Genre fans can be notoriously critical. A somewhat ironic statement I know, but true none the less. I am in awe of people who can create a film(s) being their vision and put it out there at the mercy of public opinion but more dauntingly, the opinion of their peers. Fortunately for us horror filmmakers tend to be a brave breed. Thankfully I find the horror community to be a fairly understanding bunch. They can appreciate the effort and find the honesty of films shining through in spite of poor effects, limited budgets, no name actors etc. Perhaps the one exception to this is horror/comedy. We love our genre whole heartedly and don't appreciate it being disrespected. Any chance Tyler Perry will read this?
Most horror films have an element of comedy to them, whether intended or not. Some films do this balancing act beautifully, Return of The Living Dead, Re-Animator, and Evil Dead 2 are prime examples. Some I feel lean too far into comedy and don't satisfy horror fans who just want something on the lighter side but still genre. Some strive for pure horror but fall woefully short and become unintentional riot fests which we enjoy but lack the substance we desire. 2006's Behind The Mask The Rise of Leslie Vernon is a difficult one to categorize, but it's undeniably a great watch. While it can be argued it's not a"true" horror movie I wouldn't call it a horror/comedy either. Behind The Mask borders on being a mockumentary but a more apt description is that it is just a great film. It does exactly what we all want a movie to do, it draws you in and makes forget about everything else. Its a great escape and has garnered repeated viewings from myself ever since I discovered it.
The film stars Nathan Baesel as Lelise Vernon, an aspiring slasher who is planning his jump from small town legend to reality. Angela Goethals is an fledgling documentarian who Leslie has allowed "behind the scenes" to view and record his plans and processes. Scott Wilson (Walking Dead) and Robert Englund (needs no explanation) have roles in case you need more credibility to convince you to watch. The film is a great mix of humour and darkness with some 80's slasher nostalgia thrown in. The acting is well done and the story flows effortlessly. Clocking in around 90 minutes its not long before the twist of the ending is revealed and pure horror satisfaction is obtained. This is a great movie of all tastes of horror lovers and even non-horror lovers. Again it is just a very well done film and worthy of a watch. It has become one of my staples in my vast rotation of go to movies. It satisfies horror fans dark side of "Oh ya, that's how I would have done that too!" Just do me a favor and don't get caught taking notes.
What woman wouldn't love a quiet little getaway weekend with their girlfriends? Besides me, I mean. Sitting around, gossiping, reminiscing about the good old days, boozing it up. What would your ideal setting be? Cabin in the woods? Spa weekend at the local country club? Vegas? I think I'd be more inclined to go with the cabin. It's private, you can build fires and chill on the porch, maybe get in the hot tub. Of course, if you factor in horror movie logic, it does increase your chances of dying but doesn't that add to the fun of it all? No? Okay, maybe that's just me.
Five high school friends, Nancy (Jamie Bernadette), Daniela (Katie Carpenter), Gem (Gema Calero), Stephanie (Karishma Lakhani) and Annie (Sharron Calvin), set off for a girls weekend in the mountains. On the agenda, zip lining, kayaking and drinking. When they decide to go on an impromptu hike in the woods, they inadvertently awaken an evil spirit that sends them running for their lives. As they try to escape, they realize that they are only being led in circles. Can they survive or will an all girls weekend become a solo venture?
It's impossible to count the ways that this movie fails but I'm going to give it a try. First of all, the movie poster is utterly deceiving. There isn't a single point throughout the entire film that even comes close to what is depicted in the artwork. Next, the movie becomes completely preposterous the second Nancy joins the party. There is clearly some tension between her and the rest of the group and it's a direct contradiction to her character's attitude to think that she would spend the weekend with these "friends". I'm not talking about just a little dislike here either, these people literally fucking hate each other. I can't imagine there is a person out there that would take off on a weekend getaway with people they despise as much as they seem to. Also, as the group is enroute to their final destination, Daniela suddenly pulls the car over and decides they're all going for a hike in the woods... AND THE REST AGREE! On what planet does that happen?!? They aren't properly dressed for the weather, they have no supplies and someone mentioned lunch earlier and they never ate... NO! It's unfathomable, unrealistic and frankly quite laughable to believe that these women would take off into the woods like that. What else... let's see... oh yeah, for what I'm assuming can only be dramatic purposes, writer/director Lou Simon tosses in a frost bite component that it altogether absurd. In calm winds, a person must be exposed to -22° for a prolonged amount of time to even show slight signs of frost bite. Viewers are expected to believe that it's THAT cold out when you're cast is running around the woods in light jackets and slashed up skinny jeans.
