DONNIE DARKO: The Director’s Cut (2001)
Dir: Richard Kelly (VISCERAL MATTER)
My pick of the year- this film is purely and simply awesome! I don’t know how it got past me, but this indy gem got the highest marks of all the films I researched, so I went right out and rented the “director’s cut” edition. This movie is an 80’s period-piece (!!!) that blends the creepy ambience of Todd Haynes SAFE, Cronenberg’s DEAD RINGERS and Peter Weir’s apocalyptic THE LAST WAVE- with visual motifs straight from Kubrick’s THE SHINING- the teenage social-satire of HEATHERS- and the structural cause-and-effect of Roeg’s DON’T LOOK NOW or Lynch’s LOST HIGHWAY / MULHOLLAND DRIVE. Existential angst parallels madness in a script that is spooky, funny and intellectual. The “RUH!?” factor is high in this one. There is a great ambient score and all your favorite 80’s pop songs as well. Exquisitely haunting. Go rent it now!
THE MACHINIST (2005)
Dir: Brad Anderson (SESSION 9)
Amazing film- awesome storytelling! A very dark and brooding psychological thriller, similar in themes to IDENTITY, LOST HIGHWAY, SESSION 9, VAMPIRE’S KISS, PSYCHO, VERTIGO. A very effective portrait of human guilt, through the device of a point-of-view piece. Although the clues are readily evident, I didn‘t guess the full story until the end. Unlike many thrillers these days, the plot twists here are not so much “twists” as reveals in the natural progression of the story- and all in service of the story’s premise. No gimmicks here, just effective writing that delivers its emotional ideas with such power, you’ll be thinking about them for a long time. Director Anderson succeeds in putting us into the experience of his tormented protagonist in a way that is reminiscent of Hitchcock with Jimmy Stewart or Cary Grant. Christian Bale (BATMAN BEGINS, AMERICAN PSYCHO, EQUILIBRIUM, REIGN OF FIRE) delivers yet another slam-dunk performance and is certainly in Oscar contention here with this, the most memorable physical performance by an actor since DeNiro in RAGING BULL. Jennifer Jason-Leigh is her usual best as is Michael Ironside. Very articulate Herrman-esque score by Roque Banos - passages even include creepy organ and theramin! Definitely see this one.
THE TENANT (1976)
Dir: Roman Polanski (ROSEMARY’S BABY, REPULSION, THE NINTH GATE)
One of our greatest living directors, Long before DONNIE DARKO, THE MACHINIST, HIGH TENSION, LOST HIGHWAY, MULHOLLAND DRIVE, BARTON FINK or JACOB’S LADDER - Roman Polanski was taking the art of the “paranoia film” to new levels. In Polanski’s stories, there is an ugly truth hiding underneath that is too horrible to exist on the surface, but is connected to everything and drives the entire narrative. Similar to his earlier masterpiece ROSEMARY’S BABY or also REPULSION or CHINATOWN, Polanski weaves an emotionally dynamic and twisting story full of his standard motifs of conspiracy, betrayal, denial and the quest to solve a mystery. First however, this film is a very effective comedy! The first 1/3 of the movie was hysterically reminiscent of Scorcese’s AFTER HOURS. A man moves into a new building and suddenly he’s through the looking glass. A comedy of errs ensues as Polanski creates hapless moments of unfortunate coincidence and misunderstanding- much in the traditions of Jaques Tati or Peter Sellars. There are strange and modestly understated elements however, that soon grow into a bizarre sub-story. Isabelle Adjani and Polanski himself star with strong, emotionally ranging performances. Polanski directs with such a strong sense of his protagonist’s POV, that when we begin to experience events outside this POV, the effect is intensely jarring. By the last act, very bizarre things occur that undermine everything we’ve seen so far and the end of the film leaves us to ponder if anything we thought we knew was correct at all. What appears to be the story we’ve witnessed, may only be the illusion and the real story too tragic to comprehend. As with ROSEMARY’S BABY, the humor in the film really plays with our minds. As we experience tragic events, we are also laughing out loud at the comic element- or conversely, horrified during something funny. This “Polanski Touch” is not as much satirical or “dark comedy” as it is something altogether more disturbing. Polanski meditates on the fickle and often heartless nature of people- but often with humor and a sense of commonplace, whereas in a film like MULHOLLAND DRIVE, we can almost hear Lynch licking his chops as his naïve protagonist steps unaware into dark and macabre events. By comparison, Polanski’s worlds seem less tongue-in-cheek sadistic and more matter-of-fact, which is more deeply unsettling. With Lynch, we are aware of the game he’s playing, while Polanski makes us feel, in a much more understated fashion, that his thesis on the darkness of the world is probably in fact, correct. This is altogether more profound because the design is far more pre-meditated and purposefully pessimistic in its nature. After THE TENANT, Polanski went on to make the ultra-paranoid FRANTIC starring Harrison Ford; and more recently the Oscar nominated THE PIANIST starring Adrien Brody (THE JACKET) who received the best actor Oscar for his performance. With THE PIANIST- after decades of anticipation- Polanski finally took on the issue of the Nazi holocaust. Much has been written about the tragic legacy of Polanski. After escaping the Nazi’s and the destruction of his family as a young man, Polanski would face only more unspeakable horror when his wife and unborn baby were butchered by the Charles Manson cult in the late 60’s. After a sex scandal, Polanski sought exile outside the U.S. in Europe. It is no coincidence that the tragic and twisting content of Polanski’s films are not too dissimilar from events in his own life.
