Train to Busan Presents: Peninsula

January 1, 2021 at 6:12 pm | Posted in 2020 | Leave a comment
Tags: , , , , , , , ,

◊ ◊

Korean director Sang-ho Yeon wrote and directed the incredibly successfully and fantastically conceived “Train to Busan.” The audience is kept on the edge of our seats, as the vast majority of the film takes place on a bullet train rapidly coming down with a nasty case of zombies. The trapped locale and the train’s speed made for a perfect combination for a horror film, and I loved every minute of it. Between Sang-ho and Seong-hun Kim’s brilliant “Kingdom” tv series, South Korea seems to be developing its own, internally consistent, zombie lore. So, given his success, I guess it should be no surprise that Sang-ho decided to do a sequel to “Train to Busan.” This one is set four years in the future. Those South Korean’s who could get out did, and most are now living in Hong Kong. Several of them are lured back to the Korean Peninsula with the promise of wealth. They return and, well, things don’t go as planned. I really wanted to love this as much as I did “Train,” but it is just nowhere near as good. This was less of a horror movie and more of an action film, think “Aliens” meets “Escape from New York” meets “Baby Driver.” It certainly is a mad cap adventure in parts, and it’s not without its pleasures, but I was hard pressed to not compare it to the original. The film really steered far from anything scary, and I only jumped a couple of times. It also lacked the darkness of the last film’s ending; there were no real teeth here. This felt like your kinder, gentler zombie movie. Fear was replaced by sentiment, and cuteness stood in for anxiety. The most compelling part of the film was the passing comment that North Korea had been unaffected by the outbreak; it felt like there was a clever, subversive story to explore there. But, alas, we got children (too brave and too clever by half) and an ending so ludicrous that you will at least enjoy yourself laughing out loud. Let’s hope that, when Sang-ho returns to this well again, we see a return to form.

The New Mutants

December 20, 2020 at 9:22 am | Posted in 2020 | Leave a comment
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,

◊ ½

Well, I begin my long slog of catching up today. I am behind on 6 reviews, but I haven’t loved any of them, so it has been hard to motivate myself to write. But, here we are. I had actually anticipated this film at one point. It’s part of the vast Marvel X-Men cannon. Once I heard they were making the film with a horror vibe, I was very interested. But, then rumors started circulating, and the release date got push back and back and back. Hard to get excited about that. I collected the “New Mutants” comics for perhaps the first 50 issues, back when I was in high school. It was during the Bill Sienkiewicz era that the comic got darker and edgier; that was when the comic was at its best. So, it makes sense to draw from that era when making the movie. However, they only drew from it very loosely. In what might have been a stroke of genius, the entire film takes place in what looks like an asylum but is actually a “treatment program” for young mutants. It’s a twisted and clever play on Xavier’s School for Gifted Children from the X-Men series. And, with a cast of some of the hottest, right-now young actors, including Maisie Williams (“Game of Thrones”), Charlie Heaton (“Stranger Things”), and Anya Taylor-Joy (“Queen’s Gambit”), you would think this film might work. But, somehow, it just doesn’t. Why? Honestly, because it’s lazy. Nobody could be bothered to polish the story idea into a working plot. This group of 5 kids seem to have the place to themselves. Laughably, there’s no one else, even any real staff. Who makes their meals, cleans the halls, does the admin work? Apparently, nobody. I guess the emptiness makes the place look creepier, but that would only work if this was an actual horror film. But, nothing is scary here. It’s creepy, but only mildly so. Admittedly, these aren’t the strongest superhero characters overall, which is why nobody has heard of them. But, both Dani and Illyana are actually really interesting, really powerful characters. The film does try to get the most out of them, and it’s at its best when those two are using their powers, but it waited too long to get there. I could feel the potential for a much better movie in there. It just never quite managed to claw its way to the surface.

