first, but it held its own. So I figured, I would enjoy this prequel, especially after reading an article in Fangoria about how it was supposed to be gory and brutal, and a bunch of other crap that I can't remember right now.
I didn't enjoy this movie. At least, not to the extent I thought I would. Even though it had a different director than the remake, the look felt consistent. But it dragged on for a movie that was only supposed to be an hour and 24 minutes.
Here were my problems with the film:
1. The tagline states "Witness the Birth of Fear", and birth, yes. However, the rest of Leatherface's childhood is done within a matter of 2 minutes, tops, by means of vague flashes. There was really no explanation of why he was the way he was. They did explain the cannibalism, but that's not really necessary. (When the family is obviously completely insane, does explaining why they eat people lessen the fact that they are still insane? Not really.)
2. I have no freaking idea who Jordana Brewster is prior to this movie, and I'm not sure I care. But one thing is for sure. Watching her run frantically around for an hour trying to save her friends is boring as hell. Wondering how she wears her pants so low and manages to not flash crack, not so boring.
3. Lack of character development. Is it imperative to develop characters that we know, logically, will all get it? (And that's not a spoiler. It's common sense.) Not really. But don't try to play the sympathy card on us when we can't connect to the characters that are getting the shit beat out of them. Near the end, I was just waiting for them all to die so the movie could be over.
4. This movie tried too hard on one hand, and not hard enough on the other. It was as though the filmmakers were setting the audience up to have those "Oooh...so that's why [fill in a tidbit from the TCM remake here]." So we get to see why the old guy doesn't have legs below the knees, but we don't get to see any of the teasing of Leatherface as a kid and why he's so embittered. Okay. Makes sense. Right?
5. Same ol' shit. We've seen this before. Three years ago.

What I did like was that there was gore. This was a movie made for the older crowd, not 15 year olds. The movie may have lacked suspense, but I was cringing to see how the next person was going to get it. Which is, in a sense, suspense after all, just not the kind that I would expect from a horror film.
I give it one nana. On a side note, as the movie ended in the theatre, some guy yelled out "That movie sucked my dick." That may have been the most entertaining element about the experience.

My family and I got together a posse to see this movie during it's limited 2-day release. To refresh, this movie was the final Project Greenlight project. It was actually completed about 2 years ago, but it took some time (and some reshoots) to get it out.

The plot is simple and From Dusk to Dawn-esque. A group of people are stuck in a dingy old bar in the middle of nowhere with creatures trying to get inside. I have to say, it was really the humor that saved this movie. It doesn't take itself too seriously and is deliciously campy and gross. What I didn't like so much was the lack of character development and the way the camera is shaky every time there's some action. It makes it hard to focus and SEE what is going on. This movie was featured in the current issue of Fangoria, so I saw the creatures up front. But in the movie? You're not so lucky.

But for being what it was at face value- low budget, relatively amateur director/writers- it wasn't too bad. I enjoyed myself. Compared to a lot of shit out there (*cough House of the Dead cough*) that gets a wide release, this movie is so much better. It wasn't the best horror movie, but it sure the hell wasn't the worst.

Here's my Rent story. Back in the late 90s, when Rent was touring, I REALLY wanted to see it. I'm a theatre nerd. Ex-Theatre Design Major. (You know, before I embraced my geek.) Blah blah blah. Short story is, I didn't get to see it. Ever. And I was a little ticked off about that.

Then the movie comes out. And I'm like "Ooh. Like the play, but cheaper and more accessible." But I didn't see it in the theatre. Or when it finally came out on DVD. No, I waited till yesterday. And I will say right now I AM GLAD I DID NOT WASTE A SINGLE FUCKING DIME ON THIS CRAP.

Now. There is this whole problem with taking a stage play/musical and adapting it to film. Nine times out of ten, it doesn't work. And I think that may be Rent's problem here. Maybe? Hopefully? (I'm trying to give it a shred of hope.)