THE DEVIL’S BACKBONE (2002)
Dir: Guillermo del Toro (HELLBOY, CHRONOS, BLADE 2)
Another slam-dunk from Mexican filmmaker Guillermo del Toro, who continues to prove himself a great modern director. A hybrid of Francois Truffaut, David Cronenberg and Peter Jackson; Del Toro’s standard motifs of mechanical gadgets, artificial appendages, insects and the supernatural are all here in this poetic story of a young boy’s abandonment in worn-torn Spain. The script provides very well drawn characters, each of who is sympathetic and struggles with real human dilemmas of desire and loss, loyalty and beliefs, fear and practical reason. There are no standard cliché’s or predictable plots here, just a very endearing story that, in it’s drama, asks the question: “what is a ghost?” and provides a multitude of answers from the literal to the metaphoric. Top notch movie-making here! Winner of many film festivals. Not much of a scare factor in this one, but definitely heavy on dark themes.
JOYRIDE (2001)
Dir: John Dahl (ROUNDERS, UNFORGETTABLE)
This film is well written, directed and acted. The success of the film is the simplicity of its design and the strength of its characters. We attach to the characters because their goals are clear and it’s enough to find conflict just in their interactions without any external aggression. An evil force does emerge however, in the form of an undefined and unexplained madman who surfaces as a stand in for the moral breach between the ethics of the two lead characters. Much like THE HITCHER or Spielberg’s early DUEL- the mindlessness of an unseen antagonist stirs our dark imaginations, forcing us to contemplate the potential for evils just outside our view, closer than we think. The fact that the film is a “thriller” and not a straight-up horror flick made me doubtful when renting. Seemed like it could be another lame teen slasher, the likes of Kevin Williamson (SCREAM, I KNOW WHAT YOU DID LAST SUMMER, FINAL DESTINATION) but be assured- it is not! Go rent this one. Score is well done too.
DOG SOLDIERS (2002)
Dir: Neil Marshall (STILL LIFE, BULLY, THE GATHERERS)
This is one of those guilty pleasures you hope to find when scanning Showtime or Cinemax late at night and it’s really lots of fun. It’s a very low budget (think EVIL DEAD) drive in flick, about a bunch of Scottish soldiers making a desperate last stand against modern-day werewolves. Taking much of it’s feel from James Cameron’s ALIENS, what the movie lacks in production value, it makes up for with a clever story, character and great pacing. The editors really did a fantastic job. Despite the films’ limitations, it is directed with smarts and there was never a moment that I couldn’t stay with the film. There’s enough macho tough-guy lingo to fill three DIE HARD movies and the tongue-in-cheek action is relentless. Nice orchestral score too.
HIGH TENSION (2005)
Dir: Alexandre Aja (FURIA, OVER THE RAINBOW)
A very well crafted and paced thriller that masks itself as a horror film. Terrific psychology here, although if you pay close attention to the film language in the first 20 minutes, you’ll guess everything (as I did.) The dramatic premise as revealed in the final act is disturbing and socio-politically provocative.
I can already hear the critics politicizing this one (can’t say more without spoiling.) Similar to FATAL ATTRACTION or THE TALENTED MR. RIPLEY or even PSYCHO thematically- although in terms of action, it plays like TEXAS CHAINSAW or JOY RIDE. Great forward momentum and pacing and smart characters. Be warned- quite graphic. Nicely manages to avoid many of the logic-jumping clichés of most slasher films and stays true to its underlying subtext. Aja is finishing up a remake of Wes Craven’s THE HILLS HAVE EYES due in 2006.
THE NAMELESS (1999)
Dir: Jaime Balaguero (DARKNESS)
This is basically DARKNESS but better. A Spanish production, it seems to me that Balaguero sort of remade the same film when he made DARKNESS a few years later, but for a wider audience, including American distribution. The film is extremely effective and emotionally true to its characters as it portrays a woman who has lost her daughter to an abduction, only to find much later, that she may still be alive. Balaguero directs with mature tastes and the dramatic elements of the story are very unsettling. There is a strong sense of tension throughout- although the evil characters are out of view for almost the entire movie! This was quite refreshing given the context of today’s standard of horror cinema. The final climax fizzled a bit, although conceptually it was fine, it felt a bit like a fly by for such a thorough and dramatic build up. As with DARKNESS, THE NAMELESS follows closely in the tradition of ROSEMARY’S BABY with motifs of conspiracy, betrayal and the occult. Good score although the pop song over the end credits was highly unnecessary.
HOUR OF THE WOLF (1968)
Dir: Ingmar Bergman (PERSONA, THE SEVENTH SEAL)
Bergman weaves a tale of one man’s decent into madness and his personal demons that emerge in the process. A question is also posed: “how much can you love someone before you start to experience their madness?” Max Von Sydow and Liv Ullman star. The film is brilliantly shot in wonderful B&W by Sven Nykvist. Bergman allows his camera deep into the faces of his characters and in this film, they look past their own reality and into the reality of the camera and we the audience. The style is extremely dry and stoic. Scenes last almost the entire length of a camera spool at times as the camera stays locked off and the actors move within their blocking points in Nykvist’s deep focus compositions. Bergman starts the film with the sounds of his crew shooting, as if to remind us we are only watching a movie. Liv Ullman as “Alma” sits in front of the camera and talks to us directly, as if in a pseudo-documentary style. “I’m telling you the story,” she says, and we know the film is from her POV. Von Sydow plays “Johan,” an artist in search of isolation, who begins to experience the incarnation of his inner demons. Are these ghosts real or figurative? Eventually his desperate wife begins to see them too. In the final act, Bergman reveals the ghosts as bourgeois entities, bored and desperate, aching for the living. In this way, the ghosts seem not-unlike the colorful and flamboyant characters from a Fellini film. Bergman made HOUR OF THE WOLF after his masterpiece PERSONA and in this film, continues his concern with the concept of “the deconstruction of a personality.” Von Sydow’s tortured artist seems powerless to lift himself out of his decent, while his wife must make the decision to part from him before madness engulfs her as well. Bergman uses interesting and theatrical visual styles to portray the final confrontation with the ghosts, with a bit of tongue-in-cheek references to classic horror films like Dracula and other vampire motifs. However, the most arresting scene is a dinner sequence at the castle with the ghost characters. The camera stays mercilessly tight on the faces of each actor and rather than cutting, the camera stays live, panning swiftly between each, which helps to mimic the sickening feeling of Johan as his inner tension grows. The MGM collector’s DVD is amazingly mastered from the original negative, every scene bristling with the original film grain and the sound faithfully restored. There is extremely creepy and intense use of music, although it’s the long passages of silence in the film that are the most unsettling. If you are not familiar with Bergman’s films, it may take you a bit to adjust to his cold and monotonous pacing, however, the effect is not unlike the films of Robert Bresson or the films of Kubrick or Lynch that came later- where the minimalist tone helps to heighten the sense of drama and overall mood.
