Sunday, February 9, 2014

Everything Is Awesome

Year: 2014
Director: Phil Lord & Christopher Miller
Cast: Chris Pratt, Elizabeth Banks, Will Arnett
Run Time: 1 hour 40 minutes
MPAA Rating: PG

Let me tell you, The Lego Movie had one of the least promising opening scenes of any comedy I've ever had the privilege to watch. It appears before anybody has a chance to get used to the somewhat jarring animation style and features the most YouTube-caliber comedy I've ever seen in a feature film. That is not a compliment.

This further reinforced my fears that The Lego Movie would be exactly what it sounds like - a feature length commercial with little to no redeeming value. But history has taught me to trust directors Phil Lord and Christopher Miller when they make a film that seems like an outrageously bad idea. These are the men behind Cloudy With A Chance of Meatballs and 21 Jump Street, after all.

Lo and behold, The Lego Movie is almost nothing like it seemed to be from the promotional campaign or even its own opening (Sidebar: What is it with Hollywood marketing these days that makes even the best films seem like generic garbage? It's like they're actively trying to deter viewership.).

Me every time I have to sit through another crappy movie preview.

Let me ask you a question: If you were tasked with creating a movie out of a narrative-less pile of colorful blocks, what genre would your story be? Action adventure? Romantic comedy? Maybe even an epic fantasy?

The Lego Movie is a dystopian rebellion movie and that is what separates the geniuses from you or me. Whoever thought it would be a good idea to pull influences from 1984 and Brave New World is a lunatic. But it totally, absolutely works. And it's pretty laugh out loud funny all the way through.

This is the story of Emmet (Chris Pratt), a construction worker who lives to follow the instructions (a brilliant bit of brand tie-in). He does everything he is told, listens to the music he is ordered to like, and has never had an original thought in his life.

But when he discovers a mysterious unknown Lego piece tied to a mystical prophecy, he uncovers the tyrannical president's secret plot to destroy the world and is whisked away by rebel agent Wyldstyle (Elizabeth Banks) to train with the Master Builders (the only creative people left in the universe - with the power to assemble whatever they desire sans instructions) and save the world.

This wouldn't be the first time Chris Pratt has saved the world.

The message is simple and childlike in the best way possible - painted with broad strokes but absolutely resonant with children and adults alike, just like the eternally undervalued Adventure Time. Emmet is an anonymous nobody who needs to learn to believe in himself to unlock his creative potential.

Featuring a veritable clown car of guest actors including Charlie Day (!!!), Cobie Smulders, Morgan Freeman, Will Arnett, Anthony Daniels, Will Forte, Alison Brie, Jake Johnson, Liam Neeson, Nick Offerman, and Shaq, as well as 21 Jump Street alums Channing Tatum, Dave Franco, and Jonah Hill (as well as one cameo that can't possibly be a surprise, but nevertheless feels like one so I shan't spoil it here), The Lego Movie has a thoroughly modern pop sense of humor that, despite some massive ADD, is topical and clever in ways that anybody of any age can enjoy.

The Lego Movie combines the whimsical (and low-rent) joy of playing with toys with a heartfelt message picture and rapid-fire comedy both lovably dumb and X-Acto sharp. Some of the busier action sequences are nearly impossible to contain in your visual cortex and the sheer amount of branded material is enough to make any copyright lawyer weep in fear, but it's a fun ride through and through.

But seriously. Rendering this frame alone must have taken binders of legal documents.

In the movie business, it has been a long, cold, lonely winter, and The Lego Movie provides a warm ember that lifts the spirits for the cinema slate of 2014.

You'll leave the theater singing, smiling, trading favorite lines (I myself am partial to "Come with me if you want to not die.") and fondly remembering childhood playtime. And even if it's not the best animated comedy that has ever been released, that is certainly good enough for me.

TL;DR: The Lego Movie surprises by not being terrible, but surprises even more by actually being pretty darn good.
Rating: 8/10
Should I Spend Money On This? Yes. You should.
Word Count: 762

Saturday, February 8, 2014

Women In Horror Month: Everyone Else

Welcome to Part 2 of my feature celebrating Women in Horror Month! Without much further ado about nothing, here's

THE TOP TEN FEMALE HORROR CHARACTERS 
(NON-FINAL GIRL DIVISION)

#10 Marion Crane (Psycho)


Played By: Janet Leigh

Most certainly not a Final Girl, Marion Crane is the woman who changed the game forever. Billed to be the star of the show but killed before the audience had even finished their milk duds, Marion is an enormously influential figure in the progress of modern horror. Also she had recently decided to return the money she stole so she's moral too! To a point.

#9 Carol Anne Freeling (Poltergeist, Poltergeist II: The Other Side, Poltergeist III)


Played By: Heather O'Rourke

I really can't handle how adorably creepy she is, and I am always struck by what an absolute tragedy O'Rourke's premature death was. So there's a lot of emotions coming into this, but Carol Anne is a sterling figure of modern classic horror. Everybody remembers the first time they saw Poltergeist, for better or for worse.

#8 Clarice Starling (Silence of the Lambs)


Played By: Jodie Foster

The only woman with enough sensitivity and intelligence to match wits with the infamous Hannibal Lecter. Clarice has a rough family history but an unmatched devotion to her job and saving the lives of others. She is the lynchpin that holds the entire film together. And let us never ever ever mention the Julianne Moore version.

#7 Clear Rivers (Final Destination, Final Destination 2)


Played By: Ali Larter

She welds metal sculptures, is the only one to believe the psychic boy, and manages to outrun death. At least until the sequel. But she gets to be a super cool survivor/spirit guide and hang out with Tony Todd so I'm still pretty jealous.

