The Horror Hotel

News : Independent Short - The Prospectors Curse (2012)

2012-02-26T02:23:00.002-08:00

Hi friends.

I'm always up for some new horror shorts, especially since the internet has reduced my attention span to that of a goldfish.

With this is mind, I wanted to take the opportunity to draw your attention to a new little number that will be coming our way very soon. This one sounds like a lot of fun. To be honest, I've only really discovered shorts these past few years, and have came to love them for what they are. In fact, they often surpass their full-length peers in both quality and content. Just look at DEUS IRAE to see how damned good the format can be.

As you'll see below, this one sounds like quite the ride. A western themed ditty, with stolen gold, curses and a vengeful spook? Good creepy laughs all around! I'm in.

I'll be reviewing the film on release, so stay tuned. Lets hope its a good 'un.

And here be the press release.....

The Prospector’s Curse

A western-themed horror film entitled “The Prospector’s Curse” has wrapped production near the remote town of Ponty Pool, Ontario. Set during the Klondike Gold Rush of the 1890’s, the darkly comedic short is Written and Directed by Josh Heisie (‘Mail Order Bride’), Produced by Bruno Marino (‘Anything Goes’) and is currently in Post Production in Toronto, Canada.
The talent lineup for “The Prospector’s Curse” includes David Roberts (‘Curious and Unusual Deaths’), Johnny Quinn (‘Mind’s Eye: The Series’), Amanda Ives (‘I Hate Toronto: A Love Story’) and Robert Nolan (‘Worm’).
Rounding out the creative team are Director of Photography Michael Jari Davidson (‘SICK’), and Special Effects Makeup Artist Carlos Henriques (‘Red: Werewolf Hunter’) of The Butcher Shop.

Tagline

There’s blood in them there hills!

Logline

The vengeful corpse of an old prospector haunts two gold thieves as they struggle for salvation.

Synopsis

Theodore “Tubby” Ellsworth and Jack smith are two criminals on the run, lost in the untamed wilderness. When they stumble across a mutilated Prospector, dying on Indian ground, they promise to give him a Christian burial. The fugitives break their oath and steal the old man’s gold…but that night, the Prospector’s corpse returns to make them pay!

Related Web Pages

Facebook Fan Page
http://www.facebook.com/pages/The-Prospectors-Curse/141337662650150
Josh Heisie             www.joshheisie.com
Bruno Marino            http://www.imdb.com/name/nm3012041/
Michael Jari Davidson     http://www.michaeljaridavidson.com/
Carlos Henriques         http://www.thebutchershop.ca/
Dave Roberts             http://www.imdb.com/name/nm3734080/
Johnny Quinn             http://www.imdb.com/name/nm4144359/
Robert Nolan            http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0634349/
Amanda Ives             http://www.imdb.com/name/nm4424849/

Review : The Woman in Black (2012)

2012-02-21T05:12:00.001-08:00

Director:

James Watkins

Writers:

Susan Hill (novel), Jane Goldman (screenplay)

Stars:

Daniel Radcliffe, Janet McTeer and Ciarán Hinds

A young lawyer travels to a remote village where he discovers the vengeful ghost of a scorned woman is terrorizing the locals.

Walking into this, the second screen adaptation of Susan Hill's wonderful THE WOMAN IN BLACK, I was a roiling cocktail of mixed emotions. I love the 1989 TV version with a passion. I believe it to be one of the most chilling and effective ghost stories ever put to screen, and have rarely seen its equal, on the small screen or the large. So I was understandably worried about the very real threat of a big budget remake. Experience has taught me that when it comes to classic ghost stories, big budgets and subtlety rarely compliment each other.

On the other hand, this is the fourth release from the newly re-birthed Hammer Studios, and anyone who reads my incessant ramblings will know that I have a lifelong, and unquenchable love for Hammer. That film studio is the image and the soundtrack to my childhood nightmares, and has become a comfort to the older, slightly doddering version that stands before you now. Hammers early Horror output is much like a group of family members who's memory I just cant let go of. Nor do I want to.

So far, the re-emergence of Hammer has produced a mixed bag of goodies. Their first release, WAKE WOOD, inspired me to write my first ever review, (you can read the review here), and to build this here Horror Hotel, as it now exists, . WAKE WOOD was a refreshingly old school tale that managed in many ways to capture a number of staples of the Hammer classics, and bring them into a modern environ. It was a fine start, though it was still some distance from the lush grandeur of HORROR OF DRACULA, THE GORGON, CURSE OF FRANKENSTEIN et all...

The next two films had less of an impact on me. THE RESIDENT was a generic, pointless and bland retread of overly familiar Hollywood 'thriller' tropes, and didn't impress me, (or anyone in the western hemisphere), in the slightest, yet their take on John Ajvide Lindqvist's stunning novel, LET THE RIGHT ONE IN, titled somewhat redundantly LET ME IN was absolutely solid. Problem was, it had been done before, and better, only a few years previous, in the Swedish masterpiece, titled (quite correctly), LET THE RIGHT ONE IN. It rendered the film somewhat null and void to anyone other than those strange beings who walk among us, believing every film worth seeing must be in spoken English, and must be filmed in America. No matter how good it was, it had no purpose to those who could read above a fourth grade level.

THE WOMAN IN BLACK, on the other hand, was a story that felt custom built for 'The studio That Dripped Blood'. It covered all the landmarks. Desolate town, off-kilter townsfolk, an old dark house, a dark spectre of evil looming over a small community, and last but certainly not least, it was a period piece. Could this be the return of traditional, classic Hammer? Excitement and apprehension are strange bedfellows, so it was with queasiness of tummy and steeliness of resolve that I braved the cinema to take on this new adaptation of the truly haunting tale. I'm glad I did. I enjoyed the film, in some ways even loved it, but not unreservedly.....

Right off the bat, its very clear that director James Watkins (EDEN LAKE) is hellbent on recreating the glory days of Hammer that so many of us cherish. The film looks absolutely beautiful from frame one. I've rarely seen a film that so perfectly captures the Technicolour glory of the classics as this one. In all the years between Hammers fall and recent resurrection, only Tim Burton's SLEEPY HOLLOW pulled off this trick with real success. Unlike Burton's film though, THE WOMAN IN BLACK has its visuals grounded in murky, muddy reality, and like the classics, much is shot on location, adding to its uniquely British flavour, and removing it from Burton's over-abundance of the fantastical. The film is awash in stunning imagery, from the chilly, lived in, old world town that's held under the titular 'Womans' spell, to the causeway that crosses vast expanses of fog enshrouded marshes, and finally to the 'old dark house' itself, Eel Marsh Manor...perhaps the most beautifully over-designed haunted mansion ever put to screen. Rivalling the great set designs of THE GORGON, (review here ) and DRACULA : PRINCE OF DARKNESS is its Gothic splendour. With its rooms full of glass-eyed dolls, dark purple draperies, blood red corridors and dark, secret spaces; the huge, decrepit manor is the epitome of a classic haunted locale. Peter Cushing, Christopher Lee, and yes, Vincent Price, (in his Corman/Poe era), could happily haunt these endless shadowy hallways, (were it not for the house's resident spectre, of course).

The only way THE WOMAN IN BLACK could feel more like traditional Hammer were if it was filmed in Technicolour, and had James Bernard doing the score. I wish it had both these attributes, I really do. At any rate, to see so traditional and old-fashioned a Horror movie in modern cinema's, is indeed enough to make any classic-lovers heart sing. And mine sure did. The success of this film, thanks in large to its major player, Daniel Radcliffe, may also inspire a new, younger audience to discoever the classics, and that it something to be celebrated, surely.

And Radcliffe is surprisingly good here. I had my doubts about the guy in this role. I loved him as Harry Potter, of course, but that was a huge burden to carry into the rest of his adult career. For Eight films we've all watched him grow...from child, to teen, to man. Getting past the persona of Mr Potter is a massive fucking challenge. And I'm pleased as punch he managed to pull it off. The kids a national treasure after all. He's family, and we all want to see him do well, and thank Cthulthu, he does. Turns out Radcliffe is a very strong actor. He puts in a mature, pained and subtle performance that is never overshadowed by the beautiful visuals and locations that surround him. His character, Arthur Kipp, is the heart and soul of the tale, and it needed an actor with some clout, and an understanding of loss, and it got one. For some, he may seem a little young to be a father of a 4 year old, but in my shitty neighbourhood, having a kid at eighteen is considered positively geriatric, so it didn't phase me at all. Most will still see the ghost of Harry Potter behind Daniel's eyes, initially; but soon, you'll forget all about the 'boy who lived' and start worrying about 'the man who's in deep shit'. Taking on this role was a very wise move on Radcliffe's part, and its payed off. It should be noted that he spends huge portions of time alone and with no dialogue here, and he nails the mannerisms, sense of fear, and inherent courage, (or stupidity) that lies in the heart of Kipp. Good work, son. Good work.

The supporting cast don't get much of a look in, sadly; although what we do get is good stuff. Cairan Hinds is great as the kindly and haunted 'Daily' , and Janet McTeer, as his wife, makes the most of her few scenes to bring an extra chill to the already cold and clammy atmosphere that the film invokes. The villagers don't get anywhere near enough screen time, and it appears the film has been edited heavily for time, (lets hope we see an extended home version), but even so, that's in keeping with the Hammer tradition. If the villagers are not fully rounded characters, that's because the locations are characters in and of themselves, and alongside Radcliffe and 'The Woman', they take centre stage.

And what of the dark spectre herself? Well, she's still a pretty damn terrifying force. She's onscreen far more than she was in the TV version, but as with that adaptation, even when she's not shown, her presence is felt at all times. From the very first scene to the very last, her malice hangs over the story like a poisonous vapour. I've always held to the belief that she is the main inspiration for much of the J-Horror output we've seen in the last few decades. Sadako from RINGU, and that creepy gal from JU-ON owe a great debt to 'Jennet'. They share her unending need for vengeance, and the same sense of inevitable doom that permeates those tales, in ever present in Jennet's realm. She remains one of the most disturbing embodiments of evil yet put to paper, or screen. There are a few moments here that could have been handled with greater care, (her scream is nowhere near as nerve-shredding as seen in the earlier work) but overall, shes a pretty terrifying being. The previous movies version was often far scarier than what we get in this new film, but even so, she has some seriously hair-raising moments, and often had me cowering like a lil girl. Theres just something about Jennets nature that scares me. Always has, always will.

At ninety minutes, the film flies along, and Watkins deserves respect for managing to throw everything including the kitchen sink at the viewer, in such a short time. In fact, in one extended, dialogue-free scene that lasts for twenty minutes and is seriously frightening, he fills the screen with more scares, ghostly imagery and chills than most other ghost stories can muster in their entire run time. Great stuff. On the downside, the first half of the movie does have a number of 'jump-scares' which only cater to the A.D.D members of modern audiences, and cheapen the overall feel of suspense. Its a shame that the classic feel the film exudes couldn't be maintained throughout the entire show. The more 'modernised' scare tactics are really unnecessary and dilute the fear, (its final scene has nowhere near the impact or sense of tragedy that the original held).

