The Last Station might be poorlyreceived by many. This is because most people have never heard of Leo Tolstoy, and if they have, they know him from his exhaustively lengthy masterworks Anna Karenina and War and Peace.

Both are widely-considered among the best novels ever written. I wouldn’t expect many to read through either before they die, [...]]]> The Last Station

The Last Station might be poorlyreceived by many. This is because most people have never heard of Leo Tolstoy, and if they have, they know him from his exhaustively lengthy masterworks Anna Karenina and War and Peace.

Both are widely-considered among the best novels ever written. I wouldn’t expect many to read through either before they die, but they should. I often think of them as wonders of the world, except you have to read them, not just show up. They’re tough, but incredibly gratifying reads. I insist to everyone that the greatest art is not instantly accessible, but must be worked at, revisited, and reanalyzed. Transformers is fast-food art, that doesn’t make it bad, just different. I love a double-cheese burger.

Tolstoy is also famous for his exchanges between Gandhi. His passive-resistance philosophy had a powerful influence on Gandhi. So, possibly, much of our own civil rights movement was influence vicariously by Tolstoy.

Moreover, The Last Station is a cool little movie about Tolstoy and his final days. Tolstoy became disillusioned as he got older, writing A Confession which outlined his anxieties about life, death, love, past transgressions, religion, even the rejection of his own writing. The book is even a bit influential on even me (the opening of my latest screenplay is a passage from the text). It is this time in Tolstoy’s life that director Michael Hoffman puts under a microscope.

The film takes place in a commune based on the ideals of Tolstoy (Christopher Plummer), a sort of religion had sprung from the The Confession and other late-writings, followers of which became known as Tolstoyians. Much of the conflict in the film arises from the back-and-forth between Tolstoy and his wife Sophia (Helen Mirren). Tolstoy, feeling shamed from his aristocratic background and further from the fact that many labor and he does not, wishes to put his writings into the public domain. A parallel story exists between Tolstoy’s secretary Valentin (James McAvoy) and Masha (Kerry Condon) as they explore the truths that Tolstoyian philosophy brings. The “bad-guy” is Paul Giamatti’s character Vladimir Chertkov, who asks as a Worm-Tongue in Tolstoy’s ear. Insisting he give away his works and, therefore, his fortune.

Much of the plot is meaningless. I hate to call the copyright/will thing a Mcguffin, but it is. Who really cares if the copyrights are given away? I don’t. I’m sure you don’t either. I think this might be why the film isn’t great, but just good and fun. The tone is also off too. A running gag in the film is the McAvoy’s character can’t help but sneeze when he is nervous. A gag that would be cheesy on Hanna Montanana, let alone a period drama. I realize that they were trying to add a fun and light-hearted feel to the movie, but other options could have been explored more. For example, Vladimir storms out of the room furious with Tolstoy’s wife and drops the hilarious line, “If I had a wife like yours, I would blow my brains out!……. Or go to America!”.

The one-on-one conversations between Tolstoy and all the other characters are the highlights of the movie. Take one exchange between Tolstoy and his secretary Valetin, where Tolstoy wonders out loud about the value of a sexual relationship with a girl he had when he was young. He discusses the frequency and passion of the sex and if there was any meaning to their love. This conversation exemplifies why Tolstoy is a great writer and why he is still relevant today. How many times have you wondered if a past relationship has had meaning? So many relationships end poorly with divorce, break-up, heartache, and infidelity. Anna Karenina, if nothing else, is an exploration of love, meaning, and primal-lust in relationships.

Another great moment is the sex and subsequent pillow-talk between Valetin and Masha. One of Tolstoy’s principles was celibacy, which many Tolstoyians practiced. Not Masha apparently, who seduces Valetin easily. Too many movies make sex scenes passionate and romantic. This movie makes it funny and awkward which sex for the first time with a person often is. This strips away the pornographic, exploitative element of a sex scene and adds humanism to it. Their relationship and rejection of Tolstoyianism might have something more provocative to say about organized religion, but I’m not going to guess.

With a stronger plot, or a looser, more vignettey one, like Andrei Rublev, The Last Station could have been great. But instead, we get a comedy-of-sorts about a great writer. A writer who is widely recognized as the greatest novelist of all time. Is he still too enigmatic and saintly? Hell yeah, but it is still fun to pretend.