There's no set up to thoroughly explain what's going on. The mere mention and brief talk of a curse is not enough backstory to give the plot even a slight nudge. The acting is terrible. The dialogue is laughable. There is zero character development which makes liking any of them impossible. Normally, I can watch an entire film and eventually find some redeeming qualities but All Girls Weekend has none. At the least it's a waste of 90 minutes. At the most, it makes you question why you even bother watching indie films in the first place.
Yesterday I watched a film that made me question why I watch indie films. Today I watched one that reminds me. Of course I guess you can say it's a crap shoot with any movie, really. Personally, I hated The Revenant but it was nominated for a ton of Oscars. Movies are like anything else in that they are open for interpretation. What one person loves, another may hate but opinions are what makes the world go round. If we were all just a bunch of like minded simpletons there would be no discussions or debates or silly fights about what movie to watch or which way the toilet paper goes on the roller (it's over BTW). Life would be boring.
The Shelter follows Thomas (Michael Paré) as he struggles to deal with the death of his wife Maryam (Gayle James) and their unborn daughter years earlier. When he finds the door of a seemingly abandoned house wide open, he decides to settle in for the night. After raiding the fridge and having a nice bath, he sits down to watch some TV and drifts off to sleep. Things get confusing for him when he wakes up to discover a gun in his lap and soon discovers that the house will not let him leave.
The strength of an actor is measured by how well they carry a film and I have to say Paré is brilliantly cast in the role of Thomas. He brings something to the character that director John Fallon would be hard pressed to find in anyone else. In this role, he is the epitome of a tortured soul in search of any kind of redemption he can find, usually in the bottom of a bottle. Paré spends most of the film alone, only being joined by costars in the beginning and during flashbacks inserted throughout the film. So when you hear someone say, "he carries the film", he LITERALLY carries the film from beginning to end.
There is no easy way to explain the parts of the film that I like and/or dislike without giving away too much. What I can say is that The Shelter is what I would call an interpretive film, meaning viewers will likely have differing opinions on what it's actually about. Fallon doesn't do any hand holding here. He lays out a story and leaves it to his audience to decide what is actually happening. At times, it can seem a little confusing and I can see some people needing to let it marinate for a while before forming an opinion. Undoubtedly, you will either love it or hate it. There is no in between. It's a slow burn that seems to go on for much longer than it's 75 minute run time but I suspect true fans of the psychological thrillers will enjoy it. It's a frighteningly beautiful tale that will leave you breathless.
Horror and genre fans thrive on the anticipation of a film we haven't seen yet. The promise of a film terrifying us, making us squirm or thrilling us enough to earn it a spot among our favorites. Unfortunately we also thrive on the fact that we have to sit through many less than quality films in our search for satisfaction. As a result we depend on the word of friends , blogs, reviews to help us find that uncovered gem. For this reason I think The ABC's of Death, original (2013) and the sequel (2014) are worth a view.
I just recently watched the ABC's of Death 2, I think I enjoyed it more than the first. While I don't consider either film to be among my favorites I believe there is something for every horror fan in both. For those of you who haven't seen either they are unique. The beauty of them is they are anthology style. I enjoy anthology style horror films. Trick or Treat, Creepshow one and two are among my favorites. The ABC's of Death films take that idea to the next level and matches a story to every letter of the alaphabet. Rather than just three or four stories , these films offer up twenty six a piece. With so many short stories, even if you aren't enjoying the current one its just a short matter of time till the next. In that regard I find them satisfying to watch because of the quick set-ups and payoffs. With twenty six per film, and each film clocking in around two hours long, each story is eager to please. Even the ones I didn't really enjoy still kept me engaged while I wondered how they were going to relate to the specific letter they were on. Its unique style offers incredible freedom to the individual directors to go ahead skip appetizers and the main course, lets get to desert!
