Wrong Turn

Last night, I watched a throwback film from 2003 called Wrong Turn. To be honest, it was better than I remembered it to be. I mean, the beginning is strong and it delivers exactly what you think it will - young college kids dying in gorerrific fashions. Eliza Dushku was in it. Do you remember her? She was in Bring It On and the Buffy the Vampire Slayer television show. She was super popular there for a bit, but I can't honestly say what she's been in since. Kind of fell off the radar, much like a lot of the actresses from those late nineties and early 2000 horror films. Oh, it also has Jeremy Sisto in it. You might recall him from Clueless and Suicide Kings, but he was also in a great horror flick called May - it's wonderfully twisted and totally worth your time.

Now, while Wrong Turn wasn't bad, you've seen it before. Good looking people meet creepy people in woods and, no spoilers here, die. Think of it as a combination of Texas Chainsaw, The Hills Have Eyes and Deliverance all rolled into one. You don't realize this until you're finished watching it though. But while it's playing you maintain a sense of enjoyment and there are plenty of jump in your seat moments. Don't get me wrong. I'm not saying it's good, but it certainly is an homage to those seventies horror flicks we know and love.

During the entire film I was obsessing over the male lead. I couldn't for the life of me figure out where I'd seen him before. My brain kept telling me it was Karev from Grey's Anatomy, even though I knew it wasn't. I was like, "Shut up, Brain. You don't know what you're talking about." At around four in the morning, I woke from a dead sleep and remembered what he was from .Dexter. He played Quinn. Whew. So glad I figured that out.

What I am having troubles comprehending is that there are six more Wrong Turn movies. SIX. And none of the five following the first one even made it into the theatres. Horror films are remade more often than any other genre AND they have the most amount of sequels done. At six, wrong turn isn't even close to being in the same realm as the Friday The 13th franchise, which is actually at twelve movies. But this is Wrong Turn, a blip of the silver screen, not even usually given a second thought when it comes to horror movie nights. I mean, the only reason I even picked it was because I was trying to find a movie I hadn't watched in the last two horror fests. Last year, I watched sixty-four movies for horror fest, which means there are at least a hundred other movies I would have thought of first.

And still, Wrong Turn has five sequels!

Boggles my poor wee brain.

Don't worry, these two flawless folk live. Of course. 

Freddy's Revenge

As it turns out, I hadn't actually watched Nightmare On Elm Street #2. The original is, obviously, a classic, but the follow up is a bit confounding. It's called Freddy's Revenge, but I'm not too sure where the revenge part comes into play. Like, I can't even be certain who Freddy is reaping revenge on. After all, not one character from the first movie actually appears in this follow-up.

Here's a brief rundown of the plot. New kid in town Jesse is living in Nancy's old house (five years after Johnny Depp died), sleeping in her old room, and soon is visited by her old pal Freddy. Except, in this one, Fred isn't only causing kids to have sleepless nights, he's trying to take over Jesse's body. Why? I'm not sure. And I can't really give you much more, since it isn't explained or developed very well. In fact, all I can surmise is the film was only created to ride on the coattails of the first Elm Street and cash in on the success of the leading man with knives for fingers.

It isn't all bad. There are some gory scenes, though a shockingly low body count, and some great one-liners. The issue is, it isn't clear what's going on. Furthermore, the lead character is so annoying all you want is to watch him die from the get-go. Sounds mean, doesn't it? But he's incredibly whiny! And can't seem to pull the trigger with his girlfriend. I get it, it's hard enough being the new guy in town without having Freddy Kruger's tongue make an appearance when you're kissing your girlfriend.

If there is one redeemable part of this locomotive that runs off the rails, it's the parents. They are delightfully old and think Jesse is on drugs (how cliched!). At one point, the father says, "Jesse doesn't need a psychiatrist, he needs a methadone clinic."

After I watched the movie, I took a look online to see if I missed something important (like the entire plot) and found myself knee deep in articles talking about the homoeroticness of the film, another thing I happened to miss. Apparently, people consider the movie to have a bisexual theme and that Jesse manifested Freddy in response to repressing his homosexuality. If that isn't a reason to come out of the closet, I don't know what is! All jokes aside, I think people dig too deeply into the 'meaning' of things. Sometimes there isn't anything beneath the surface. Personally, I don't think the movie intentionally had homosexual themes, even if that's how it seemed in the end.

Tons of laughs, for sure, but it's definitely one of the most confusing horror movies of the eighties.

Black Death

It has not been a rip roaring start to Horror Fest. Last year I created a most awesome schedule, something I decided not to do this year because I wanted the freedom of changing my mind. The issue with having freedom - it's harder to make a decision. Instead of knowing what I am going to watch, I'm left to my own devices, which means scrolling through Netflix, wasting time on IMDB, and flicking through all the movies I actually own until something strikes my fancy. Problem is, my fancy is unusually picky this year.

Last night's movie of choice? Black Death.

Sounds promising, no? Well, I thought so. Who doesn't want to watch a movie about whether the bubonic plague is God's punishment? The secondary plot is one where devout Christians (one a Monk!) journey to a seemingly immune town that is shrouded in tales of necromancy and dark forces. Apparently, they are going to capture the ringleader and take him back to the Bishop, or some such tale. I can't be certain because I kept getting distracted by Sean Bean and dreaming of his Eddard Stark days.

Oh, yeah, Eddard Stark is in this. And true to Sean Bean roles, he doesn't exactly meet a happy ending. You know who else is in this? Melisandre, the red woman, also from Game of the Thrones. Carice van Houten. And it seems as though she also is suffering from a bit of typecasting because she seriously frowns on God in this one. Not the old Gods, but 'the' God. The big guy in the sky. She also seems to have some of her priestess powers, since she's raising the dead and all. This might have been the woman the Eagles were singing about. (A joke about the song Witchy Woman)

So, Black Death did have a few things going for it. The plot wasn't necessarily a terrible one. There were some choice actors. Except, once they got to the town, the whole thing sort of fell apart. Sure, there are some excellent gore scenes, including a man being torn apart at the limbs, but for the most part it lacked reasoning. For a movie centring around faith, it actually tiptoed around the serious questions it could have explored, including the reasoning behind this town blindly following Melisandre. The reasoning behind it? Because she was there. Not a fulfilling answer, to say the least.

Should you watch this? Why not. It is entertaining to a degree, just don't expect to walk away understanding it. Neither the religious zealots or pagans have many redeeming qualities and the one character they do take the time to flesh out (the monk) is more two dimensional than three. And not to give anything away, but the big plot twist is - there is no plot twist.

The tagline on the poster made me laugh - Journey into hell. More like, journey into meh. This is not a horror movie, no matter what IMDB or Rotten Tomatoes says.

In The End - Day 31

At the end of this whole endeavor, I have learned a few things. But this is just a bit of a recap for those who may not have followed along on my 31 day Horrorfest.

Original horror movies are better than remakes 97% of the time.