January 2010

I say: B

You’ll say: C+

Bookmark It

Hide Sites

I’d thrown together a discussion about the movie right after I’d seen it. Only one problem: everyone on the internet did too. Even people who don’t talk about movies. So I decided to just let things cool for a while, come back to the review, and then write a few things in a [...]]]> Inception

I’d thrown together a discussion about the movie right after I’d seen it. Only one problem: everyone on the internet did too. Even people who don’t talk about movies. So I decided to just let things cool for a while, come back to the review, and then write a few things in a simple format.

Pros:

1. The film is definitely cool looking if nothing else. Nolan is a god of special effects that look like they’re “real”. Even Cameron’s Avatar and Jackson’s King Kong are guilty of looking like they don’t take place in the same space and time as their subjects. Nolan is grueling in his love of organic effects. Take the hallway/hotel room gravity scenes. When I originally saw the trailer for the scenes I was annoyed. How did he do it? I came to the conclusion that Nolan built big, fake sets and spun them like a top with actors inside. And so he did. Granted much is done with computer generated images, but to a different degree. Things don’t look synthetic. Or should I say, too synthetic.

2. Slowly science-fiction is being molded into the mainstream. This isn’t a thing I care much about. I have always been pro-science fiction and fantasy. I read Wizards First Rule and Sphere before I was ten. I even know what a Shrike is. But my point is Avatar and Inception don’t seem like fiction people would get invested in. Then why do they? I’m not sure. The love story and special effects in Avatar went well with most people. But why Inception? It is hard-core, nonsensical science-fiction. It is like a Philip K. Dick novel rolled into a Michael Bay film. Maybe it is the Bay part that people love? I think it comes from the very humanizing story of loss that is devastating in DiCaprio’s story.

Cons:

1. The story of loss could have been better and more devastating. Nolan was forced to pack in the action wall-to-wall. This isn’t a problem. The film had to be exciting for everyone. A film that was more psychological, Eternal Sunshine of Spotless Mind, was more devastating in its approach toward loss, memory, love, and dreams. I don’t think Inception will ever be essential. Maybe great, but never essential. I always base essential movies on the fact if I had twenty movies to be shot into space with, what movies I’d take with me. I don’t know if Inception will be one of them. Nolan could have spent more time on these ideas, but he wasn’t making a five hour melodrama. He was making a blockbuster. One isn’t better than the other, they’re just different.

Instead, I still imagine a version where Nolan scaled down the action and went a more terrifying approach. What would it be like if you could really actively approached dead or alive loved ones in your dreams? There are infinite ideas to be approached here. Anyone who takes issue with the film were probably fantasizing about these questions as well. There were inevitable discussions about how Kubrick or Charlie Kaufman would have approached these ideas. Maybe better, but would it have been seen? But then again, if Nolan had gone a more psychological route, it could have been long, boring, and make you want to put a pistol in your mouth at the end. For such a film, check out either version of Solaris.

2. A film like this gets over-analyzed. I walked away from the film pretty clear headed. Not because I understood the film up and down. But I knew there was really not much to get. It isn’t a film you understand because it is complete nonsense. It is visceral, not intellectual. Much of the film’s psychological and technological approach is fiction. The only thing to understand is what Nolan gives us, which is his own laws of the universe. Not ours. If anything, it is the films greatest asset that he makes people believe what they’re seeing makes sense and relate it to reality. If the dream sequences were a computer game I don’ t think people would be arguing about it as much. It didn’t help that Nolan through up an open-ending.

Released: Summer 2010

Collin says: A

You’ll say: A

Bookmark It

Hide Sites

August 4th, 2010

My brother and I recently did a podcast where we discussed, amongst other things, our top favorite fifteen films.  Here are mine and the podcast should be coming sometime this weekend. These films are my favorite and the list has little to do with what films are the [...]]]> Top Fifteen Favorite Films

By Collin Gilbert

August 4th, 2010

My brother and I recently did a podcast where we discussed, amongst other things, our top favorite fifteen films.  Here are mine and the podcast should be coming sometime this weekend. These films are my favorite and the list has little to do with what films are the “best”. Enjoy.