THE WOMAN IN BLACK is akin to a haunted house in a fairground. Its colourful, short and extremely enjoyable while it lasts. Its an old fashioned ghost story with a wonderfully rich atmosphere, fine acting, and a demonic, relentless nightmare of a villian. While the film does have some very frightening moments, its much more of an atmosphere piece. Creepiness and foreboding are the order of the day. The power and terror that the original inspired in so many viewers simply can't be matched, but it doesn't need to be. Although it does have some really powerful scares, and Jennet herself is as disturbing an entity as always, this is a different type of film. This is a classic Hammer Horror, flaws and all. A colourful, exquisitely shot, and unabashedly old fashioned tale of the macabre. Its simply a wonderful story, well told. And for that, it must be seen by fans of the greats. I truly hope this is the first of many forays into the realms of 'Gothic, romantic Horror' for Hammer. I need more of this in my life.

Terrance Fisher would be proud....mostly.

8 Living Dolls out of 10

Editorial : A Brief History of Horror Gaming - Part 2

2012-02-20T02:27:00.002-08:00

A BRIEF HISTORY OF HORROR GAMING - PART 2

THE FALL OF TRADITIONAL SURVIVAL HORROR AND THE RISE OF ACTION BASED HORROR

For many, Survival Horror's descent from prominence was the equal of its rise. After the tidal wave of hits that pushed gaming in such exciting new directions, came the inevitable calm. The purity of intent that led developers to embrace the influence of Horror remained, yet like in its cinematic counterparts, Horror gaming was to become a much less cerebral affair and take on a more action oriented guise. RESIDENT EVIL 4 (2005), ditched many of the elements that made its predecessors so powerful. Gone were the pre rendered back grounds and the sparse encounters with lurching zombies and while the game retained plenty of what fans cherished about the originals, (limited inventory, strong gore), its focus was moving more towards action rather than suspense. The game featured more weapons, a far more precise aiming system and, whereas the original saw the player take on one or two enemies at a time, RE4 featured large crowds of death dealing enemies at any given time. The game was praised for its visual design and its massive crossover appeal, yet remained divisive among the core Survival Horror fans. Today, RE4 represents, for many, the point where traditional Survival Horror morphed into some new, and just as SILENT HILL followed suite with the original RE's template, so would SILENT HILL : HOMECOMING follow in this new direction. It’s argued that the more action Horror based games featured, the more compromised the emphasis on terror and dread became. And although this is often a very easily defendable stance, there are games that have challenged this thought line.

F.E.A.R

FEAR (2005) combined the fast paced shootouts of the first person actioner, with the eerie discordance of J-Horror, to create a product both exciting and unsettling. Its depth of story and keenly felt Horror themes were perfectly balanced with tense gunplay, creating perhaps the first true hybrid of Horror and Action gaming. It was soon followed by Sega's CONDEMNED: CRIMINAL ORIGINS (2006), which launched on the shiny new X-BOX 360, and was an instant hit, worldwide. CONDEMNED followed the,‘FEAR’, template and put its own spin on things. As a homicide detective, the player was required to investigate scenes of murder, and the reliance on gunplay was replaced with melee combat, adding to the sense of threat that its dank, filthy environments elicited. Sure, there were guns, but ammo was extremely sparse, (the guns contents were all the ammo you could hold). The influence of Survival Horror was again very prominent. And very welcome.

Another game of note that appeared the next year was Capcom's DEAD RISING, a title that raised a lot of eyebrows on release. For many it was a heaven sent work of art, and for many, it was symbolic of the direction Horror gaming was taking, and not in a good way. The game was set in a huge shopping mall during a zombie apocalypse, (sound familiar?) and placed the gamer amidst literally hundreds of our flesh eating pals at any one time. It looked beautiful, and there was never a game that featured more zombie slaughter and carnage. Almost every object in the mall could be used as a weapon to disembowel, behead and even ridicule your undead chums. Weapons ranged from the very effective, (chainsaws, mallets and lawnmowers), to completely useless, (bags of potato chips, magazines and plastic light sabers). It was a helluva lot of fun. Yet the games comic tone and lack of suspense was bemoaned by many. Fears abounded that the Survival Horror was becoming a parody of its once formidable self, but all fears that the genre was in freefall were soon cast aside, as the second golden age was soon to follow.

DEAD SPACE

2008 saw the release of two titles that pushed the element of fear, tension and Survival back into the forefront of gamer’s minds. And while vastly different in content, both games have garnered acclaim for pushing the envelope in bold new directions. DEAD SPACE took RE4's immersive game play to its logical next step. The full 3D world was still there, as was the action, but the reliance on suspense and fear elevated the title far above what had come before. DEAD SPACE blended elements of science fiction with familiar cinematic influences, (including ‘THE THING’ and ’ALIEN’), and used stunning lighting, and innovative sound design to bolster its scares. Once more, weaponry was sparse, fight or flight became a deadly choice, the tone was serious and the sense of danger was ever present. There have been few games before or since that transported a player so vividly into the world of Horror. It became an instant classic and re-affirmed the huge appetite for atmosphere over bombast within the gaming community. In the same year, players were treated to what has become one of the most popular online gaming experiences before or since, LEFT4DEAD.

LEFT 4 DEAD

Online gaming had been around for a long time before L4D sunk its teeth into us. Net based Multiplayer warfare was the new black, and in this fast paced competitive world where a gamer could hook up with others worldwide for short sharp blasts of action, it looked like the Survival genre would be forever relegated to ‘single player campaigns’. Then along came VALVE with their new take on online gaming. L4D put four players together in a world overrun by the mutated undead, and left them simply to get from point A to point B. The genius here was that it was impossible to survive the game without player teamwork. On single player, the game was bland and repetitive, yet online, with three others horror hungry buds, it became a fierce co-operative struggle for survival. Players had to protect each other, heal each other, and act as one, communicating online constantly to get more than a few feet. The antagonists were of the '28 Days Later' variety, charging at the hapless survivors with murder on their minds, allowing for frentic battles without ever losing sight of the fear factor. In another stroke of genius, the game utilised hardware that essentially acted as a 'Director'. The action onscreen was constantly changing, offering huge replay value and a sense of unpredictability that no other game could muster. On one play through, a lonely car park would be just that, and on another play through, the same scene would see you swarmed by the undead. If you were playing too well, and things were looking too easy for you and your chums, the games in-built A.I would soon put you in your place, and throw hell at you. In short, it was, and remains, brilliance. A Horror fans wet dream.

The genre was alive and well, and not even RESIDENT EVIL 5 (2009), could dampen the enthusiasm for fear. It was a critical success, but its action based game play was a huge let down for the fans of its forebears. That same year, we were gifted with two sequels in FEAR 2 and CONDEMNED 2 : BLOODSHOT, both maintaining the high level of tension that were the trademark of their predecessors, while pushing the envelope to include more in depth game play, upgraded graphics and a furthering of their original concepts. LEFT4DEAD 2, while basically the same game as the original, offered more death dealing weaponry and new maps to keep us gore hounds smiling until the next great title came along to blow our minds.

ALAN WAKE

That title was ALAN WAKE (2010). A game which for genre fans was a perfect storm of past, present and future. In ALAN WAKE, story and atmosphere was everything. Set in a world caught somewhere between TWIN PEAKS and Stephen King’s americana, the game was so immersive as to play out like an interactive Horror movie, (or series, as they game was played in the form of episodes of a Horror show, cliffhangers and all), in which you were the star. The graphics were a huge leap forward, the characters and writing were second to none, and the whole thing felt like the future of Survival Horror, at least on a single player basis. It never sacrificed gameplay or action in its attempts to unsettle, and found a perfect balance between gameplay and cinematic flourish. With these more recent triumphs of the gaming world, the genre, despite its trip ups, continues to grow in popularity, and all is well in the Horror fans world.

WHAT THE FUTURE MAY HOLD

THE DARKNESS 2

And that brings us full circle to where we find ourselves today in 2012. THE DARKNESS 2 stands on the shelf alongside the incredible DEAD SPACE 2, and the John Carpenter directed FEAR 3, and the public are eating them up whole. Technology is advancing fast, and more and more artists from alternative media formats are jumping aboard for the ride. It’s a very exciting time to be a gamer, and an even MORE exciting time to be a Horror fan. The merging of formats to create new experiences in terror is a bold and enticing event. And while Horror has often had its peaks and valleys, both cinematically and in the gaming world, it holds on tight and refuses to go down. Where the next generation of Horror gaming takes us is anyone’s guess, but as long as there are artists and writers who believe in the genre as much as we do, and developers who are willing to bring us their twisted visions in vividly rendered form, the possibilities are truly endless...

For Part 1 Click Here...

Kyle Scott
Hotel Management

Editorial : A Brief History of Horror Gaming - Part 1

2012-02-20T02:26:00.003-08:00

A Brief History of Horror Gaming

IN THE BEGINNING

As I write this, the second game in THE DARKNESS series is sat atop the shelves in stores worldwide. A game that utilises first person action, comic-book sensibilities and is blessed with a bucketful of glorious gore. Jimmy Stewart was right, life is indeed wonderful.

HAUNTED HOUSE

It’s been a long ride to get to where we are now in the gaming world, where old masters of the genre like Mr Carpenter come to spread their creative wings. It’s easy to sit back today with our Wide-screen TVs and our super powerful consoles and live the dream, but it was a long road. Let's face it, we Horror fans are spoiled for choice when it comes to gaming, and that's cause for celebration, kids. In an ever changing world our love for horror is a constant, but our means of experiencing and enjoying fear and the macabre are making leaps and bounds forward, and its damned exciting. We can share the gaming experience with other fans the world over without moving from our couch, we can BE the guy behind the gun with only a few bullets left and a horde of the hungry undead hot on our heels. Hell, we can even play through the eyes of the undead ! We can band together and fight off mutants, and take on lank haired ghost girls in worlds so fully realised they make Main Street look like 24th Street, but It wasn't always this way....

As a card carrying 80's kid, I was lucky enough to have been there at the start. I grew up with each consecutive gaming system, and watched the whole story unfold as games that today's generation would, rightly, deem so basic as to be laughable, filled our young heads with nightmares and fuelled our imaginations for endless hours. Put us in a dimly lit room with a twenty minute loading time, some monotone bleeps for a soundtrack to back up the unrecognisable graphics, and we were THERE, man!