Here's the thing. I like the story. I think it's a fantastic story. Take the story out of the context of a musical and it would have made a great film. But as a film musical? Bleck. The songs were incredibly too cheesy. After the opening song, and the next song came on, I had too many instances of laughing at inappropriate times. Adam Pascal's voice was toooo much. Actually, every time he sang, my husband (who has a creepy talent of being able to emulate damn near any male singer's voice) would break out into the song Pascal did in School of Rock- which did not help my inability to keep a straight face.

I don't know. I hope the actual stage version is better, although that wouldn't help me with the lyric issues. What's funny is I've come across folks who are SO into this film, quoting shit like it's some mantra for life. You can find 'em on the IMDB boards...but take caution...the imdb folks, as I've said before, are angry folk.

I give it 1 nana, and only because I like Taye Diggs.

You'd think after the whole Cavern fiasco, I'd avoid anything with "cave" in the title. This wasn't as bad though.

Basic story. There's a cave. And people have to explore/map it. Only, there's some weird ass flying big teeth monsters hanging out there and shit. AHHH!

Meh. It just wasn't scary. The monsters didn't have enough screen time. There wasn't enough b & g. It was PG-13. I couldn't care about the characters. There was just nothing.

But at least it didn't end with a beastiality-esque rape scene, ala The Cavern. Right?

1 nana, for being a bit better than The Cavern.

I heard good things about this movie. At least, I think I did. But hell if I can remember from where or whom. Anyway, this movie stars Kate Winslet and Melanie Lynskey in their film debuts as Juliet Hulme and Pauline Rieper, respectively. Juliet and Pauline are two teens with a rather...er..obsessive relationship. I think obsessive is too weak though. "Crazy as fuck" may be more appropriate. Anyway, two girls become crazy friends, one is going to move away, they freak, they kill one of their mothers. That's the jist.

I'm a little on the fence about this one. I wouldn't own it, that's for sure. But it was entertaining to watch this whole fantasy/relationship unfold. And I found Kate Winslet a little annoying (and I usually like her in stuff.) or rather,her character annoying. And a little spooky. You know, that may have been the point.

I'll get right to the punch. This movie sucked.

And the proposed title for the fourth installment, as offered by my husband- Quit Doing Shit in the Summertime

Give me a few days off, and I'll catch up on some movies.

Red Eye

Nice thriller. Cillian Murphy is creepy without even trying. Yikes.

The Transporter 2

What can I say? I freaking love Jason Statham. I don't care if this movie even had a plot...he was kicking ass like nobody's business. And that car...wooo! What I didn't like was the throwback to 80s villian girls in here- short, boyish blonde hair, heavy makeup, obviously crazy and oversexed. It was like watching Pink..but...this actress was more tolerable. They never did explain why her version of getting dressed involved walking around in her undies.

The Constant Gardener

I like the whole thriller-mystery aspect of this film. But jeez...it FELT long.

The Benchwarmers

There are some funny parts, I won't lie. But overall...bleck. Definitely too crude for a family movie (yeah, it's rated PG-13). And poor Jon Heder seems to be a character actor. (In fact, my husband kept referring to this as "The Napoleon Dynamite Baseball movie".)

The Cavern

Oh dear god. It started out cheesy, got a little creepy, and ended with one of the WORST ENDINGS EVER. I think my husband was right, and we would have been better off renting She's the Man.

There's not much I can say for this movie other than it is evident that I rented the wrong movie. I had in my hands Marebito and A Tale of Two Sisters. I put the latter back. Now I regret it.

This film started out relatively creepy. Then it took some path that I just wasn't following. Man is obsessed with fear. Man goes into tunnel. Tunnel suddenly looks not unlike Genesis in Star Trek III. Man finds naked woman chained. Man somehow gets out of bizarro tunnel with naked woman and puts her in his apt. Naked woman doesn't eat food. Naked woman likes blood. It became some weird vampire experience with oddly sexual/animalistic blood drinking scenes. What I can't understand is why the guy didn't slice his wang and let her lick that, as he was obviously getting off by her licking his hand. Pervo.