Modern horror thrives on the 'big twist'. They love to have an unexpected ending these days.

The Purge wasn't really worth my time, except I love Ethan Hawke, and I am still suffering residual disappointment over this.

The Awakening, Stoker, and The Conjuring were three new movies that I will put in the 'need to watch again' folder.

Doing double features was probably a bit much. Next year I will stick to one movie a night, except on weekends maybe, and, if I am feeling adventurous, I will add more in.

In total, I watched 51 movies off the schedule and thirteen other horror movies that weren't on the list.
The two movies I didn't watch were The Omen (original) and Poltergeist (because the two files I had just wouldn't work for me.)

Of the sixty four movies I watched, I enjoyed well over eighty percent.

Most horror movies are approximately ninety minutes, give or take a minute or two. With that in mind, I wasted 5760 minutes of my life. That works out to be about ninety-six hours. Which is about four days of movie watching. I am not sure if this fact makes me sad or super impressed with myself.

The previous fact confirms I don't actually have a life at all.

Themed weekends were the best idea I've ever had. Most notably, the nineties weekend.

Stephen King books don't translate well into movies unless they don't have supernatural elements.

Not many other people have the same dedication I do when it comes to horror movies.

Halloween is still my most favourite.

And I can't wait until next year's Horrorfest.

Thanks for tuning in! Regular scheduled programming will resume tomorrow.

No Such Luck - Day 29

Last night, I was supposed to watch Poltergeist. I've never seen it before, you see, and I was looking forward to finally crossing it off my short list of classics I've yet to indulge in.

First, the MKV version I had wouldn't play on my xbox, then the MP4 file was corrupted. Well, a girl can take a hint. So, I didn't end up watching Poltergeist at all. Instead, I watched a truly terrifying flick called Sleepless In Seattle. I still have chills.

Okay, okay, comedy hour is over. This is what I really watched.

Title: Cabin In The Woods
Year: 2012
Synopsis: Five friends go for a break at a remote cabin in the woods, where they get more than they bargained for. Together, they must discover the truth behind the cabin in the woods.

Tagline: You think you know the story.
Thar be spoilers in this here review! Because I can't write a rave review about this without telling you just what I thought was amazing.

When I went to go see this movie in the theatre, I thought it was going to be another slasher teen flick. You know, the movie where the ridiculously good-looking main characters do a bunch of stupid shit and they all get killed in clichéd ways and you roll your eyes because it's all soooooo predictable.

I was wrong.

Granted, on the surface, it does look like that kind of movie. The overtly sexual blonde bimbo is dating the douche-face jock. Stoner guy is thrown in for comedic effect while you assume the virgin is going to be the only survivor in the movie. Actually, like so many horror movies, there is a gang of kids that kind of resemble Scooby-Doo. It makes me laugh how accurate that statement is.

Upfront, I can address why a lot of people didn't like this. There are two groups of people, the 'what the hell is going on crowd' who don't like it when a movie is one upping them and they can't figure out the plot. These people are the ones who will walk out before the movie is completed because it doesn't make any sense and it seems like a couple other horror flicks they've seen before. Basically, they have no patience and shouldn't be allowed in the door to a movie of this calibre.

The second crowd is the 'I've seen every horror movie known to man and I will never be happy with anything big Hollywood does'. These elitist horror snobs are the worst. They can't enjoy anything except for seventies Italian horror and Foreign films with knife wielding and a fair bit of pert nipplery. These folks are annoyed because this movie used ideas other movies that came before used. Apparently, they didn't get the memo that there are no original ideas and people borrow, modify and steal lines, characters, plot points all the time.

To be blunt, when I went to go see this, it'd been a long time since I saw a truly good horror movie. Cabin in the Woods is at once a parody of the horror genre and also a tribute. In a lot of ways, it is like a magic trick, a genius case of misdirection, but revealed to the audience.

First, they show you what you already expect to happen. The Scooby-Doo gang, all good-looking college students, going to an isolated cabin for a chance to kick back and relax. Because we have all seen this a hundred times before, we check our watches and think to ourselves, good another hour of blood and mayhem and I can get home and trash this on my blog. That's when the zombies make an appearance. Well, not just zombies. The zombie redneck family!

Second, they hit you with a sub-plot and start to explain things, a bit. This is where you have the 'wait, something else is going on here', thought. What are these tech guys talking about? What are they betting on? Wait, they know who the Scooby-Doo gang is? They've been watching them. Wow. So, this whole weekend getaway has been orchestrated? The dumb shit these seemingly stupid characters are doing has all been planned? Nothing is as it seems? It's all a giant set-up!!! At this point, our brains explode, but we are delighted because this is new. This is exciting. We didn't plan for this.

Or it's where you walk out of the theatre.

Last, they deliver the big reveal. The climax. Why this group of techie nerds is harbouring every monster known to man in the pits of this underground lab. What these kids have been sacrificed for. And how it all was able to be worked out. This is the part where a lot of people asked 'is this for real?" It is. It is so for real.

The most important reason for you to go and watch this movie is to see the epic monster battle scene. I can't even explain it. I will simply say, the unicorn made my day. And it doesn't end the way you think it does. In fact, nothing about this movie is what you think it is. If you don't like to laugh during horror movies, or if you have a serious case of the 'nothing-is-ever-good-enough-for-mes', then just pass on watching this, okay, fun killers!

 Honestly, the only disappointing part is the ending. Not the end itself, but the fact that there can't really be a sequel. And I would have loved to have seen a sequel for this one!

Wanna Play - Day 28

To the five people who are diligently reading these reviews, thank you, and congratulations. You have almost made it through. October is almost over. Let's go out with a bang and make these last couple of days count.

Title: Curse of Chucky
Year: 2013
Synopsis: After her mother's mysterious death, Nica begins to suspect that the talking, red-haired doll her visiting niece has been playing with may be the key to recent bloodshed and chaos.

Tagline: Foul mouth. Foul temper.

Sometimes movies are bad on purpose, like a lot of the 'b' rated campy slasher flicks from the eighties. That said, I'm not sure Curse of Chucky was supposed to be bad. I think they were actually trying to make a legitimate horror movie, but maybe they haven't seen the rest of the Child's Play franchise. These movies aren't supposed to try. There isn't supposed to be a twist ending. They are supposed to be bare bones, with funny dialogue, and the quirky doll stealing the scene.

Sadly, Chucky got his scene stolen from him by the emotional acting of Nica, played by Fiona Dourif. Yeah, emotional acting, since when is that supposed to happen in these movies.

Just so we are all clear, I love Chucky. He's a puny little guy who has some of the best lines of any of the horror baddies. Except in this installant his witty, bitter ways seem to have fallen to the wayside. He just paled in comparison to all the other movies, which makes me think this was just a lack lustre attempt to make a bit of money.

