Film Filter: Off- This movie received rave reviews, and I couldn't stop hearing about it. I was obviously really pumped to go and see it, as did many, since the theater was sold out.
Pros- Having Brad Pitt as the leading man never really hurt a film, in my opinion. It's always important to have a strong actor when you're trying to put together a movie where there is limited interaction between the lead actor and other human beings. Much like Castaway and I Am Legend, the actors need to rely on themselves and their abilities to make the film work, as they have few counterparts, and I think Brad Pitt does a pretty good job of keeping the film together.
I really liked that there weren't a lot of other A list actors involved, especially in regards to his wife. I thought Mireille Enos did a great job as his wife, and I don't think a stereotypical supermodel A list actress could have done it as well. Who knows, but I liked her in the role.
I thought the pacing and evolution of Brad Pitt's character's ability to figure out what was going on was well executed. There was enough information to keep you interested, but enough information missing to keep you invested in the plot of the film.
The zombies were interesting, as they moved quickly, and not at a stereotypically crawling pace. It definitely added a new dimension to the idea of zombie attacks, similar to that of 28 Days Later.
The special effects were good, and certainly added to the movie. It's hard to do a zombie movie of this magnitude without using special effects, and I feel they utilized them wisely. Also, on an unrelated note, there was a surprise death at the beginning that I found highly unexpected and effective to the plot.
Cons- Ok, there were a few discrepancies here and there that I feel were deliberately overlooked for cinematic appeal. One of particular note was the dramatic "inject-yourself-with-a-random-disease" scene. He could have easily written a sign saying "ring the phone when I have the right one" and held the vials up to the camera. Problem solved.
Despite the fact that the zombies were different from their depiction in the majority of films, I'm not sure I, or the rest of the audience, really responded appropriately to the zombies when we got to interact with them one on one. The whole teeth clicking and head pounding were highly amusing and the audience laughed several times. I'm not sure if that was the intention of the scenes, but I feel like it wasn't. Perhaps I'm wrong.
Lastly, and most annoyingly so, this movie is about an 86% rip off of I Am Legend. Now, before you jump down my throat by saying, "Well Corri, World War Z was a 2006 novel that came out before the movie AND before I Am Legend which wasn't released until 2007." Yes, this is true, but I Am Legend was ALSO a book, and was written in 1954, so, boo yah. I know a lot of people hate on I Am Legend and Will Smith, and say World War Z was a much better film, but there's something to be said about the emotional attachment garnered in I Am Legend that just isn't there in World War Z. Hell, I watched it a few weeks back and I barely remember enough of it to be able to blog about it, not because it was a bad movie, but because it was forgettable. I Am Legend at least had emotional connections that were deepened because of a great loss, as opposed to a happy go lucky we all live to see each other ending found in World War Z. Maybe I am just biased, but since Will Smith's movie came out first, and I am partial to it I have to give this round to I Am Legend, and call World War Z out for what it is: a copycat.
Tuesday, July 30, 2013
Tuesday, June 25, 2013
Film Filter: Off - Hansel & Gretel: Witch Hunters
Film Filter: Off- I had chalked this film up to being as close to the bottom of the barrel as possible before I pushed play, but I have to say that (given my extraordinarily low expectations) it surpassed my initial judgment.
Pros- First off, it was produced by Will Ferrell. It went like this, (about 2 minutes into the opening credits) "Woah, rewind that." "Why?" "Just do it." "Ok." "See, I was right! Will Ferrell!" That may seem trivial, but I will say that knowing that he had a hand in the production shed a lot of light on the film and some of its idiosyncrasies.
Speaking of the opening credits, I thought they were very well executed (pun intended). They creatively and effectively laid out the main idea of the story while also moving the credits along. It was a small victory, but it did not go unnoticed.
Although there were parts that felt a wee bit contrived, I have to say that unlike most films, the dialogue felt natural and most of the character relationships worked well too. That being said, none of the above were appropriate for the time period of the film, but if the intent was a modernized tone in an antiquated setting, we have a winner. If not, well, better luck next time, Ron Burgundy.
The pacing of this film was nearly flawless. It gave enough background information to allow the story to have a reference point, and that back story was alluded to many times throughout the film as well. The movie also did a good job of mixing the action with the plot; it interchanged between the two pretty evenly.