THE JACKET (2005)
Dir: John Maybury
Another time-shifting psychological thriller in the same vein as DONNIE DARKO, LOST HIGHWAY or TWELVE MONKIES. Keira Knightley is gorgeous and Adrien Brody is strong. All in all, this one was more compelling in it’s JACOB’S LADDER-esque first act as it built mystery and concept potential, but turns into a straight drama mid-way and then is never really ethically focused and leaves us with too many questions. The film is more concerned with the emotions of the lead character than story logic, which is ok, but ultimately I wasn’t really sure what the film was saying, if anything. Chris Kristofferson was great as usual. Strange and interesting score by Brian Eno.
DON’T LOOK NOW (1973)
Dir: Nicholas Roeg (THE MAN WHO FELL TO EARTH, WALKABOUT, PERFORMANCE)
Donald Sutherland and Julie Christie star in this very well acted and realistic drama with a touch of the supernatural. The film takes its time to elaborate on one incident in the lives of a married couple that turns horribly tragic. Roeg uses his jump-cutting style to parallel sequences of events happening to different characters at different points in time. The result leaves the viewer to ponder forces of synchronicity beyond our known reality. The ending is quite arresting and a terrific payoff to an otherwise long film. Not the sensationalist horror film of the 80’s or 90’s, DON’T LOOK NOW raises other worldly questions rather than draw a specific premise. Similar in themes to the films of M. Night Shayamalan (THE SIXTH SENSE, SIGNS) and Alfred Hitchcock (THE BIRDS, STRANGERS ON A TRAIN, SHADOW OF A DOUBT, THE WRONG MAN)
WILLARD (2003)
Dir: Glen Morgan (TV’s THE X-FILES)
I liked this film a lot. As with Del Toro’s films, WILLARD acts as much as a tragic drama about loneliness and isolation as it does a twisted revenge thriller. This remake of BEN(1975) was not the twisted or bizarre surrealism of LYNCH or CRONENBERG that I half expected- but instead a much more audience friendly and accessible dark comedy. The madness of Willard is expressed symbolically in the form of rats that inhabit his cellar. We are never quite sure if what Willard sees is really happening or merely an expression of his descent into madness. Stylish and well directed and acted, WILLARD is an expressionist fantasy firmly anchored in a story of revenge and loss. Crispin Glover’s performance as the tragic WILLARD is fantastic. Solid musical score by Shirley Walker.
WAR OF THE WORLDS (2005 remake)
Dir: Steven Spielberg (JAWS, CLOSE ENCOUNTERS OF THE THIRD KIND)
The most anticipated and perhaps most disappointing modern epic horror tale in a while. Despite a terrific first act and all the right elements, Spielberg chooses to tell the wrong story in this spin on the classic H.G. Wells novel. I recommend the film for it’s HUGE production value and ambience of paranoia, especially in the first hour - but I much prefer the 1953 film directed by Byron Haskin. (Don’t let the year it was made sway you, it’s a great must see.) This new Spielberg version however, leaves us wanting so much more and has a “Hollywood ending” that is down right lame. The sound design (Ben Burtt) and digital FX (ILM - Dennis Murren) and creature FX (Stan Winston) are unbelievable. Solid John Williams score. Tom Cruise is actually decent doing his panicky “guy on the run” shtick as usual. A real heartbreaker, could’ve been the best horror film ever, but is ultimately forgettable. (see featured "spotlight" essay below)
THE VILLAGE (2004)
Dir: M. Night Shayamalan (THE SIXTH SENSE, SIGNS, UNBREAKABLE)
The second most anticipated disappointed. This film is actually quite well done, intriguing and scary. Despite the big giant plot twists (that spoil the whole thing if you learn of them before seeing the film) I actually thought the film was very successful- until the end that is. At the dramatic climax point of the film, director Shayamalan once again fails miserably at sidestepping his own giant ego, and plants himself into the film (as an actor) in a really bad and glaringly obvious presence that spoils the whole thing. I realize he probably thought, in terms of film language, that he was forcing the film to “window out” yet one more level of reality- but it didn’t work. What a terrible gamble. In the end, for me at least, the film is rendered obsolete due to this mistake. It’s hard to recommend or not recommend this one. I was very disappointed, but I do feel (unlike everyone else apparently) that the rest of the film works. It’s a nice allegory of human socio-politics. To be accurate, this is really NOT a horror film- it’s a story wrapped inside the appearance of one, which speaks to the thematic premise of the film. I can’t say anymore without spoiling the movie. The film I thought it was going to be was so promising, I was of course disappointed that it turned out to be something completely different. However, I stuck with it and enjoyed what it became, it’s just the damn stupid scene with Shayamalan that kills it for me. Nice score by James-Newton Howard.