Here's the sad part, I have been waiting two decades for Andy to make a return. Finally, he does and it's just a bit cameo, which happened to be the best part of the film. Okay, that's a spoiler, but don't worry, I'm not ruining anything for you. I could tell you word-for-word what happened in this film and you'd still be lost when you watched it. Honestly, I have no idea what the writer, director and producer were all thinking when they decided on dual endings and a plot twist. Give me a break! It's like these guys were trying to apply big Hollywood tricks to their low budget film.

It failed miserably.

In the end, this movie makes no sense. The ending with Andy is negated by the fact Chucky is transferring his soul into Alice before the credits roll. And he is supposedly doing this soul transfer thing without the pendant, the tool they put so much emphasis on in the first three movies. Then there is the fact that Tiffany is still helping him. Oh, and Chucky doesn't bleed when he gets hurt. Since when?

And why is the doll all normal looking at the beginning of the film only to get scars and stitches later on?

Colour me confused.

Also, the murder scenes kind of suck. I mean, they aren't tense, scary or gory.

Even if you love Chucky, go ahead and pass on this. Needless to say, I think this franchise has finally be slashed to pieces and laid to rest.

Found Footage - Day 27

Remember when everyone was all about The Blair Witch Project?

Title: [Rec]
Year: 2007
Synopsis: A television reporter and cameraman follow emergency workers into a dark apartment building and are quickly locked inside with something terrifying.

Tagline: Experience Fear

Before 1999, there were only a handful of found footage horror movies, Cannibal Holocaust being the first I can remember and that was from 1980. Then Blair Witch was made and the world went crazy for these 'this could be happening to you' movies. You know, I don't actually remember seeing at all. I mean, I know I saw it, but it didn't leave any sort of impression and if someone sat me down and asked what it was about I'd shrug my shoulders and say, "Not sure. Some kids with a camera and snot coming out of a nose or two." Seriously.

Like it or not, Blair Witch popularized the mockumentary style genre. After came Cloverfield, Paranormal Activity, The Zombie Diaries, The Last Exorcism, and this foreign film [Rec]. That's right, it's a Spanish film with English subtitles, which means you're going to have to read. I know, I know. We all hate reading. Or, maybe we don't, but apparently that's what Hollywood thinks. They always remake amazing foreign movies and I can't think of any reason other than the fact they don't think people like to read. Remember that movie Let Me In? It was a remake of the Swedish horror movie Let The Right One In, which was amazing. So often these remakes don't do the originals any justice. Since I haven't seen the remake of [Rec], called Quarantine and stars Dexter's sister, I can't comment on it, but I'm going to hazard a guess that it pales in comparison.

I myself don't LOVE the found footage style of film making. It kind of makes me sick, all that running around and shaking camera nonsense. That said, this way of shooting really did add to the overall tone of the movie, instead of feeling gimmicky and humorous, it had an incredibly authentic air to it.

A journalist and camera operator are following these fireman around. They go on a call to investigate a scream, only to find an infected woman. Then the biting starts. Like most zombie movies, the plague travels fast, easily taking out the people who were healthy only a moment before. The plot line isn't actually anything original, we've seen it before, but the sense of urgency in the first person perspective certainly lends an engaging element to the overall film.

People raved about [Rec] when it first came out, calling it ground breaking, but in truth it is a simply mash-up of a few other movies. Nothing about this breaks boundaries or is in any way 'new' to the viewer. That doesn't mean I am trashing the movie for taking bits and pieces from other horror movies, such as Blair Witch and 28 Days Later. The truth is, I love Quentin Tarantino and he loves borrowing from the classics that came before. It's what he's known for. Sure, he's smarmy and has major attitude, but who didn't love Django?

To sum it up, [Rec] is good. Tense. Scary. And totally worth it for the last ten minutes. For a movie that had a very limited budget, was shot on a digital camera, and contained in one building, it was really well done. A quick view that any zombie lover will surely enjoy.

Zombie Weekend - Day 25

Yesterday kicked off Zombie weekend here, and let me just tell you, I am over the moon. Zombies have been and always will be one of my most favourite horror creatures.

Title: 28 Days Later
Year: 2002
Synopsis: Four weeks after a mysterious, incurable virus spreads throughout the UK, a handful of survivors try to find sanctuary.

Tagline: Be thankful for everything, for soon there will be nothing.

The truth is I can't say enough good things about this movie. Granted, there will be some who meekly raise their hands and tell me this isn't actually a zombie movie. After all, zombies are people who have died and been reanimated. The monsters in 28 Days Later don't actually die, but contract a virus called 'rage' that makes them act like the cannibalistic undead. Now, while I can appreciate that outlook, I don't feel the same way.

If it acts like a zombie and looks like a zombie. It's a zombie.

That being said, I would actually suggest categorizing this as a virus/outbreak movie, as opposed to a zombie flick for one simple reason. People think zombie and they assume it will be cheesy and regurgitate all the stuff we've already seen in other lurching, moaning, flesh-eating movies. This is not the case with Danny Boyle's 2002 masterpiece.

Now, why is this movie so phenomenal?

Well, it contains all the necessary pieces to make a great film. Believability. Anyone who existed ten years ago remembers when the swine flu was taking the world by storm. It was all over the news. People were dying. Everyone was scared. Before the swine flue was the plague. Black death. It happened. And it could happen again. In fact, my money is on a virus wiping most of us out one day. Besides, have you seen how many people don't wash their hands or cover their mouths when they sneeze? Disturbing.

28 Days Later also touts sympathetic characters. You can't help but like Cillian Murphy's character. Not only is he undeniably attractive with those pale baby blues, but his fear is palpable. You can feel it. He doesn't do stupid things because he is afraid. He's sensitive and lost, certainly not the stuff most heroes are made from. All his moves are authentic, he does things we all would do if we woke up in the hospital and suddenly found the world taken over by mobs of very angry people. Kind of like Vancouver when the Canucks crap the bed during play-offs and the citizens burn their own city down. Bravo.

And maybe that's the whole point. The parallel between real life and the virus induced state isn't too far away from one another, is it? People seem to be so very agitated so often in lift and, towards the end of the film, you really get the sense that Danny Boyle is skewing the line in who is the 'monster' and who isn't. In the end, this truly does explore human nature, and maybe that's why it is one of those flicks that sticks with you after the fact.

Unlike a lot of horror movies, this one doesn't let up. From the very beginning straight through to the end it is a blood spraying riot of violence and tension. But it isn't in your face gore, it isn't overwhelming, and it isn't trying to be the grossest movie of the decade. Each scene shows you a snippet into the characters and their development, creating this perfect arc that you can see over the entire film, kind of like a rainbow.

The writers did a fantastic job with plotting out and executing this storyline. Like I said, I can't say enough good things. Watch it for entertainment or because it is subtly layered and beautifully executed. This is just another example that great movies can be done on small budgets. I am beginning to think Danny Boyle is untouchable.

Possessiveness - Day 23

The whole idea of possession is so very intriguing to me. To be taken over by demons, controlled and contorted, twisted and tortured. For me, this always has had a parallel to mental health. Of course, in the movies and books, the person afflicted is literally possessed by demons, sometimes Lucifer himself. I myself cannot say if this is true or not. It is like meditation and hitting that higher plain. It is like people who unlock their past lives.