Lastly, they took a well known story and innovated it brilliantly. Perhaps there were nuances that were not preferred by some audiences, but it can't be denied that the strategy of taking a fairy tale classic and retelling it with the victims as badass heroes is a unique, and fun take to witness on-screen. Sure, there were definitely moments of predictability and cheesiness, but this movie was refreshing in its ability to recreate a story without boring us to tears.
Oh, did I mention Famke Jensen? Rawwr.
Cons-
Despite being horribly cute and formidably badass, the poor-man's-Rachel-Weisz of a lead actress got kind of annoying. She was too confrontational, which definitely ended up getting her into trouble. As tough as she was, she attempted to take on a pack of 5 or 6 pissed off grown men and she had no weapon. To top it all off, she bites the sheriff's nose as he's trying to talk to her. Granted, the guy was a total douchebag, but an intelligent young woman would have tried to coax her way out, then fight them off., not just flail around uncontrollably with no plan. Tsk, tsk.
My next annoyance is the lack of accountability of Hansel. She was getting the shit kicked out of her, was nearly sexually assaulted while Hansel is...banging some hot witch in a pond. Real brotherly love, right there. Moreover, when they finally meet up again, she never asks where we was. Lucky for him, I guess, since she probably would have bitten his nose off too if she knew the truth.
The last con I have is more of an overlying theme. There is almost an unnecessary amount of f bombs dropped in this movie, which is fine when in the right context. In this film, however, they appear amidst a sea of corny, predictable, one liners. Ewww. Curse words are like plastic surgery; if they won't enhance what's already there, they are pointless.
Wrap up- This movie leaves no loose ends, has a lot of action, and adds ingenuity to a story we all love to hate. It not only ties up its own loose ends, but those of the original fairy tale as well. As long as you don't take this film any more seriously than you would take a Will Ferrell movie, I think you're in for a treat.
Pros- First off, it was produced by Will Ferrell. It went like this, (about 2 minutes into the opening credits) "Woah, rewind that." "Why?" "Just do it." "Ok." "See, I was right! Will Ferrell!" That may seem trivial, but I will say that knowing that he had a hand in the production shed a lot of light on the film and some of its idiosyncrasies.
Speaking of the opening credits, I thought they were very well executed (pun intended). They creatively and effectively laid out the main idea of the story while also moving the credits along. It was a small victory, but it did not go unnoticed.
Although there were parts that felt a wee bit contrived, I have to say that unlike most films, the dialogue felt natural and most of the character relationships worked well too. That being said, none of the above were appropriate for the time period of the film, but if the intent was a modernized tone in an antiquated setting, we have a winner. If not, well, better luck next time, Ron Burgundy.
The pacing of this film was nearly flawless. It gave enough background information to allow the story to have a reference point, and that back story was alluded to many times throughout the film as well. The movie also did a good job of mixing the action with the plot; it interchanged between the two pretty evenly.
Lastly, they took a well known story and innovated it brilliantly. Perhaps there were nuances that were not preferred by some audiences, but it can't be denied that the strategy of taking a fairy tale classic and retelling it with the victims as badass heroes is a unique, and fun take to witness on-screen. Sure, there were definitely moments of predictability and cheesiness, but this movie was refreshing in its ability to recreate a story without boring us to tears.
Oh, did I mention Famke Jensen? Rawwr.
Cons-
Despite being horribly cute and formidably badass, the poor-man's-Rachel-Weisz of a lead actress got kind of annoying. She was too confrontational, which definitely ended up getting her into trouble. As tough as she was, she attempted to take on a pack of 5 or 6 pissed off grown men and she had no weapon. To top it all off, she bites the sheriff's nose as he's trying to talk to her. Granted, the guy was a total douchebag, but an intelligent young woman would have tried to coax her way out, then fight them off., not just flail around uncontrollably with no plan. Tsk, tsk.
My next annoyance is the lack of accountability of Hansel. She was getting the shit kicked out of her, was nearly sexually assaulted while Hansel is...banging some hot witch in a pond. Real brotherly love, right there. Moreover, when they finally meet up again, she never asks where we was. Lucky for him, I guess, since she probably would have bitten his nose off too if she knew the truth.