#6 Gale Wathers (ScreamScream 2Scream 3Scream 4)


Played By: Courteney Cox

I've loved Friends for as long as forever, but Courteney Cox's role in the Scream franchise is the one I most indelibly associate with her. This feisty, assertive reporter with the heart of gold and a suitcase full of one-liners rampages her way across the screen with an energy and verve that Monica Geller, love her though I do, just can't match.

#5 Dr. Katherine McMichaels (From Beyond)


Played By: Barbara Crampton

A surprisingly complex figure for a movie that features copious amounts of slime and a leather S&M outfit, Dr. McMichaels is driven to madness by her ambition and selfish egotism. She is one of many bricks in the argument that B movies have much more going on beneath the surface than your average horror viewer might think.

#4 Sophie (100 Bloody Acres)


Played By: Anna McGahan

With two hot Aussies wrapped around her finger, Sophie is living the life. And after being captured by a pair of bumbling brothers in the Outback, she is smart enough to continue living that life. She's not perfect, but she's just trying to get along any way she knows how. She's scrappy, resourceful, and spunky and I love her.

#3 Moira O'Hara (American Horror Story: Murder House)


Played By: Frances Conroy, Alexandra Breckenridge

Moira is one of the most poignant characters in the entire series. In a season packed with one-dimensionally evil, twisted ghosts, Moira stands supreme as a complex figure. Neither good nor evil, she is merely tragically imprisoned in the site of her murder and infidelity. Supremely resonant. Also young Moira is hot as Hades.

#2 Melanie Daniels (The Birds)


Played By: Tippi Hedren

I've talked about her plenty of times before, but Melanie Daniels is a force to be reckoned with. At first she seems every bit the young, flighty socialite, but as we explore her relationship with Mitch and his mother, her character expands into an entire universe of subtlety and range. I hope more people will come to side with me on loving The Birds far more than the also great but less complex Psycho.

#1 Ángela Vidal ([REC], [REC] 2)


Played By: Manuela Velasco

She's cute and bubbly. She's raw and determined. She's a charming fluff news reporter. And she's the first to whip off her patent leather jacket to fashion a tourniquet. Ángela is the inimitable heart of the [REC] franchise (something the director of [REC] 3 seemed to have been unaware of - stupid, stupid man) and Velasco's performance gets deeper and deeper every time.
Word Count: 730

Thursday, February 6, 2014

Women In Horror Month: Is That Your Final Answer?

What do you know, but it's already a week into February. Where does the time go?

I don't know whose job it is to decide these things but we are officially celebrating Women in Horror Month, and I would be loathe to ignore my calling. Throughout the month I will have several features celebrating women and their contributions to the horror genre, but first the obvious.

Because I'm me, I'd like to open with my

TOP TEN FINAL GIRLS

#10 Alice Johnson (A Nightmare on Elm Street 4: The Dream Master, A Nightmare on Elm Street 5: The Dream Child)


Played By: Lisa Wilcox

A character that manages to survive in my esteem even in spite of the entirely terrible and incoherent Part 5. Alice is essentially the Tommy Jarvis of the Nightmare franchise, a late-to-the-game player that defeats a horror icon multiple times - and lives to tell the tale. Where most Final Girls who have a return get their comeuppance, she sticks to her guns and makes Freddy her chew toy.

#9 Ginny Field (Friday the 13th Part 2)


Played By: Amy Steel

One of the smartest of Jason's victims, child psychologist Ginny Field manages to get inside his head and trick her way to survival. She's one of the only Final Girls to actually outwit the killer instead of wail on him with a machete for 20 minutes. Although she does get a few good whacks in during an especially memorable chainsaw sequence.

#8 Marybeth Dunston (Hatchet II)


Played By: Tamara Feldman, Danielle Harris

Although she was certainly a sideshow in the first Hatchet film, perennial 21st Century Final Girl Marybeth Dunston was given new life when genre veteran Danielle Harris stepped into the role. Having appeared in four Halloween movies (two of them as a child!), she was the perfect choice to sass up what needed to be a punchy role opposite King Jason himself, Kane Hodder.

#7 Jannicke (Cold PreyCold Prey 2)


Played By: Ingrid Bolsø Berdal

Sexy. Norwegian. Badass. Jannicke has seen more than her share of trouble, so she decided to make some of her own. Despite one terrifically dumb decision that extended the finale of the sequel for a good fifteen minutes, she is still one of the most consistently intelligent and entertaining slasher protagonists of them all.

#6 Sidney Prescott (Scream, Scream 2, Scream 3, Scream 4)


Played By: Neve Campbell

Darn but I do love myself a sarcastic heroine. Sidney hates horror movies for being a series of reductive and insulting clichés, so her worst nightmare comes true when she is trapped in one. She's still alive and kicking though, so hats off to seeing herself through four installments of a notorious director's franchise.

#5 Sarah (The Descent)


Played By: Shauna MacDonald

Savage womanhood at its finest. She's minding her own business, just trying to get over the death of her cheating husband and daughter when she is attacked by a horde of underground flesh-eating monsters. However, she quickly turns the tables and although her ending might not exactly be happy, it's absolutely fitting and resonant.

#4 Nancy Thompson (A Nightmare on Elm Street)


Played By: Heather Langenkamp

So good they brought her back. Twice. Decades apart. Nancy is everything a teen protagonist should be: lovable, smart, a little bit silly, and, most importantly, a teenager. Although Langenkamp's acting isn't exactly top drawer, it matches perfectly with the genre and keeps Nightmare going strong a good 30 years after its release.