15. Casablanca

I don’t care what people think of me picking this one. Citizen Kane is certainly one of the best, most important films ever made, but it certainly isn’t one of my favorites. People who claim Casablanca as their favorite film are usually douche bags, myself included. It is one of my favorite love stories. One of those movies you can show to pretty much anyone. I bet even my father, a man who won’t watch a black and white film, would even like it. Was it Woody Allen that said the only romantic love is unfulfilled? Plus, I’m a sucker for love triangles.

14.City of God

Should be number one. This is one of the best movies ever made. But again, this is a personal favorite list. Has nothing to do with best or worst.

13. Kill Bill

This could be the best action movie of the past ten years. Many people take the first and second as a whole. Not me. The first is a masterpiece of revenge-asian-splatterhouse-action-Kung-Fuishness. The soundtrack alone gives boners.

12. English Patient

Another film that will make most people turn their noses up at me, thinking I’m a huge twat. My only response to that is I’m a sucker for these types of movie, including, and not despite, the dance sequence that so many people my age despise. And again, love triangles, got to love ‘em.

11. Billy Elliot

One of the greatest British films ever made about a boy trying to do ballet. A favorite  moment of mine in movies is when Billy symbolically and literally bursts out of the bathroom on his estate and dances proud in front of the entire town and then is blocked by a big wall. The director could have a  little more subtly, but it is still awesome.

10. Inglorious Bastards

I think this is the newest film on the list. Recentness was something my brother and I were trying to avoid, but it happened anyway. When Hitler gets his face shot apart and Eli Roth is mowing people down in the film’s conclusion it was a “stand up and clap moment” for me. The only other time I really felt like that was when you found out the dude was banging his daughter in Oldboy.

9. Pan’s Labyrinth

Probably the best Mexican New Wave film. Del Toro claimed it almost killed him and it shows. There is such technical skill, imagery, symbolism, and clever use of color palettes. Also, everyone knows all great movies have vaginal symbolism in them, look at that tree in the picture, looks like a vagina to me. Dt is the king of monsters and though he left The Hobbit, he still has his best films ahead of him.

8. Requiem for a Dream

My brother thinks this movie is Aronofsky’s masterpiece. That may be. But I think his other movies Pi, The Wrestler, and to some extent, The Fountain, are not too far behind.

7. Das Boot

Jürgen Prochnow puts down one of the craziest performances of a master and commander. His peers and underlings look to him for strength and his face says so much while seemingly showing very little. The film took over a year to shoot and exhibited masterful technical skill. The steady-cam shots pre-dated the Steadicam. The director of photography made a custom rig that allowed him to run from one side of the boat to the other. Cool.

6.Children of Men

Alfonso Cuaron is a hero of mine. He made one of the greatest science-fiction films of all time by being a minimalist and trying his best to create a world that feels “real”. His cinema-verite style shooting is such an effective technique at allowing a viewer to believe what they’re seeing is the truth, especially when dealing with science-fiction.

5. Closer

An odd little movie that has also been a personal favorite of mine. Don’t know why, probably the love triangles and Clive Owen calling himself a cave man and Julie Roberts a fucked up slag.

4. Terror Firmer

The best of all the Troma films. The one that started it all for me. It was this movie, above all others, that convinced me that someday I too needed to make a crazy movie.

3. Apocalypse Now

The Godfather might be a great movie, but I wouldn’t deem it essential. Apocalypse Now is essential. It delves into the madness of war and exists in a realm between reality, fantasy, nightmares, and terror. The soundtrack is one of my favorite and the ad-libbed conversations between Sheen and Brando are epic. Also, catch the making of documentary. Francois Truffaut said, “I want a film I watch to express either the joy of making cinema or the anguish of making cinema” When watching Apocalypse Now this quote always comes to mind.