LAND OF THE DEAD (2005)
Dir: George A. Romero (NIGHT, DAWN and DAY OF THE DEAD trilogy)
Not that great in terms of the trilogy and the expectations that accompany, but a pretty good drive-in flick none-the-less. Despite a lackluster concept script, Romero still manages to direct the film well. The FX are as gruesome as expected and lots of maniacal fun, albeit pretty unnecessary. The acting is good, particularly John Leguizamo and Dennis Hopper. Also co-stars Asia Argento (daughter of famed Italian horror director Dario Argento.) Perhaps the most disappointing factor in LAND is the bizarre morality in the story, which plays as pretty sophomoric and hard to place in the logic of Romero’s preceding DEAD trilogy. It’s also worth mentioning that this is the first of the DEAD films that features any CGI effects, which are done sparingly and tastefully. Most of the gore effects are still done the old-fashioned way. Although Tom Savini does NOT do the make-up effects this time around, he does have a nice fan-pleasing cameo as a machete wielding zombie. I can’t hate this movie, in fact it was a lot of fun- just not the intellectual standard of NIGHT or DAWN. There is also a nice cameo by the two young filmmakers of SHAUN OF THE DEAD and the DVD features a little video documentary of how they got to meet Romero (who turns out to be a big SHAUN fan) and be in his film. I recommend this on the same guilty-pleasure level as DAY OF THE DEAD and because Romero is still “The Man” in my view- making horror flicks nearly 50 years after setting the standard. (LAND OF THE DEAD is every bit the film RESIDENT EVIL: APOCALYPSE wanted to be and failed at miserably.) It’s interesting that rather than trying to update his vision to trump the more recent “zombie revival” flicks (28 DAYS LATER, DAWN OF THE DEAD 2004) Romero instead goes for the campy angle (much in the way John Carpenter has tried with his films THEY LIVE or VAMPIRES, but more successfully.) Score is pretty cool.
SHIVERS (1975)
Dir: David Cronenberg (DEAD RINGERS, THE FLY, THE DEAD ZONE, VIDEODROME)
Cronenberg’s first feature film, SHIVERS was Canada’s first bonafied horror film and also marked the birth of Canada’s indy film movement of the 70’s - which was very much spearheaded by Cronenberg’s early works like SCANNERS and THE BROOD. Originally entitled “The Parasite Murders,” the film was marketed as a “sploitation” slasher but is really an intellectual story about science gone tragically wrong. All of Cronenberg’s visceral motifs are here- perversion from inside, the dark danger of modern technology and man’s inevitable convergence with his own irrational instincts. SHIVERS is an extremely low-budget effort with horrible acting (mostly using non-actors) and stiff production. An A for effort, but you’ll probably want to read about it more than watch it, although I do recommend it. The end scene is really arresting. This film follows in the zombie-apocalypse tradition of Romero’s DEAD trilogy, but with it’s own unique concept of man’s self-destructive destiny. Similar to Danny Boyle’s 28 DAYS LATER or even BIOHAZARD.
SAW (2004)
Dir: James Wan (STIGIAN)
A wanabee cross between CUBE and SEVEN, this gruesome indy thriller focuses on dark, sinister acts of of human cruelty. Much like the villain in SEVEN, a disgruntled serial-killer seeks to make lasting statements about human ethics through a crusade of unspeakable crimes. The mystery angle was engaging enough, but the story fell apart in the final act- miserably so. There was also an incredibly brutal sequence near the end that is sure to keep you nauseated for years to come. There were ample plot twists to keep you surprised, but ultimately this work is stillborn I’m afraid. Not sure what the point of the film was- definitely horrific and also implausible and overstated in my view. A sequel is on the way. Ultra-creepy score.
HIDE AND SEEK (2005)
Dir: John Polson (SWIMFAN)
A psychological thriller in the vein of SECRET WINDOW or WHAT LIES BENEATH. Opening sequence is hauntingly tragic, but the film fizzles at the end. Overall, a sad and tragic drama, but we’re never really sure to what end. Dakota Fanning is amazingly empathetic and continues to prove herself perhaps the best young actress in the business. Robert DeNiro is solid, but the story lacks sufficient dimension to justify the caliber of both its lead actors. Famke Janssen is strong, as is Amy Irving in supporting roles. The score by John Ottman is very effective. HIDE AND SEEK is another in a recent tradition of thrillers that rely too heavily on a big surprise twist at the end that only renders the film a technical story gimmick, rather than a substantial horror tale.
FEAR DOT COM (2002)
Dir: William Malone (HOUSE ON HAUNTED HILL 1999 remake)
This film is just a visual exercise. If you liked the trippy video sequences in THE RING, you might like the trippy sequences in this film. It seems these days the story is always about a vengeful ghost seeking justice and there’s always freaky visuals of some omnipresent and expressionless pale child popping up for shocks (no doubt spawned by Kubrick’s twin dead girls in the hallway in THE SHINING.) The critics destroyed this bomb when it came out and rightfully so. Roger Ebert was no exception, although he did add to his review that the visual language of the last 20 minutes or so was worth watching with the sound down, just as a film student type experiment. I took this idea a step further and digitized the scenes into my Macintosh and edited them into one long montage. (you can view on my website: www.belodeau.com) Rog was right, pretty neat stuff. Borrows from JACOB’S LADDER, THE RING, SEVEN and a bit of Ken Russell’s drug-trip style, to try and visually represent a really stupid idea about the internet playing host to an angry ghost who torments visitors of a website for 48 hours until killing them with their own greatest fears. This is about as compelling as the killer videotape gimmick in THE RING. The logic is a mess and nothing is ever succinctly explained. There’s another whole story going on too about a mad doctor who kills victims on a live website as some sort of statement about modern disconnectedness (how original) which borrows heavily from SEVEN. Shock/surprise- the ghost leads the hero to the bad guy, never seen that before (STIR OF ECHOS did it better.). The filmmakers obviously put a lot of effort and care into the visual look and feel of the film, however, the script lacks any story or character and the concepts are half-baked at best. Some script doctoring might have turned this F into a C-minus maybe. Natascha McElhone adds a pretty face and bad accent and Steven Dorff plays the crusty cop with a past that no one cares about, least of all me. Score by Nicholas Pike is first rate however.