GHOSTS 'N' GOBLINS

The magical moment when horror and video games first locked eyes, took place almost 30 years ago, when a then revolutionary gaming system known as the Magnavox Odyssey released a title called HAUNTED HOUSE (1982). It was the first game to feature all those cool things we associate with our favourite genre. Bats, ghosts, monsters and more all provided kids in the dark ages with plenty of spooky fun. Sure, there was little to be afraid of, but this was the moment that horrors Gothic sensibilities and gaming were to meet, and in the years that followed things just got better. As arcades began to grow across the globe and kids moved away from the forests and playgrounds, and into the brightly lit wonderland of the Arcade Hall, Horror influenced games were rapidly becoming more and more popular. 1985 saw the release of GHOSTS N GOBLINS (1985), a platform based side scroller that took the world by storm, and captured the imaginations of budding genre geeks the globe over, ruining a million childhoods in one fell swoop as we wiled away the hours trying to save our princess bride from the clutches of Beelzebub himself. We battled zombies, ravens, sea monsters, gargoyles, possessed trees and much more as we made our way toward the big kahuna and our gal. It was also so damn difficult that it’s become a rite of passage for gamers nowadays to complete the thing. Soon after came SPLATTERHOUSE (1988), a controversial game for its time, as it was the first arcade scroller to rely heavily on gore and violence for its kicks. In it you played, for all intents and purposes, a Jason Voorhees clone, and spent your time smashing all comers to mush with a baseball bat, axe and machete. The parents hated the damn thing, and of course, us kids lapped it up like there was no tomorrow. Some things never change. (It was recently remade to sound fanfare and critical success among horror fans).

By 1985, home computers were already a fixture in most households, and while Dad bought you the thing for your school studies, the only thing we had in mind was to get our grubby paws on the latest arcade conversion coming down the pipe. Owners of the fabled ZX SPECTRUM, AMSTRAD and COMMODORE 64 were treated to a plethora of classic spook filled games.

ANT ATTACK 3D

ANT ATTACK 3D (1983), pit the player against swarms of giant ants in a (necessarily) sparse world. The classic ATIC ATAC (1983) combined exploration and simple avoidance tactics to create a colourful and fun experience, and in a stroke of genius, featured a rotting chicken as a health bar. The release of the 3D adventure NOSFERATU (1983) was a notable moment, and perhaps the first horror game that actually garnered fear in the player. It worked hard to put you in the mindset of the character, utilising a Gothic musical score, (as Gothic as sound could get anyway), lots of exploration in a foreboding castle, and an emphasis on atmosphere that would become, rather obviously, a key requirement in the horror games to come. FRIDAY THE 13TH THE GAME (1985) plunked players down in the heart of Camp Crystal Lake during one of Jason's killing sprees, and while it was a critical failure, mostly due to playing out as a sort of whodunit, (Jason was disguised as a camper until he attacked, don't ask me why), with little actual 'game play' involved. We loved it nonetheless. We were just stoked to have Jason on our monitors.

IT CAME FROM THE DESERT

Later, more advanced home computers such as the COMMODORE AMIGA and the ATARI ST, blessed us with titles that came close to matching their arcade counterparts. FRIGHT NIGHT (1988) put us in the shoes of Jerry Dandridge and urged us to prey on sultry blonde's to keep the character ticking. IT CAME FROM THE DESERT (1989) placed you middle centre in the heart of a 50's atomic monster movie and blended action, adventure and puzzling to great effect. HORROR ZOMBIES FROM THE CRYPT (1990), NIGHTBREED (1990), ALIEN BREED (1991), ELVIRA (1991), DARKSEED (1992), and many more brought horror gaming front and centre, and it was with the unvieling of a hunble online shooter the following year that Horror gaming, and gaming itself, took a huge leap forward.

The release of ID's DOOM (1993) was a landmark in gaming history, and introduced the world to the first person shooter. Taking its cues from ID's own WOLFENSTIEN (1992), and transferring the action to mars, DOOM essentially put the player in the eyes of the games character, pitching them in a fully real time 3D environment battling endless waves of demonic enemies, first within a space station and in later levels, within Hell itself. The game was renowned for its tense game play, dynamic lighting, contained hostile environments and a propensity for gore and mayhem that was unheard of at the time. While released initially as shareware on the PC, the game soon found worldwide fame as gamers across the planet got their first real taste of where Horror gaming would be heading in the future. It’s perfect mix of action and scares have secured its legacy in the annals of gaming, and its influence has been felt for many years since.

DOOM

While many of these earlier games were barely horror in terms of scares, the content provided us fans with a new means to enjoy our number one interest, and for many kids, these games were their introduction into the genre. It’s rare for any genre fan to have found his/her introduction through literature, but I'd bet there’s a whole hell of a lot fell in love whilst gaming. After all, most upstanding parents were monitoring their child's viewing on VHS and TV, but how many parents had any idea there perfect offspring was spending their nights blasting the hordes of hell a new ass? Few, I would think, and bless the Gods of Horror for those small favours. These things may seem small nowadays, but this was important shit to an eight or nine year old back then. Trust me.

And if we'd known what was coming next, our heads may have exploded there and then....

THE BIRTH OF SURVIVAL HORROR

CLOCK TOWER

The dawn of the 32-bit consoles, led by Sony’s Playstation afforded developers the tools to create far more vivid worlds in which to work their magic, and saw a huge step forward in Horror gaming with the birth of 'Survival Horror'. This is where gaming and horror truly became one. The Survival Horror sub-genre utilised elements directly from horror cinema and aimed to place the player into environments and situations designed simply to scare the hell out of them. It’s the point where horror gaming became every bit as terrifying as horror cinema, and often more so. The barrier of the big screen no longer existed. The player was now, for all intents and purposes, inside the movie. There was no guarantee of safety in a happy ending. None. And it was glorious. Suddenly the possibilities seemed endless, and time has proven that this was exactly the case.

CLOCK TOWER (1995) brought the Horror goods to the next gen, yet the first game to be labelled ‘Survival Horror’, within the industry was Capcoms Zombie epic, RESIDENT EVIL (1996). A game so absolutely committed to instilling dread in the player it was ruthless. Although Capcoms previous release, SWEET HOME (1989), was the blueprint for their masterwork, THIS was the moment when everything changed. Action and fast paced gun play was gone, as was any kind of incidental horror imagery for the sake of Gothic nuance. No, this was a fully fledged horror movie in which YOU were the star. The influence of not only horror imagery, but the essence of what made horror so powerful was implicit here. FEAR. Your character was extremely vulnerable, held limited ammo, and was trapped within a claustrophobic dimly lit environment where horror's lurked around every corner, and it was often a far better strategy to flee rather than fight. Among its myriad strengths were its atmospheric music, explicit gore,effective jump scares and a very strong plot line.

RESIDENT EVIL

Essentially, the original RESIDENT EVIL and its immediate sequels dropped unsuspecting players inside a George Romero movie, (the great man was actually set to direct the film adaptation. One can only dream), and left you to your own devices. Sure it was extremely playable, but this was more than a game, this was the merging of many kids, and adults, dreams. Terror, gore and game play.
Of course, the title was a huge success, and as the concept of ‘Survival Horror' lit up the gaming world. Developers were keen to hop on the bandwagon and create their own brand of fear fuelled gaming. The immediate years after the release of RESIDENT EVIL saw a whole host of horror influenced titles, both good and bad, emerge on the scene. Among the best were its sequels RE2 (1998) and RE3 (1999), and Capcoms own DINO CRISIS (1999). And while many clones were sub standard, there were some that truly understood the power this new style of gaming could hold, and set about creating their own masterpieces.

SILENT HILL 2

The next evolutionary step in Survival Horror came with the release of Konami's SILENT HILL(1999), a game that took all the strengths that made the RESIDENT EVIL series so effective and added the element of psychological horror into the heady mix. SILENT HILL combined brutal and disturbing imagery with a surreal and disorienting atmosphere that deeply affected players on visceral and an intellectual level. The game played like an interactive nightmare. Whereas R.E was heavily influenced by western horror, SILENT HILL drew its inspiration from Eastern fright films and Art House Horror, and replaced R.E's pre-rendered static environments with real time 3D exploration. It was a great success and its first sequel, SILENT HILL2 (2001) is still considered by many as the peak of the Survival Horror era, and one of the scariest games ever created. That same year saw the release of FATAL FRAME, which took the J-Horror influence to its logical conclusion, and remains one of the scariest video games ever developed. FATAL FRAME allowed the players to photograph spirits in an extremely foreboding oriental world, and was gifted with what many regard as the strongest writing in the genre, up till that point. Lank haired ghost girls and fleeting glimpses of shadowy spectres abound, and the unique game mechanic , ( photography forced the player to get up close and personal with a whole host of demonic entities), pushed the player into extremely claustrophobic and frightening scenarios. Its sequels expanded on this format to great effect, and Survival Horror reached its zenith. Yet traditional Survival Horror was soon to become a rarity.....

PART 2 - THE FALL OF TRADITIONAL SURVIVAL HORROR AND THE RISE OF ACTION BASED HORROR

Horror Hotel Cinema : Valentines Midnight Show - Shutter (2004)

2012-02-14T02:32:00.001-08:00

It's Valentines Day. And what better gift for Hotel Management to give you lovebirds, than some old-school, ghostly goings on, that'll have you holding each other close in the small hours of the night? For tonight's midnight show, we would like to introduce, or at least re-acquaint you, with the pant-soilingly scary, and altogether excellent SHUTTER.

Before you start sending the hate mail, and hand your ticket, (and lube) back, let me take a moment to assure you that you are NOT about to suffer through some poorly scripted, terribly acted, artless, gormless and utterly shallow piece of celluloid trash that couldn't scare a fucking cat on acid. No....this is the original SHUTTER. You know, the good one, the one with potent themes of Karma, guilt and retribution? Yeah, that one. Not the bastardised-beyond-all-Thunderdome remake that burned eyes and minds in the states a few years later, and forever tarnished the originals legacy.

Sure, time has passed and much of the J-Horror imagery has lost a little of its potency, but SHUTTER still has the power to chill. Theres some fundamentally frightening shit going down here, so whether you've been bum-banged by that Hollywood dick-storm of a remake, or not; your gonna most likely have a very good, very scary time. And whats more, the entire show is in one video, with hard-coded subtitles, and very crisp quality. Who's your Daddy?

For those who don't know the basic plot. It revolves around a Photographer and his ladyfriend, who are driving home after a few too many drinks, (never advisable, chums) and mow down a woman in the street. Do they stay and help out? Do they hell! Its hit and run time, kids. And these two clowns think they're getting away with it, till they realise that the photographs he's taken all seem to show disturbing, ghostly apparitions. Theres gonna be hell to pay.....

SHUTTER may not be the most original work, but its damned effective under the right circumstances. So boys.....grab your girls, turn out the lights, get real close to your little lady, and get yourself ready for ninety minutes of creepy-ass Horror, followed by some good, old-fashioned, terror sex.

Who says Karma's a bitch....?

Review : Chronicle (2012)

2012-02-12T23:03:00.000-08:00

Three high school friends gain superpowers after making an incredible discovery. Soon, though, they find their lives spinning out of control and their bond tested as they embrace their darker sides.

CHRONICLE is a movie of minor miracles.