2. Dark Knight

Christopher Nolan’s Dark Knight is the best kind of movie. It is a movie that is well-done and can be seen by a broad audience. Its special effects are done with minimal use of CGI and the cuts are infrequent in action shots Greengrass and Bay would have made you puke during. Nolan shot many of the action sequences in IMAX and his action exists somewhere outside any school of thought in filmmaking today. The French and European directors don’t cut much and love to have highly choreographed scenes, with talented stunt man acting in front of the camera to due their stunts. (Luc Besson films:aka most modern action movies) Asians use high wire trickery and CG camera edits. (Ong Bak, The Protector, Kung Fu Hustle) Americans have so many edits I want to smash my television set. (Transformers, Bourne Ultimatum) But Nolan mixes all of these styles into something that is amazing. Ledger and Nolan’s Joker is diabolical, making him the 2^nd best character with a Glasgow smile. (See Ichi the Killer for #1)

1. Y Tu Mama Tambien

This film is my favorite of all time. I am super pro-gay, but would never call this movie strictly a “gay film”. Like I’ve said so many times before, this is not just a “gay movie” nor is it just a “coming of age story.” It is a multi-layered story of two boys who are forced to discover that life is more than just proving they can bang chicks and must view the opposite sex with some sort of respect. When they embark on a cross-Mexico journey with a sexually charged women their egos are hurt and their relationship with their girlfriends challenged. What they ultimately discover is not only shocking, but with repeatedly viewings is a tender look at a period in all men’s lives when they have to consider how they treat sexuality, their friends, and basically everything else.

I mentioned this anecdote last time I mentioned Y Tu Mama Tambien, but here it is again. The late Gene Siskel saw Saturday Night Fever almost twenty times and bid on Travolta’s suit. Ebert later claimed it dug into [Siskel's] soul and touched something deep. I first saw Tambien when I was about eighteen, my view of sex mirrored Julio’s and Tenoch’s.

Many American dude’s, fueled by homophobia, hate this movie’s ending, which feature Julio and Tenoch kissing. I myself have never fully understand the dynamic this kiss created. (It takes place duringa 3-some with a chick) So what does it mean? Are they gay? Bi-sexual? Do they have feelings for one another they don’t share with anyone else…does that make them gay? So many women kiss each other these days, doesn’t that mean the same amount of men should have such a similar inclination? Before I go too far, watch the scene below, it might be my favorite of all time. Plus, this movie is another love triangle.

Bookmark It

Hide Sites

By Devon Gilbert

Up is one of those movies that makes me wonder how I was ever able to watch hand drawn cartoons.  I feel bad for saying that considering hand drawn animation is still very difficult to achieve and has made for many great films/TV shows, but CGI animation blows [...]]]> Up (2009)

By Devon Gilbert

Up is one of those movies that makes me wonder how I was ever able to watch hand drawn cartoons.  I feel bad for saying that considering hand drawn animation is still very difficult to achieve and has made for many great films/TV shows, but CGI animation blows it out of the water.  It seems that every CGI animated film I see looks more gorgeous and detailed than the last.  Up is no exception.

Of course, by now, everyone knows to expect an above average film when there is a Pixar label involved.  It goes without saying the animation is top tier.  As for story, it was one of the best and most mature I have ever seen in an animated film.  It involves an old man, Carl Fredrickson (voiced by Ed Asner), who is struggling with life after the loss of his wife.  In an attempt to make his late wife’s dream come true, he attaches a bunch of helium balloons to his house and sets out for the “undiscovered” Lost Land.  Unbeknownst to him, Wilderness Explorer Russell (voiced by Jordan Nagai) was on his porch when he took off.

From there the plot takes off in more or less a typical Pixar adventure.  But the themes are more mature.  I think adults are going to be more touched by this film than kids.  On the flip side, I think kids will enjoy the humor more than the adults.  Though, I don’t know how anyone could not laugh at the “squirrel” running gag.  There is a montage that runs through Carl’s whole life with his wife and continues past her death.  It sums up the bright side of marriage in less than five minuets, a feat which I consider to be one of the best attempted in an animated film.  The movie is not perfect though.

I found Russell to be stupid annoying, not stupid funny.  The more Russell talked, the more I started to feel like I was watching a film about the mentally handicapped.  Also, I thought the villains (dogs with collars that allow them to speak) were weak and not very intimidating.  But maybe I’m judging a kids movie to seriously.  Leave it to Pixar to make you wonder.