#3 Laurie Strode (Halloween, Halloween II, Halloween H20: Twenty Years Later)


Played By: Jamie Lee Curtis

How could I not include her? She's not gonna be number one due to her unfortunate habit of dropping weapons right next to masked serial murderers, but she's one of the most persistent and incredible Final Girls due to Jamie Lee Curtis' unmatched slasher performance. She was so good they retconned her offscreen death from Part 4 to bring her back in a blaze of glory.

#2 Tina Shepard (Friday the 13th Part VII: The New Blood)



Played By: Lar Park-Lincoln

AKA Carrie. This telekinetic teen kicks some serious Voorhees butt. This is no small feat, especially considering that in this installment the masked galunk was played by Kane Hodder for the very first time. Definitely one of my favorite installments of the series, in large part due to Tina's incredible prowess at being awesome.

#1 Erin (You're Next)


Played By: Sharni Vinson

Who couldn't have predicted this one? The only Final Girl I've ever seen who is more proficient with an axe than her pursuers. Pitted against multiple foes, she easily outstrips any of her single-villain peers, all with a flawless Australian accent.
Word Count: 781

Tuesday, February 4, 2014

Beat It, Essay: Way, Way Back

I was rifling through my computer the other day and I stumbled across the missing link in my first essay series! So without further ado, here is the personal statement that got me into the film program!


For the longest time, I was planning on majoring in Theatre. Though I still love the theatre, drama helped me discover that my true passion is film by showing me that my interests lie more behind the scenes than onstage. I’d been involved ever since I got into the musical theatre program in 7th grade and I continued working in drama throughout high school. The program at Canyon High School was very comprehensive and I gained experience by working both onstage and off as an actor, sound and light operator, house manager, writer, and a member of the stage crew.

Acting is a passion of mine but I realized that the spotlight isn’t everything. In my third year in high school, I had seniority in the drama program and I became a student director for the semi-annual One Act Festival. The One Act Festival takes place every semester and is a series of short plays performed by students in the drama class. The scripts can come from books available in the drama program’s library or they can be student-written.

I soon developed a passion for writing and directing and directed students in three one acts that I had written myself as well as three from book scripts. I also wrote two scripts for other directors, so I had a fantastic opportunity to hone my skills as a creator and I loved every minute of it. There’s such a rush that comes from creating a universe entirely from scratch.

I am extremely devoted to detail, and I tried to make each setpiece I designed seem like a room from whatever world we were visiting, whether it was a 1950’s apartment building, the Glee classroom, or a vacation home in the Caribbean. I was perhaps a little too enthusiastic with my set design, peppering the stage with end tables, bookshelves complete with books, homey (or whatever was appropriate) decorations, and other odds and ends. Typically my one acts would be the last ones of the night because of the sheer amount of time it took to clean up the elaborate sets.

I soon realized that my ambitions were too much for the small scale of high school theatre, or most theatrical productions for that matter. The level of extreme detail I wanted to apply to my productions was not entirely suited for the medium I was exploring, so I realized I had to find another path. When I started thinking about it, it soon became obvious that my answer was staring me in the face.

When I was three years old, my mom would film my sister and I playing in our condo in Orange. However, she would have to be subtle about it because whenever I saw the camera, I would demand to hold it and look through the viewfinder. In the past years, whenever I’d had a creative project in a class, I made a video. If I was bored at home, I’d make a video. I even made videos for the drama program as the head of Publicity.

I loved musicals, so I’d try to make my own by rewriting the tunes to popular songs. I made a film musical about Indoor Pollution for my Chemistry class to the tunes of 90’s pop songs. I also made a musical adaptation of Romeo and Juliet with songs from Mamma Mia! Now these were certainly amateur productions; I had no clue what I was doing. But I knew I loved being behind the camera, whether it be writing, directing, or shooting film.

I also loved just watching films. I have friends over at least once a week and we watch two, three, maybe even four films at a time. I love thinking about the means through which directors express themselves and the narratives under their care, and actually started reading multiple reviewers and writing my own movie review blog so I could get a chance to look at films from many different perspectives.

It didn’t take much of a stretch of logic to be able to fit my desire to create detailed fictional worlds, my passion for filmmaking, and my love of movies as an art form together. I decided then and there, the summer before my senior year of high school, that I wanted to be a director, and I’ve never strayed from that goal since. I started applying to film schools and was thrilled when I got into Cal State Long Beach.

One of my biggest values has always been passion. I don’t think life is worth it if you’re not pursuing what you love, and film is the perfect expression of everything I’m most passionate about in life, in work, and in art. As of yet, I would in no way consider myself anything above an amateur filmmaker, which is why I came to Cal State Long Beach.

I want to learn the techniques and skills to be able to bring a narrative to life. I want to learn how others before me have accomplished it and how I can emulate them. I also want to use the methods of others as a jumping-off point to innovate my own style, my own technique. I want to be deeply involved in all aspects of filmmaking, from the birth of an idea to post-production and distribution. I want to follow a story from beginning to end and watch it change the world.

Film is art, and I couldn’t imagine myself not being an artist as my career. I am one hundred percent certain that this is the route I want my education, my career, and my life to take. Film has engrossed me since a young age and I want nothing more to let it continue being the centerpiece of my world.
Word Count: 999

Sunday, February 2, 2014

Here's The Kickoff

Happy Super Bowl, everybody! Although it would be uncouth of me to reveal my psychic powers on such an important day in sporting history, your jaw is gonna drop when the Seahawks win and you realize you read it here first.

For those of you (like me) who are merely impartial commercial observers who couldn't care less what the outcome of the game is, here's a couple mini reviews to help you pass the time.