About 3/4 of the way through, I fell asleep. And I have no idea what happened.

With Pulse opening up today, I thought I would take this opportunity to plead with Hollywood to STOP REMAKING FILMS. The list of remakes is just astonishing. The Wicker Man I don't particularly care about, cause the ass slapping in the original kinda put me off. And I have no problem with ass slapping, but this was just weird.

I just read today that they are remaking Battle Royale. And by remake, I mean someone feels the need to market to the young teen American audience (as it will inevitably have a PG-13 rating). It's just horrible and I'm not happy about.

Now about Pulse. I'm a little torn here. It looks creepy, but the PG-13 rating just puts me off. No offense to the younger crowd, but I do not want to see a movie and put up with a bunch of 13-16 year olds texting each other and acting like idiots. (I originally included 17 yr olds in that mix, till I realized that they can get into R movies anyway.) This has happened quite a few times, and really the only alternative is to see a "Past curfew" showing, which is what we did for Stay Alive. Then there's whole movie itself. I can't say Kairo was my favorite movie, but I understand what it was attempting to say. I have a feeling that Pulse bastardized (this is my new favorite word) the plot, removed all the existential overtones (not necessarily damaging), and threw in some cheap scares for the teenagers. Not to mention the fact that it didn't test well when it was supposed to be release months ago, so it had to be reworked. So I may just wait for the DVD release, as it most likely will be "Unrated".

Making this decision doesn't help me with the "If I only saw 1 movie tonight, which would it be?" problem I have. I'm at least 3-4 movies behind at this point.

I'll be honest. I'm not entirely sure what this movie is about. I think the general idea is: It's a wee bit in the future and a new drug is on the streets. A narc is essentially assigned to monitor himself.

It may be a little more complicated than that, but you know what? I don't actually care. I saw the trailer a few months ago, so when my husband said it was playing at the local artsy theater, I said "Word!" Weird, I remembered I wanted to see it, but that was about it.

The whole look of the film is just mind-fucking. It's like animated, but not. Like if you take a photo in Photoshop and use one of those artistic filters. I'm sure there's a technical name for this type, but I like to refer to it as the Charles Schwab look. I hate those commercials, but I dug the movie. Go figure. It was just entertaining and (surprisingly) funny at times, while maintaining this very intimate feel of drug use/addiction. What most amazed me was that I could tolerate Keanu Reeves. Who would have guessed that animated, he does fantastic work? That's the ultimate mind-fuck. Plus there was a pretty good supporting cast, especially Robert Downey Jr.

I'm not sure what it was about the trailer that made me really want to see this. I didn't even read the book, and I have issues with Anne Hathaway ever since Havoc. But I dragged my husband to it anyway. (And let me tell you, I didn't have issues with her in this film.)

Basic plot- Andrea Sachs is a newly grad trying to make her big break in journalism. So, to up her chances of getting her dream job, she ends up as a personal assistant to the editor of fashion mag "Runway", Miranda Priestly (played right on key by Meryl Streep). Unfortunately, it's a 24 hour on-call job for a demanding, demeaning boss who makes outrageous demands while dismissing them in the next breath. Andrea, or "Andy", takes the job in stride, knowing it will ultimately open doors for her career. But, she manages to compromise her own beliefs and alienate her friends in the process.

What irritated me was the whole situation with her boyfriend and friends. Sure, in the perfect world, you can tell The Man where to stick it and lead your own revolution. But in the real world, most people need to work their asses off and be under-appreciated to work their way to the top. Her friends acted like asses about it. Yeah, it was ridiculous for Andy to jump every time Miranda wanted something, but that was the job she chose to take. Oh hell, what am I going on about? It was a movie. I've read that in the book, Andy's own judgmental side is more evident. She's working with extremely superficial people...well, people whose world revolves around fashion at least. Andy, however, could give two shits less about fashion, so she writes them off as vacant, etc. Interesting little cycle.