Up:    A-

Bookmark It

Hide Sites

By Devon Gilbert

I decided to view this old ozploitation movie (meaning Australian exploitation flick) because it looked like one of the better movies on the excellent Not Quite Hollywood documentary.  Turkey Shoot is more or less what I expected from the clips, which is to say [...]]]> Turkey Shoot (aka Escape 2000) (1982)

By Devon Gilbert

I decided to view this old ozploitation movie (meaning Australian exploitation flick) because it looked like one of the better movies on the excellent Not Quite Hollywood documentary.  Turkey Shoot is more or less what I expected from the clips, which is to say it was a silly, bloody, low-budget action exploitation movie.  I was a little surprised that Brian Trenchard-Smith directed it, considering his other “famous” ozploitation movie Dead-End Drive In seemed to be much more mature and less focused on shock value.  But that was made five years after this one.

The plot for Turkey Shoot is incredibly simple.  Sometime in the near future a totalitarian government rules Australia.  All people that deviate from what they’re told, or are even accused of it, end up being sent to a strict prison camp where they undergo behavior modifications.  Or more simply, people are sent to these camps to be abused and killed.  From what we see of the camp, people are forced to work hard labor and take showers naked together.  They are also beaten to a bloody pulp and lit on fire.  However five people, three of them main characters, are given a chance at freedom if they can survive being hunted in the wilderness for 24 hours.

The three main victims of the hunt are Steve Railsback (Barb Wire, The Devil’s Rejects) as Paul Anders, Olivia Hussey (1968 Romeo and Juliet, It) as Chris Walters, and Lynda Stoner (no other movies) as Rita Daniels.  I think for a B movie like this they all do a good job with their roles, though in all honesty Stoner barely has anything to do in this.  Hussey looks genuinely terrified the whole movie (and according to interviews with the cast she was genuinely scared of Australian wildlife) and that’s really all she has to do.  Railsback is entertaining as the stereotypical hero who won’t give the evil camp warden (Michael Craig) the satisfaction of breaking.  He looks like a wimp but he has charisma, I guess.

I liked the brutality of the camp, but it was probably much more shocking in the 80’s.  Still, the abuse of the prisoners is so outrageously sadistic (like beating a women to death for not being able to sing an anthem right) that it’s hard not to be satisfied.  The hunt takes up the brunt of the movie, and the gore is what saves it.  People die in such violent ways (impaling, being cut in half) that the movie redeems itself from any flaws.  Plus, the addition of a mutant werewolf like hunter and a crazy lesbian hunter gets bonus points.  The climax features a giant body count and plenty of explosions, even if it’s all still low budget.

For anybody that likes B movies, this is definitely one to check out.  It’s sadistic, violent, and shocking (though not in a Saw or Hostel way) but still silly and unserious.  It’s also in a lot of ways better than the B movies that come out these days.

Turkey Shoot:  B+

Bookmark It

Hide Sites

by Devon Gilbert

I definitely don’t love the Final Destination series, but I still find them enjoyable.  They really were never about story and character, though you might be able to argue that the first one had some of both.  Instead they featured really cool death scenes (the opening [...]]]> The Final Destination (2009)

by Devon Gilbert

I definitely don’t love the Final Destination series, but I still find them enjoyable.  They really were never about story and character, though you might be able to argue that the first one had some of both.  Instead they featured really cool death scenes (the opening car crash scene in Final Destination 2 being my personal favorite) at a pretty good pace.  Based on that criteria, I thought that The Final Destination was very entertaining, though technically it might be the worst of the series.  I find it tough to tell because two of the movie’s best assets, 3-D home viewing and its incredibly short runtime (I believe the end credits start before the 80min mark), have really nothing to do with talent.

The plot of this movie is pretty much exactly the same as the other three in the series.  This time the initiating incident is a car race, and the person with a premonition is Nick O’Bannon (played by unknown Bobby Campo.)  As anyone familiar with the series knows, Nick has a long premonition in which he sees many people die (including himself, his girl, and his friends) due to a mammoth car crash and the instability of the stadium.  Of course, Nick gets his crew out just in time to escape the predicated disaster.  So as usually, Death picks them off one by one in the order they died in Nick’s premonition.