THE GRUDGE (2004)
Dir: Takashi Shimizu (JU-ON, MAREBITO, TOMIE: REBIRTH)
This film is also purely visual, but unlike FEAR DOT COM which tried to reach at some concept (albeit a dumb one) THE GRUDGE has none at all. There is no story, character development or intellectual content- just visual design. Having said that, the visuals are in fact, well done and way creepy. Major “RUH!?” factor. This is a good rental for film night with friends if you are looking for guaranteed shocks. Other than that, it’s worthless. Sarah Michelle Gellar adds nothing. Christopher Young’s score is nice. Also, I really can’t keep track of all the versions. Ju-On, the Japanese original was imported after this American remake was made (by the same director) then there’s the sequel in both U.S. and Japanese versions- there’s like 6 different DVD’s plus a brand new “Collector’s edition” out this month in time for Halloween. Did they make a version that had a story?
SESSION 9 (2001)
Dir: Brad Anderson (THE MACHINIST)
This is very much a spin on Kubrick’s THE SHINING in both story structure and tone. An odd indy film about a group of guys cleaning up an old, dormant asylum and the parallels between past horrors and horrors in the present day. It is left to the viewer to decide if there is a connection. The film takes an interesting and oblique way of to revealing a murder mystery. Quite creepy, but slow and aimless until the final act –. I wouldn’t put this at the top of your rental list, but it’s not bad by any stretch. Director Anderson went on to make the not-too-dissimilar and critically acclaimed THE MACHINIST.
THE AMITYVILLE HORROR (2005 remake)
Dir: Andrew Douglas
A faithful remake of the 1979 version, which I watched again recently and didn’t much care for actually. Produced by the same team that remade THE TEXAS CHAINSAW MASSACRE last year (and blew it.) As a kid, the Amityville story was a compelling urban-legend haunted house tale. As an adult, the story seems a bit too tired for a remake. The concept of a possessed father killing his family is kind of a re-run of THE SHINING. The only thing to possibly add is lots of modern special visual effects. Of course, once again there’s a little dead kid popping up all the time for shocks. I would have liked a bit more psychology in the relationships between the ghosts and the human characters. The whole thing plays a little distant, which may have been enough in 1979, but I was left craving more depth. They did a nice job portraying the story as a 1970’s “period” piece. The score by Steve Jablonsky (THE ISLAND) is good, but the theatrical trailer is misleading because it uses bits of Lalo Schiffrin’s masterful 1979 score, which is NOT in this film in any way unfortunately. I don’t particularly recommend this one.
MULLHOLLAND DRIVE (2001)
Dir: David Lynch (NAKED LUNCH, LOST HIGHWAY, BLUE VELVET)
Creepy, bizarre and highly erotic fun. This film is basically an extension or redux of LOST HIGHWAY only better. Lynch seems to be trying to perfect the same idea over the course of two consecutive. The same identity shifting, time warping elements are here, only with more of Lynch’s trademark dark humor.
Naomi Watt’s plays a young, impressionable actress arriving in Hollywood – much like Laura Dern’s character in BLUE VELVET. Gone are many of the freak-show elements from WILD AT HEART or TWIN PEAKS and instead, there is more humor. As with all of his films, Lynch wants us to ponder the idea that there are dark elements in our midst, unspeakably deep and evil and different from us- but there none-the-less. Motifs such as the mob and evil business men pulling the strings and uncanny coincidences force us to imagine a causal reality different from what we expect to see, yet as much a part of our world as anything else we know. In the darkest depths of Lynch’s parallel and macabre universe is always a character who seems to be born of the evil core- the Frank Booth of BLUE VELVET or the Handycam Man in LOST HIGHWAY and in this film- the “Cowboy.” These characters confront the naïve and unaware hero character- the ultimate contrast between the real and the unknown. The evil character doesn’t seem to exist in time or space and acts as a sort of “voice of the beyond” as if they are some intermediary of a wider, unknown causality. This presence keeps us forever uneasy and puts a question mark on all other elements in the narrative. Much like Hitchcock- who allows his characters to “succeed” in the end, but only at the price of having attained some horrible knowledge that will change their lives forever- Lynch seems to allow us back to the comforts of the real world- only now knowing that it’s only that way because outer forces allow it to be. A truly dark existential architecture. It still seems wildly ironic and improbable that Lynch would find a mainstream audience in American living rooms with his mega-hit TV series TWIN PEAKS.
DEEP RED (1975)
Dir: Dario Argento (SUSPERIA, OPERA, TENEBRE, PHENOMENA)
Most agree, as does Argento himself, that this is his master work. The same murder mystery elements as his previous films are at play. As with THE BIRD WITH THE CRYSTAL PLUMAGE or TENEBRE, a protagonist who happens into ghastly crimes, becomes obsessed with finding the murderer. DEEP RED seem to weave several different films into one story. There are moments where we begin to question everyone’s identity- as if perhaps the film might evolve into a psychological identity piece. There is a dynamic “haunted house” segment that seems to create an identity of its own and of course, a provocative murder mystery that winds it’s way throughout. Similar to all his films, Argento puts less emphasis on the narrative through-line of his story and instead allows his fascination with specific elements and motifs to drive his direction. Here is where Argento’s work becomes very different from Hollywood’s mainstream. At times, the movie almost loses touch with itself as it wanders off into the murder scene of a newly introduced character, or as we are treated to detail shots of the secret murderer’s hideaway. As always, Argento uses extremely technical camera movements, that seem to have a mind of their own. The camera leaves a window and scans over the rooftop to another window, then back down to reveal action in yet another window- all to the beat of Goblin’s progressive rock score. Moments like these seem to completely detach from the rest of the film and break the rules of narrative, but these are in fact the Argento signature moments. The murder scenes are brutally detailed in movements that by today’s standard seem clunky and cheesy, but in their time, were more about mood and tone than the shock value of the later slasher flicks Argento’s work inspired. Argento wants us to witness the contents of a nightmare- a heightened reality of fear that immerses us in the macabre elements of life we would otherwise turn away from. As with PHENOMENA, the concept of ESP or a clairavoyant level of consciousness becomes a key motivating element in the story. DEEP RED Co-star Daria Nicolodi later became a co-writer on Argento’s later films and mother of his two daughters Fiere and Aria (both actress/filmmakers). Music is by the famed “Goblin” quartet which became popular the world over and inspired the likes of John Carpenter’s score for HALLOWEEN among others. Argento’s sensibilities for his musical scores marked a stepping away from traditional orchestral horror scores (Herrman, Goldsmith, etc.) toward more experimental and ambient soundtracks (Carpenter, Wendy Carlos, Mark Isham, Brad Fiedel, Angelo Badalamento) Argento’s use of the killers’ point-of-view sort of super-stylized Hitchcock’s camera styles into today’s “slasher eye view” floating camera techniques. Carpenter perfected this with early float-o-flex and steadicam equipment in his films. Today’s steadicam has pretty much made the technique standard in any genre.