Anyway, Emily Blunt and Stanley Tucci gave awesome performances. Gotta love the Tucci!

And I'm putting the book down as a must read. (Update: I read the book. Quite good.)

I saw the Americanized Grudge in the theaters and it remains one of those movies that I have a difficult time watching because I get too creeped out. Pale freaky asian boys + contorted black haired women = a creeptastic experience for me. I had delayed watching Ju-On cause I didn't think I'd be able to sleep afterwards.

Well, I finally sucked it up and rented it from Netflix. Comparing The Grudge with Ju-On, it was evident that bits and pieces of the Japanese story were used to make a solid story line in the American version. Ju-On, on the other hand, follows multiple story lines, treated as chapters, with the creepy woman/child being the common thread to tie them all together. I wish I would have seen this version first actually, because it threw me for a loop at first. (I was essentially expecting the same exact story and structure, but in Japanese...kinda how the Ringu/The Ring played out.) Not that this was a bad thing. In fact, I have a theory that The Grudge 2 is based on another chapter in Ju-On, so it'll be interesting to see how that goes.

Now creepy-wise... I still felt this movie was just as creepy as its Americanized version. I mean, hell...the whole pale, wide-eyed, semi-naked boy popping up everywhere was just unsettling enough. Now add in the crawling woman showing up in the bathroom, bedroom, in the freaking bed (that's a safety zone for crying out loud!) and I think I may have clawed up my husband.

Ultimately, what I like about this film is it manages to be creepy in either language. There's not a whole lost in translation effect, like in Kairo.

Scoot had mentioned this movie several times over the course of the past few years. I finally rented it from Netflix this week. I wasn't entirely too sure what to expect from the film. I had seen flicks such as The Suicide Club, so I knew how the violence in Japanese films can be a little over the top in a very surreal/animated way. And of course, there are the social-cultural-political references that fly over my head, BUT- Battle Royale was not like that. The setup is fairly simple (yet kinda difficult to grasp at the same time): It takes place during times of unrest and economic lows. The school children have even become bastards by abusing their teachers and refusing to go to school. (So in other words, it's like some of the public schools here....oooh, bad joke.) As a result, the gov'ment decides to enact the Battle Royale Act- a randomly selected class is dropped on an island where they must kill each other until 1 remains. (How this deals with the skipping class, I don't know. I suppose the theory is "Bastards don't deserve to live".) They have 3 days to complete this task; if, after 3 days, there is no winner, the collars attached to their necks with explode. Lovely, eh? So what ensues is a lot of crazy killing, paranoia, and desperate survival tactics. I found interesting the undercurrent activity of "BFF!" and then the supposed best friends would turn on each other. And of course, it provides food for thought by reflecting on the ol' "What would I do in this situation? Is friendship more important than one's life?"

Anyway, it was definitely worth the watch and managed to be entertaining, thought-provoking, horrific, and disturbing all in one package.

This was a Netflix rental as I missed it in the theater. But I've been eager to see it so I had to watch it the second it came in the mail.

Now let me mention two things. First, I love Spielberg and it would be unusual to NOT like anything he's done. AI was close because there were too many damn endings and frankly, I was just lost at the end. The actual end, that is. Second, I will be the first to admit that when it comes to worldly/current affairs, I have no idea what the hell is going on. I neither read a newspaper or watch the news. (But I do go to CNN.com occasionally.) Most newscasters annoy me, and the local newspaper pissed me off by calling my home for someone else every day for 2 months. (That last point has nothing to do with the fact that I'm really too cheap to buy a newspaper. It just gives my cheapness a sort of feudal feel.) Speaking of the news, how many fucking times are they going to report on the dangers of MySpace AND act like it's a new topic of discussion???