I have never experienced this. But that does not make it untrue. After all, I have never seen a narwhal whale but that does not mean they do not exist.

Last night, I watched two possession movies. The Exorcism of Emily Rose and this more recent film.

Title: The Possession
Year: 2012
Synopsis: A young girl buys an antique box at a yard sale, unaware that inside the collectible lives a malicious ancient spirit. The girl's father teams with his ex-wife to find a way to end the curse upon their child.

Tagline: Fear the demon that doesn't fear God.

A little girl buys a cool looking box from a garage sale and starts acting all sorts of messed up. Of course, a demon is inside the box and it tries to take over the girl. Not a crappy plot line, except no one in the movie acted accordingly.

Remember in Exorcist when Regan's behaviour started changing her and her mother noticed and tried to get her help. Apparently, the Brenek family doesn't have those natural instincts. I can tell you this much, if my gentle, lovely, animal loving daughter suddenly stabs me in the hand with a fork one breakfast morning, you best believe she'd be making a trip to the doctor's office and a therapist. The reason they don't? She must be feeling the affect from their divorce, which happened months prior.

Though this whole movie I sat there wondering, why the hell isn't anyone helping the obviously disturbed and unhappy Emily?

Her obsession with the box alone would raise some eyebrows. And the fact that her finger was turning green and swelling from the ring she was wearing. How did anyone not notice this? It reminded me of the time I put a rubber band around my finger to the point that I couldn't get it off. At first, I panicked, but when my finger started turning blue, I decided I needed to tell my mom because I didn't want to lose the tip of my finger. This was over the span of twenty minutes. Needless to say, if my entire hand went blue, my mom would have noticed. The fact that neither the mother or father in this didn't seem to care that her finger was practically falling off leads me to believe they are neglectful.

And what kind of parent buys a weird box for their child but doesn't investigate how to open it or what's inside. There could have been drugs or porno in there! Instead, there was just a demon that ended up possessing the daughter.

You know what this movie really suffered from? The inability to hurt any of the main characters. Right from the first ten minutes, I knew what was going to happen. I knew everything was going to be okay for the Brenek family, that they would all be alive and well by the end, but the box would some how fall into the wrong hands. Maybe it was so predictable because I've seen far too many horror movies before. Or maybe it was predictable because this is he classic Hollywood way. They only like to kill the people you aren't connected to. These people should take a cue from George R.R. Martin, I'm still suffering the depression from him killing ... everyone. (No Game of Throne spoilers here!)

Let's put the bashing of this lack-luster film (that I was really looking forward to watching) to the side and detail what didn't disappoint.

There were a few greatly creepy scenes. The fingers down the throat of the girl. A demon being shown in the MRI. And the boyfriend's teeth falling out. That's about it. Granted, the movie did start out with a bang, but why didn't the family go back to the original owner and ask a few questions?

Just doesn't make sense.

A House and Chainsaw Wielding Maniac - Day 22

Talk about a crappy inheritance, huh? With this gorgeous house, you also get your bonkers cousin who likes to cut faces off people and has an affection for chainsaws. Yikes. But don't worry, Leatherface will protect you because you're family. Just make sure you tell him you two are related or else he's going to cut you to pieces, okay?

Title: Texas Chainsaw 3D
Year: 2013
Synopsis: A young woman travels to Texas to collect an inheritance; little does she know that an encounter with a chainsaw-wielding killer is part of the reward.

Tagline: Evil wears many faces.

With my approaching birthday, I find myself wondering if I'm getting soft in my old age. And I'm not talking about my body. No, this here body is a temple and it just happens to be curvaceous and soft, pliable and cuddly. It's always been that way - another birthday isn't going to change that. What I'm referring to is my usual hardass ways - especially when it comes to horror movies. I don't think I was supposed to like Texas Chainsaw 3D. After all, the Tobe Hooper classic is one of the scariest films of all time both cinimatically and on a psychological level. Simply put, it leaves a disturbed taste in the viewers mouth.

This doesn't do that, not really. In many ways, this supposed sequel is actually a very nice movie about the bonds of family. No character development. Not scary. A decent amount of gore, but it lacked tension. Still, I didn't hate it. And I honestly don't know why. See, it isn't the most brilliant movie of the year, not by a long shot. But I thought the premise kind of cool and the female lead, who wore way too much make up, was actually fairly likable while still being off enough that you can believe she is related to a bunch of homicidal maniacs. 

This did fall victim to continuity issues as well, not to mention realistic viability. If this movie takes up right where the last left off and is supposed to be in present day (they use Iphones), then the ages of both Leatherface and Heather are off. According to the expanded beginning which extends from the end of the previous, we can assume it picks up from 1974 which would make Leatherface 60 and Heather nearing the end of her thirties. Now, I can bend my imagination enough to allow for a couple of years flexibility, maybe, but Heather would have to be at least in her thirties for this movie to even be plausible. And she most certainly is not. Her breasts are far too perky. 

Then there is Letherface. Was he seriously locked in the basement for the last 35 years? Perhaps this is why he limps, but I can only surmise that he would certainly have other noticeable issues. No sunlight and little exercise alone would guarantee this man to be handicapped in some capacity. But there he is chasing after the young kids, clubbing buff twenty year olds and dragging them around as if they weighed the same as a sack of potatoes.

See what I mean about continuity and whether or not it is realistic?

Through the whole film, I kept telling Heather to read the bloody letter from her Grandmother. In the end, it detailed everything, from Leatherface being locked in the basement and what happened to her family. If she had of at least skimmed the note to being with the whole movie might have been avoided. Furthermore, what isn't explained is why everyone in the town is mental. The attractive police officer who happens to conveniently be the son of the mayor who was part of the lynching party who burned Heather's family to bits. Truth be told, you don't care about anyone in the movie and are kind of rooting for the cheater boyfriend and whore best friend to bite it from the get-go.  

Oh, and by the way, Tobe Hooper already did a sequel to Texas Chainsaw Massacre (which was, in fact, a terrible, terrible, terrible movie), but this 3D follow up completely disregards the 1986 installment of this series. Which is fine, I guess, but is something I just now thought of.  

You know, I think I've just talked myself out of liking this. Funny how analyzing things can do that. 

In the films defense, I really did like the idea. Family takes care of family, no matter how messed up said family is. It's kind of a nice thought. But if your cousin who has been touched by the angels is slashing people to bits with a chainsaw (the loudest weapon of them all) then I highly suggest you notify the authorities. It's just good manners. And I have to give props to the scene where Leatherface is sewing the skinned face onto his own. It made me squirm. 

Thank goodness I'm still a hardass!