The Lost Boys

Year: 1987
Director: Joel Schumacher
Cast: Jason Patric, Corey Haim, Kiefer Sutherland
Run Time: 1 hour 37 minutes
MPAA Rating: R

The Lost Boys is less successful as a vampire film than a snapshot of the excessively fabulous, mildly homoerotic, glittery electronic culture and fashion of 1987. Directed by Joel Schumacher of Bat Nipples fame, who could expect anything different?

Brothers Michael (Jason Patric) and Sam (Corey Haim) have just moved into the seaside city of Santa Carla (played with great distinction by Santa Cruz) with their mother (Dianne Wiest). Michael falls in with a biker punk crowd led by David (Kiefer Sutherland) and it's a legitimately tough question as to which aspect of his personality is more terrifying - the fact that he's an undead creature with a thirst for human blood or his bleached blonde mullet.

Because Michael is a dude who doesn't even unpack his suitcase before he starts lifting weights (As a matter of fact he doesn't even go upstairs. He just walks in and starts pumping iron in the living room.), he is irresistibly drawn to this buff and charismatic leader. Ostensibly he wants to join the group due to his attraction to Star (Jami Gertz), the sole female member, but it's quite obvious that he can't resist a man with a mane.

Also the tossed off love scene between Michael and Star reeks of post-production reshoots to give the character even a tiny glimmer of heteronormativity. This is a boy who drinks some of another man's bodily fluid (blood, you sicko) and becomes an uncontrollable thirst monster as evidenced by his newly pierced ear and leather jacket.

And though there is a plot in there somewhere, it mostly takes the backseat in favor of a sparkly explosion of 80's signifiers. With most horror films of this decade, there are some laughable pop culture moments or outfits, but The Lost Boys is literally comprised of them. We're talking Dynasty and Flying Nun references. We're talking Rob Lowe posters in a young boy's bedroom. We're talking a pre-insane Corey Feldman playing a young vampire hunter. We're talking a soundtrack that sounds like Cyndi Lauper after eating a bad burrito.

We're talking severe homoerotic tension between literally every single set of actors, even the ones who play brothers. Michael and Sam can only talk with their faces two inches apart, practically shouting into each other's mouths.

I rate it lower because the vampire action is lacking somewhat (although anyone who has seen the film's finale might beg to differ), but as a campy 1987 time capsule of the absurd, this film is number one.

Rating: 7/10

The Help

Year: 2011
Director: Tate Taylor
Cast: Emma Stone, Viola Davis, Octavia Spencer
Run Time: 2 hours 26 minutes
MPAA Rating: PG-13

As much as I may resist it, I have to thank Sergio for making me watch Powerful Drama films. Without him, I'd certainly never have seen August: Osage County, Lee Daniels' The Butler, Mildred Pierce, and countless other esteemed pictures. I also thank him for his infinite patience when I turn into a whiny six-year-old after being forced to sit through a movie for longer than 100 minutes.

And although I don't have much to add to the discussion about the already three-year old period drama film The Help, I did enjoy it for what it was. Also I enjoyed riding down the sloped aisle of the classroom on my roll chair. Seriously though. I may get restless by the two-hour mark but the film wasn't a waste of time.

Emma Stone plays Skeeter, a young journalist who was raised by a black nanny during the time of segregation. As racial tensions begin to rise, she goes behind the backs of her hoity toity friends and interviews their maids (Viola Davis and Octavia Spencer) to get true life testimonials for the book she's writing. You get a shiny nickel if you can guess the name of that book.

Although The Help can't escape a lot of the pitfalls of the genre (White People Solve Racism, the Wise Old Black Character, an undeservedly bloated run time), it makes up for it where it counts. Bryce Dallas Howard shines in an enormously nuanced performance as a being of pure domestic evil, Davis and Spencer pick up most of the weight with their capable hands, the romantic B-plot about pretty white people is shunted to one side (exactly where it should be in a movie with this subject matter), and also Jessica Chastain owning a role that almost went to Katy Perry.

Although I would have loved to see that movie, this casting impacts the film undoubtedly for the better. For an Important film, it's never as dull as its brethren, but the story it tells is a thematically unraveled bastardization of what I hear is a vastly superior novel so as such it gets less points than perhaps it should have.

Rating: 6/10
Word Count: 900

Saturday, February 1, 2014

London Underground

Year: 2012
Director: Matthias Hoene
Cast: Rasmus Hardiker, Harry Treadaway, Michelle Ryan
Run Time: 1 hour 28 minutes
MPAA Rating: N/A

Way back when when I first saw the trailer for Cockneys vs. Zombies before 100 Bloody Acres, I knew it was my destiny to see this film. An indie British zombie comedy with a funny title? And it came out on my birthday? How perfect is that?

It turns out I never got around to it. My birthday weekend was far too busy to drive all the way down to L.A. multiple times (I was already down there to watch my beloved In A World...) and it slipped through the cracks. Thank goodness it did, because it's a pretty crappy movie. I really should learn to stop trusting the Brits with low budget zombie mayhem.

Sure this is the country that brought us the classics 28 Days Later and Shaun of the Dead, but their indie scene is that which brought us such cinematic defecation as Zombie Diaries and its illegitimate brother Zombie Diaries 2: World of the Dead, one of the top ten worst movies I've ever seen, and not in the fun way.

I know I've said this before, but come on! A seven minute rape scene that aims at ribald comedy rather than hard-hitting body horror? That could only work (and at that barely) under the hand of an exquisitely talented director, something which the film patently did not have.

What was I talking about?

Oh yeah.

Cockneys vs. Zombies takes place in London's East End during a zombie outbreak caused by a construction crew's discovery of an underground cave network filled with Cryptkeepers. Or... something. It's not really explained, but with a genre film of this caliber, does it really need to be? At least there's not as much exposition to sit through before half of London is emptied of living inhabitants.