For me it goes without saying that the characters are insignificant.  I would have been shocked if they were well drawn, and given the content of the movie, I would have been disappointed if they were.  I liked that The Final Destination gets right down to the point.  The movie moves from death scene to death scene with very little filler in-between.  The death scenes themselves are entertaining but certainly not groundbreaking.  There is much more of a reliance on “paranormal activity” in this entry, which didn’t really bother as much as it will some people.  On average the deaths weren’t the most creative in the series, but they were clever enough to pass the time.  I also wouldn’t describe this movie as violent and/or gory, but it earns its R rating.  Overall, this movie chose quantity of deaths over quality of deaths, which makes for faster pacing but also means nothing memorable happens.

The 3-D element of the movie is really what makes the movie good despite its flaws.  Since it’s so rare to be able to watch a 3-D horror movie at home, I think The Final Destination benefits from being one of those few.  I guess the 3-D element makes the deaths creative.  For instance, some deaths are shown in “X-Ray” vision, an effect that was cool in 3-D but would probably look cheap in 2D.  And make no mistake, the makers of The Final Destination milk the 3D for all it’s worth.  It is clearly a gimmick in this movie, with planks getting upturned and metal shrapnel shooting forward, as opposed to Avatar which has none of the traditional 3D gimmicks.  But even as a gimmick, it works (at least until there are tons of 3D movies you can watch at home, which would make The Final Destination’s best asset seem old.)

As a solid good movie, The Final Destination fails.  As the forth entry in a decent horror series, The Final Destination is okay.  As a 3D horror movie, The Final Destination is good solid fun.

The Final Destination:  B

Bookmark It

Hide Sites

It is fairly well known that Hollywood has been having trouble making films about the war on terror and even more trouble selling them to audiences.  I have seen many of these and not been too impressed.  A couple of good ones that come to mind are The Kingdom (maybe [...]]]> The Hurt Locker (2008)

It is fairly well known that Hollywood has been having trouble making films about the war on terror and even more trouble selling them to audiences.  I have seen many of these and not been too impressed.  A couple of good ones that come to mind are The Kingdom (maybe the end is more Arnold Schwarzenegger film than accurate war film but it’s still awesome) and In the Valley of Elah.  The Hurt Locker, directed by Kathryn Bigelow, is one of the better attempts but I was pretty disappointed given the buzz surrounding it.

The plot of the film is very simple.  It follows wildcat SSgt. William James (Jeremy Renner) as he diffuses bombs in Iraq.  He is both feared and respected for his courage bordering on suicide.  Many characters in the film, including his “for the most part” right hand man Sgt. JT Sanborn (Anthony Mackie), wonder why/how he does it.  The film has a simple answer, war is a drug and like any drug, it is addictive.  Not to mention he feels more at home in a blazing car ready to explode than he is trying to find cereal in a grocery store.

The film does a good job of not turning the soldiers into clichés, probably through the combination of a decent script and excellent acting.  There’s no comic relief or character that dies heroically to save others.  Nope.  Just people doing their jobs and usually not liking it, unless of course, they’re addicted.  Also, the war scenes themselves are not cliché.  In fact, you usually don’t even know whom or from where bullets are coming from, just like a real battle.  The only problem with that is some of the action scenes almost lack intensity because it’s just random bullets flying at random people.

The action is almost non-stop in this movie.  But it’s all filmed realistically and without typical Hollywood action style.  This movie trades slow mo car flips for the nervous tension that goes into diffusing a bomb that could easily level a street while being shot at from various locations.  And while no one comes of as a typical “hero”, all the soldiers come of as brave and respectable.  Their character flaws make them more identifiable.

I don’t feel this is one of the best war films ever made like some critics.  I think it gives good insight into why some soldiers are constantly willing to risk it all, something most war films ignore or cheapen, but there isn’t much emotional payoff.  I wasn’t overwhelmed by powerful emotions like in better war movies like Saving Private Ryan and Platoon.  I can’t even really say that I was surprised by anything that happened in this movie; in other words, if you have seen a average amount of Iraq war coverage both real and fictional than I doubt you’ll find much that is new here.  But still, for a gritty look at the daily grind of soldiers constantly in danger in Iraq, this is a solid entry.

The Hurt Locker:  B

(I thought I should add that after I wrote this review, The Hurt Locker went on to win best picture and director Oscars.  That is absolutely ridiculous.  Inglorious Basterds, Precious, Avatar (yes technical genius trumps an important story that is average), Up In The Air, Up, and District 9 were all better films.  Shame on the Academy.)