For one thing, its a low-budget Science Fiction piece that has far more impact, excitement and visual splendour than a the vast majority of Hollywood's, (or anywhere's), mega-budget output. Also, it has a tiny, eighty minute run-time, yet manages to fully develop its main characters and have the audience care deeply about their fates, while still finding plenty of time for eye-popping, heart-racing scenes of emotional and psychical struggle, that are as fulfilling as anything seen in the 'superhero' genre, at any time previously. And lets not forget that its an origin story that turns the concept on its head, and gives us not one, but two origins, both completely authentic (George Lucas couldn't manage a decent fall into darkness in three movies, kids), within said eighty minutes.

All this would be enough reason to recommend this film unequivocally, but theres so much more. The main miracle here, is that the sheer amount of depth and substance to be found in this bad-boy is damned near ridiculous...

CHRONICLE tells the story of three high school kids, who stumble upon a strange meteor-like object, and find themselves developing unearthly powers. Simple as it may be, the concept in itself warrants any self-respecting geeks interest. Its wish-fulfilment time, friendos. Yet instead of taking the easy route, first time director, (yep, first time) Josh Strank, and writer, Mark, (Son of John) Landis have structured a Sci-Fi sleeper that astounds visually, engages emotionally, and can be looked at in a whole myriad of ways.

This is not just a Sci-Fi tale. Nor is it simply wish-fulfilment. CHRONICLE is a Greek Tragedy. Its a metaphor for the horrors of Columbine style massacres. Its a teen comedy. Its an impassive look at the nature of good and evil. It's a heart-soaring, imagination fuelled fantasy. A character study, a coming-of-age movie, and ultimately, a tragic tale of loneliness and the horrors it can inflict on those who suffer its vicious bite, and those around them.

Of course, there have been superhero movies that have touched upon many of these subjects before..SPIDERMAN dealt with the 'powerless' being granted power, and X-MEN, (and its first, Bryan Singer directed sequel), looked at right and wrong as opposing viewpoints, rather than black and white extremes. Yet those films, as excellent as they were, still felt like superhero movies. CHRONICLE does not. It feels strange even relating it to the superhero genre. I have a similar issue labelling Christopher Nolan's BATMAN BEGINS and THE DARK KNIGHT in such a fashion. They strive for, (and achieve) a real world feel, and a level of intellect that pushes them into full-on character studies, political meditations and artistry.CHRONICLE, it should be stated, feels far more grounded than either of Nolan's films.

The film is shot in the style of the now commonplace, 'found footage' sub-genre, yet its most definitely not a found footage film. While much of the movie is seen through the eyes of a main characters camera, the fact that he has Telekinetic powers allows the camera to flow freely, as he uses his powers to float his camera where-ever he pleases, (very clever). It helps the film feel much more intimate than any of its type that has come before, while outside footage, (News stations, Helicopter-cams) helps allow for the necessarily epic shots of magic and mayhem that an audience demands of such a movie. The whole 'hand-held' thing has love/hate written all over it, of course, and some will be bemoan its use here. Really though, this is one of the few times, like TROLL-HUNTER or REC, where it really does help tell the tale unfold.

The three leads are all excellent in their roles, and each brings a unique quality to the group dynamic. We have Dane DeHaan, as, the damaged, lonely 'Andrew'. Here's a kid who can find no respite from the constant alienation and bullying he suffers at High School; even at home. His mother is terminally ill, and his father has become an embittered, drunken husk of a man in the process. In many ways, Andrew is the 'angry heart' of the tale, and its probably no co-incidence that he brings to mind Leonardo Di Caprio's early work in THE BASKETBALL DIARIES, in looks and intensity.

As his loving, yet somewhat distanced cousin, 'Matt', Alex Russell brings a warmth and quiet kindness to the role of a good natured, philosophical soul, who looks for, and finds, the good in all he can. And, with the smallest, yet far from insignificant role, Micheal B. Jordan plays the High School football star, 'Steve', who, despite his popularity, is a down to earth guy, who genuinely cares for those around him, even when it threatens his own well-being.

Through getting to know these guys as they develop their powers and their friendship, we come to love them. We laugh with them, (they early scenes are extremely funny, as they guys do what any guys would do when the develop super powers.....fuck around), and we feel their joy as they realise just how powerful they have become. All three characters feel very real, and easily garner our care and compassion, which makes it all the more painful when things go horribly wrong in the films second half. As usual, I wont give away any details of what these guys can and do experience, but your with them all the way, from delight and ecstasy, to rage and terror.

CHRONICLE is a hard film to find fault with. Other than a romantic sub-plot involving Matt and a high school sweetheart, which feels tacked on, I got nothing. It never outstays its welcome, despite its wealth of subject, its never falls into pretension despite its intelligence, and its never depressing, despite its inherent sense of tragedy. It's the best movie 'of its type' , ( I just cant call this a superhero movie), of its type since THE DARK KNIGHT, and it stands alone as a unique cinematic experience that really shouldn't be missed. It will make huge stars out of its cast, its writers and its director. Mark my words. This heralds a number of new arrivals.

CHRONICLE is a dark delight, indeed.

9 Haunted Teddy Bears our of 10 (It'll make sense when you see the movie, trust me).

Review : Saint (2010)

2012-02-10T01:46:00.000-08:00

Director:

Dick Maas

Writer:

Dick Maas

Stars:

Huub Stapel, Egbert Jan Weeber and Caro Lenssen

I've always thought of myself as quite a cultured soul. I take an active interest in other cultures, and the origins of their customs, but this one slipped me by...

I had no idea that in Denmark, instead of the traditional Coca-Cola sponsored corporate bullshit that we call, 'Santa Clause', our Danish pals have 'Saint Nicholas', and that instead of delivering presents to kids on Dec 25th, he'd rather show face on any Dec 5th which boasts a full moon, and kill the ever-loving shit out of as many people as possible, kids and adults alike. Cool. This is yet another reason I should move to Amsterdam...

SAINT boasts a festive undead fruitcake who rides a zombie horse across rooftops, wields a huge, razor sharp staff, and has a limitless army of undead slaves who do his bidding, which usually entails wholesale slaughter. This is my kinda Father Christmas.

If this all sounds completely ridiculous, that's because it is, but its also a zany, fun-filled little slice of foreign lunacy that is well worth a beer-soaked viewing with some good buddies. If your a fan of holiday-themed Horror, this one should be on your list. It may be prime grade cheese, but its a surprisingly well made prime grade cheese.

Visually, SAINT is a real treat, it looks very expensive, despite some obvious CG that carries throughout. For the most part, its shot entirely on real locations, and the cinematography is joyous. If your a fan of atmospheric winter snow-scapes, you've came to the right place; and if you've never spent time in the beautiful city of Amsterdam, you may wish to after you slap your eyes on its sights and sounds. Also of special note is that the film makes very good use of the camera's fluidity, its constantly kinetic and full of a rare energy, (outside Asian Cinema), and frankly, far too professional for a film dealing with a rooftop riding undead Santa. Even the obvious CG has a certain warmth to it. It feels more like the matte painting of old, than the sort of bullshit such 'luminaries' as George Lucas spew forth onto the world. And while blatantly fake, its very pretty, and adds to the cheesy charm the film has in spades. Also, and very importantly for a slasher film, it has its fair share of nastiness. There are some great gore-gags here, and plenty of blood, grue and decapitated heads are liberally thrown around the screen. Some kills are off-screen, and that's a big no-no in my opinion, (for this style of movie), but the kills we do witness more than make up for it. Its a whole lot of fun watching 'Saint Nicholas', and his 'Black Peters' doing what they do best.

If your wondering what 'Black Peters' are, (and if your in any way as ignorant of this stuff as I am), think of Santa's elves, except with huge swords and axes, and burned to death. Yeah...that. Oh, and if this seems perhaps a little racially dubious, well, its not. This is the Danish, man. Let them be. Chances are those mellow fellows are far less concerned about political correctness than the tight-asses that populate these shores.

SAINT also boasts some really well directed action sequences. One rooftop chase in particular owes a great deal to BATMAN BEGINS, and the influences don't end there. There are scenes lifted right out of John Carpenters output. A scene introducing some of the female characters is tonally, and thematically, exactly the same as HALLOWEEN's Laurie and her pals heading home from school. We even have one of them heading to babysit a kid, and a friendly figure jump-scare that doesn't work at all, but raises a smile of recognition. THE FOG is also a huge inspiration, especially during an ocean-bound scene wherein a small boat comes into contact with the spectral ship that is piloted by the undead and brings ole Santa to 'The Dam'. Its all nonsense, of course, and would probably be insulting, were it not so charmingly put together.

The characters, like those who populate most slashers, don't really bear mentioning, although they all do a decent enough job, and the two leads are fun to watch. The fright scenes are non-existent, (save for two jump-scares that came completely out of the blue, and raised me off my chair), but the overall tone of tongue-in-cheek silliness pulls this thing through.

SAINT is no masterpiece and it won't create a franchise, but what it is, is simply fun. Its relatively gory, colourful and thankfully, never takes itself too seriously. You won't learn a great deal about Danish culture, but you will get to see a zombie horse fall five stories and crush two cops, and that in itself puts this right up there with SCHINDLER'S LIST.

6 Black Peters out of 10

Review : Rosewood Lane (2011)

2012-02-09T06:15:00.000-08:00

Director:

Victor Salva

Writer:

Victor Salva

Stars:

Rose McGowan, Lauren Vélez and Ray Wise

When radio talk show psychiatrist, Dr. Sonny Blake, moves back to her hometown, she takes notice of her neighbourhood paper boy's unusual behaviour. She soon comes to realise the little bastard could be very dangerous, as he launches a campaign of terror against her...

I liked some of Victor Salva's output. I really did.....

I thought that CLOWNHOUSE was a really well made and genuinely frightening look at childhood fears, and I enjoyed JEEPERS CREEPERS' approach to old school monster-movie making. The guy was a good thing to have around in the genre. Sure JEEPERS CREEPERS 2 left a lot to be desired, but it was watchable, and its flaws weren't enough to quell my thirst for a third film.

Then I learnt all about Salva's unfortunate past...

Now, I understand that art and its creator often need to be separated, especially in my line of work, but Salva's abuse of young boys left a particularly sour taste in my mouth, especially as his more 'unsavoury' compulsions seem to infuse his films more often than not. For one thing, the young star of CLOWNHOUSE was being systematically abused during filming, and its impossible to watch it now and not feel heartbroken for the suffering that poor kid went through. Not to mention the fact that half the fucking film has half naked preteen boys running around. And how about JEEPERS CREEPERS? A predator that wants a part of a young boy, even going so far as to sniff his goddamn underwear. Or how about its sequel, in which we have to suffer through high-school boys having pissing contests while scantily dressed. I'm sorry kids, but that shit just doesn't sit right with me. How it sits with you, is your own issue.