The film opens strong with a gross jaw-ripping scene and some great retro credits, but quickly peters out after a lively introduction to Terry (Rasmus Hardiker) and Andy (Harry Treadaway), two argumentative brothers who are trying to keep their Granddad (Alan Ford)'s old folks home from being torn down.

Although the first five minutes are packed with wry British comic moments that absolutely land, one gets the sense that the filmmakers decided to make a movie on the strength of five great scene ideas, but could never quite figure out what to do with the remaining 70 minutes. Although the bulk of the first act has a smattering of humor, the next discernible joke won't occur for a good third of the film.

Anyway, Andy is the hot one (well, hot for this budget) and always gets his brother into trouble. This time around the trouble is a bank robbery to attain enough funds to save the elderly home. 

Not that they need help.

Once the outbreak hits, we cut between two intriguing setups. There's the potential zombie movie drama of a bank heist crew with hostages dealing with interpersonal tensions and misplaced post apocalyptic priorities. And there's the grand possibilities for camp humor with the boarded up Cockney octogenarians fighting the undead.

Between these two disparate situations, the film makes rapid shifts in tone that seem lively and slick at first but it ends up getting dizzy, toppling over, and lying gasping in a pool of its own sick. The conflict of horror and humor proves too much for the film and for the bulk of the middle third it ends up having neither at all.

The gore budget is wasted in the first scene, leaving us with dry and humorless gore for the rest of the time. The ending manages to pick up a lot of slack but goes a good ten minutes longer than it should with two false endings, each capped with the exact same dull joke.

Sam Raimi this ain't.

Not to disparage the humor entirely. This is a British production, after all. But the humor is of a contextless sort that I'd rather find on YouTube in short bursts than have to sit through this entire movie to get at. Honestly, if you want to have a good laugh, just watch the trailer. Apparently we Yanks aren't the only ones who put all the good bits in the previews.

Anyway, it's alright. I wouldn't mind if nobody ever saw it, but it doesn't make me regret the hour and a half I spent hanging out with Sergio watching a dumb zombie movie. Also it was my revenge for him making me sit through the entirety of The Help. Not that it wasn't good or anything, I just have an aversion to movies longer than 105 minutes on principle.

So at least it was short. And hey, there were no rape scenes.

TL;DR: Cockneys vs. Zombies has a few beads of hilarious comedy sequences strung together with a weak string of shallow events.
Rating: 5/10
Word Count: 829

Tuesday, January 28, 2014

The Backside of Water

Alright, I'm gonna try something new here. School and work have both been keeping me busy as a worker bee, so I'm gonna expedite my blog process by combining two features together! One of my homework assignments was to watch The African Queen and write a two-page response about the characters' arcs. Normally I'd post a review and an essay post separately, but I'm gonna stick them together as a mini-review/essay feature and see what happens! Let the great experiment begin!

Year: 1951
Director: John Huston
Cast: Humphrey Bogart, Katharine Hepburn, Robert Morley
Run Time: 1 hour 45 minutes
MPAA Rating: PG

Fun Fact: John Huston, the director famous for his work on the 1980 slasher picture Phobia once directed an obscure adventure flick with Humphrey Bogart! What a skeleton in the closet, am I right?

Really, I'd rather watch Phobia. Not to sound like a classics-hating stabby film-lover, but I found The African Queen to be an absolute slog. Now, although I'm an outspoken opponent of the reign of Citizen Kane, I don't just hate films because they're old. Black and white cinematography doesn't make me want to claw my own eyes out like some of my modern peers.

I'll give anything a chance. Because you never know what you might enjoy. Unfortunately, this film was not it. The story of Charlie Allnut (Humphrey Bogart), an alcoholic riverboat captain, and his reluctant companion, poised missionary Rosie Sayer (Katharine Hepburn)'s escape from German-occupied Africa during World War I is interesting enough to support a good 40 minutes of its run time, but can't sustain it much longer than that.

Bogart is hidden behind a pair of false teeth and jokes about indigestion, but manages to keep up with Hepburn. These were two great actors in their prime after all. So there's that. But a leaden adventure gives way to a sallow romance in the least engaging way possible (although the film does give us one of the most hilarious "Escape the Censors" sexual innuendos I've ever seen).

And although this film has a lot to do with female empowerment, a theme far ahead of its time, that fact doesn't make up for the dull exposition and alarmingly consistently incongruous music (Bogart drinking a bottle of gin is given as many minor key bleats and crescendoes as a particularly gruesome Freddy murder).

So, no. I'm not a fan. But hey, the film gets extra points for inspiring the Jungle Cruise. And although it's a low tier classic, it didn't make me want to roll over and die like Lawrence of Arabia. Hooray!

Rating: 5/10

Prompt: How do both characters arc (change their beliefs and actions) and how does their relationship spur and mirror that change? In essence, how does each character affect his/her "flaw" and how does that occur over all three acts? 

[AN: Note how nice I was to the film in my essay. It always pays to brownnose.]

Regarding character, The African Queen is an excellent case study. John Huston’s rollicking African adventure is practically a one room drama, with most of the action taking place between a pair of isolated characters. The plot (two people must escape a river while under siege by German troops) is intentionally simple for the express purpose of allowing the audience more time with the characters and their arcs.

The characters in question are Charlie Allnut (Humphrey Bogart), a Canadian riverboat captain and hopeless drunk and Rosie Sayer (Katharine Hepburn), a straight-laced British missionary woman. In the beginning of Act One, the characters are exactly where you’d expect. Rosie is leading a roomful of natives in a hymn, the same thing she has been doing every Sunday for ten years. Charlie is delivering the mail, perturbing Rosie and her brother with his uncouth behavior.