His House

November 3, 2020 at 9:25 am | Posted in 2020, Uncategorized | Leave a comment
Tags: , , , , , , ,

◊ ◊ ◊ ◊

Given that I had no intention on going out this Halloween (which, frankly, is exactly like every other year), I opted for a horror film instead. And I think I made a great choice. Remi Weekes is a British director, and “His House” is his full-length directorial debut. It tells the story of Sudanese refugees who make it to England and are placed in government housing. The only problem is that something has followed them and is now occupying the house with them. As I have said before, what I require from horror firstly is a high creepiness that makes my skin crawl a few times. A few jump-scares are also fun, but the film should not rely solely on them. I prefer as little gore (especially gratuitous slasher gore) as possible. Lastly, strong acting and an interesting story are a definite plus. This film wins for me in all of these categories. Against an over-arching story of cultural clashes, assimilation, government bureaucracy, and forgiveness, we feel immersed in the claustrophobia of this rundown government housing. Weekes uses the space really well. With flickering lights, holes in the walls, peeling wallpaper all adding to the creepy vibe that runs through most scenes. The supernatural element is well done and did give me a start a few times. The two leads: Sope Dirisu and Wunmi Mosaku were both very effective in their roles (Mosaku is also excellent in HBO’s trippy “Lovecraft Country”). Dirisu was especially good as a man worn down by stress and anxiety. I won’t say anything more, because I think the joy of the film comes in discovering it for yourself. This is the type of horror I want to see more of: clever, creepy and original.

 

Relic

August 30, 2020 at 5:49 pm | Posted in 2020 | Leave a comment
Tags: , , , , , , , ,

◊ ◊ ½

This new Australian horror films starts with the perfect opening scene. We watch a bathtub overflowing and then following the water to floor, out in the hall, down the stairs, where it pools around someone’s feet. She turns sideways toward us and we think, maybe, something moved in the darkness behind her. Great moments like that are the foundation for horror. And I was excited that the film started that way; I had hopes for where it would lead. Unfortunately, it doesn’t really get any more suspenseful for most of the film. It does a great job of maintaining a constant, lingering tension. And sometimes it teases something more (like the great scene where Emily Mortimer looks under the bed). But it does not ratchet up the dread in the way great horror films do. It is just mostly foreboding. At less than 90 minutes, maybe that is all it needs to be, and the final 30 minutes do begin building tension effectively. Once the daughter goes exploring the closet, the story starts building toward its climax. The ending is unexpected and may confuse people, but I found it sweet/disturbing/interesting. This is a film that is clearly also about aging, isolation, and the slow decay of the mind, and from that perspective, I think the ending works. The acting is wonderful, especially from Robyn Nevin as the old woman. This was writer/director Natalie Erika James’s first feature length film; I will be very curious to see what she does next. This film won’t linger long in my memory, but I am glad I saw it. I would call it more suspense than horror, and it did a fine job at creating and sustaining suspense. But, be warned, if you are not a fan of black mold, you might want to steer clear.

 