 

All About Cartoons - Day 18

Last night I kicked off my cartoon weekend, and I may have deviated from the schedule. Don't worry, I am all caught up now, but I completely forgot Monsters University came out and I HAD to watch it. I know, I know, it isn't technically horror or halloweenie, but there are monsters in it. I thought it was amazing. It made me laugh out loud a couple of times. None harder than this part:

Anyway, because it wasn't on the list of movies it is off the review selection, which leaves me with another cartoon I simply adored. 

Title: Hotel Transylvania

Year: 2012
Synopsis: Dracula, who operates a high-end resort away from the human world, goes into overprotective mode when a boy discovers the resort and falls for the count's teen-aged daughter.

Tagline: Even monsters need a vacation.

Horror buffs the world over are rolling their eyes at my cartoon weekend. And I say, go ahead and roll your eyes, fun killers! No matter what, there are certain movies that will always be spooky even if they are cartoon-y and they deserve to have their day in the spotlight. Hotel Transylvania has all the elements of a fangtastic film. Dracula, Werewolf, Frankenstein, The Mummy and let's not forget skeletons, zombies and bats. 

While I really do love this shiny nugget of fun from last year, I also think it was misrepresented. While Count Dracula certainly does build and run a resort for monsters, it really isn't about that. In truth, it centres around his love for Mavis, his daughter, and the desire to keep her close, even though it is her 118th birthday. But the Count's overprotective ways are inevitably what shows a wandering twenty-one year old backpacker the way to this exclusive resort. 

What unfolds truly is a cute film with all our favourite campy b-movie creatures making an appearance. I think a lot of people who watched this failed to remember that this is a children's movie. Like Shrek and Toy Story, this movie does have adult humour, which you have to be quick to pick up, but it also has fart jokes and a kind of annoying impression of Dracula. That said, it is a KIDS MOVIE. And of course there is a moral to the movie! After all, it is for CHILDREN, and we want our kids to learn. 

I thought it rather ingenious to address discrimination in this manner. We've seen it before, with Shrek and Paranorman and a lot of other family rated movies, but seeing monsters afraid of humans was enjoyable for me. Then again, I am easily contented. Sure, it's cliched. Yes, there are some unfunny parts. But the over all idea and animation are good. Trust me, I'm not an Adam Sandler fan either, but he isn't at his most annoying in this. The only thing I really didn't like was the final musical number. What was that??? And why was it necessary?  

If you want to watch a cartoon tonight, make it Monsters University, but if you've already seen that, give this one a go. It's fun and cute. 

Oh Man - Day 16

Last night, I watched the remake of The Omen.

Here is my review:

Title: The Omen
Year: 2006
Synopsis: A remake of the 1976 horror classic The Omen (1976), an American official realizes that his young son may literally be the devil incarnate.

Tagline: His day will come.

After all these years I've come to the conclusion I don't like The Omen. Not the original from 76 or the remake of 2006. It's just a bad movie. And I know it's heralded as a classic, but it really isn't very good. I can't even pinpoint what it is I dislike so much. Probably because we've seen it before. Is this not just a blend of The Exorcist and Rosemary's Baby? Both of which are far superior films. 

In both movies, the slow build is almost agonizing to watch. Nothing really happens. A lot is hinted at. And the creaking wheel on a tricycle is supposed to be scary. I must have missed the memo. It takes about 3/4 of the film to actually get to any action, but by that point you're so board that they could kill Damien and you wouldn't give a care because you can't stand any of the characters. Or maybe that's just me. Like Julia Stiles and Liev Schreiber couldn't act in this movie. Granted, I am not a huge Julia fan, but Liev, I love Sabretooth! But that's beside, even then, most of the action and suspense in The Omen is delivered through the dreams of the mother. What a cop out! 

Both of the fathers from the original and remake are annoying. The mothers weak and kind of crazy. Priests are erratic and don't offer enough evidence of their claim to convince. And the fact that everyone who is associated with the anti-christ is marked is far-fetched. Something else that drove me nuts, the dog. Why are dogs always these snarling snapping balls of fur in movies? Especially horror movies! 

There is the bones of a good movie here. It just so happens the flesh over said bones is rotten. To put it simply, the acting is stilted in both, plot is thin and watered down, movie generally lack luster and boring. I honestly think that this was such a success because it capitalized off the gore it displayed. Some of the deaths in this are cited in horror movie blogs as ground breaking, so I suppose it does in some ways deserve its cult classic standing. But I honestly think the only reason it was ever popular was because horror exploded in the seventies as cinema and the audience embraced their desire to be scared. 

Then they went and remade it. But that's irrelevant in this day and age, because there are far scarier, gorier movies, that actually have good actors and keen plots. 

A truly good movie stands the test of time. 

This sadly isn't one of them. Neither will the remake. 

Just pass on The Omen. 

Stoke The Fire - Day 15

Halfway through Horror Fest and, I must say, it's so much fun. I know there are a lot of people out there thinking I could be doing more constructive things with my time, but this is what I like to do. Watch movies. Horror movies.

Last night's movie was another new release, which was kind of refreshing, since I've been down memory lane so many times in the last two weeks that I've started wearing holey jeans, plaid shirts and listening to Nevermind on repeat.

Title: Stoker
Year: 2013
Synopsis: After India's father dies, her Uncle Charlie, who she never knew existed, comes to live with her and her unstable mother. She comes to suspect this mysterious, charming man has ulterior motives and becomes increasingly infatuated with him.

Tagline: Do not disturb the family.

This movie is in essence a simple whirlwind of what the fuckery. And you know how I try to keep my potty-mouth to a minimum around these parts, just in case there are impressionable youths and elderly persons reading. That said, what the fuck indeed. If you like twisted tales of dysfunctional families tied up in a nice package with gorgeous cinematography, then this movie is for you!

What starts off as a weird family dynamic quickly grows into one gigantic mess of 'that shouldn't be happening' and 'this isn't going where I think it is, is it?'. The synopsis of this movie will have you believe it is about India's infatuation with her uncle. This is so utterly false, in my humble opinion. It is actually about oddball Uncle Charlie and his obsessiveness with India. Thrown into the mix is Nicole Kidman's character, who is not only jealous of her daughter but who has this inexplicable need to be ravaged by her husband's brother. See, it's getting messy already.

Well, let's throw in not one homicidal maniac, but two. Don't worry, I won't spoil the plot and reveal who the crazy people are, but I will say, one uses a belt as their device of death and the other a long range rifle.

For a movie that is one hundred and ten percent fucked up, it's also beautiful. Exquisitely shot. Well-written. Executed to perfection. Director Chan-wook Park is brilliant. Yes, I said brilliant. Have any of you seen Oldboy? If yes, then you know what I am talking about. If no, then why the hell are you reading this blog? You should be watching Oldboy, followed by Stoker.

Regardless, Stoker is Park's first step into the tawdry world of Hollywood, and I have to say it is a smash. The best part being, the bigwigs in Hollywood didn't try to squash Park's flare. He managed to keep it dark, very controversial, by touching on such harsh themes as incest, matricide, rape, and murder. What I love the most about Stoker is the father. You don't know much about him, but from what is hinted you can gather he tried to keep India safe only to eventually be the catalyst for her demise, whenever that will come. And it will come.