The last con I have is more of an overlying theme. There is almost an unnecessary amount of f bombs dropped in this movie, which is fine when in the right context. In this film, however, they appear amidst a sea of corny, predictable, one liners. Ewww. Curse words are like plastic surgery; if they won't enhance what's already there, they are pointless.
Wrap up- This movie leaves no loose ends, has a lot of action, and adds ingenuity to a story we all love to hate. It not only ties up its own loose ends, but those of the original fairy tale as well. As long as you don't take this film any more seriously than you would take a Will Ferrell movie, I think you're in for a treat.
Monday, April 8, 2013
Film Filter: Off - Evil Dead
Film Filter: Off So I was waiting diligently for this film to come out, and I even went so far as to watch the original (which I'm embarrassed to admit, I don't do often enough) before I went to the theater. Needless to say, after watching the trailer and hearing all the hype, I was pretty stoked to see this movie.
Pros- This film followed the plot of the original pretty closely, which I consider a good thing. There is definitely a difference between a re-make, a re-telling, and a sequel, and it's pretty clear that this is a solid re-make, with some dollops of ingenuity thrown in as well.
I can't really say a whole lot about the actors, as it doesn't really take a lot of strong ability to portray frightened adolescents, however I will say that they were very well cast for their roles. Each character had their own little niche that they fit into to make up the story, and some of them even had to act possessed and be psychotic, which I assume would be pretty hard on its own. Add into the equation that they must also go back and forth between said possessed state and their normal character state and then you get a decently challenging role.
This movie, based on previews, appears to be 90% gore. Surprisingly, despite the fact that there is almost a sufferable amount of blood, it is fairly evenly balanced with other scare tactics as well. The build up to all of the gory scenes was fantastic, comparable to some scenes in Sinister where you KNEW something was going to happen, but it scared you anyway. Those are pretty magic moments, right thurr. They also have a good, though slightly over the top, system of incorporating music into the film. Again, like most horror flicks, it strongly foreshadowed an event, but if that's something that bothered you immensely, than maybe scary movies aren't your thing and you should check out some rom coms.
One of the things this movie does well that separates itself from the pack is its ability to show the un-showable. Some movies go there, but the vast majority leave you with the individual parts to piece together the grotesque moment ahead, and let your imagination fill in the gaps. This film does not, it's pretty much all right there on the table for you to see. The jury's still out on if it made the film better, but the movie certainly gets points for being ballsy.
Holy intro. I watched a pretty unsettling preview (The Conjuring...pretty stoked to see that one!) and felt relieved when the movie actually started, since I knew the plot would work its way into the scary parts and not start with them. Wrong. It did a throwback to a much older time period, which did two things 1) set the movie up with some background info, and 2) be delightfully unpredictable for those of us expecting the beginning to mirror that of the original film. Genius!
Lastly, as I could probably go on, this movie refreshed my faith in re-makes, as there are some pitiful excuses for them out there. It did not derail itself form the original, but instead added very important background information, refreshed plot points to make them applicable to modern day while also furthering the story in a believable way, and filled in gaps in the story line. Sure, it was quite different in parts, but the story is pretty much the same thing with a more modern feel, which is how good remakes should be. That being said, there is a time, place, and reason for a remake, and not every horror movie made circa 1980 needs to have a makeover. There's a lot to be said for antiquated horror, and we also have to remember that, at the time, some of those movies were the best of the genre.
Cons- Other than slightly over-the-top musical excerpts, and some slight inconsistencies with the storyline, I really didn't have any cons.
Wrap up: If you're not interested in blood and gore, this movie is most definitely not for you. If you can stomach the gross parts (which is more than half the movie) then I highly recommend it.
Pros- This film followed the plot of the original pretty closely, which I consider a good thing. There is definitely a difference between a re-make, a re-telling, and a sequel, and it's pretty clear that this is a solid re-make, with some dollops of ingenuity thrown in as well.
I can't really say a whole lot about the actors, as it doesn't really take a lot of strong ability to portray frightened adolescents, however I will say that they were very well cast for their roles. Each character had their own little niche that they fit into to make up the story, and some of them even had to act possessed and be psychotic, which I assume would be pretty hard on its own. Add into the equation that they must also go back and forth between said possessed state and their normal character state and then you get a decently challenging role.