All that said, I went into ROSEWOOD LANE with an open mind. I knew that Salva was capable of achieving good things in the Horror genre, despite wrecking lives in reality, and had hoped that since his arrest and incarceration, he'd be less inclined to have his camera linger on young boys like a drooling one-eyed cyborg. I was right on that part. There are zero young boys in this film, but stunningly, that's one of its biggest problems. Believe me, it has many, but that's a pretty goddamn big one. Seems like Salva's past may have killed his career after all. Let me explain...

See, the antagonist in this film is a paperboy. Now, I don't live in the states, but I'm pretty sure 30 year old men don't fuck around on BMX's throwing papers on peoples porches. Yet that's what happens here. When I first clapped eyes on this guy, I thought he was meant to be a sad-sack thirty-something who was perhaps a little handicapped or what have ya. Not so. Throughout the film, hes constantly referred to as a 'minor', a 'kid', and a 'boy'. He's none of the fucking above. What I suspect may have occurred here, is that Salva was forced to cast the paperboy character as way older than the required age, because he ain't allowed within two states of a young boy anymore. Its the only reasonable explanation for this crazy-as-fuck casting, and while it may not be the only thing that kills this nonsense stone-dead, it certainly doesn't help watching a grown-ass man wearing a skip cap backwards, and almost buckling his BMX under his weight. Fucking stupid, is what it is.

But as I mentioned, its far from the only stupid thing going on here. Each character, from top to bottom, make the most dumb-fuck choices possible at every turn. From cops who don't give a fuck about breaking and entering or attempted murder, even when there are witnesses, to some asshole with a broken arm and a broken leg, proclaiming he's gonna kick the guys ass who caused his injuries in the first place, and he was in perfect condition during round one! Dipshit. These sort of moments are legion.

As for the 'scare scenes', they're even dumber. We get such heart-pumping classics as 'pooddles chasing a BMX', 'kid pissing in a guys eye', (admittedly very funny, that one), and 'game of chicken between a car and a BMX'. You get the picture...this is not MARTYRS we're dealing with here. It doesn't help that our middle-aged psycho paperboy looks exactly like the character from the 80's arcade classic, PAPERBOY. Nope, it doesn't help at all.

The only good thing here is Rose McGowan. I've always dug that gal, way back from her scene-stealing in the original SCREAM. She's a competent actress, and a very likable girl. I do personally feel that she hurt her career with the plastic surgery, as it appears she has a harder time emoting with all that shit in her face, but that's her own personal choice, and she still deserves some love. She does what she can here, but the poor girl is rolling uphill.

Something else that grinds my gears is that, somehow, alongside McGowan, Salva managed to secure the awesome Lin Shaye and Ray Wise, (you may have seen them knock it out the park together, in DEAD END), and then completely underused them. Silly, man. Just silly.

This film has precisely zero scares, no tension, ridiculous plot-holes and a ninety minute run-time that feels twice as long. Salva's fallen a long way from his early, effective works, but the simpleton script and the laughable premise don't really help matters either, (although he also wrote it, so its his own damn fault). It scores some points for Rose's ample 'gifts' and the eye-pissing scene that had me rolling with laughter, but this is a dodgy TV-Movie at best. Victor Salva may still have a solid genre film in him, but on the basis of ROSEWOOD LANE, I ain't holding my breath. Not that I was, anyway. I got better things to do, and so do you.

2 Well Aimed Pisses out of 10

Horror Hotel Cinema : The Veil - Jack The Ripper

2012-02-08T23:44:00.000-08:00

Hi kids, it's Hotel Management here, with the return of the sometime dormant, in-house cinema. And in lieu of my recent review of WHITECHAPEL, today's little number is a real treat for any Jack the Ripper fans, (I'm loathe to call us 'fans', as its not like we cheer on the murder of prostitutes. Lets just call us Ripper Aficionados. Yeah, that'll do....).

This little ditty will also be of interest to anyone and everyone who has a taste for the grand Universal Classics that helped kick off our favourite genre, as it features the mighty Boris Karloff, as narrator. In fact, he narrated all ten episodes of this little known and delightfully old school Horror anthology. In a sense, old Boris was a blueprint for the crypt-keeper. Its worth watching for historical reasons alone, friendos! The short-lived show was titled, THE VEIL, and this episode goes by the name of.....you ready? JACK THE RIPPER. Shocking, I know, at least a little more thought went into the plot than the title.....

The tale concerns a Psychic who begins experiencing visions of bloody, savage murders in the Whitechapel area, and becomes a suspect in the eyes of the local 'bobbies'.

Those who's knowledge of Horror and its past will also find another very familiar face, in Niaill McGinness, who is most famous among lovers of the macabre, for his portrayal of Dr Karswell, in Jacques Tourniers excellent adaptation of M. R James CASTING THE RUNES....NIGHT OF THE DEMON, (also known as CURSE OF THE DEMON, in a re-edited, uncut form). If you haven't seen it, do so immediately and then send your old pal Kyle a bottle of Scotch as a thank-you.

So, with no further adieu, here's THE VEIL : JACK THE RIPPER. Twenty five minutes of eerie time-travelling fun, for all you good folk.

See you at the next show....

Review : Whitechapel (2008)

2012-02-07T02:04:00.000-08:00

Stars:

Rupert Penry-Jones, Philip Davis and Steve Pemberton

A fast-tracked inspector, a hardened detective sergeant, and an expert in historical homicides investigate modern crimes with connections to the past in the Whitechapel district of London.

I'm no 'Ripperologist', but I do boast a rather unhealthy obsession with the crimes, the myths and the madness that surround the infamous Jack the Ripper's killing spree.

At school, I performed a presentation on the circumstances of Mary Kelly's demise, in explicit detail, and was somewhat frowned upon by my bitch of an English teacher in the process. My parents received one of numerous letters pertaining to my 'strange fixations', (others included short Horror stories, a predilection for all things 'Stephen King' by age eleven, and the always present, 'Killers Casebook' which I bought monthly to study up on Dahmer, Gein, Manson and all the rest of those crazy fuckers.

Needless to say, minus a two-decade long detour into drug addiction and mind-melting psychedelic insanity, I turned out just fine. Though my fascination with all things 'Ripper' continues to this very day.

I came across WHITECHAPEL completely by accident, and wasn't overly confident in its premise. A three-part mini-series that looks at the Whitechapel murders from a modern perspective, is not something that I find all that enticing. The initial imagery that caught my imagination about the killings was that of a fog-enshrouded 'Olde London Towne', that felt to my young self, much like a Hammer Horror film, made violently real. To set the events in the present day Whitechapel area seemed like a shark jump too far, for this kill-happy camper.

You know where I'm going with this, guys. I was wrong....

Whitechapel is 135 minutes of totally engaging, brilliantly performed and downright creepy television. It stays faithful to the original Rippers legacy, while recreating the investigation using a rather-damn-clever mix of modern technique, (using DNA, the Internet, modern surveillance), and a somewhat accurate study of the real/original case. For anyone who doesn't know the case and is actively seeking a route into its many mysteries, the history presented is not nearly thorough enough to begin your crusade here, but for long-standing enthusiasts and those who couldn't give a good shit about the history of the case, its all pretty good stuff. This is, after all, a Thriller/Crime Drama, that follows a copy-cat killer. Its not a reworking of the original case, per-se, but a modern work of Horror that dips into the Rippers history, as a means of apprehending the modern killer. If you look at it in this light, its a very fun, and mildly educational trip down Ripper-Lane. Theres even a monologue in which the writers clearly voice their theory on who the real Ripper was. Good stuff.

One of the most impressive achievements to be found here is the retention of the atmosphere and imagery that we all associate with the Jacks crimes. In this wholly modern setting, (and I believe its all filmed on location), theres a very real feeling of past and present intertwining. We understand that the tale is set in modern London, but our establishing shots of the city, in all its modern, high-tech glory, are the only link we feel in terms of this being a modern environ. Most of our time is spent in dark, dank alleyways, where screams herald yet another atrocity committed by 'Ripper 2'. Its gripping, potent stuff, and something of a feat, to make modern London once again feel like a hunting ground in which no corner, and no woman, is safe. It certainly doesnt hurt the gothic atmosphere to have our second, modern Ripper also enjoy dressing up as the real thing. The long flowing coats, glinting knife and hunters cap makes for a frightening figure, just as it always has.

The dark, oppressive atmosphere is greatly enhanced by the ever-present soundtrack, which recalls the theme from THE SIXTH SENSE, and lends a sense of the epic, even as it creeps out the viewer. In short,m this whole thing feels like a 'Ripper Tale' of old, and that is its greatest strength. The fog may be absent, but the labyrinthine alleyways, and shadowed underworld of the city and present and correct.

Performance wise, we get something of a treat. In truth, its really a three-hander, and all the leads carry the nightmarish trip into history with a very firm grasp of what makes us care for character. As the new D.I, and a clean-cut kid who is fast tracked up the ladder, (much to the dismay of his counterpoint), Rupert Penry Jones is immediately likable, empathetic and engaging. The always awesome Phillip Davis, as said counterpoint, is a (perhaps understandably), angry, old-school Detective who hates the young go-getter on sight, and makes it his mission to humiliate, ridicule and undermine the D.I's efforts a every turn. Its a well-worn character dynamic, but if it ain't broke, don't fix it. The two performances take what could have been a hackneyed on-screen relationship, and make it enthralling, and oftentimes, quite touching. Last, and certainly not least, is a fantastic performance from Steve Pemberton, (best known for his off-the-wall work in THE LEAGUE OF GENTLEMEN). He's a revelation here, as a 'Ripperologist' who may well hold the key to the macabre goings-on. His performance is alternately creepy, endearing and, finally, even quite heartbreaking. Who would have thought it?

Gore-wise, we don't see much. Much is implied and envisioned by the viewer, yet there are moments that are pretty strong for a TV-Movie. Of course, as our killer is copying the work of Jack, each kill is a recreation of what has come before, so there are few surprises for the afficianado. What does surprise, is the smallest, careful attention to detail in certain scenes. The infamous death of Annie Chapman contains all the usual goods, ( intestines over shoulder, slit throat etc), yet goes so far as to show the fecal matter that would obviously be strewn everywhere during just such a crime. Its pretty vile, but its realistic, and its these subtle observations that elevate the work.

Horror fans could do a lot worse than set aside a few hours for WHITECHAPEL. Acting wise, its head and shoulders above most genre material, and its a mature, fresh and intelligently handled slice of serial-killer thriller, that owes as much debt to SEVEN, as it does to Hammers output, or the Micheal Caine starring mini-series of the past. It can never reach the dizzying heights of those works, but it remains a fun, exciting and well thought-out little murder-mystery. The climax doesn't quite reach the stark horrors of what has come before, yet it has a fulfilling coda, and is overall, a balanced, energetic and hugely atmospheric work. One question... if low-budget television can produce Horror this thoughtful and professionally acted, why the hell can't Hollywood?

Head down to WHITECHAPEL soon as you can. Jack's waiting....