But I digress. My point was, I'm no expert in the Palestine/Israel going-ons. Although, this movie makes me want to read up on it. So I went into this movie with a really basic understanding of they don't particularly care for each other. The movie starts up at the Olympics of 1972 and the hostage to murder situation that occurred with eleven Israeli athletes. It then carries on with the Israeli move to go after anyone that was involved in the attack. The film is noted as being "inspired by actual events", as there are no available documents saying "this group of guys killed XXXX". Nevertheless, it remains a striking film delving into what is justice, violence begetting more violence, and the overall cycle of attack/be attacked. What got me most about the movie was how many times I uttered "Oh shit!", due to someone getting shot all the hell up. Munich is not shy about the violence and it's presented in a very frank, matter-of-fact way. This movie was close to 3 hours long, yet I managed to stay interested the entire time. I give it four out of five nanas.

Now, I must wake my husband up. (He does not share my opinion of this movie. At least, I'm pretty sure he doesn't. I'm not entirely sure if he was awake during most of it.)

Let me start by saying this is not a movie for everyone. I liked it, my husband hated it. But he fell asleep. And this isn't his website so therefore mine is the ruling opinion. HA!

Basic story- 14-yr old girl and much older man (who happens to be a photographer...aren't they all...) flirt online and decide to meet. He takes her back to his place. She makes drinks. And slips him a mickey. And THAT'S where things get interesting. Turns out, she isn't the vulnerable little girl he mistook her for and she's out to make his day really, really bad.

Now I've heard complaints that this movie goes beyond reality. First of all, no shit. It is a movie after all. If I wanted reality, I would make fun of the stinky people outside the coffee shop next to the theatre. But that's a whole other story. I got the feeling that the character of Haley was supposed to be older than 14. Like an 18 yr old who faked 14. To kick some ass. I was waiting for something to be dropped like that, but nothing was. It stays very vague about both characters' respective backgrounds, which works both for and against the film. It allows for the game of action and consequence to begin without a bunch of useless crap thrown in. And in a way, I think it makes some viewers go back and forth on who is the actual "bad guy" in this film. Is she mental? Is he a pedophile? These things are just implied without hard evidence. I mean, sure, it seems pathetic if not creepy that a 30 something old man would take a 14 yr old girl to his crib, but there's all this ambiguity. First, he doesn't give her alcohol- that's her action. He suggests she call her sister to tell her where she's going to be. He seems reserved in the sexual area (not to willing to rip her clothes off). On the other hand, if some old guy lured my niece to his place like that, I would still kick ass first and ask questions later. And there is a brief mention of kiddie porn. So again...

I was almost tempted to walk out at one point. Haley gets Jeff in a rather awkward position. And by awkward position, I mean she's ready to perform surgery on him. This whole scene was just disturbing. Not gory. Nothing is shown. But the mental anguish is very intense. And I can't imagine how a guy would sit through this scene. But I stayed around to see what happened. And I'm glad I did. Cause wow.

This movie likes to fuck with your head. It's hard to feel bad for Jeff without thinking "Oh, he's a damn dirty kid lover in the wrong sort of way". But it's hard to cheer Haley without thinking it's encouraging some weirdass vigilante/sadistic justice. Definitely worth the watch though.

I was waiting for this movie for a long time. Funny enough, I never played the video game. My youngest brother had it and I used to watch him play. (I wasn't coordinated enough to handle PS controls.) So I remember the whole freakiness and all. And man was it freaky.

We decided to see a late show, hoping most of the hooligans would have come and gone. It didn't work. But the hooligans didn't come in the form of teens or youths. It was in the form of a man in his 30s. He was "Lame Guy". You know Lame Guy. He's the one who, when amongst a group of friends, decides to make horrible jokes and lame ass observations for a laugh. Unfortunately for this Lame Guy, he was only getting 1 out of his approximately 10 friends to laugh, so it was really pathetic. At one point, I almost screamed at him to shut his cocksucker (a term I oddly picked up at work), but I managed to be restrained. Without medication. Holy shit, I must be maturing.