But when the village is destroyed by rampaging German troops and the brother dies of illness, these two are thrown together in a desperate attempt to survive and escape. Throughout their journey, Rosie and Charlie will forge a formidable bond and bring out the best in one another. However, at the beginning of their journey, both man and woman are deeply flawed.

Rosie has never let her hair down. Constantly fussing with her elaborate updo and primly reprimanding Charlie for his behavior, she finds comfort in the manners and routines of her home country. Living for so long with only her brother for company has left her stiff and emotionally unavailable.

Charlie, on the other hand, has never taken responsibility. Sure, he brings the mail in on time, but that’s only because there’s nobody else who wants to do it. He’s living what he considers the good life, chugging up and down the river all day on the African Queen and drinking himself into a stupor. He’s inconsiderate during his brief stay in the Sayer’s home, but only because his laid back life has left him unprepared to care for the feelings of others.

In Act Two, everything begins to change. Rosie and Charlie constantly butt heads due to their inherently different lifestyles, but one rainy night when Rosie demands that Charlie not enter her private (and dry) enclosure, she sees that her rigidity and modesty is wildly inappropriate for the situation. She relents, both literally and figuratively letting him in, allowing him to see the first chink in her armor and finally recognizing his humanity. When the tossing river rapids show her how to have a good time, her change begins in earnest.

On the other hand, Charlie, who has only ever lived a life on his own, begins to understand the needs and desires of this woman whom he has begun to care for. Although he clings to his drink and his rugged lifestyle, Rosie showing her true colors begins to chip away at his hardened façade.

As these two characters feel their carefully constructed realities crumbling around them and realize their attraction for one another, they enter Act Three and will never be the same. The intensity of the journey has worn them to tatters and the two are at the end of their rope.

When push comes to shove, both characters come out on the other side, completely the opposite of the way they were before. Rosie suggests with bravado that they torpedo the invading German ship while Charlie, newly sensitive, thinks she’s insane. Where the adventure charged her batteries, it wore his down and the two find themselves switching positions, only to clash once more.

However, once they are captured and brought aboard the ship, Charlie realizes how lucky he is to be alive and with Rosie. Seeing her face and the new vivaciousness he has bestowed on her spurs him to new fervor as he tries desperately to save their skins. By the successful end of the finale, both characters have completely transformed and blossomed, all thanks to that fateful trip on the African Queen – and into each other’s worlds.
Word Count: 1157

Saturday, January 25, 2014

Pregnancy Scares

Year: 2014
Director: Matt Bettinelli-Olpin & Tyler Gillett
Cast: Allison Miller, Zach Gilford, Sam Anderson
Run Time: 1 hour 29 minutes
MPAA Rating: R

Alright, all you people complaining about how Devil's Due is a haphazard remake of Rosemary's Baby can stop balking now. It's clearly a haphazard remake of Paranormal Activity 2.

It's not even February yet and we're already into our second found footage release of 2014. Devil's Due, which will go down in history as the god-fearing meat between the bread of the two anemic Paranormal Activity movies they're throwing at us this year, was helmed by the filmmaking collective Radio Silence, the team behind "10/31/98," easily the best vignette in the 2012 found footage anthology V/H/S.

That vignette was largely forgettable (which is, ironically, why it stands out - every other part of the film was memorably atrocious), but was redeemed by a gonzo practical effects-filled ending that was predictable and unshocking but fun enough to avoid leaving a bad taste in the mouth. Clearly Radio Silence didn't want to mess with success and changed their formula not one iota for this found footage "whoops, the devil's in me" thriller.

This is what happens when you have sex without a condom - you get pregnant. Then die.

Devil's Due opens with a creepy shot of a stalker filming a sixteen-year-old girl and her friends through her living room window. When the friends leave, he sneaks up the trellis and into her bedroom, scaring her as she comes out of the shower. It turns out that the stalker is her fiancé coming to surprise her before the wedding and she's not actually a teenager at all, thus providing the first and only shocking twist in the entire film.

Sam (Allison Miller) and Zach (Zach Gilford) are madly in love - and Zach wants to use his new video camera to record all the stupid dumb moments of their wedding week that he never wants to forget. It's actually quite sweet. Unfortunately, from what we see of the tape, he records about seven seconds worth of footage a day, including the wedding and the first half of the honeymoon.

Once the takes get longer, you know something's going down and the couple's honeymoon in beautiful Santo Domingo is shortly derailed by a mysterious cabdriver (Roger Payano) taking them on a detour to an underground party (you'd think that the "hold on, let me unbolt these steel doors and take you into an underground catacomb in a foreign land" part would have turned them off, but darn are those young lovers intrepid). 

This might look like a mere wedding, but it's actually a fierce gauntlet of warriors.

The camera apparently turns itself on and off for several minutes and we capture glimpses of a mysterious cult ritual being performed on an unconscious Sam. Gosh, I wonder what could be happening?

Spoiler alert: She's pregnant. With the Antichrist.

It's really all just so much boilerplate, pulled evenly from the Found Footage and Unimmaculate Conception genres. There's secret cult symbols, creepy watchers, pregnancy complications, mysterious happenings, and plot holes galore. Although there are far fewer holes than in most movies of its ilk, Devil's Due still manages to be unraveled by "the police don't believe Zach's story even though he captured it all on tape and apparently forgot to show them" and "how could a college student and a recent graduate afford this house?"

He pays with kisses.

The movie's biggest flaw is its absolutely poisonous pacing. When the audience has seen it all before, that gives filmmakers a chance to subvert expectations or at least deliver what they want in an expedited manner, skipping over some of the more routine aspects of the genre. 