This movie, based on previews, appears to be 90% gore. Surprisingly, despite the fact that there is almost a sufferable amount of blood, it is fairly evenly balanced with other scare tactics as well. The build up to all of the gory scenes was fantastic, comparable to some scenes in Sinister where you KNEW something was going to happen, but it scared you anyway. Those are pretty magic moments, right thurr. They also have a good, though slightly over the top, system of incorporating music into the film. Again, like most horror flicks, it strongly foreshadowed an event, but if that's something that bothered you immensely, than maybe scary movies aren't your thing and you should check out some rom coms.
One of the things this movie does well that separates itself from the pack is its ability to show the un-showable. Some movies go there, but the vast majority leave you with the individual parts to piece together the grotesque moment ahead, and let your imagination fill in the gaps. This film does not, it's pretty much all right there on the table for you to see. The jury's still out on if it made the film better, but the movie certainly gets points for being ballsy.
Holy intro. I watched a pretty unsettling preview (The Conjuring...pretty stoked to see that one!) and felt relieved when the movie actually started, since I knew the plot would work its way into the scary parts and not start with them. Wrong. It did a throwback to a much older time period, which did two things 1) set the movie up with some background info, and 2) be delightfully unpredictable for those of us expecting the beginning to mirror that of the original film. Genius!
Lastly, as I could probably go on, this movie refreshed my faith in re-makes, as there are some pitiful excuses for them out there. It did not derail itself form the original, but instead added very important background information, refreshed plot points to make them applicable to modern day while also furthering the story in a believable way, and filled in gaps in the story line. Sure, it was quite different in parts, but the story is pretty much the same thing with a more modern feel, which is how good remakes should be. That being said, there is a time, place, and reason for a remake, and not every horror movie made circa 1980 needs to have a makeover. There's a lot to be said for antiquated horror, and we also have to remember that, at the time, some of those movies were the best of the genre.
Cons- Other than slightly over-the-top musical excerpts, and some slight inconsistencies with the storyline, I really didn't have any cons.
Wrap up: If you're not interested in blood and gore, this movie is most definitely not for you. If you can stomach the gross parts (which is more than half the movie) then I highly recommend it.
Monday, April 1, 2013
Film Filter: Off - The Raven
Film Filter: Off- I can remember watching a preview for this movie, and being intrigued. Much like The Woman in Black, this is a period horror flick that depicts a less chaotic time in regards to technology and resources. Unlike other "based on true events" films, this one almost necessitated some research, as it is about a historical, dark writer that nearly everyone is familiar with. For my own personal satisfaction, I needed to know the lines between fact and fiction, and if you have watched, or will watch this film, I would encourage you to do the same.
Pros- It's pretty near impossible to do a Poe story in modern times, but the time period the film takes place is definitely critical to the film's pace, and ultimately resolve. Those unhappy with the speed of the plot I think forget that we are witnessing a time period void of any modern technology. Every discovery and communication is thus slowed down to a believable degree to, in my opinion, enhance the films believed authenticity. Did it make it an edge of your seat thrill ride? No, but if that's what you're looking for you should have done a little research before you jumped into this movie.
The jury is still out for me on whether or not I am in love with John Cusack as Poe. I really do like Cusack as an actor, but there's something I can't put my finger on regarding his performance. Granted, I think he did as good a job as one could do with Poe, but I'm not sure the director found the best balance for the direction of Poe's character. I could be way off base, but he seemed a little quirky and antagonizing, but almost in a teasing manner. It could just be my perception, but I just viewed Poe a lot more serious than I think was portrayed in this film. Despite those notions, I really loved the pompous nature of Poe that was portrayed, along with his poetic and articulate line deliveries that made him look more intelligent than those he kept company with, which is why Cusack ultimately goes as a pro.
After having looked up a lot about Poe and his death, it made me appreciate the fine line this film tread in regards to fact v. fiction. It was pretty obvious when things were made up for cinematic reasons a lot of the time, but I really like the idea of taking a historical figure's untimely, and mysterious death, and creating a fictionalized account of what could have happened to yield the result. It's almost like writing a story with the ending first.