Lame Guy aside, I did enjoy this movie. I think I missed a lot due to not remembering the game a lot, but I was delightfully creeped out. You most likely know the whole story to it, so I won't go into it all. There's definitely a parallel universe thing going on here as we see 2 stories- Rose (the lovely Radha Mitchell) looking for her daughter, and her husband (played by the always ass-kicking Sean Bean) looking for them both. It can get confusing at times if you don't think "Oooh...parallel universes an' shit!" The creepies in this one were wonderfully done. I particularly loved the nurses and Pyramid Head. Not only did the costume/makeup combo help, but just the choreography of movement on these characters added to the "oh shit" factor.

Sure, there were cheesy lines, but that's a given. I was ultimately more creeped out than scared with this film, but it didn't affect my overall liking of the film.

This movie sucked. The gore/violence....eh. Pointless. The story...typical. And since it's a remake and all, I guess I can't harp on the story line. I wanted to leave the theatre, but decided to stick around to see what happened to the baby. Other than that, it was the suck.

They killed fucking Buffalo Bill for crying out loud. BUFFALO BILL. From Silence of The Lambs. The nut tucker. Yeah. Dead. WTF?

I had another point to make, but I forgot it when I thought about the whole nut tucking incident.

I liked this movie. I really did. It wasn't the best movie, certainly not the best horror movie I've ever seen. But given the whole story- a video game that can, essentially, kill you- it wasn't too bad. The acting wasn't spectacular, but it wasn't awful. Just expected.
The story goes, these "hardcore gamers" of sorts come across an unreleased video game called Stay Alive. Gamer #1 (Loomis, I believe) dies in the game and subsequently dies for real. Gamer #2 (Hutch?) gets the game at the funeral thanks to a family member. Apparently (and by that I mean "according to whoever wrote the script") gamers play homage to lost gamers by ...er....gaming. Ergo, the gaming posse gets together to play this game. Soon enough, they start dropping off and the gamers realize "Oh..shit. We in it now!" And thus they have to figure out how to stop the game- cause if you pause the game, the game will play you. Or something.

So what I didn't like about this movie is the lack of gore. Seriously, what is it with PG-13 rated horror movies this days? I know, it's all about the $ and reaching that market. (side note- if you have no tolerance for teenage shenanigans, see this movie either during "school hours" or after curfew.) I didn't like using Elizabeth Bathory as the crazy killer woman. (I was too familiar with the actual Bathory story).

I did like those creepy girl creature things. Those were fucked up. Actually all the ghosts/creepies were.

2 nanas. It may get more if they offer an uncut version of the DVD.

Bad does not describe this film. I thought I was seeing, at best, a B-grade slasher flick based on the Green River Killer. Instead, I got an F-level home movie quality piece of shit. The cover art was better than the movie. I felt kinda bad for the poor actress that gets killed in the first 10 mins.

Director: Hey, wanna be in a movie?

Actress: Oh boy! Do I!

Director: Okay. There's a few catches though. 1. You have to be naked. 2. One of your lines is "Okay, but I have to take a shit first." 3. Another of your lines will be "Wanna wipe my ass?"

Actress: SIGN ME UP!

In that same scene with the naked and the ass and the shitting, our killer says to her in a commanding tone "Play with yourself." At this point she starts to rub her knees and ass, while biting her finger.

Now if I was a guy, I don't think I'd want to see a woman suggestively bite her finger. Especially if the finger was a phallic representation. No teeth fool! No teeth on the wang!

Anyway. Movie sucked and we turned it off after shit girl was dumped in a creek.