Shirley

June 7, 2020 at 7:28 pm | Posted in 2020 | Leave a comment
Tags: , , , , , , , ,

◊ ◊ ◊ ◊

I had no idea what to expect when I sat down to watch this film. I watched it because of the great cast and its 90% on Rotten Tomatoes. So, I spent maybe half the film trying to figure out what it was. I don’t know that that’s a bad thing, and I wonder how I might have viewed it if I had known anything (or at least the genre) before I started. So, If you feel adventurous, stop this review now, and watch the film; it’s available for free on Hulu. Otherwise, I will tell you this. I had thought I was watching a period drama about a toxic older couple and their effect on a younger couple, a la “Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf.” It is partly that. But, at it’s heart, this film is a horror movie. It is based on the novel of the same name by Susan Scarf Merrell. Merrell’s novel is an entirely fictional story about Shirley Jackson, a real-life horror writer (she wrote “The Haunting at Hill House,” which was turned into a Netflix series). Jackson died at 48 due to poor health and substance use. The film hinges entirely on the performances of its two female leads: Elisabeth Moss (“The Handmaids Tale,” “The Invisible Man”), who plays Shirley, and Odessa Young (one of the leads in the upcoming “The Stand” series) who plays Rose. Both are truly excellent. Moss plays Shirley with a venomous intensity that is gripping to watch from her first scene onward. She is malevolent and bitter in everything she does, right down to how she carries her body. But Young (who I have never seen before) was equally brilliant, particularly as Rose became more and more undone. At the end (and, obviously, if I say “at the end” you can expect a spoiler), this story is about how this older, ugly couple seemed to get new life and find joy, by passing their suffering on to the younger couple. Shirley starts the film home-bound, never dressing, and suspicious of everyone. By the end, she is fully dressed, leaving the house, dancing and laughing (albeit in a cruel way), while Rose has fallen apart. Likewise, both husbands have seemingly traded places, with Rose’s once loving husband becoming cold, cruel, and unfaithful. That story arc was compelling and creepy and good fun to watch. The film can feel slow in parts, but it’s really more of a slow burn, as the tension mounts and the audience tries to figure out where this is going. I would be remiss if I didn’t mention that Michael Stuhlbarg was brilliant as Shirley’s husband. He is one of my favorite actors right now, and this film again shows why. His Stanley is charming, menacing, and deeply self-hating in every scene; there are not many actors who can carry that complexity off. If your idea of horror is a slasher film, I would skip this one. But, if you like a more cerebral, gothic-style horror, I think this fits the bill.

 

The Invisible Man

March 3, 2020 at 3:51 pm | Posted in 2020 | Leave a comment
Tags: , , , , , , ,

◊ ◊ ◊ ½

As I understand it, this film was originally to be made with Johnny Depp in the lead role. It was going to be part of the big interconnected horror universe called Dark Universal, which was their attempt to capture what Disney/Marvel created with the MCU. But, when the $175M “The Mummy” flopped, they stepped back and reconsidered. Instead, this film was made for just $7M, and it’s much better off for it. It’s hard to imagine what this film would have been like with Depp in the lead; when he works, he only works as an over-the-top character (eg Jack Sparrow or Edward Scissorhands). That would have been a disaster here. What worked so beautifully was Elisabeth Moss’s incredibly believable performance as the terrified Cecilia who appears to be losing her mind. The eponymous villain is, well, mostly invisible. He haunts Cecilia and he haunts us, the audience, in the best way possible—in our minds. Horror is at its best when it doesn’t reveal the villain who can, therefore, be almost anywhere (think “Jaws” as perhaps the greatest example of this). I was also reminded of the fantastic “It Will Follow.” What worked best about that film was that you never knew where the monster was. Is it this person walking toward the camera? Or is it that person? Or him? Or her? The uncertainty ratcheted up the film’s intensity. Here, we are constantly staring at empty spaces wondering if the invisible man is there. Is he in that chair? Standing in that corner? It’s a brilliant device that could utterly fail. An absent villain only works if we connect to a hero whose fear becomes the audience’s fear. That was the power of Moss’s performance. From the first moment of the first scene, she puts us on edge just with her facial expression, and she keeps us on edge for almost every minute of the film’s entire 2:05 run time.  Now, I have to be frank, one must do a lot of suspension of disbelief. There are parts that, if you think about them, really just don’t work. How did he breathe? See? Seemingly follow her so closely, but also appear to give her enough alone time at critical moments? And how did that pepper spray actually work? But, look, any horror requires large suspensions of disbelief. Those suspensions may be more noticeable in a film that tries to stay grounded in the real world, but that also makes the film more terrifying. This movie was far from perfect, but it was really damn entertaining.

Ready or Not

September 6, 2019 at 12:08 pm | Posted in 2019 | Leave a comment
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