Cons- One of the big issues I had with this story was with the intermittent unbelievable moments. Unlike The Woman in Black, where we're dealing with supernatural beings out of our control, this movie is clearly dealing with supposed real life scenarios. Since the film does a very nice job of making 90% of what's going on feel realistic, the 10% of scenarios where it doesn't feel that way stand out. For example, the killer standing on the roof jumping down onto a police officer and slitting his throat as he pounces on him. I mean, his feet aren't even on the ground when he cuts him! It's just slightly fantastical, and I didn't really buy it. Or when the bricks are slightly different colored, which tells us the killer recently replaced old bricks with new ones when he hid the body inside. I didn't go to brick laying school, but I'm pretty sure that process would have taken a reeeaally long time, and the mortar wouldn't have dried and looked like the same mortar that the old bricks used.
Wrap up- I didn't think this movie was half bad, although there were a sprinkling of things I didn't enjoy or that I disagreed with. If you're into period thrillers or like dark historical horror movies, you would enjoy this. If you are a die hard Poe fan looking for 100% accuracy, this probably isn't for you.
Pros- It's pretty near impossible to do a Poe story in modern times, but the time period the film takes place is definitely critical to the film's pace, and ultimately resolve. Those unhappy with the speed of the plot I think forget that we are witnessing a time period void of any modern technology. Every discovery and communication is thus slowed down to a believable degree to, in my opinion, enhance the films believed authenticity. Did it make it an edge of your seat thrill ride? No, but if that's what you're looking for you should have done a little research before you jumped into this movie.
The jury is still out for me on whether or not I am in love with John Cusack as Poe. I really do like Cusack as an actor, but there's something I can't put my finger on regarding his performance. Granted, I think he did as good a job as one could do with Poe, but I'm not sure the director found the best balance for the direction of Poe's character. I could be way off base, but he seemed a little quirky and antagonizing, but almost in a teasing manner. It could just be my perception, but I just viewed Poe a lot more serious than I think was portrayed in this film. Despite those notions, I really loved the pompous nature of Poe that was portrayed, along with his poetic and articulate line deliveries that made him look more intelligent than those he kept company with, which is why Cusack ultimately goes as a pro.
After having looked up a lot about Poe and his death, it made me appreciate the fine line this film tread in regards to fact v. fiction. It was pretty obvious when things were made up for cinematic reasons a lot of the time, but I really like the idea of taking a historical figure's untimely, and mysterious death, and creating a fictionalized account of what could have happened to yield the result. It's almost like writing a story with the ending first.
Cons- One of the big issues I had with this story was with the intermittent unbelievable moments. Unlike The Woman in Black, where we're dealing with supernatural beings out of our control, this movie is clearly dealing with supposed real life scenarios. Since the film does a very nice job of making 90% of what's going on feel realistic, the 10% of scenarios where it doesn't feel that way stand out. For example, the killer standing on the roof jumping down onto a police officer and slitting his throat as he pounces on him. I mean, his feet aren't even on the ground when he cuts him! It's just slightly fantastical, and I didn't really buy it. Or when the bricks are slightly different colored, which tells us the killer recently replaced old bricks with new ones when he hid the body inside. I didn't go to brick laying school, but I'm pretty sure that process would have taken a reeeaally long time, and the mortar wouldn't have dried and looked like the same mortar that the old bricks used.
Wrap up- I didn't think this movie was half bad, although there were a sprinkling of things I didn't enjoy or that I disagreed with. If you're into period thrillers or like dark historical horror movies, you would enjoy this. If you are a die hard Poe fan looking for 100% accuracy, this probably isn't for you.
Monday, December 31, 2012
Film Filter: Off - In Dreams
Film Filter: Off- I had seen parts of this movie a long time ago and remember it being the first film in which I had seen Robert Downey Jr. I saw it on Netflix and thought it might be nice to have a refresher on it.
Pros: One of the things that I found very interesting with this film was the cinematography. There were many scenes that took place in a dream-like state in an orchard, and they did an excellent job of making the scenery have an eerie feel to it, but also a sense of wonderment and mystery.
This movie also has a lot of symbolic color to it, using red quite frequently. They even go as far as to name the character in peril "Ruby". Add that to the red hair of the antagonist, the red dress seen in the dreams, and the constant references to orchards and apples and you have an abundance of the rosy hue. I'm not sure what the direct relationship with red is in films with symbolism, other than the obvious representation of blood. There have been many films that have had this common theme, and not just gory ones. It could possibly represent control, as red is a majestic color and is also seen as a power color.