7 Leather Aprons out of 10

Review : Abominable (2006)

2012-01-24T01:06:00.000-08:00

Director:

Ryan Schifrin

Writers:

Ryan Schifrin (story), Ryan Schifrin, and 1 more credit »

Stars:

Matt McCoy, Haley Joel , Christien Tinsley and Tiffany Shepis

Who doesn't like a good Bigfoot movie?

Problem is, there really aren't to many to choose from. I can think of only one that has any merit whatsoever, and that's THE LEGEND OF BOGGY CREEK. That film scared the dick out of me when I was a kid. I still recall the mournful sound the beast made, juxtaposed with the stunning shots of sunsets. Great stuff.

Of course, watching it as an adult, its pretty hard to get past the endless, completely zany singing, and the porn-level performances of the cast. So, I'm loath to even call that film a good Bigfoot movie.

Well, last night, in a frenzy of boredom, I decided to revisit a more recent stab at the Bigfoot myth, and I enjoyed it enough to feel it deserved a little review. Many of you will have missed it on its release, as its a low-budget affair, and may well be a Scy-Fy Original. That's a dreaded term, right there, but hang tight. ABOMINABLE is a ton of fun, and a surprisingly well made creature feature.

The opening scenes are, (and I may get lynched here), actually authentically scary, as we witness a good ole boy and his wife encounter Mr Sasquatch in an almost pitch black setting. The shot of the monster silhouetted against a dark forest skyline recalls that great shot in MADMAN, where we first see Marz. Its creepy, and it grabs the attention from the get-go.

From there, the film follows a crippled gentlemen, Preston, traumatised by the accident that left him wheelchair bound, and left his wife soil-bound. He's returning home for the first time since his lady died, and is accompanied by a carer, Otis. No sooner has he arrived though, and picked up his trusty binoculars to enjoy the views from his window, he begins to notice some strange activity out there in the wilderness. There seems to someone watching from the woodlands that surround his home, and as he quickly realises something not-quite-human, is stalking both himself and his hot, half- naked neighbours, (whom he wisely also keeps a close eye on), he realises its up to him to save everyone, including his own ass, (and I assume, maybe get laid in the process). Problem is, of course, he's wheelchair bound, has no phone, and can't get across the damn street.....

Now if this sounds familiar, that's because it is, (and you know your Hitchcock). Yep, this is REAR WINDOW with Bigfoot. It follows that films lead in establishing the leads helplessness in the situation, and builds some significant tension and fear, as the perceived enemy looms ever closer. The film, like the Hitchcock classic, takes place mainly in one location, while utilising the main characters viewpoint to give an outsiders look into events across the street, and it somehow pulls it off in grand fashion. It helps that the cast are taking this whole thing pretty seriously, (even if, at times, we aren't), and that the performances are way above the norm for DTV Horror flicks. As Preston, Matt McCoy brings a quietness to the role, that gradually turns to desperation and terror as he realises theres a beast out there, stalking him. He comes off as a once proud, now broken man, who still has a mine of courage buried inside him, which he must tap into in order to survive, (and save the hotties, can forget about them). As his carer, Otis, Christien Tinsley is an off-the-charts asshole, and is simultaneously hilarious and annoying. He's plays Otis as a self important, condescending dickhead who treats Preston like a child, and who approaches his 'carer' duties with an iron fist, and tyranny in his heart. In short, he's a big ole bully, and a lot of fun to watch. Job done.

ABOMINABLE also features a pleasingly solid wealth of cameos, from some Horror favourites. Lance Henrikson, (ALIENS, NEAR DARK), shows up as a gun-toting redneck. Jeffrey Combs (RE-ANIMATOR, THE FRIGHTENERS), plays his buddy, who happens to be dying of lung cancer. Dee Wallace , (CUJO, THE LOST, HOUSE OF THE DEVIL), features in the opening scene as the terrorised wife, and the always watchable fan-favourite, Tiffany Shepis, (EVERY LOW BUDGET HORROR EVER MADE), plays one of the hotties living, (and partying) across the street from Preston's windowed prison. Shepis is always value for money, (all the guys out there know where I'm coming from).

As for the monster, he's kept in the shadows until midway through act 2, and when he appears, he's starring in one of the most effective jump-scares I can remember. When we finally get a good look at the big guy, he sorta looks like a drunken hairy Scotsman, and it may cause a few giggles, (or more than a few, in my case), but he's mean-spirited and bite-happy enough, to stay dangerous, even if he does look like you should be throwing your loose change at him.

If the third act feels a little less effective that the previous two, then its still a great watch. Tension is replaced by gore, mayhem and an epic battle between wheelchair and woolly man-eater. We're back in traditional monster-movie territory, and that's no bad thing. There's also a nice little capper on the film two that should please you guys.

If you missed ABOMINABLE on its release, its worth seeking it out. Its a fun, fast paced, alternately scary and campy monster movie, that does our pal, Sasquatch, proud. And does me proud too, knowing that the big hairy bastard is Scottish. I couldn't help but cheer on, as my 8ft tall countryman bit off peoples faces and dragged naked babes through windows. Sometimes, life just makes a man smile. Dig a good creature feature? Then grab some beers and your binoculars, and have a look.

8 Abominable Scotsmen out of 10

Review : Rage (2010)

2012-01-23T01:20:00.000-08:00

Director:

Chris Witherspoon

Writer:

Chris Witherspoon

Stars:

Audrey Walker, Rick Crawford and Chris Witherspoon

A thirty something man who lives in a suburb just outside of Portland says goodbye to his beautiful and loving wife and heads into town. There he unintentionally provokes the wrath of a mysterious motorcyclist. The confrontation between the two, sets in motion a day long battle. Beginning in the form of harmless taunts then quickly escalating into something more serious and then into something unimaginable.

Just when you thought it was safe to piss off a biker....

Reviewing a truly independent work can be a tricky business. As a fan, you want to help the artist reach as large an audience as possible, yet as a critic, you have the duty, and the trust of your readership, to tell the whole truth, for good or ill.

For me, I tend to view low budget, indie films within the bounds of their limitations. I look for the good in them, and I give credence where its due. If they don't quite hit the mark, I usually point out the fact that these films were made under the most demanding of circumstances, while being more than ready to note that imagination, and skill, can overcome any hurdle. Many of these small, humble films have to be judged on their own terms, and within their own space. Not so, with Christopher Witherspoon's RAGE. This one needs no such support frame.

With RAGE, Witherspoon has crafted the sort of work that should, in a perfect world, have the studios shaking in their boots. A film that deftly transcends its budget, and its crews lack of experience, and knocks your teeth down your throat.

Taking the credo, long held in Horror high-regard, that simplicity is most often key to truly primal scares, Chris has locked his sights on a premise that's as streamlined and minimal as they come, and has added depth, nuance, and most importantly, a fucking truckload of suspense, thrills, and shocks.

RAGE takes the 'faceless stalker' trope and turns it on its head, creating a nameless, unknowable psychopath who preys in broad daylight, on bustling city streets, and on the roads. And it all works brilliantly. We have a genuinly frightening masked killer who's outfit is a black bikers suit, who sports a beautiful blue bike, and who will just as happily fuck up your day in a public toilet, as in an isolated space. In finding influence in the slasher sub-genres most celebrated tropes, Witherspoon has subverted the rules to suit his own wicked template. Yet this is so much more than a simple stalk-n-slash party.

RAGE practically screams 'cineaste at the wheel'. Our director here is clearly a huge fan of not only Horror Cinema, but all cinema. The influence of Carpenter permeates the movie, yet it jostles constantly with a finely tuned 'Hitchcockian' sense of suspense, and an ability to frame, shoot and orchestrate scenes of fear and apprehension that would make a young, hungry Steven Spielberg proud. For someone with so little time behind the camera, ( I believe this is only Witherspoons second movie), he impresses at every turn with his confidence behind the wheel, (pun intended).

In fact, though the plot of RAGE may appear, at first, to borrow heavily from Spielberg's own debut, DUEL, (hell, theres even a monologue discussing the merits of that movie in here), Witherspoon soon hurtles off in his own dark direction. Karma, moral choice, and fate, all drop by with a knife to take a swing at the viewer, yet the film never becomes po-faced, or wallows in pretense. Its a streamlined, hyper-tense joyride, that just happens to hold deeper subtext, should one wish to look. At heart, RAGE is a refreshingly simple Horror movie that goes right back to basics, and eschews all the bullshit that the mainstream has forced upon us poor bastards for so long. Theres no CG nonsense going down here, just a guy in jet black biker gear, taking no fucking prisoners.

And what a villain. The unknown force here can be summed up with only one word : Badass. This guy has a severe chip on his shoulder, ( I won't give away the reasons, so relax), and will go to any lengths to ease the load. As events quickly spiral out of control, it becomes clear than this nutcase is Micheal Myers with a cool-ass ride, and a wicked sense of humour to boot. the director plays this unknowable maniac, himself, and does a great job at expressing the anger, resilience and sheer danger that exudes from this creepy bastard. RAGE has as memorable a villain as 'Ive seen in Horror in a long time, and I can see this guy becoming something of an icon, if Karma treats Witherspoon a little better than his poor protagonist.

The film is mainly a two-hander, with our crazy-as-fuck biker on one side, and our long suffering good-guy on the other. Its a cat and mouse game that spends most of its running time focusing on these two souls. And in actor, Rick Crawford, RAGE has found a capable lead, who's willing to dirty his hands and flesh out a guy who is very human , and, subsequently, very flawed, while remaining likable, even when cowardice takes its toll. After all, I personally would run like hell if I came across 'The Rider', and I'd throw grannies in front of me to slow him down, (not that our lead does that). There are a few moments when Crawford's performance feels a little forced, but I put that down to inexperience. He performs well, and makes for a very believable counterpoint to our friendly neighbourhood biker. Its great to see a lead who isn't afraid to cry like a baby when the going gets tough. We all would, and we fucking know it. Kudos to the actor, for taking a courageous route with the character.

His wife, played by Audrey Walker, puts in a strong performance also, and in one particularly brutal scene that showcases how far the biker will go, she really tugs the heartstrings. Apparently there have been walkouts on the festival circuits during that scene. In my mind, its Horror; I expect to be horrified. Its doing it damn job, so just calm the fuck down people.

Direction wise, Witherspoon is on top form. There are a few small flaws that hint that perhaps he hasn't yet fully grabbed his confidence by the balls, though. A couple of flashback scenes are unnecessary, and appear to exist only as pointers as to the films subtext, but in truth, the films subtext is already well established and needs no other signs. Its a very small misstep, and far from a game-breaker.

Overall, Witherspoon demonstrates, with ease, that he has the chops to play with the big boys, and most likely knock them the fuck out, in the process. The chase scenes are brilliantly shot, the suspense scenes are, as I said, Hitchcockian, (and that should tell you all you need to know), and the violence is handled skillfully and with maturity. It never becomes a full-on bloodbath, but that's hardly the intent. This is all about edge-of-the-seat scares, and it overflows with such moments. Hitchcock and Carpenter never relied on gore, after all. RAGE gets bloody, it gets brutal, and in some scenes in gets downright disturbing, but it manages all this without over-the-top gore. In truth, all that good-stuff would probably have brought the movie down in my estimations. It simply doesn't need it.