While the first film left me cringing a little more I still found the second more enjoyable. That being said I would recommend watching the original first. The second was a little more tongue in cheek, better quality directors (Soska sisters, Vincenzo Natali etc.) Be forewarned, there were a few moments that are obviously going to elicit reactions from the viewer at any cost. This stands for both movies. I found one story in particular fairly disgusting and not from a gore standpoint. With twenty-six stories per film, I'm sure certain directors had a goal of standing out, either positively or shockingly. I want to remain clear about these movies though. Not every horror fan is going to love them start to finish. This remains a key selling feature of these films, something for everyone. I liked a lot less of the first and a lot more of the second. Especially with the second I found each reveal of the word at the end of each story to be humorous, clever and sometimes quite poignant. Overall, I would recommend watching, especially if you are seasoned horror lover. "Twenty-six directors, twenty-six ways to die." Who wouldn't love the anticipation of watching that?
After the success of films like The Blair Witch and Paranormal Activity, we were bombarded with found footage films. Scream hit the scene and suddenly slashers were all the rage again. Now, after films like VHS picking up where the greats (Tales from the Crypt, Creepshow, etc) left off years ago, anthologies are making a comeback. Now, I'm not a big fan of anthologies, especially when they're combined together to form a "story", simply because it becomes hard to stitch them all together where they all connect properly.
Patient Seven centers around Dr. Marcus (Michael Ironside), a renowned psychiatrist who has selected 6 severe mentally ill and dangerous patients from the Spring Valley Mental Hospital to interview as part of research for his new book. As Dr. Marcus interviews each patient, one by one the horrors they have committed begin to unfold. However, Dr. Marcus soon learns that there is one patient who ties them all together.
So I guess if you're going to do an anthology, this is an appropriate way to do it. Each segment is told by a different patient and while drastically different, still connect to the story surrounding them. The individual shorts are pretty phenomenal and range from horror to dark comedy. While none are particularly scary, they effects are well done and the acting is pretty spot on; but I would expect nothing less from such a star studded cast. Ironside has been a favorite of mine since he sent me away from the drive in scared and crying after watching him make someone's head explode in Scanners. His sideways grin and little giggle gives me chills every time. Alfie Allen (Game of Thrones) stars in the segment The Body" and is no less than brilliant.
Any filmmaker that can tell a complete story in less than fifteen minutes will always get kudos from me and I give a lot of kudos to each of one involved here. It would be difficult for me to choose a favorite from the bunch as they are all equally stunning in production, effects and acting. The story that pulls them all together, however, is a bit predictable and the twist at the end isn't anything we haven't seen before but that doesn't take anything away from the overall film. It's enjoyable and I would recommend it to other horror fans but suggest that they don't go into it looking for anything groundbreaking. Give it a watch then come back and let me know what you think!
I have to admit that I'm not the biggest fan of fantasy horror. Fairies and Goblins and things of that nature just don't draw my attention. Not that I haven't seen some great fantasy horror. Peter Dukes' short A Goblin's Tale is one of the most recent ones I've watched and enjoyed. It takes a pretty well rounded team to create a successful fantasy horror film. The execution of this type of film has to be pretty much flawless (in my opinion) and I think that's what always turns me away. It's hard to find a group of filmmakers that are committed to seeing that the color, tone and pacing of the film stays consistent throughout.
Mary Ann (Emily Stride), a troubled young woman, has been tormented her whole life by dreams of a sinister figure called the Red King and his morbid fairytale kingdom. Following the death of her father, Mary Ann returns to her family home where she recalls the childhood stories of the Red King and Alice from 'Alice's Adventures in Wonderland' that her father once read to her. Haunting events and suppressed memories propel Mary Ann through the dark corridors of her parental home into the realms of her nightmares where she must finally confront the Red King and gain closure to her scarred past.