It is held that 70’s Italian filmmakers Dario Argento, Lucio Fulchi (following in the footsteps of low-budget horror king Mario Bava) are responsible for creating the modern “slasher” genre. American producer/financier Moustapha Aakad witnessed the box office sensation of low budget teen favorites like Fulchi’s ZOMBIE and Argento’s SUSPERIA at foreign film festivals. Aakad rushed back to America to enlist USC film grads John Carpenter and Debra Hill to script “The Babysitter Murders” in a matter of days. The resulting film, HALLOWEEN (1978) went on to become the highest grossing indy film in history, until de-throned in 1998 by THE BLAIR WITCH PROJECT. It was HALLOWEEN and Tobe Hooper’s THE TEXAS CHAINSAW MASSACRE (1978) that spawned all the teen-sploitation clones that swept American box offices and video rentals throughout the 80’s and evolved the genre into what is now a well-worn cliché
TENEBRE (1982)
Dir: Dario Argento
Very similar to THE BIRD WITH THE CRYSTAL PLUMAGE- a foreigner in Italy happens into a murder scene and becomes obsessed with helping police track down the killer. Plot twists and surprises emerge in this interesting murder mystery. True to his style, scenes with the killer use a POV shooting style that give the narrative its “horror/slasher” element. Just when we start to entertain the idea that a deeper psychological reality may be present- the story wraps it’s self up with practical explainations. Argento temps us to explore a darker level underneath what we see, only to bring us back in the end. As with Lynch or Polanski, Argento seems to ask us to contemplate parallel and somewhat darker universes at work within or own world.
OPERA (1987)
Dir: Dario Argento
Certainly the most technically proficient of Argento’s films, this perhaps should have been his masterpiece, but instead continues the change in Argento’s direction that started with PHENOMENA (1985). An interpretation of PHANTOM OF THE OPERA, the film is so odd, I’m not sure how to place it exactly. In OPERA Argento is certainly disconnecting with his narrative and his characters in the pursuit of other elements. I’m reminded a bit of Robert Bresson’s later films like AU HAZZARD BALTHAZAR or MOUCHETTE- where the filmmaking becomes more about symbolic abstraction than narrative drama. Argento perfects his killer’s-eye point-of-view shtick here with amazingly technical camera movements and detailed close-ups- and his sadistic gore-factor hits an all time high. The overall production value is strong and Argento seems to have worked out the kinks from his previous efforts. However, it’s never clear to what end his voyeuristic fascinations are all about. The protagonist seems unaffected by much of the events she endures and the plot logic is curiously subverted. OPERA follows the same plot formula as Argento’s previous works. There is a murder mystery with enough question marks and foreshadowing that we almost start to believe that perhaps the hero is the killer- that there are deeper elements at work- only to come back to the surface with a practical explaination in a false ending, followed by the real ending. The sound design is well done and much of the film is in real-time sync with ongoing opera tracks that span the course of several scenes at a time. Also, Argento’s famed use of heavy metal music during the murder sequences- which I found to be completely unsuccessful- continues in this film. In the end, I don’t know whether to believe Argento is his own brand of inspired auteur, or just a lousy filmmaker. It’s this very dilemma that compels me to keep watching his films.
THE BIRD WITH THE CRYSTAL PLUMAGE (1970)
Dir: Dario Argento
This is Argento’s first feature film and the first of his “animal trilogy” (films with animal names in the title.) It is not a horror film, but an intriguing murder mystery that establishes many of Argento’s fascinations with the dark side of human nature. I was a bit surprised that it seemed a bit more polished than many of his later films, possessing the maturity of a straight up drama, rather than the low-budget feel of SUSPERIA or PHENOMENA. Very much along the lines of a Brian DePalma thriller.
CANDYMAN (1992)
Dir: Bernard Rose (IMMORTAL BELOVED, PAPERHOUSE)
Virginia Madsen (SIDEWAYS, SLAM DANCE) stars in this awkward, but not ineffective story about urban myths, societal fears and a touch of inner-city socio-politics. A very Wes Craven-esque (A NIGHTMARE ON ELM STREET, THE PEOPLE UNDER THE STAIRS) style film that explores the nature of reality vs. perception. Features my personal favorite horror theme: Is there really something supernatural going on, or are we merely witnessing the point-of-view of someone’s decent into madness? If the results are the same, does it matter?? Musical score by Phillip Glass
HAUNTED (1995)
Dir: Lewis Gilbert (EDUCATING RITA, MOONRAKER)
Aidan Quinn (IN DREAMS, FRANKENSTEIN, A HANDMAID’S TALE) and Kate Beckinsale (UNDERWORLD, VAN HELSING) star in this modern romantic ghost story. Very much like Alejandro Amenábar’s THE OTHERS (2001), the film sustains a good amount of intrigue as a ghost de-bunker comes face to face with his own fears, with some great twists at the end. Nice themes about personal denial and destiny. The film falters a bit toward the end as it tries to portray supernatural events visually, rather than through some other mode of reference. All in all an ok flick, if not a bit Hallmark-Hall-of-Fame-ish.