There's no denying that I love me some J-Horror. So when I heard about the remake of this one coming out, I had to see the original first. I read so many "This is truly terrifying" reviews, so I was hoping for a good show. To describe the premise is tricky. Essentially, the ghosts hang out in the internet or something and the ghost world is full so all the spirits are spilling over. Well basically it's like that. But I think there was more to say in terms of a cultural/sociological observation than just "GHOSTIES". Unfortunately, there is a difference between the Japanese culture and us Mericans. The whole "we like suicide" is a little lost on me. I couldn't really connect with the whole feeling of loneliness and questioning existence that was going on. That seemed to be more of a focus in the film. Sure, it was creepy that people were disappearing and the city seemed empty. It just didn't have the quite effect on me as it would on...I dunno... someone who has felt the pain of depression. Or something.

Anyway, 2 nanas because it was set up to be this creepy ghost story and it ended up being a whole meaning of life with dancing ghosts film. But jeezis, those dancing ghosts were creepy.

1. The Kick. Open with a random killing that no one seems too concerned about.


2. The Hero. Stick with a formula. Either go with the rogue "bad ass" with a shady past, or the fun-loving "good guy" type out to save mankind.


3. The Brain...Oh, Never mind. Have the obligatory marine biologist, but use the "dingy woman" character who will immediately flirt with the hero and who is completely unbelievable as any type of scientist.


4. The Villain. No. It's not the shark. This is the corrupt politician or business man who is out to make money and will disregard anything the hero says, forcing the hero to make some pseudo-philosophical statement about how the villain is an ass.


5. The Quality. Budget got you down? Don't worry. Just use stock footage of some guy fishing shot on Super 8mm circa 1970. The audience won't notice the glaring difference between the shots.


6. The Shark. Make sure you have it look as fake as possible. Rubber is good. Have all attack shots just close ups of the teeth. Add in some over the top crunching noises. And make the shark make an audible "roaring" sound- because that's EXTRA scary.


7. The Shark Part II. Need a bigger shark? Of course, there's ALWAYS a mama shark. (Especially good for types of white sharks who are just so well known for their maternal instincts. *sarcasm*) Just use footage of a white shark and super-impose boats by it to make it look huge.


8. The Sidekick. Have him ex-military for more punch. And slightly crazy. He'll try to save the day and either get eaten or fail.


9. The Plan. The plan is so crazy that the hero can't find words to describe it. He just has to move and move quickly. When it comes down to it, the plan is actually quite simple and there are no excuses as to why the hero was unable to communicate it.


10. Karma. Because we all know that in life, bad guys NEVER get ahead. Their evil ways will ALWAYS come back to bite them in the ass...no pun intended.


11. The Punchline. Add in a few groaners, like "Chew on this!". We all know we'd be so witty if a shark was trying to eat us, so indulge us. This line is all the more powerful if uttered by the useless biologist who just spent the last 5 minutes screaming helplessly for the hero to save her.


12. The Setup for the Sequel, a.k.a, Nature comes out on top. The shark was annihilated, right? It was the only one of its kind, right? Or was it... ???

After having this movie in my possession for over 4 months and desperate not to have another "Hero" incident, I finally forced myself to find the time to watch this movie. I suppose my motivation for renting it was based both on word of mouth and my tendency to rent foreign films for the hell of it.Unfortunately, my husband is not much of a subtitle fan, so finding the spare time to watch such movies is a bit of an obstacle.
Admittedly, I wasn't entirely sure what to expect from this movie.Based on the diary of Ernesto Guevaro, it chronicles the journey of Ernesto and friend Alberto Granado across South America in the 1950s. It started out well, but after 10 minutes or so, I felt as though I was sitting through a series of scenes involving two guys falling off a motorcycle in various fashions, which subsequently leads to the motorcycle breaking.Sure, there were bits of action in between these falls, but the first hour seemed to be entirely dominated by this. After awhile it was tiring and predictable and slightly painful to watch.
The movie went up in my opinion during the second half. Motorcycle no longer in the picture, it allowed time to see some character development.Combining some absolutely beautiful background scenery with truly interesting characters that Ernesto and Alberto come across in their journey allows for a glimpse of the evolution of Ernesto. At this point, it no longer was about two guys falling off a motorcycle repeatedly, but about the journey and the experience.