◊ ◊

Comedy-horror is not a new subgenre; and, in fact, it’s hard to do it better than “Scream” did. That high bar aside, this was an amusing distraction that sometimes made me jump. While it was generally funnier than it was scary, it gamely kept me on my toes through its lean 90 minutes. The premise is this (and I don’t think it spoils much to share the first big shocker of the movie, as it is the selling point in all the trailers): The film starts with a wedding. Grace (Samara Weaving) and Alex (Mark O’Brien) are getting married. After 5 years of dating, she has finally forced his hand (marry me or I leave). But the Le Domas family has a strange wedding night custom. Actually, it is more like an utterly absurd, straining credulity, custom. This film could only be made as a comedy; it’s just too ridiculous to take seriously at all. When the game is underway and people start dying, that same absurdity cuts deeply into the scare factor. It’s hard to feel afraid of (or even creeped out by) silliness. Part of what made “Scream” so brilliant is how it was able to do both really effectively. Here, directors  (mostly an actor who has directed some shorts before this) and Tyler Gillett (mostly a cinematographer who has directed TV episodes) attempt to ratchet up the scare factor with over-the-top gore. This is not an uncommon technique horror directors use, but it has never worked with me; being grossed out and being scared are not the same thing. They also rely too heavily on jump scares, rather than real horror. And even the big twist of the film was so telegraphed that I had been waiting for it almost since the beginning. That said, the film was more successful as a comedy. Andie MacDowell was quite good as the exasperated mother trying to keep the family of psychopaths focused. Adam Brody gives the most earnest and heartfelt performance in the movie, which was generally short on sincerity. As the lead, Weaving’s slightly hammy performance was exactly what her role called for. She has has mostly had supporting roles until now, and this film may help raise her profile. Nobody will be talking about “Ready or Not” a year from now. I wouldn’t rush out and see it. But, when it shows up on Netflix, curling up on the couch with some popcorn will probably feel like an evening well spent.

Midsommar

July 14, 2019 at 7:03 pm | Posted in 2019 | Leave a comment
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

◊ ½

Some people will love this film and I want to be careful not to dissuade them. But most will hate it. Let me see if I can explain why without giving anything away. This is director Ari Aster’s second feature film; his first was “Hereditary.” That movie was a brilliantly done scarefest that I loved every minute of… except for the last ten, which I felt let the audience off the hook. He gave us a pat answer for all the ambiguity. Well, this film definitely does not let the audience of the hook. It is a long ride toward increasing weirdness. Some have complained that this 2½ film was slow. That wasn’t my experience; there was always something to keep me engaged. As with “Hereditary,” this film was shot by Pawel Pogerzelski, and I really love his visual style. In the last film, he used classic horror techniques to ratchet up anxiety. But, this film plays against type, which I suspect was part of what Aster was after. Where, “Heredity” was a dark creepy house in the woods at night. This film takes place at a Swedish festival for the summer solstice; it is bright all day and all night. The color palette of the entire film was bright whites, with pale blues, pinks and yellows. It was as though Aster wanted to know if he could make a horror film in such an anachronistic setting. My problem is that I’m not sure this is a horror film. It is definitely endlessly disturbing, but that’s not the same thing. This movie was never remotely scary to me, nor did it have much suspense. In fact, it seems to contain the worst parts of modern horror, without anything I love. It was like a slasher film full of gratuitous violence, but without any of the suspense. But, does gross and disturbing make something horror? I’m not sure, but I can tell you my audience treated more like a comedy than a horror film. Much of the theater was laughing themselves to tears by the climactic scenes (pun intended). I doubt that’s what Aster intended. The film might have played better if it had been made as a sardonic commentary about dating. Yeah, dating. The most realistic dynamic in the film was the very dysfunctional relationship between Dani and Christian; it’s ultimately what drives the film along. Dani, as played by the brilliant Florence Pugh (“Lady MacBeth“), is a codependent mess who desperately tries to please the self-involved man-child played by Jack Reynor (“Mowgli: Legend of the Jungle,” “Macbeth“). Both actors go all out for their roles and deserve credit for being the one-grounding thing at this off the wall party. Aster is a compelling director with a very unique vision. He deserves credit for what he is doing, and I will definitely be lining up for his next film. But, part of being a risk-taker is accepting that not everything will work. Daring, shocking, beautiful, funny, crazy, and weird as this film was, I’m just not sure it worked. But, you be the judge of that.