RAGE is a shot in the arm, for indie Horror. Its great fun from start to finish. Violent, gripping and occasionally darkly humorous. Its as confident and as well crafted as any Independent Horror released this year, and deserves wide distribution. This thing is, sadly, still on the shelves, despite universal critical acclaim. That says nothing about the quality of the work on show, but it says a hell of a lot about the film industry and it's unwillingness to take chances on fresh talent.

I guess iconic killers, nail-biting suspense and pitch perfect directing and pacing don't really count for much these days...

RAGE is a gem. Find it, love it, and pray we get a sequel. Oh, and mainstream? Hire this fucking guy...

8 Leathered Lunatics out of 10

Authors Note : Completely off-topic, but I should also note that Portland is beautifully shot here, to the point where I'm considering moving there, (my lady is from that area, so she may owe Chris some thanks)

Review : Don't Go in the Woods (2010)

2012-01-17T02:32:00.000-08:00

Director:

Vincent D'Onofrio

Writers:

Vincent D'Onofrio (story), Sam Bisbee (screenplay), and 1 more credit »

Stars:

Bo Boddie, Eric Bogosian and Gwynn Galitzer

A young band heads to the woods in order to focus on writing new songs. Hoping to emerge with new music that will score them their big break, they instead find themselves in the middle of a nightmare beyond comprehension.

When I finally shuffle off this mortal coil and make my inevitable descent into Lucifer's Grill-house, I won't be facing any surprises. I already know whats waiting for me down there....

Religious zealots, (yeah, your going down, too), Musicals and Emo music, on endless repeat, forever.....

Each and any of these curses would be terrible enough, so I can only imagine the sheer unrelenting horror that awaits my sinning soul, as I spend untold endless days drinking weak-ass tea with insufferably bland ass-clowns, only to find that the only source of entertainment I'll get to share with these blowhards is the dreaded 'Musical'. In my mind, there has never been a more nonsensical form of cinema than the musical. I just can't fathom the fucking things. Now, arguably, OH BROTHER, WHERE ART THOU? could be called a musical, but I'm not having it. To me, that's like saying RAY or WALK THE LINE are musicals, they ain't.

A musical, to me, is one of those insufferable films in which you (occasionally) find yourself caught up in the story, only to have the cast burst into fucking song for no sane reason, (often about doing the dishes, growing stronger, a broken heart, the circle of life, or some other silly shit that ruins the flow of the narrative and bores me to goddamn tears); I hate the damn things.

And don't get me started on 'Emo's. A bland, vapid name for a bland vapid generational 'movement' that make me wanna throw up all over my Coco-Pops. Past generations have had anti-war movements, anti-fascist movements, revolutions and wars in the sacred name of freedom. What does this 'movement' believe in? Half arsed, no-balls music, hair colouring, and feeling sorry for themselves before they've even come close to facing down some of life's true evils. They're the most self-serving group of youths yet to be created by mainstream media and MTV. No cares, no cause, no fight. And if I sound like a grumpy old bastard, that's because I am a grumpy old bastard. I may have a bad back and not be able to get it hard 23 hours of the day, but I still care about freedom, god-dammit!

Now, with all this in mind, imagine my dismay as I sat on my ageing ass to experience the joys of DON'T GO IN THE WOODS. A film, that's basic premise, is to take the much loved slasher sub-genre and turn it into an EMO MUSICAL. Yeah, you fucking read that right, friendo's. God help us all.

I had no idea of this, of course, before watching the damn thing. I figured I was dealing with yet another low-budget slasher that may be great, may be terrible. I like to give them all a try. All these independent directors out there deserve our attention, at least to some degree, but this fucking thing....!

The film opens with some singing, but at this point, my penis had yet to shrivel up completely, as many slashers start the same way....a group of kids in a car, playing guitar and chilling out. It's as familiar as fake tits in slow motion. This is a slasher, so I expect this. Hell, I even feel comforted by it. Then the cast start talking......

I ain't gonna bash these guys too much, as I've since learnt that they aren't, in fact, actors, but were chosen for their musical ability. Seems a weird choice to me, but okay, 'I'll give them the benefit of the doubt', says I. Sorry guys, but this just wasn't working. There is zero chemistry, (and this is supposed to be a band we're dealing with here), and practically every line is delivered dead in the water. These lad's are never convincing in any way, shape or form. Sure they can sing, play guitar and 'emote' for the camera, music-video style, but I frankly don't give a rats ass. If I wanna hear some dire emo music, I'll go to a 'Bullet for my Valentine' gig. This is supposed to me a movie.

Also, the pacing is way off from the get-go. We learn a little of who these douche-bags are as they wander through the woods for ten minutes, and that's fine. I can handle the severely dodgy acting, as long as we get to the good stuff some time soon. Alas, the film then spends untold amounts of time having these guys sit around campfires, singing self-obsessed songs that will cause the inner-ear mechanism to bleed profusely in almost all listeners. Sometime, seemingly days later in real-time, their girlfriends show up, and some bland drama unfolds in between the 'songs', as the lead singer complains about the band not having time to make music, if they spend all their time getting high and partying in the woods with hot ladies, (what kind of lead singer is this, I ask?)

When the slasher elements finally arrive, and believe me its a long, long wait, they're handled almost as an afterthought, with zero panache, the bare minimum of gore, and a killer that's as obvious and unmemorable as he is unoriginal. This 'twist' has been done to death a thousand times and more. Its no longer clever, at all.

I was surprised to learn this whole endeavour was put together by Vincent D'Onofrio. I've enjoyed some of his work as an actor, most notable his section 8 nut-job in FULL METAL JACKET, but he shows no real signs of prowess behind the camera here. To be fair though, with a script this shitty and a cast who are essentially little more than an unsigned emo band, jamming onscreen for what feels like a fucking eternityy, he really didn't stand too much of a chance. The film goes nowhere worth going, is as shallow as it is devoid of tension and style, and will probably serve only as a curio on D'Onofrio's otherwise successful and impressive career.

Other than some well handled camerawork, and some really pleasant locations that are easy on the eyeball, I really can't find anything positive to say about this nightmare. Thats not to say that all will hate it with the fury that I myself do. I'm sure some will find some merit in the songs, I just can't imagine who would want to sit through it for the songs alone. If you listen to this sort of music, you already have your record collection, why waste time watching these clowns argueing in the woods between songs?

Perhaps also of some merit is the bare bones concept, (not the singing), of a look at a band attempting to create art when in the cusp of youth. It's a wild time to be alive, and a hard thing for an artist to fight through, torn as they are between hedonism, and capturing the fire that such hedonism fuels. To quote Spacemen 3 : Taking Drugs To Make Music, To Take Drugs To....someone should look at this concept in a serious manner. But honestly, that's all I got.

If this is my perfect hell, and I believe it to be so. I may have to apologise profusely to all and sundry, especially Jesus, Allah, Buddha, Krishna, Thor and Batman. I want to repent! Please, whichever one of you who has a heart....grant me eternal peace. I want psychedelic music, agnostics and Horror movies that have real heart, power and presence. Oh, and no fucking musicals!

Slasher fans.....this isn't a slasher movie. It isn't a backwoods movie. It's barely a movie.

Musical fans..... I may hate the damn sub-genre, but I understand how it works, and I respect those who do it well, and who enjoy it. This isn't a real musical. No emotional crescendo's to be found here, folks. Its band-practise in the woods.

Emo's....I got nothing to say to you. Just back away from me, man...

0 Emotional Content out of 10

Review : Dream House (2011)

2012-01-06T02:45:00.000-08:00

Director:

Jim Sheridan

Writer:

David Loucka (screenplay)

Stars:

Daniel Craig, Rachel Weisz and Naomi Watts

Soon after moving into their seemingly idyllic new home, a family learns of a brutal crime committed against former residents of the dwelling.

Any regular visitors to The Horror Hotel will know that I take a pretty hard-line stand against trailers within the Horror genre. I never use them in my articles, and I'm as adamant about advising people to avoid them as I am about avoiding them myself. In some genres its not such a huge deal, but for me, a teaser should be just that, a teaser.

When it comes to our favourite genre, though, the studios seem to deem us all 'Attention Deficit Disorder' suffering fuck-wits, who have zero imagination, and must be spoon-fed our Horror as they see fit. Be it through misleading advertising being used to promote a film as one thing when its entirely another, (DON'T BE AFRAID OF THE DARK, anyone?), giving away each and every scene featuring the villain, (A NIGHTMARE ON SHIT STREET), or, in the case of the DREAM HOUSE trailer, giving practically the entire game away before we even see the fucking thing.

Now, me being me, I didn't see the trailer, so I had no idea what was to be expected. Hell, I hadn't even read the synopsis. All I knew was the James Bond was in it, and so were two very capable, very attractive actress' by the names of Rachel Weisz and Mrs Kong. This information, and the fact that it sounded like a haunted house movie of some kind or another, was enough to get my motor running. Thank God I didn't watch the trailer.

Let me say right off the bat, that DREAM HOUSE is a very flawed movie. Its messy, sloppily edited in many places, and lacks direction; but its certainly not half as bad as its reputation would have you believe. I cant help wonder how many critics who viewed this film had seen the trailer beforehand, and already knew 75% of the plot, before their asses warmed the cinema seats.

I'm sure they would still have gave it a hard time, (as will I, in a few moments), but I have a feeling the reactions may not have been quite as negative, had the films central mystery been kept secret. We'll never know for sure, thanks to the gormless wonder-fucks who handled the advertising. Good work, guys; your mothers will be proud.

Onto the film...

Besides the trailer, (which I have now viewed, as one would a car-crash), the film really does have a few serious issues. Yet its a watchable film, and somewhat engaging, if your expectations aren't set too high. Not an easy feat, when it stars James Bond...but I digress.

The main problem the film has, is that it doesn't seem to be sure what genre it fits into. Whereas the mixing of genres can often lead to great, great things, (see THE INNKEEPERS review here for a look at why), it can be a death knell when handled with less than careful hands. DREAM HOUSE flirts with the 'haunted house' movie, holds hands with the 'home invasion' movie, french kisses the 'family drama' movie, and eventually gets drunk and gives a hand-job to the 'psycholigical thriller' movie. Had it settled on one, or maybe even two, of these formats, it would have been a far more effective film, because when looked at separately, all the elements are handled well. Its when they meet, mix and mingle that the films strengths are lost.

Acting wise, its all good. James Bond is his usual brilliant self; turning in a believable portrait of a man struggling with some pretty formidable demons. Rachel Weisz is solid, and easy to care for, as his loving, loyal wife, and Mrs Kong is okay too, despite having a very small role in the grand scheme of things, (she's a neighbour from across the street, and that's all I'm saying). Its a good cast, easy on the eyes for both sexes, and more than worthy in the acting stakes. Oh, and James Bonds kids are really cute too.