DARKNESS (2004)
Dir: Jaume Balaguero (FRAGILE, THE NAMELESS)
Anna Paquin (X-MEN, THE PIANO Oscar winner) stars in this creepy and suspenseful tale of demons, witches and unholy destiny. Reminiscent of ROSEMARY”S BABY or THE OMEN, the film is a bit predictable and comes with the standard lightening-quick editing of vague computer FX that are too expensive to have on screen for very long. A nice mystery and the “secret cult” motif is very creepy. Not a great film, but well acted and directed and worthy as a rental with a few other B-grades.
BOOGEYMAN (2005)
Dir: Steven T. Kay (GET CARTER, THE LAST TIME I COMMITTED SUICIDE)
Well, the trailer for this was so compelling- a small boy hides under the covers during a storm and the shapes in his room he imagines as monsters actually begin to move! Unfortunately, the scene from the trailer was the best part of the film. I do give the story credit for trying to hold true to a concept- facing up to inner fears- but alas, no go. The first act was kind of fading fast, but act 2 shows promise as our tormented hero is advised by his shrink to stay one night in the old house where he grew up and face his fears. The film starts to become intriguing here. By act 3, things turn trippy and for a moment, become quite interesting. Shades of IDENTITY or Lynch’s LOST HIGHWAY start to surface and we start to question everything. Unfortunately, the end let’s us down with “tell don’t show” CGI visual schtick that undermines all else. Very anti-climactic. The most compelling element of the film is we never know until the very end whether or not the hero character is imagining things or not. We wonder if perhaps he is the murderer? Similar here to CANDYMAN. I love the “face your fear” HEART OF DARKNESS angle, but I had a feeling they would blow the end and they sure did. Also pretty low budget and characters are un-even. Score is ok.
DAWN OF THE DEAD (2005 remake)
Dir: Zach Snyder
Remake of the classic George A. Romero film of 1978, not as good or nearly as satirical, but had all the right elements and could have been. Strong first half but the plausibility meter goes awry towards the end. First outing for director Snyder. Ving Rhames gives a strong performance. The writers made a major critical flaw in the script by explaining the zombie phenomenon as “a virus” - thus destroying the metaphysical intrigue of the original DEAD series and nullifying all the subsequent existential themes. So this film is unfortunately rendered a spooky, but mindless actioner. If you want a “Virus” zombie film, rent director Danny Boyle’s 28 DAYS LATER (2003) which was quite good.
ALIEN VS. PREDATOR (2005)
Dir: Paul W.S. Anderson (RESIDENT EVIL, EVENT HORIZON, MORTAL KOMBAT)
Not the horror film of ALIEN or the action epic of ALIENS. This flick was basically a high-tech sci-fi thriller. It was slick and stupid with nice special FX and zero character. Dan O’Bannon, who made the first ALIEN, wrote the script (huh!?). Great score by Harold Kloser. I didn’t hate the film, but I wouldn’t recommend it either. Perhaps a “guys night” rental with lots of beer and no expectations (and DOG SOLDIERS!)
DOMINION: PREQUEL TO THE EXORCIST (2004)
Dir: Paul Shrader (FOREVER MINE, AFFLICTION)
This was the first film on my research list this year and it was just released on DVD in time for the Halloween rental rush. Famed screenwriter Paul Shrader (Martin Scorcese’s TAXI DRIVER, RAGING BULL, THE LAST TEMPTATION OF CHRIST, BRINGING OUT THE DEAD) takes on this somewhat doomed production of the story that leads up to the original THE EXORCIST. The story always partially existed in the book by William Peter Blatty and despite some other lackluster sequels, never made it to the big screen. John Frankenheimer was slated to direct before he fell ill and was replaced by Shrader. The studio wanted a horror flick that bled off the fame of the original blockbuster and some great people were thrown at it, including legendary cinematographer Vitorrio Storraro. The script was co-penned by William Wisher (TERMINATOR 2: JUDGEMENT DAY) of James Cameron’s camp. Well, as Shrader speaks in the director’s commentary on the DVD, their approach to the film pretty much killed the horror element, which was fine with him because he was more interested in the character drama. The film has great heart and really good conceptual merit, but the filmmaking is quite lackluster. However, compared with the bulk of the purely-visual “horror” films out these days, this film was quite refreshing. Unfortunately, DOMINION has the look and feel of a TV movie-of-the-week and Storraro’s lighting is overly theatrical and strange to say the least. The visual effects are really bad. The musical score is a hodge-podge of different guest musicians, including an experimental heavy-metal band Shrader’s teenage son discovered. Not the most successful movie-making here, but the lead performance by Stellan Skarsgaard is quite good (another Swedish actor- as with Max Von Sydow in William Friedkin’s original THE EXORCIST.) Similar to THE EXORCIST or Shayamalan’s recent SIGNS, the story centers on one man’s guilt-ridden journey back to faith. The original THE EXORCIST movie left a lot of question marks as to the tortured past of Father Merrin and what he found in the African desert- the demon that followed him and became the bane of his life. This film portrays that story within the assertion that evil exists and is not a condition of man, but a pre-existing condition that man must suffer. The intellectual conflict between Father Merrin and his younger protégé, Father Francis, characterizes the struggle between guilt and faith among Christian believers. The final emergence of the demon works less as the film’s center and more as a device symbolizing Merrin’s final inner conflict. There is some good existential dialogue in the film that is refreshingly well rooted in its characters. The studio took one look at Shrader’s completed film and shelved it because they knew it would not appeal to any box office. They then proceeded to make the entire movie again, this time with action director Renny Harlin (DIE HARD 2, THE LONG KISS GOODNIGHT) for a more “commercial” version. This was the version given all the marketing push. Critics universally agreed Harlin’s film was worthless and not nearly as interesting as Shrader’s more intellectual, if not somewhat less cinematic piece. Roger Ebert gave DOMINION some praise for having depth and at least giving an earnest effort. I recommend this if you are sincerely interested in the underlying themes of THE EXORCIST and issues of good vs. evil in a religious context, but not if you’re looking for a slick movie going experience.