Bookmark It

Hide Sites

As far as straight to DVD horror movies go, you could do much worse than The Hills Run Red, directed by Dave Parker.  The movie doesn’t exactly defy stereotype, especially when it’s centered on a masked killer, but it feels original enough.   Not to mention there’s something very intriguing [...]]]> The Hills Run Red (2009)

As far as straight to DVD horror movies go, you could do much worse than The Hills Run Red, directed by Dave Parker.  The movie doesn’t exactly defy stereotype, especially when it’s centered on a masked killer, but it feels original enough.   Not to mention there’s something very intriguing about the idea of finding an old lost film so scary and disturbing it has the power to drive people mad.

The plot of this film follows college student Tyler, played by Tad Hilgenbrink, who is obsessed with finding an old movie like the one described above.  His quest is especially difficult because the director has been MIA for years, much like the cast.  The movie he is looking for is called The Hill Run Red, about a vicious killer named Babyface.  Close to the beginning of the movie we see that Tyler has an old movie trailer for The Hills Run Red, and the contents looks much like an old Friday the 13^th movie.  Just a guy gruesomely killing people in the woods.  However as the plot thickens, this movie sort of gains from that cliché, in that it gives you the idea that any old movie from your childhood could have been more realistic than you think.

I think the movie could have gone farther with that idea, instead of going down the deranged “Texas chainsaw” family route.  However, the movie is original and fast moving enough to be well worth the 80 minute running time.  The cast is adequate and raises no complaints.  In the gore department, the film is average with a couple scenes that stand out as gruesome.  There are also some creepy moments, which to me is amazing having long ago become immune to mask wearing killers in the woods.  I also very much liked the “before the credits” final scene of the movie.  Even the last scene during the credits is pretty good and scary, though again, not quite original.

I would recommend this horror film to pretty much anyone interested in the genre.  For people used to hard-core horror, it may be tame but its original touches should make it worth you’re while.  For people into tamer horror films, shame on you (just kidding), this might be a step up in gore and intensity but it’s far below the Saw and Hostel type films.  This is almost a perfect example of what a B horror movie should be.

The Hills Run Red:  B

Bookmark It

Hide Sites

I didn’t expect much from The Hangover.  Of course the premise, about three guys who wake up after a crazy Las Vegas bachelor party with no memory of the prior night yet must find the missing groom in time for his wedding, had lots of potential to be hilarious.  It’s just [...]]]> The Hangover (2009)

I didn’t expect much from The Hangover.  Of course the premise, about three guys who wake up after a crazy Las Vegas bachelor party with no memory of the prior night yet must find the missing groom in time for his wedding, had lots of potential to be hilarious.  It’s just that most the time Hollywood misses the mark with mainstream comedy.  I’m sorry, but Knocked Up and Wedding Crashers were about as funny as used toilet paper (maybe not even).  However, I was greatly surprised by The Hangover.

Todd Phillips is a director I would usually associate with bad Hollywood mainstream comedy, with the exception of Old School.  Now he can add another good film to his resume.  This movie gets a lot of laughs out of how bad one bachelor party can go.  And luckily, this party was uniquely outrageous.  The three main characters (played by Bradley Cooper, Ed Helms, and Zach Galifianakis) wake up to find their apartment thoroughly destroyed, a tiger in the bathroom, and a baby of unknown origin in the closet.  One of their crew, the groom (Justin Bartha), is missing.  They have very little time to find him before the wedding starts back in LA.  Of course as they discover clues, they discover more evidence of a seriously debauched night, which range from learning they are now in possession of a cop car to finding a naked Asian man in the trunk of the car they arrived to Las Vegas in.

Plot doesn’t really matter in this movie, it’s the laughs, which is how it should be for a comedy.  This movie has no stupid last half hour that turns dramatic.  The cast works well together, with possibly the exception of Justin Bartha even though he was barely in the movie.  He seemed boring and not funny at all; I was happy he was missing.  Supporting cast (like Heather Graham, Ken Jeong, and Mike Epps) all do an adequate job with their roles.

All in all, The Hangover is actually one of the best comedies of the year, if for no other reason than it wants nothing else but to be funny.

The Hangover:   B+

Bookmark It

Hide Sites