The plot, (the real one), is actually really strong too. The twist that the trailer so brutally reveals, actually comes halfway through the movie. This, believe me, is a good thing, because we've all seen this particular twist being done to death over the last decade. By placing it in the centre of the movie, we're left with a pretty intriguing premise. Where does the character go next? I actually found the second half of the film to be pretty engrossing, at least until the finale, which comes out of left-field far too quickly, and is wrapped up with very little suspense or vitality.

It feels like a film that has too many hands sculpting it. The scenes of family drama are solid, the scenes of Horror, (however few and however light), are pulled off okay, and the story is sound, but the whole thing feels like some George Lucas-type producer dropped by and forced some completely ridiculous changes.

The soundtrack is a good example of this. The music is completely innapproriate and often dilutes the onscreen dynamics. Theres one scene that is properly tragic, yet has a John Williams-esque E.T vibe playing over the top of it. Its fucking nuts.

What you get with DREAM HOUSE is the structure of a pretty solid movie, having its overall power diminished by a foundation that seems to lack confidence, direction and purpose. With a little more care in the editing suite, and with some creative changes, (not least that music!), this could have been a winner. As it stands, I didn't hate the film. I enjoyed it for what it was, and my attention was held to the final moments by the strong cast. Sadly, what could have been a great film is merely a watchable one.

The good news is that, trailer aside, its nowhere near the car-crash that many critics would have you believe. I have a feeling that certain sections of the female audience will find a little more to appreciate than the males, (as its a pretty romantic story, when all is said and done), but all in all, its a mildly diverting ninety minutes, and is probably worth watching for James Bond, alone. This DREAM HOUSE isn't shattered completely, but the cracks are hard to cover. Enter with care.

Oh, and don't watch Horror trailers....they're shit.

5.5 Spy Kids out of 10

Review : The Innkeepers (2011)

2012-01-05T04:29:00.000-08:00

Director:

Ti West

Writer:

Ti West

Stars:

Sara Paxton, Pat Healy and Kelly McGillis

During the final days at the Yankee Pedlar Inn, two employees determined to reveal the hotel's haunted past begin to experience disturbing events as old guests check in for a stay.

I had seriously high expectations going into Ti West's latest spook-show, and who could blame me? The last time this guy had full control of a production, he created one of the decades creepiest, most atmospheric movies, in HOUSE OF THE DEVIL. Its practically languid pace may not have appealed to every Horror fan, but for an old school guy like yours truly, it was just what the Mad Doctor ordered. West instantly became a Director who's work I had to see. I fell over myself to catch CABIN FEVER 2, and while I believe he disowned the film, (after much studio-fuckery), you can still feel his capable hands all over it. I enjoyed it quite a bit, and can only imagine what would or could have been, had the studio heads done the seemingly impossible (for some of them), and allowed an artist to create art.

Word had it that with THE INNKEEPERS, West was once again in full control of his raising his baby. And given that the plot involves a couple of would-be paranormal investigators spending a few nights in a haunted hotel. I was all over this thing. The one-sheet, as you can see above, was also a factor in my months long salivation problem. For my money, this was the must-see Horror of the year.

I was lucky enough to catch the film during a particularly violent storm. and as the wind howled outside and the lights faded, I prepared myself for what would surely be the years most eerie film. So, did it live up to the hype I'd created in my own mind?

Well, that's a hard question to answer, as it was far, far removed from what I expected, yet knocked me for six, in a whole different way...

As a straight-up Horror film, it didn't have quite the impact I expected. Yet as a suitably creepy, and deeply atmospheric work, it's just impeccable. Instead of following in the footsteps of the handheld horrors of PARANORMAL ACTIVITY or INSIDIOUS' non-stop scares, West has crafted an entirely original vision of the 'haunted house movie'. It has all the tropes we expect from the sub-genre, but it brings them to the audience in a very unique and stylised manner that is really quite charming.

In many ways, this is the CLERKS of Horror movies, following, as it does, a pair of down on their luck, slightly odd employees, who spend large amounts of time shooting the shit, and ragging on the hotels clientele. The film has a huge leaning towards humour, at least during its first half, as we get to know our likable, (and very relate-able) leads, but the comedy, thankfully, is not bold and/or farcical. Instead, the idiosyncrasies of the characters is the conduit from which the light humour flows. There are very few outright gags, if any, but theres a great deal of amusing moments as these two hapless ghost-busters slog through the long working hours in the near abandoned Inn. In short, spending time with these two is an absolute blast. They feel like the friends you never had, and its easy to fall in love with them, and become involved in their lives, and the subtleties of their relationship.

The Horror, much like HOUSE OF THE DEVIL, takes its time coming, but anyone who's used to West's calm, composed style of direction, will feel right at home. It never feels stretched and not one moment is wasted, be it conversations with guests or humorous, half arsed paranormal investigations. The films greatest strength is that in spending so much time with these guys, and by never leaving the one location (bar one fleeting scene), you quickly begin to feel like your in the Hotel with them. And for such a slow moving (for the most part) film, I found myself not wanting it to end. The Yankee Pedlar Inn, is a very cool place to spend a few nights in.

Thanks to Wests brilliant sense of space, we get a feel for the hotels many dark corridors, large lobbies, dining rooms and bedrooms. He handles his camera with fantastic ease, to the point that you'll be so engrossed in the events onscreen, that you may not realise just how expertly shot the whole thing is. The best comparison I can think of, in terms of camerawork, would be that of Kubrick, or early John Carpenter. Its really impressive stuff, memorable too, and when the Horror hits full speed, and things get dark, it only adds to the sense of dread.

I mentioned earlier that the films first half is more akin to a humorous character piece, but the second half brings the chills and thrills in great style. There are only a handful of truly scary moments, building up to the finale, yet they all hit their mark. West doesn't pile on the spooky imagery, and instead allows the audience to project their own fears into the pitch-dark cellars and empty hotel rooms. The second half of THE INNKEEPERS builds a genuinely chilling atmosphere of danger and apprehension, effectively pulling the rug from under the audience, after the seemingly lighthearted nature of the opening scenes. Slowly, queasily, you begin to fear that this may not be quite the happy-go-lucky 'Ealing-Style' spook film that it appeared to be. Ti West is a clever man. Without giving anything away, the finale brings terror in a big way, and it gets pretty damn unsettling. I would say that those with patience will be rewarded, but that would imply that your merely waiting for events to take place....not so. The whole film is a blast, from scene one to the thoughtful epilogue, (yes, theres an epilogue, not to mention chapters with their very own title cards, throughout).

The cast are all great, and with only six characters, (two of which have barely any dialogue), you really get a feel for who these people are. Kelly McGillis brings a believable intensity to her role as a washed out, once famous actress who's staying at the Inn for the weekend. George Riddle, (no relation to Tom), is strangely bone-chilling, as the elderly customer who is adamant about spending the night in one particular room, and the leads are both brilliant, bringing depth and warmth to the eccentric, quietly sad employees of The Yankee Pedlar Inn.

Sara Paxton is no stranger to Horror, having faced Krug in the remake of LAST HOUSE ON THE LEFT, yet shes almost unrecognisable here. She plays 'Claire' as an easygoing, slightly ditsy, and very, very lovable loser-in-life. I think I may have fallen in love with her, during the three nights spent in that creepy hotel. Pat Healy, as her work colleague, Luke, and the guy who's enthusiasm for the paranormal leads her on her dark adventure, plays his role as a wisecracking, intelligent loner with just the right amount of pathos, and while Claire is arguably the films lead character, observant viewers will realise that the story Ti West is telling, is actually Luke's. His tentative attempts at expressing his feelings, and his reactions to Claire's behaviour are subtlety telling. The simple, warm relationship these two share, has hidden depth, and as I stated, they make for very fine room-mates.

THE INNKEEPERS is not what I expected, or what I hoped for, but that's okay. I was quickly able to slip into its vibe, and by the time the weekend spent there was over, I found myself in love with the place, the people, the story and the film. Had I seen this sooner, it would have made the 'best-of' list with ease. Its a stylish, enjoyable and hugely atmospheric ghost story with great characters and writing, brilliant direction, some serious scares and a whole cellar-full of charm.

I've no doubt that some will find Ti's latest to be a disappointment. It lacks the white-knuckle pacing of so many modern Horror movies, and has almost no gore/violence whatsoever. Those of you who enjoy a refreshingly old school haunted house story, however, will find much to enjoy. I can see this film taking its place on my 'comfort-list' of movies I watch repeatedly, year after year. I came to The Pedlar Inn expecting one thing, was given another, and fell deeply in love. I'll be visiting the labyrinthine hallways and stairwells of this place, often. Spend a few nights with THE INNKEEPERS, and you may not wanna check out. In fact, you may not have a choice.....

10 Disgruntled Ghost-hunters out of 10

Editorial : 2011's Top Ten

2012-01-03T03:05:00.000-08:00

Well, another year is over and we're all a little closer to the cold embrace of the crypt, but it ain't all bad. Despite the whiners, naysayers and proud owners of eternal virginity's.....Horror has had a great year. Sure, the mainstream scene has left a lot to be desired, but since when has the situation been any different? Those of us who done our homework were rewarded with a plethora of brilliant fright flicks, and a few bona-fide timeless classics to boot. This 'top-ten' was actually really hard to compile, such has been the amount of downright impressive Horror on release in the fine year of 2011. I haven't put these in any particular order, as its too damn difficult. All these films stand proudly as their own entity, and shouldn't be compared. I have my own personal best, if I HAD to choose, but I'll keep that to myself. Anyway, here's the list...I've went by the year of release, but if theres any mistakes in here, be sure to let me know, and I'll sort it out. Oh, and if you've missed any of these little numbers, do yourself a favour and give them a look. Chances are, you wont be disappointed....

Mothers Day

Bousman's hardcore reworking of the 80's cheese-fest is as violent, intense and perverted as you could wish for. MOTHERS DAY has great performances, non-stop violence and just enough character and situational nuance to make for a damned fun time. (Review here...)

Black Death

One of the years smartest, and darkest films. BLACK DEATH delves into theology, and takes a painful look at the animosity between Atheists and Christians. As a microcosm of the current mental illness that grips the world, its flawless, and as a WICKER MAN inspired sword 'n' sandals, bad-ass Horror movie, its no slouch either. Oh, and Sean Bean is cooler that Jesus. (Review coming soon...)

A Lonely Place to Die

For my money, the very best thriller of the year. Pitch perfect direction and believable performances help lend to a film that brings the intensity back to cinema. The foreboding Scottish setting only adds to the sense of terror. As exciting a film as you'll see all year, and not a pair of CG Robot Balls in sight. Scotland for the win. (Review coming soon...)

I Saw The Devil

A Nietzchian nightmare writ large, and easily the best revenge thriller/horror crossover since OLDBOY, (and starring the same, demi-god of an actor, in Min Sik-Choi). