?

Log in

 

The Review Crew

About Recent Entries

The Mist - 3/5 Apr. 24th, 2008 @ 01:18 am
mythandra

I don't want to give anything away in case you're interested in watching this one.  Thomas Jane can't act his way out of a wet paper bag but he's surrounded by good writing and characters that evoke strong emotional responses and draw in the viewer.  I'm not saying you'll like all the characters, I'm saying that some will evoke strong emotional responses.  What starts out as a supernatural thriller rather quickly turns into a horror movie.  I was a little disappointed at the B horror movie, "let's go investigate" scenes which eventually led to "oh shit, we're fucked" scenes where, instead of running, people just stood around and gaped at their imminent demise.  I think that what you're supposed to get out of the scene is that they're paralyzed with fear.  They can't run because they've completely locked up at the incomprehensible grotesqueness before them -- only the actors fail to convey the necessary primal terror and instead portray a kind of idiotic and slothful panic.  Regardless, if you liked Dagon, I think you'll like this one.  It's clearly Stephen King flavored but it's good King; bear that in mind.  You're probably not going to declare this your most favorite-est movie of all times, ever but I think it's a movie that everyone should see.  The Mist does drop gore and body parts intermittently but it's nowhere near as serious an offender as the SAW series, High Tension, or Hostel.  Put another way, if you're at all squeamish, at the very least bring someone with you to tell you when the nasty parts are over. 


Cloverfield - 5/5 stars Jan. 19th, 2008 @ 01:43 am
mythandra
This movie is a brilliant piece of cinema, an instant classic.  I can't really give you a plot summary or even an introduction without spoiling some surprises.  What I will say is that this movie revolves around a handful of people caught in New York during a crisis.  It's a disaster movie from the standpoint of a recovered home video camera -- which brings me to a warning.  If you do not like watching home videos, do not bother with this movie.  The cinematography involves exactly what you could expect from the filming of a crisis with a home video camera.  To be honest, if you step back away from the movie and objectively consider the cinematography, you'll realize that for all the helter-skelter wobbly shots, the movie is largely well framed and focused.  Car-sickness inducing motion is used judiciously to punctuate situations where the characters are appropriately panicked (but it does exist so bring the dramamine).  Since this is a home video, you don't really have time to grow any meaningful attchments to the characters.  You, the viewer, are dropped into their lives at the beginning of the tape and watch as a going-away party unfolds and takes a sudden turn for the worse.  I'll be honest, the characters really come off as a bunch of Chads and Trixies but I think that's the beauty of it.  These people could be anyone, anywhere.  They could be the friends of a friend, your neighbor, or even just some people you walked past on your way in to work this morning.  These people could be anyone.  When you put it all together, you arrive at a very voyeuristic experience -- and whether or not these people are a bunch of Chads and Trixies, they do not deserve the shit that happens to them.  The Cloverfield experience is much less War of the Worlds and much more The Blair Witch Project.  My only real criticism is that the opening sequence may seem excessively protracted for some viewers.  In it's defense, what you have to understand is that the opening sequence is necessary to introduce the audience to the cast of characters; once the action starts, there is very little time to develop interpersonal relationships.  Considering what happens, I think that seeing the movie at a theater would add to one's enjoyment of the movie even if you wait until it hits the cheap show.

Hellraiser: Hellworld Jun. 3rd, 2007 @ 10:49 pm
mythandra
Yeah, this movie didn't get any better.  It started out just fine with allusions to some kind of obsession with an "internet game", Hellworld, but then it devolved into something wholly formulaic.  Hallucinations are fine to drive home a creep factor but when they're the meat and potatoes of your movie, something needs to change.  The ending?  The ending was a complete digression from Hellraiser canon by actually allowing someone to get away.  I'm sorely tempted to watch the final chapter in the Hellraiser series (3 movies is a trilogy so would 8 be an octology?) tonight.  Still, the movie deserved an NC-17 for gratuituous sex scenes that were thoroughly enjoyed by this reviewer.

Heh Jun. 3rd, 2007 @ 09:55 pm
mythandra
So I'm watching Hellraiser:Hellworld.  This movie can be summarized as "shitty soft-core goth porn."  Mildly amusing but I think that's more due to the rum and coke I'm drinking than anything else.

Masters of Horror: Imprint Mar. 5th, 2007 @ 11:44 pm
mythandra
I just finished watching 63 gut wrenching minutes of the most disturbing horror movie I've ever seen.  The Netflix synopsys of the movie reads thus: "Called 'one of the most unsettling horror directors alive' by the New York Daily News, Takashi Miike lives up to that reputation with this disturbing shocker.  An American journalist (Billy Drago) is searching for a prostitute in 19th century Japan; what he flinds instead is a deformed courtesan with a tale of unspeakable cruelty.  Based on a Japanese horror novel, this presentation is the first uncensored version to be available in America."

"Unspeakable cruelty" does not even begin to scratch the surface of how hellishly warped this movie is.  Unless you like your horror Texas Chainsaw Massacre styel, don't even consider watching this one.  Even if you do, I'm still not going to endorse it.  It could very well be the most upsetting movie I've ever seen. 

Seriously.  I'm quite nauseaous right now.
Other entries
Top of Page Powered by LiveJournal.com