Finally, the star of this movie is India, who is played by Mia Wasikowska - the phenomenal budding actress from Tim Burton's Alice in Wonderland, The Kids Are All Right, and Lawless. What can I say, I'm a fan. I expect great things from her in the future. India is at once naive and ignorant, sheltered and plain, yet stunning, frightening, and wise. It's wonderful how much can be conveyed by a glance, tick of a clock, and very uncomfortable piano scene.

In the end, Stoker isn't your run of the mill horror, despite it's link in name to "Bram Stoker". Yes, it certainly has a vampiric theme, but in this you won't find any fangs or capes. What you will come across is seduction, temptation of the macabre and the hunter and prey cat and mouse game. It's horror is bold and subtle at the same time. This will not keep you up at night but at the same time it won't be easily forgotten.

The Best Cast Ever - Day 13

Within this movie you will find the best cast ever. 

Title: The Faculty

Year: 1998

Synopsis: Students suspect that their teachers are aliens after bizarre occurrences.

Tagline: Take me to your teacher.

Truth be told, I hadn't actually seen The Faculty since 1998 when it first came out. I didn't remember much of it, except Josh Hartnett played a staring role and something weird was going on with the teachers at Herrington High. Of course, all of that can be guessed by simply looking at the cover of the DVD.

This movie delivered surprise after surprise for me. Not with the plot, I had that figured out fairly early on, but with the ensemble cast. Jon Stewart, Clea Duvall, Famke Janssen, Salma Hayek, Jordana Brewster, Usher, Danny Masterson, Robert Patrick. I mean, the movie was so crammed packed with familiar faces I was beside myself with merriment. And so many of them are still acting today. I mean, I just watched Robert Patrick in an episode of Sons Of Anarchy!

My mind was blown. 

But it went into overdrive when I saw the final credits and learned the movie was done by Robert Rodriguze. Not sure how I missed that little factoid. This man is one of the masters of cinema and his list of hits are long and impressive with such blockbusters as Planet Terror, Desperado, Sin City, Machete, and From Dusk Till Dawn. Unfortunately, the dude also has some misses, like Spy Kids and The Faculty. 

The idea isn't bad, but like Disturbing Behaviour, we've been here before with better movies. And with Disturbing Behaviour. Looks as though 1998 proved to be the year MGM and Dimension films were battling it out to have the best Invasion Of The Body Snatchers inspired adolescent Sci-Fi/Horror movie! Honestly, I can't tell you which one won. 

Have you ever noticed this happening? Two major distributors releasing similar movies in the same year. Think about it. Snow White and the Huntsman came out around the same time Mirror Mirror did. The Prestige battled The Illusionist, Friends With Benefits fought No Strings Attached, The Cave went head-to-head with The Descent. And the list goes on and on. Actually, to prove my point, take a look at this blog right here. (Someone did the work for me and actually put the posters next to each other and everything.) 

This was keeping me awake last night. I kept thinking, why does this happen? Is it because these powerhouses in film want to beat the other out? Or are they simply trying to monopolize on the other's idea? Maybe this is all a coincidence.

Regardless, both The Faculty and Disturbing Behaviour ended up being misses, in my book. They weren't entirely disappointing. Both had attractive leads. And surprisingly robust casts. But I just can't tell you to go an watch them. You aren't missing out on anything if you don't see them, and that my friends is how you can tell if a movie is good or bad. 

Though I will give props to the alien aspect of this. Most movies shy away from showing the 'monster'. This one didn't. And Famke's head crawling around on the ground with tentacles was priceless. 

With this review the nineties weekend comes to an end. Needless to say, it's been a slice. 

 Priceless.

The Nineties Weekend - Day 11

Besides grunge music and some choice television programs, the nineties didn't have much else to offer. Unless we are talking about horror movies. There wasn't a massive change from eighties horror to nineties. For the most part, the genre stayed the same, except the effects got marginally better and they stopped showing boobs as much. Kind of like how the horror of the seventies showed beaver (meaning public hair) but the eighties did away with that. Over time, the gore gets more intense, but the nudity is fading away. How disappointing.

The horror of the nineties is still class. 

Last night, I kicked off the 90s Weekend with a bit of nostalgic awesomeness. Scream and I Know What You Did Last Summer. It's hard to pick one to write about, I mean, both of them are completely awesome. I think I'm going to go with the later, just because we've all seen Scream a hundred thousand times before and know it word-for-word. 

Before I launch into the Freddie Prinze Jr. classic, I have to mention that Wes Craven's Scream is actually very brilliantly written. It set itself apart from the standard slasher films by having the duel killers at the end, what a twist! Also, it did away with the 'boogeyman' plot line and turned Sydney's loved ones into her greatest threat is genius. In the movies that came prior, the serial killers were always strangers or some external force, often mythical. If anything, Scream is also a psychological thriller, as well as a comedy. I mean, Stuart had some of the most hilarious lines, but I might be bias because I had a huge crush on him!

On to other things: 

Title: I Know What You Did Last Summer

Year: 1997

Synopsis: Four teens are in great danger one year after their car hits a stranger whose body they dump in the sea.

Tagline: If you're going to bury the truth, make sure it stays buried.

Welcome to the coolest cast of nineties has-beens you've ever seen! I mean, I can't even tell you what the four main actors of this movie are up to today. This doesn't negate the fact that back in 1997 they were the most sought-after sweethearts and heartthrobs of the decade. Hewitt, Phillipe, Prinze Jr. and Gellar - they just don't make dream casts like this any more. Ironically, the nerdy secondary character Max who dies first and is played by Johnny Galecki is the one who is currently the most famous! Just proves to show, some successes are fleeting. 

That said, I love this movie. A fisherman with a hook gutting teenagers - how can you go wrong with that? Sure the plot line might be a little flimsy and overdone. I mean, we can probably name a hundred films where a group of teens is being stalked by a deranged lunatic. And sure, the Last Summer crew probably should have simply called the cops when they hit the person in the middle of the street, but we all make mistakes. And if they did, we wouldn't have such a stellar flick on our hands.

Okay, some of this is tongue-in-cheek. Truly, the most horrifying part of the film is when Barry grabs Julie by the throat and her boyfriend, the not-so-brave Ray stands there watching and doesn't do a thing. No wonder Julie didn't keep in touch with him when she went off to college. I wouldn't have either.

I didn't know this was based on a Lois Duncan book. I should look into reading that.

After the crew dumps the body, that isn't dead, in the ocean the movie really begins. One year later. When the seriously stacked Jennifer Love Hewitt returns to the quaint fishing village she grew up with the worst hair ever. She gets a note. Dun, dun, dun. Someone knows what she did last summer! 

If you doubt how good this movie is, then watch it simply for nostalgic purposes and ignore the contrived plot line and overly obvious twists and turns. The fashion and hair in this is totally worth your time and energy. 

I know there will be a crap ton of horror snobs out there scoffing at my recommending this movie. But everyone needs a little horror cheese. And this is the Costco platter of fromage. At least it has those two hunky hunks in it. Oh, Freddie Prinze Jr. where did you disappear to?

I'm Getting Old - Day 10

It just so happens I fell asleep during the movie last night.

And it wasn't because it was bad. In fact, I loved it! Sadly, I've been feeling a bit under the weather. I guess an early night was in order. Does anyone else get sick during seasonal changes? Or is that just me?

Title: An American Werewolf In London
Year: 1981
Synopsis: Two American college students on a walking tour of Britain are attacked by a werewolf that none of the locals will admit exists.

Tagline: Beware the moon

Because I fell asleep, I can't give you a full review of this. I will finish watching it tonight and, if it falls to shit, I will detract my recommendation that you view this. From this statement, you might be able to surmise that I hadn't actually seen this movie before. Shocking, right? It truly is a classic. 

From the man who brought us Blues Brothers and Animal House, John Landis delivers one of the best werewolf movies of all times. In case you didn't know, werewolves excite me. Full moon. Silver bullets. This will be the third movie I've watched (or 2.5, because I took a snooze through some of it), and I'm kind of wish I'd put more on the Horrorfest schedule. (Breaking news, I actually know how to spell schedule now!)

Ten minutes before I fell asleep last night, I said, "This is really good." Those are the exact words that came out of my pretty little mouth. It just goes to show, the older you get, the harder it is to keep your eyes open. 

This movie actually reminds me of a long lost friend. It scared the piss out of him. He mentioned it on more than one occasion. So, whenever I think of this movie, I think of him talking about running home, too scared to look behind him. 

I'm safe because I'm in Canada and the monster on the moors can't get me. 

What I did see of An American Werewolf in London put me in a happy state. Werewolves done right. Vicious. Terrifying. And there's a sex scene in the shower. Everything a girl like me could possibly dream of. 

Go watch it. And ignore this sub par review. 

Double Feature - Day 9

To be honest, I'm not sure which of last night's movies to write about today. So, I think I'll do both of them. And why not? It's my blog after all and I can do whatever I damn well please. Within reason.

So, watch out world, this wild woman is getting crazy up in here!

And so ...

Title: The Descent
Year: 2005
Synopsis: A caving expedition goes horribly wrong, as the explorers become trapped and ultimately pursued by a strange breed of predators.

Tagline: Scream your last breath.

Once upon a time, a girl named Sarah loses her husband and daughter in a car accident. Sometime later, she convinces her friend Juno to put together a spelunking expedition. Of course, they end up in a cave that basically implodes on them, trapping the girls. Also, one of the six wants a moment of glory and doesn't tell the others there is no map. Oh, and the cave has never been explored before. Now they have to find their way out. Since this is horror, you can probably guess not all of them make it out alive.

And there is something else going on. 

There are these beings down in this cave. Who happen to have cannibalistic tendencies. 

That being said, I really liked this movie. Not only were the 'creatures' fantastically frightening, but all the actors could hold their own. For a movie centring around six girls down in a dark, dank hole, it was surprisingly enjoyable. I didn't find myself annoyed over the banter at all. Granted, the Sidekick didn't understand any of the jokes at the beginning of the movie and had a perplexed sort of confounded look to him until they actually got down into the cave. Despite what he may think, the beginning is important because it shows the girls just being girls. Bluntly, the director and writer collectively are doing their damnedest to show how 'normal' and generally happy the friends are. 

Sure, the movie does leave us wondering a few things, like how these creatures came to be down in this cave and where they came from. But that didn't detract from the plot at all. In fact, I liked it. I used my own imagination and choose to believe they were once human and, over time, turned blind and got super quick speediness. Because I don't want to spoil the ending for anyone, I won't touch on  why I am glad I did what they did. 

And as we all know, I love when people play with words and titles with double meanings totally tickle my fancy. The Descent - not only do the girls go down in the cave, but they also journey into madness. Two thumbs up. 

But it left me with one question ... can overweight people spelunk? Some of those cracks and crevices looked a bit small for my fat ass. 

Title: Haute Tension (High Tension)
Year: 2003
Synopsis: Two college friends, Marie and Alexa, encounter loads of trouble (and blood) while on vacation at Alexa's parents' country home when a mysterious killer invades their quiet getaway.

Tagline: Hearts will bleed.

It's impossible for me to avoid spoilers with this review. If you want to watch this movie and don't want me spoiling it, go do it now and then visit this post afterwards. I'll wait for you. 

You're back! (Or you never left) 

People all over the internet are raging about the twist ending for High Tension. They don't understand how it is feasible to have Marie be the killer. The thing is, people are over-thinking things. Once they see the twist, they start picking out all the inconsistencies, like the man using a severed head to give himself fellatio and the scene in the greenhouse. They ask questions like, who was she racing in the car chase? And, how did she get all cut up by the killer when fighting him?  To put it simply, they are remembering movies like Fight Club and Sixth Sense and comparing the two. By doing so, they are missing the point.

The point being ... Marie is batshit crazy. She has multiple personalities. And she's made up most of the movie, by superimposing her normal self into the scenes with the killer. Some parts probably didn't happen at all, while the rest have been severely altered. This isn't a follow the clues and figure it out before the twist happens kind of movie. It isn't a clever-we've-hidden-hints-throughout-for-you film. It's simply a horror movie with a twist ending that negates everything that happened.

And I liked it.

My only questions being, is it standard for people with multiple personalities to be aware of their other personalities? And was cute, pseudo lesbian Marie her true personality? And when did this killer personality manifest? Why? Did Alexa ever notice anything odd about her friend?

After watching it for a second time, I think it was good. All the other actors do indeed act weird around Marie, even when she is trying to 'help' them. Like Alexa being all freaked out in the truck and the mom asking 'why, why, why?'. If I had to choose a rating, seven out of ten. And I stand by it.

Another Miss - Day 8

On the 8th day of Halloween, I learned my lesson and will not be letting other people contribute to my Horrorfest schedule from this day forth. And here is my review.

Title: Pumpkinhead
Year: 1988
Synopsis: A man conjures up a gigantic vengeance demon called Pumpkinhead to destroy the teenagers who accidentally killed his son.

Tagline: For each of man's evils a special demon exists...

This year, I took into consideration my sidekick. I asked for suggestions. Well, let's just put it this way, I wasn't expecting this colossal flop of a movie. Especially since Mr. Sidekick was earnestly excited over watching it. It was later to be revealed that he hadn't actually watched it since his teenage years. And, as we all know, the things we loved as teenagers aren't always what we love as an adult. For example, I cannot mix all the soda pop at the fountain together to make swamp water any more. It simply does nothing for me. 

That said, I gave it a go. Mostly because I hadn't seen it before and, just between you and me, I secretly hoped for a monster wearing a pumpkin on its head. Or, even better, a jack-o-lantern. Boy was I let down. 

Not only did Pumpkinhead lack someone wearing a carved pumpkin on their head, but it also missed out on the opportunity to be great. In theory, this should have worked. I mean, all the plot points were there. A man's son dies so he goes to visit the resident witch where he sets about summoning a demon to kill the teenage hooligans responsible for the kid's death. That right there is a rock solid plot! It can't get any better! 

Unfortunately, the basics of a great story isn't always enough. Atrocious acting, lack of meat, poor characterisation, and too many questions left for any viewer to be content. Where did Pumpkinhead come from? Why does the witch know how to summon it? How long has it been exacting revenge for humans who summon it? Why didn't the five other friends overpower the one dick head who hit the kid and insist they stick around? 

Really, the laundry list of whys are a mile and a half long. 

Such a shame. Because this movie could have been great. It isn't gory. Or suspenseful. Moderately confusing. And down right disappointing. Now, can someone please do this movie justice by remaking it, slapping a pumpkin on a monster's head and fleshing out a understandable plot? Also, please hire actors that can at least display more than three emotions. Thanks. 

Doesn't look like a pumpkin head to me!

Rosemary's Review - Day 7

If my Sunday night movie selection sucked, then Monday night kicked its ass. And hard.

Last night's freaky double feature consisted of The Exorcist and Rosemary's Baby. Because I wrote about The Exorcist last year in my E Is For Exorcism  post, I've decided not to rehash what I said way back then. If you want to know my thoughts on this movie you can click the link and travel back in time to a year ago. That said, I stand by my statements that this movie is one of the freakiest ever made. For a film from 1973 it is surprisingly undated. The special effects have rather miraculously withstood the test of time. I give Linda Blair all the credit, that crucifix scene is ... disturbing.

Now, onto Rosemary and her bundle of joy.

Title: Rosemary's Baby
Year: 1968
Synopsis: A young couple move into a new apartment, only to be surrounded by peculiar neighbours and occurrences. When the wife becomes mysteriously pregnant, paranoia over the safety of her unborn child begins controlling her life.

Tagline: Pray for Rosemary's baby. 

Honestly, I don't think I've watched Rosemary's baby since 2006. No matter how much time passes, I always think of two things when I put it into rotation again. First, my mother - I'm reminded that she saw this movie in the theatre and she didn't enjoy it. And also, I think about how surprisingly good it is. 

Let me address the fact that I know people hate Roman Polanski for the sexual abuse charges brought against him in 1977. Some people will refuse to watch this movie on principle. That's fine. All the power to you. I will not insist you see it or beret you if you don't. I do not agree with what the man did, but I cannot deny he makes good movies. The Pianist, Chinatown, Repulsion, The Tenant, Fearless Vampire Killers - I simply cannot name them all. And since I'd already seen four of these movies before I even learned of Polanski's indiscretion (Hey, the internet wasn't so popular back in the day, I didn't even have a cellphone in 2002!), I have decided to go ahead and continue to watch his films. 

That said, like The Exorcist, I find this little gem of a movie incredibly undated. It is well executed and one of the best psychological thrillers I've ever seen. of its time. While a lot of movies from the seventies reek of terrible acting and horrible special effects, this one doesn't. This late sixties shining star exploits the talents of a pixie faced Mia Farrow, who does a phenomenal job at portraying the naive Rosemary, and who actually looks quite sickly through the whole film. 

While I certainly don't want to give any spoilers, I have to say the best part of this movie is how normal Rosemary is portrayed in beginning. Then you are thrown into her decent into what feels like madness, but you cannot be a hundred percent certain of it because there's this nagging feeling in the back of you head that something simply isn't right. Not with her awkward husband. Or her nosy neighbours. The drinks she's being made. And the pain in her belly. 

I myself haven't read Ira Levin's novel, which is this adapted from, but I imagine it leaves it open for the reader to decide whether what is happening is true, or simply Rosemary's over active imagination. The methodical pacing is deliberate and allows us to imagine what next will happen. Unlike a lot of horror films from later on and today, Polanski didn't need to shove a bunch of cheesy effects into this movie. Through pacing, dialogue, acting and the way it is filmed the viewer is left riveted to the film, on the edge of their seat, curious over what happens next. 

Since I am always frank, there is one part of the movie that grates on my nerves. Guy Woodhouse. Rosemary's husband. He is so controlling and manipulative. Through the whole film, I wanted her to hit him upside the head with a frying pan! How he treated her drove me up the wall. I can't tell you how many times I said, "If someone every spoke to me like that they wouldn't have a tongue." I mean, after Rosemary goes to Vidal Sassoon and gets her hair cut, he asks, "What the hell is that? You actually paid for it?" Seriously! What a jerk. 

This movie doesn't disappoint and I highly suggest giving it a go. 

Go ahead and tell me that hair isn't adorable! 

Underwhelming - Day 6

For the longest time, I've always said, it's hard to take Stephen King books and make them into movies. Because he truly is a master of horror, it can be tricky to translate his imagery onto the big screen. Don't get me wrong, it can be done, but I find myself loving the movies that are more dramatic and suspenseful than straight up horror. Great examples of this would be Delores Claiborne, Carrie, Misery, The Green Mile and The Shining.

Horrorfest 2013 had me being adventurous. I selected a unique blend of movies, some I'd seen and others I hadn't, and as you might have noticed, I was excited for this weekend. Unfortunately, last night I chose two  stinkers from the 1980's. The movies were Christine and Children of the Corn, and ended up being a huge let down for the wrap up party for the Stephen King weekend.

When I was thirteen, Christine was one of my favourite books. But a great book doesn't necessarily make a great movie. Because this was directed by John Carpenter I feel bad giving it a thumbs down, like I might be burned at the stake for saying something he put his golden hands on is crap. Sadly, that's exactly what I'm saying, even if he is sacrilegious to horror buffs the world over. Between crappy acting and a weak plot line, I was left feeling unfulfilled. In the book, the main plot was that Christine's previous owner Roland LeBay was so poisoned that his evilness possessed the car. The movie decided to go another route, which failed to explain where Christine's need to kill came from, even why she was doing it. With this one decision, the entire movie was derailed.

What could have been a truly genius film fell short.

Second was Children of the Corn. I do remember being terrified of this movie when I was a child and, for what its worth, it isn't terrible. Like Christine, though, it was left with bad acting and a terrible screen writer. While John Carpenter purposely cut out a pivotal piece of plot from Christine, director Fritz Kiersch apparently didn't change a bloody thing from the book version of COTC. The issue with this is, because Children of the Corn was only a short story, one would actually need to add elements in to have enough substance to make a feature film out of it.

If you watch this movie and aren't left with a lot of questions, then you clearly have a better imagination than I do. This suffered a lack of meat and meander all over the place. Don't get me wrong, the idea is great, it simply wasn't developed enough to make it a ninety-two minute movie. Lastly, what the hell was with Isaac's voice? Was that really necessary?

In the end, I can't really recommend either of these movies. This hurts me more than it hurts you.