As I mentioned, this is the first film I had seen Robert Downey Jr. in (minus Weird Science...but who counts that one in his repertoire?) and I have to say I didn't have a great first impression. Not because of his acting ability, but because he creeped the hell out of me in this role. He plays a very mentally unstable adult who was clearly mistreated to a foul degree as a child. He seems to have issues identifying with his sexuality as a young boy, but seems to be pretty clever when it comes to escaping from and covering up his deviant activities. Overall, having now been able to compare his roles in various films from his career to this one, I have a much greater appreciation for him as an actor. I think the true testament of a good actor comes when/if they have to play a crazy person. To do the job justice takes an extreme amount of dedication and patience, but the outcome usually justifies the means, a la Heath Ledger.
Cons: Annette Bening? Yikes. There were about four times that I thought she did a good job in this film and that's saying something, as she was just about in every shot. I can't really put my finger on what was irksome about her performance, other than she seemed really inconsistent and illogical. You might be saying, "Well, she was crazy..." but that's the thing- she WASN'T! It was hard for me to take her seriously, even though I knew the whole time that she was sane.
The other incredibly frustrating part of this film comes on the behalf of the stupid-ass psychiatrist who was responsible for Annette Bening's well being. Maybe I'm just privileged from my experience with B.D. Wong as the Law & Order SVU psychiatrist, but there comes a point where you have to put the "my patient is a nut job" aside and actually look for validation in their story...especially if they have had not past of mental illness. The fact that she was spouting off information about the killer and predicting her own husband's death seemed to not matter to the psychiatrist, and it wasn't until a few days later that any of her story was looked into. Someone should revoke his license.
And lastly and MOST frustrating(...ly?) was the unexplained connection between Claire Cooper's (Bening) brain and Vivian Thompson's (Downey). Anyone? Nothing. There was one shot where it almost alluded the link to the fact that she wrote children's stories, but nothing more was brought up on it. I'm all for supernatural connections between murderers and victims, but please have it be rational.
Wrap up- This movie is a tough one to peg. What it lacks in characterization and explanation, it almost makes up for with creativity and cinematography. Almost. I wouldn't really recommend this to anyone mainly because it lacks focus.
Pros: One of the things that I found very interesting with this film was the cinematography. There were many scenes that took place in a dream-like state in an orchard, and they did an excellent job of making the scenery have an eerie feel to it, but also a sense of wonderment and mystery.
This movie also has a lot of symbolic color to it, using red quite frequently. They even go as far as to name the character in peril "Ruby". Add that to the red hair of the antagonist, the red dress seen in the dreams, and the constant references to orchards and apples and you have an abundance of the rosy hue. I'm not sure what the direct relationship with red is in films with symbolism, other than the obvious representation of blood. There have been many films that have had this common theme, and not just gory ones. It could possibly represent control, as red is a majestic color and is also seen as a power color.
As I mentioned, this is the first film I had seen Robert Downey Jr. in (minus Weird Science...but who counts that one in his repertoire?) and I have to say I didn't have a great first impression. Not because of his acting ability, but because he creeped the hell out of me in this role. He plays a very mentally unstable adult who was clearly mistreated to a foul degree as a child. He seems to have issues identifying with his sexuality as a young boy, but seems to be pretty clever when it comes to escaping from and covering up his deviant activities. Overall, having now been able to compare his roles in various films from his career to this one, I have a much greater appreciation for him as an actor. I think the true testament of a good actor comes when/if they have to play a crazy person. To do the job justice takes an extreme amount of dedication and patience, but the outcome usually justifies the means, a la Heath Ledger.
Cons: Annette Bening? Yikes. There were about four times that I thought she did a good job in this film and that's saying something, as she was just about in every shot. I can't really put my finger on what was irksome about her performance, other than she seemed really inconsistent and illogical. You might be saying, "Well, she was crazy..." but that's the thing- she WASN'T! It was hard for me to take her seriously, even though I knew the whole time that she was sane.
The other incredibly frustrating part of this film comes on the behalf of the stupid-ass psychiatrist who was responsible for Annette Bening's well being. Maybe I'm just privileged from my experience with B.D. Wong as the Law & Order SVU psychiatrist, but there comes a point where you have to put the "my patient is a nut job" aside and actually look for validation in their story...especially if they have had not past of mental illness. The fact that she was spouting off information about the killer and predicting her own husband's death seemed to not matter to the psychiatrist, and it wasn't until a few days later that any of her story was looked into. Someone should revoke his license.
And lastly and MOST frustrating(...ly?) was the unexplained connection between Claire Cooper's (Bening) brain and Vivian Thompson's (Downey). Anyone? Nothing. There was one shot where it almost alluded the link to the fact that she wrote children's stories, but nothing more was brought up on it. I'm all for supernatural connections between murderers and victims, but please have it be rational.
Wrap up- This movie is a tough one to peg. What it lacks in characterization and explanation, it almost makes up for with creativity and cinematography. Almost. I wouldn't really recommend this to anyone mainly because it lacks focus.
Tuesday, December 18, 2012
Film Filter: Off - Slither
Film Filter: Off- This movie had popped up on my Netflix suggested list several times, and I had disregarded it until the other day. After looking at the cast, I'm surprised I didn't select it to view sooner.
Pros- As I just mentioned, there were more than a few members of the cast that were actually pretty well known. As you know from several of my reviews, I really like Nathan Fillion, and he certainly did not disappoint in this film. In all of the movies I've seen him in, he has definitely portrayed a very different type of character, but has done them all justice. Elizabeth Banks was also a pleasant surprise to the cast, along with Michael Rooker (Merle in The Walking Dead).
One of the things I liked the most about this movie was the comedic interruptions, which allowed the movie to feel more realistic. They weren't even blatant comedic attempts, but the dialogue felt so realistic and sort of pessimistic, which allowed for the subtlety of the humor to be expressed.
Although this is more or less a zombie movie, it doesn't really go about the cliche zombie movie recipe, which is nice and refreshing. It adds a lot of new elements, and ties them all together in a nice, neat package which allows the audience to enjoy the movie without any stereotypes or distractions.
I will say it was pretty brilliant to have one of the girls get a worm stuck part way down her throat, but was then able to pull it out. It gave her an inside look at what the alien's existence has been, and as soon as she frees herself from its grasp she now knows enough to be helpful to the rest of the survivors.
Lastly **SPOILER ALERT** it's assumed that as soon as the host alien is killed, the town and its infected people will resume normalcy. Wrong. All the infected people die, which I like. Not saying I like death or anything like that, but it's unrealistic to become possessed by an alien worm, have it live inside your brain, and then just survive when its host dies. I mean, it's in your brain.
Cons- One of the things I disliked about the movie was the ludicrous amount of slithery, disgusting worms and how inconsistently they attack. They seem to sense human flesh, since they gravitate toward it constantly throughout the film, yet when there are hundreds of worms that explode from a body, and only 10 or so humans in the room, there are like 5 or 6 humans that don't get attacked. The odds don't seem right to me on that one.
Also, when the host alien sticks his pointy umbilical cords into you, he sucks you dry and inserts the worm disease instead. We don't find out, though, until the end of the movie that you must have both pointy extensions inside of you to get infected. It's just another circumstance of making something happen, and then validating it later with a statement like, "Oh by the way, that is supposed to happen."
Wrap up- This was one of those movies that definitely had me pleasantly surprised. I laughed a lot more than I was frightened, but overall it was one of the better movies I've seen in a while, considering I prejudiced it with some pretty low expectations.
Pros- As I just mentioned, there were more than a few members of the cast that were actually pretty well known. As you know from several of my reviews, I really like Nathan Fillion, and he certainly did not disappoint in this film. In all of the movies I've seen him in, he has definitely portrayed a very different type of character, but has done them all justice. Elizabeth Banks was also a pleasant surprise to the cast, along with Michael Rooker (Merle in The Walking Dead).
One of the things I liked the most about this movie was the comedic interruptions, which allowed the movie to feel more realistic. They weren't even blatant comedic attempts, but the dialogue felt so realistic and sort of pessimistic, which allowed for the subtlety of the humor to be expressed.
Although this is more or less a zombie movie, it doesn't really go about the cliche zombie movie recipe, which is nice and refreshing. It adds a lot of new elements, and ties them all together in a nice, neat package which allows the audience to enjoy the movie without any stereotypes or distractions.