HOUSE OF WAX (1953 original)
Dir: Andre De Toth (SPRINGFIELD RIFLE, THE BOUNTY HUNTER)
Halloween wouldn’t be the same without at least one Vincent Price classic. Although I am a much bigger fan of THE PIT AND THE PENDULUM(1961) and THE FALL OF THE HOUSE OF USHER(1960) by Roger Corman, this film was quite fun. The dramatic element was a bit flattened because we know from the beginning who the killer is and there’s never really any mystery to the story. Price is his usual macabre, obsessed self in this story of a tortured sculptor gone insane who uses real corpses to make his wax museum. This film is considered the most successful 3-D film of all time and although there are some hokey finger-in-the-camera moments, doesn’t really play up the 3-D factor all that much thankfully. The score is elegant and the production value nice. There’s nothing super about this film except that it reminds us of a day when horror films and cinema in general were very different than today- where just a dark or ghoulish idea was enough to drive a story, without any need for visual trend setting. The DVD I viewed was extremely well mastered and featured on side-2 the please-do-not-even-consider-watching-ever sequel: MYSTERY OF THE WAX MUSEUM.
TOOLBOX MURDERS
Dir: Tobe Hooper (TEXAS CHAINSAW, POLTERGEIST, INVADERS FROM MARS)
Pretty much sucked although the last act had a compelling mystery with a pretty diabolical end. Honestly, the film would have worked without the slasher crap. The creepy ending made it clear that the film had a compelling satirical premise, but unfortunately emerged too late to deliver much. The story should have centered this premise, rather than playing up the “slasher” element- which was not scary at all and came aacross rather juvenile. I liked that the entire film was basically ripping on Hollywood shallowness (perhaps a guilty pleasure for Hooper after being in the industry for some 30 years?) Beyond this, I can’t really understand what Hooper was up to with this flick, it’s a far cry from CHAINSAW or POLTERGEIST to be sure. Even his remake of INVADERS FROM MARS, as awkward and clunky as it was, had more production value (i.e. “budget”) and had the excuse of being a remake, whereas as TOOLBOX is just downright C-grade filmmaking. Certain motifs in the film paralleled CANDYMAN and DARKNESS, both of which were better flicks. Forward to the last half-hour if you bother at all.
MARY SHELLEY'S FRANKENSTEIN (1994)
Dir: Kenneth Branaugh (HENRY V, MUCH ADO ABOUT NOTHING)
As the late-great Tony Amoroso put it: “FRANCIS FRAUD CRAPPOLA’S: CRAPENSTEIN” - and I certainly agree. The “Frankenstein” story is such a timeless and important fable, but this telling dumbs it down to a 3rd or 4th grade level. The melodrama seeks to create a grand period piece classic, but instead, short-circuits the thematic urgency of the story. As loud and poetic as it was, I would have much preferred a more stripped down and existential treatment. The themes of obsession, compassion and ethics were pushed aside for more of a surface level morality play. Helena Bonham Carter was quite good, as was Robert DeNiro as “the monster.” The score was a bit relentless and could have been used more sparingly. I would only recommend this movie if another, better version of Frankenstein wasn’t available. I saw the original black & white Boris Karloff version re-master a few years ago and didn’t care too much for the film as much as the story. Perhaps skip the movies and read the book instead. There are a few recent movie versions out, including one executive produced by Martin Scorcese, but I have not seen them as yet.
FALLEN (1998)
Dir: Gregory Hoblit (TV’s NYPD Blue, L.A. Law, Hill Street Blues)
I finally caught up with this one. Denzel Washington stars as a hero cop who stumbles into demonic goings-on that change his life forever. There are some nice ideas about demonic possession and a secret war between angels and demons on Earth, but they never get off the ground. The film brushes against a classic horror theme of “heightened knowledge that one can never escape from once exposed” which was a favorite of Hitchcock and is in the spine of films like THE MATRIX (“…choose one: the red pill or the blue pill…”). The drama is intriguing, but ultimately the supernatural element is just sort of a device, rather than the conceptual focus of the film, making this more of a thriller than a horror piece. The end gets mired in silly logic and peters out. Hollywood can’t make a horror movie, it’s just isn’t going to happen. John Goodman co-stars as does James Gandolfini (The Sopranos) and Donald Sutherland. Musical score by Tan Dun is really great. Skip this one.
RESIDENT EVIL: APOCALYPSE (2005)
Dir: W.S. Anderson
Not a horror film at all and not nearly as fun as the first film. Certainly not “evil” or “apocalyptic.”
Somehow it manages to lose everything that made the first such drive-in fun. Basic hi-tech, sci-fi action that tried to riff on some of the dynamics of ESCAPE FROM NEW YORK and DAWN OF THE DEAD, but in no way that worked. The fight choreography is non-existent. I fart better stories in my sleep.
BLADE: TRINITY (2004)
Dir: David S. Goyer (screenwriter of BLADE and BLADE 2)
Not a horror film and not worth seeing. Whereas the first two BLADE flicks were really cool gothic action pics, this one is just plain stupid. So stupid in fact, that Wesley Snipes sued the production company for breach of contract. Even the fight choreography sucked. Goyer blew it by switching to directing here. Skip this one entirely.
|