But Devil's Due insists that we watch an endless series of scenes of the couple's happy/blissfully unaware activities inconsistently punctuated by brief bursts of "ooh creepy" that aren't terribly composed, but simply aren't interesting enough for the massive amount of limp plot they're expected to drag along with them.

The good thing is that Gilford and Miller have a surprisingly sweet and unforced chemistry that renders them absolutely believable as young newlyweds. The acting is of a par rarely seen in found footage movies (largely because the producers chose actual actors instead of unknowns) and their little tics and tiny interactions make the roles absolutely fleshed out and lived in.

This is of massively powerful importance, because without these actors, there would be no reason to care about what the film is doing at all. As it stands, the characters are charmingly portrayed by likable actors with easy chemistry (somehow Zach's character isn't a douche - a welcome departure from a horror genre staple) and is largely enjoyable even if it's a not particularly scary horror flick.

Their conversations about kale are more fascinating than the cult ritual scenes. I'm being serious.

There's a few shock moments that land, like Father Thomas (Sam Anderson) ruining Zach's sister's first communion by leaking a veritable geyser of blood and the leadup to the finale, but the bulk of the horror in the film all exists in the ethereal realm of potential energy. There's a lot of moments that could be scary that mysteriously aren't. 

The most memorable of which is that when the cult sets up secret surveillance cameras inside the house (a bothersome detail considering that the compiled footage is supposedly from three entirely disparate groups who all have good reason to hide and protect it - who is "finding" these tapes and editing them together?), one camera is hung directly above the stairwell, peering down.

I told Sergio I would eat my hat if that shot wasn't used for some cool falling scene.

I can feel the brim poking my small intestine.

Let's ignore that too-vivid imagery by staring at these lovely fellows for ten seconds.

It's all predictable from the very first scene (in fact, it's predictable from the opening five seconds of the trailer), but it's certainly not the worst January horror movie ever released. It's mostly pleasant, which is more than I can say of the tripe that's being released in theaters lately.

My biggest problem with Devil's Due is this. Why this story again? Is there anything more compelling to say about the birth of the Antichrist? These films always end more or less immediately with its emergence from the womb (Not a spoiler. Come on.), but wouldn't it be way more interesting to see the aftermath?

Not that I'm asking for a Devil's Due 2, but wouldn't it be nice to have a film with stakes like "the end of the world as we know it" to actually depict the end of the world as we know it?

I'm just saying. When you think about it, the travails of one attractive couple don't quite compare.

But hey. At least it's not Texas Chainsaw 3D.

TL;DR: Devil's Due is never anything but boilerplate, but committed leading performances keep it at a high ebb despite bland scare sequences.
Rating: 5/10
Should I Spend Money On This? Although I enjoyed it, I'm gonna go with a firm no on this one.
Word Count: 1193

Sunday, January 19, 2014

Blog Error: Does Not Compute

Year: 2003
Director: Tommy Wiseau
Cast: Tommy Wiseau, Greg Sestero, Juliette Danielle
Run Time: 1 hour 39 minutes
MPAA Rating: R

I'm gonna come right out and say it: The Room is unreviewable. At least not by any standard of cinema that has been invented as of January 19th, 2014.

The way I see it, there are five types of bad movies.

First off, there are movies that are just plain bad. Not terrible enough to be funny but not good enough to be anything more than a dull lifeless heap. These are the worst kinds of bad movies, because you can't even get enjoyment from making fun of them. Hollywood tends to make these kinds of movies by accident when there's a good budget but not enough passion behind the camera to keep it from sucking, or at the very least from being uninteresting.

These are movies like bad comedies (Identity Thief, Movie 43, You Don't Mess With the Zohan) that are impossible to mock because they intend to be funny and fail in their goals. This is inherently unfunny. On the other end of the spectrum, there's movies like Memorial Day and Psycho Santa that are prosumer nightmares made by amateurs with not even production values to redeem themselves. Stay away from these movies at all costs.


Second, there are intentionally bad movies which in all honesty aren't that much better. These movies try to capture the bad movie magic by making themselves as terrible as possible. But you know how the saying goes: Truth is stranger than fiction. For a bad movie to be "so bad it's good," the filmmakers have to think they're creating a masterpiece. Or at least not be completely aware of the profound levels of suckitude they are reaching. These intentionally bad movies are a fairly recent phenomenon, chasing the cult following many older films have garnered.

These filmmakers are the most incredibly crass and mercenary workers out there. Seeing the sheer amount of cash some terrible cult movies have made on midnight screenings and DVD sales, they set out to make one of their very own. But that very insincerity is their downfall. Some of them turn out alright, like Santa's Slay or ThanksKilling, but they're never as good as their authentic counterparts (The best of these is undoubtedly SharknadoJack Frost 2: Revenge of the Mutant Killer Snowman is a close second.).

And most of them end up not even being bottom of the barrel like The Gay Bed and Breakfast of Terror or Bachelor Party in the Bungalow of the Damned (and nearly everything Troma has ever released). In fact, they aren't even in the barrel. They're hundreds of miles away from the barrel, stuck to the bottom of some Chinese dockworker's shoe.


Third (now we're finally getting somewhere good) are the old low budget B-movies. Nobody ever paid any real attention to this stuff so they could get away with anything. This arena is where MST3K gets all their material - stuff like Teenagers From Outer Space and Secret Agent Super Dragon. These films have invariably awesome titles.


Fourth are the camp films. Like a tennis ball that gets stuck in the net, these films are caught exactly in between intentionally bad and B-movie glory. These are films like John Waters productions or The Rocky Horror Picture Show that depict over the top melodrama, musical numbers, costuming, and/or dialogue. The only difference between camp movies and intentionally bad movies (and what separates them from that dreck) is that the campy ones shoot straight for the fun jugular. The juggler, if you will.

These movies want to be visual and aural experiences unlike anything you've ever seen. Their over the top nature and dissimilarity to the blandly average Hollywood products is what attracts cult and fringe audiences to this day. Horror can also tend toward the campy, especially in the films of Roger Corman and Stuart Gordon.


The last category - and my personal favorite - is insane horror. Horror as a genre tends to be the most lenient toward batsh*t insane ideas and as such welcomes such titles as Troll 2 or Phantom of the Mall: Eric's Revenge. This is what kept the slasher genre going throughout much of the 80's, with the rock 'n roll singalong killer of Slumber Party Massacre II, the killer robots of Chopping Mall and, well, everything else that I've been writing about in Census Bloodbath.


The Room falls into absolutely none of these categories. Not a one. It is absolutely, irrefutably bad, but in no easily definable way. Although it would be greatest sin to define The Room under any category. It is to be grouped with no other film. The Room stands alone, a monument to the X factor - that inscrutable quality that makes a bad film so infinitely compelling.

And where most bad films have a litany of flaws, there are usually patches of either brief improvement where it is enjoyable on a legitimate cinematic level (like some of the musical numbers in Rocky Horror) or brief decline where there are periods of utterly blah doldrums (like the middle half of Anthropophagus). The Room is so consistently legitimately bad that it defies logic and boggles the mind.

Written by, directed by, produced by, and starring Tommy Wiseau, a man who looks like his face was beaten with a sack of potatoes and then took on the primary qualities of said sack of potatoes and speaks in an accent completely divorced from any earthly language, The Room is a hornet's nest of plot holes, continuity errors, stilted line readings, bad dubbing, random non-sequiturs, and every conceivable error that plagues the nightmares of young film students.

Including terrible green screen effects.

The very simple plots follows Johnny (Tommy Wiseau), a banker who is beloved by all (the way Wiseau writes people fawning over his character smacks of a sort of sweaty desperation and loneliness. This man wrote himself some friends, and if that's not the saddest thing you've ever heard, I'm sorry about your missing limbs.) and his "future wife" (the word fiancée is never uttered) Lisa (Juliette Danielle). Lisa has grown tired of her relationship and seeks alternative boners with Johnny's best friend (on the flip side, the phrase "best friend" is uttered approximately a borktillion times) Mark (Greg Sestero).

The actual plot takes up about 5 seconds of the overall run time. For the rest of it, The Room features visibly uncomfortable actors performing disconnected scenes that wantonly repeat themselves throughout the production performed in wafer thin sets decorated with framed pictures of spoons, a tuxedoed game of football (The Room's vernacular for the grand American pastime known as "catch") and a veritable avalanche of lengthy sex scenes featuring Wiseau's sinewy and veiny backside (one of which is comprised of outtake footage from an earlier scene).

It is so impossibly impenetrably weird, that for years nobody had any clue whether or not the whole thing was some big joke, some troll from the pre-4chan age. New information has come to light in the  tell-all book The Disaster Artist, a firsthand account of the 6 month production by Sestero himself.

Completely devoid of sarcasm, this is the most fascinating nonfiction book I have ever read. Highly, unironically recommended.

The new information being that every frame of every shot was treated with absolute dignity by a very odd man who wanted to be a star. The book raises as many questions as it answers, but it paints a portrait of Wiseau even stranger than anybody could even imagine. This is a man who won't reveal where he's from even to his best friends (when asked, he always answers with "New Orleans"), has millions of dollars of disposable income, and orders cups of hot water with his meal at restaurants.

The Room is Tommy Wiseau's brainchild through and through (Of the other two producers credited, one was an elderly woman who almost certainly had no idea The Room existed and the other was a man who died a good three years before production began.) and the immense amount of money and dedication he poured into it resulted in a film that not only failed to function at a basic narrative level, but failed to function on every single storytelling level but one - the production values are, frankly, quite gorgeous for this type of independent film.

Wiseau sank millions of dollars into this film and it shows, adding yet another completely inexplicable element to the film. If it looked terrible, underlit, and shabby, it could have been chalked up to some crazy amateur experiment. But the lighting, camerawork, and production design are utterly professional save for the areas where Tommy extended his twisted influence like some unnatural fungus. Also, and I sort of hate myself for saying this, but I a little bit love the soundtrack.

The reaction of every audience member during the first screening of the film.

Try as I might, it's impossible to explain the Mariana Trench depths of ineptitude Wiseau's performance sinks to. But his histrionics, and those he pulled out of his cast as a director, are unparalleled in the world of modern cinema.

Take that, Meryl Streep!

It's utterly compelling bad filmmaking. Every single second has something new and extraordinary puking across the screen, resulting in the most consistently belly laugh-inducing bad film in the history of the human race.

I've had the good fortune to attend a midnight screening of The Room with several good friends of mine and it was the most exciting moviegoing experience I've had in my entire life. The audience shouts along with the best lines ("You're tearing me apart, Lisa!" "Leave your stupid comments in your pocket!"), mocks every character with manic glee, and throws handfuls of plastic spoons in the air every time one of the framed silverware pictures shows up in the background.

So there I was, hundreds of spoons raining down over my head, watching a hideously inept drama play out onscreen via an accent with no geographical ties, smiling and knowing deep in my heart that whatever choices I had made in life that led me to this moment were the right ones.

TL;DR: hfewlihbehlrtbhjfgapdhwe;lKIO'
Rating: 10/10
Word Count: 1707