 

Pet Semetary

April 6, 2019 at 12:00 pm | Posted in 2019 | Leave a comment
Tags: , , , , , , ,

◊ ◊

Having not seen the original (or read the book), I don’t have much to compare this one to. Though, if I think of it in terms of modern horror, it doesn’t fare all that well. The plot is fairly straight forward: a family in Maine find a cemetery on their land; if you bury things there, they come back to life. All sorts of bad decisions and their consequences ensue. While the first film hewed quite closely to the book, this one takes some small liberties, mostly to good effect. I am putting a spoiler alert here, though if you have seen any trailers, this will not be a shock at all. In this film, it is the older daughter who is killed by the truck, whereas in the book and first film, it was the younger son. There is a clever nod to that original story line and a fun piece of misdirection in this film, when it appears that it is the son who will die. That would have been a great moment, if the trailers hadn’t ruined it. That aside, I do think this switch was a wise choice, because the young actress, Jeté Laurence, is really the best thing about this movie. She plays creepy just beautifully. The film was slow, plodding, and had no energy until she returned from the dead. Her character was just fun to watch in every scene. The film makes another nod to the original (and the book) when it pans over a burning house. We get no explanation, but it was a nice wink to those who knew. I also much prefer this ending to the one in the book or the first film. In fact, I think the final scene was pretty close to perfect. So, overall, this wasn’t a bad film. The things that worked, worked well. There were just too few of them. It took too long for the energy to build. We also got a wholly unneeded subplot about the wife’s sister that was more weird creepy than fun creepy. It provided some jumps early on, but I found it mostly distracting. If we had gotten to the corpse girl sooner and spent more time with her hunting her prey, that could have been a truly good horror film.

Us

March 25, 2019 at 5:49 pm | Posted in 2019 | Leave a comment
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,

◊ ◊ ◊ ◊

Jordan Peele is on a roll. Two years after his genre-busting “Get Out,” he’s at it again, firmly establishing himself as one of the new horror auteurs. As with all really great horror films (and sci-fi, for that matter), Peele uses the genre for social commentary. Just as “Get Out” was a vehicle to lambaste liberal racism, “Us” has set its sights on something more than just scaring the hell out of you. But, what has it set its sights on? The message of “Get Out” seemed fairly clear, but “Us” manages to feel both in-your-face and obscure, at the same time. I cannot get into what I think it means here, without spoiling all sorts of things. What I will say (cryptically) is this: Peele seems to again be exploring racism in America, and class as well, this time. Although, it appears to be more from a larger cultural and generational perspective. What is the experience of being an outsider in America? One of the invisible who most of us ignore? What could be the end result of our dehumanizing them? What could their pain allow them to do? The movie starts with a TV showing an ad for “Hands Across America.” If you aren’t old enough to remember it, look it up. Because it’s a brilliant metaphor for the naive, condescending way that we perceive those less fortunate and how much effort we are really willing to put into helping them. The metaphor is returned to again and again, and the film ends with the haunting implications of an inversion of that metaphor. Metaphors aside, the film is also a reasonably good horror story. It was very tense at times and genuinely creepy, though there weren’t that many actual scares to be had. The creepiest part of the film was the brilliant acting. Peele clearly hired his main actors based on their ability to play two opposite roles– one person scared shitless, and the other one crazier-than-fuck. Lupita Nyong’o is truly brilliant as Adelaide/Red. She is one of the brightest stars among Hollywood’s crop of young actors, and it shows here. Those two performances were equally as mesmerizing. Though all the actors were good, I have to give another shout out to Shahadi Wright Joseph as the young daughters Zora/Umbrae. As Zora, she genuinely looked terrified. And, as Umbrae, she had the creepiest expression all the time. This was her first feature film, but I can guarantee we will be seeing more of her. The film was also surprisingly funny. Peele had a nice way of making you laugh throughout the film, even during the most disturbing moments. To that end, he choice of music was brilliant. Check out the scene with the Alexa knock-off called Ophelia; those musical choices are full of commentary about race and class, and they are really really funny. This was a terrific film with a really terrific last five minutes. You will be left thinking, “Wait! What just happened? So, what does THAT mean for Peele’s metaphor?” Don’t ask me. I have no idea, and I love that I have no idea. Go see the movie, and then let’s discuss…

Next Page »

Blog at WordPress.com.
Entries and comments feeds.