As is the case with most Indie films, the cast here is relatively unknown. That's sometimes a good thing and sometimes a bad thing. In this case I'd say it was a great thing. Director Navin Dev managed to assemble a cast of unknowns that most assuredly will become very well known faces in the Indie horror scene. Stride gives a flawless performance as the troubled lead. Going one step further, I was completely enamored with young Alice, played by Etalia Turnbull. You'd never guess this was her one and only film. Silvana Maimone, the most seasoned actor the bunch, is extremely convincing as the sometimes sane mother of Mary Ann. She goes from zero to psychotic bitch quicker than me on a bad day.
Red Kingdom Rising is beautifully shot and the use of color that's added gives it a believable fairytale feel. There are so many places in this film where a lot of directors would've lost control. With all the transitions from the dream world back to reality, I can see where that would happen but Dev never once let's the enormity of it all overwhelm him. They're smooth and clever and you will be asking yourself, "is this the real world or the dream world?" Dev also creates some rather brilliant dialogue that effortlessly draws the viewer in. It's not a film that you can walk in and out of. You have to pay attention. The dialogue is full of riddles and cryptic talk that if you're not watching, you're lost. BUT, don't let that steer you away, it's worth the 73 minutes you'll invest. I honestly can't find one thing wrong with this film... I know, shocking isn't it? It's a twistedly beautiful film that every fantasy horror fan should watch. I look forward to seeing more from Dev and his team.
Nothing impresses me more than someone who proves they're not just a "one hit wonder". I became a fan of Adam Green after seeing his "Old School American Horror" Hatchet. I've also had Joel David Moore on my radar since Dodgeball. He's such a great actor and he has that whole sexy geek thing going for him. I'm thrilled to see the depth of his talent come to the surface.
Spiral centers around Mason (Moore) a reclusive telemarketer with a knack for painting. Every day life for him is depressing. He's an outcast at work who is prone to bursting into panic attacks that end with 4 a.m. phone calls to his only friend Berkeley (Zachary Levi). When he meets Amber (Amber Tamblyn), a cute, quirky coworker, Mason slowly starts to open up about his past. But as Amber digs deeper and deeper into her new friend's history she realizes just how disturbed Mason is.
I will do my best NOT to give away any plot points of this film as discovering them while watching is kind of like a journey you have to make on your own. Kind of like a right of passage. Miss them and you won't know what's going on. Know them ahead of time and it spoils the whole story. What I can tell you is that writers Jeremy Danial Boreing and Moore have created a film that can easily be compared to the likes of Alfred Hitchcock and Roman Polanski. The tension in Spiral starts from the opening scene and continues throughout the entire story. No matter how much you THINK you've seen this story before, think again. No element of this story overstays it's welcome. It is unusual, creative and provocative.
The biggest surprise for me was the performance by Moore. His character is developed with such love and empathy that by the end, you're torn between loving him or being horrified by his actions and Moore pulls it off with perfection. In fact, every one of the main characters does a terrific job. Tamblyn is great as the vivacious, bi-polar love interest. Some viewers may not like that her character wasn't explored deeper but I think in terms of story progression it had to be done that way. Levi portrays Berkeley who in some ways is the big brother type to Mason and in other ways he's more of an enabler. His motives for keeping such a closed off person as a friend are never quite clear. Is he using Mason to keep himself from being alone or does he really care about what happens to him?
The cinematography is great as well with the back drop of rainy Portland, Oregon enhancing the dark mood of the film. While some might find Spiral a little slow going, I personally enjoyed everything about it and would definitely recommend it to others. If you're looking for tons of gore or an in your face horror, I'd suggest a viewing of Hatchet instead. This is more of an 80 minute mind fuck. Is what your seeing real or fake? Did he or didn't he? Spiral is a new spin on an old twist. ENJOY!!