I will say it was pretty brilliant to have one of the girls get a worm stuck part way down her throat, but was then able to pull it out. It gave her an inside look at what the alien's existence has been, and as soon as she frees herself from its grasp she now knows enough to be helpful to the rest of the survivors.
Lastly **SPOILER ALERT** it's assumed that as soon as the host alien is killed, the town and its infected people will resume normalcy. Wrong. All the infected people die, which I like. Not saying I like death or anything like that, but it's unrealistic to become possessed by an alien worm, have it live inside your brain, and then just survive when its host dies. I mean, it's in your brain.
Cons- One of the things I disliked about the movie was the ludicrous amount of slithery, disgusting worms and how inconsistently they attack. They seem to sense human flesh, since they gravitate toward it constantly throughout the film, yet when there are hundreds of worms that explode from a body, and only 10 or so humans in the room, there are like 5 or 6 humans that don't get attacked. The odds don't seem right to me on that one.
Also, when the host alien sticks his pointy umbilical cords into you, he sucks you dry and inserts the worm disease instead. We don't find out, though, until the end of the movie that you must have both pointy extensions inside of you to get infected. It's just another circumstance of making something happen, and then validating it later with a statement like, "Oh by the way, that is supposed to happen."
Wrap up- This was one of those movies that definitely had me pleasantly surprised. I laughed a lot more than I was frightened, but overall it was one of the better movies I've seen in a while, considering I prejudiced it with some pretty low expectations.
Film Filter: Off - Identity
Film Filter: Off- One of the first things I look at when choosing a horror movie is the cast. Seeing as this one had a pretty well known group of actors, I figured I would give it a go.
Pros- I really like John Cusack, and despite his tendency to always play the same type of role, I always enjoy seeing him on screen. In addition to his performance, I think most of the cast held their own and portrayed their characters well.
I would definitely have to say that the premise for the story was pretty unique as well. Despite the fact that human psyche films are popular, this one definitely took a different look at it. It also did an excellent job of making one world out of something that was actually two. Eventually it became clear that there were separate stories, but the two fit very nicely together until that time.
The ending does a nice job of tying up some loose ends while also throwing in a bit of a twist. It was one that I sort of saw coming, but dismissed right after I thought about it. I think it's one that would be a surprise for most, as it's really not all that predictable.
Cons- One of the things that I thought was pretty irritating was Amanda Peet's character and her inability to follow simple directions. I get that she's an independent woman who doesn't like to take orders, but when people are dying and a former police officer is telling you what to do to make the situation better or calmer, you should probably heed him.
Another thing that I found a little jarring about the film, was the moment the viewer realized that there were indeed two stories going on at one time. It took me a while to figure out what was happening and who belonged where, and then it upset me that some of the characters I had grown to like ended up not being real. I suppose the film was supposed to force you to take a minute to figure it out, but there was a definite WTF moment for me mid-way through the film.
Wrap-up- This film isn't bad, if your looking for a psychological drama with limited scary moments.
Pros- I really like John Cusack, and despite his tendency to always play the same type of role, I always enjoy seeing him on screen. In addition to his performance, I think most of the cast held their own and portrayed their characters well.
I would definitely have to say that the premise for the story was pretty unique as well. Despite the fact that human psyche films are popular, this one definitely took a different look at it. It also did an excellent job of making one world out of something that was actually two. Eventually it became clear that there were separate stories, but the two fit very nicely together until that time.
The ending does a nice job of tying up some loose ends while also throwing in a bit of a twist. It was one that I sort of saw coming, but dismissed right after I thought about it. I think it's one that would be a surprise for most, as it's really not all that predictable.
Cons- One of the things that I thought was pretty irritating was Amanda Peet's character and her inability to follow simple directions. I get that she's an independent woman who doesn't like to take orders, but when people are dying and a former police officer is telling you what to do to make the situation better or calmer, you should probably heed him.
Another thing that I found a little jarring about the film, was the moment the viewer realized that there were indeed two stories going on at one time. It took me a while to figure out what was happening and who belonged where, and then it upset me that some of the characters I had grown to like ended up not being real. I suppose the film was supposed to force you to take a minute to figure it out, but there was a definite WTF moment for me mid-way through the film.
Wrap-up- This film isn't bad, if your looking for a psychological drama with limited scary moments.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)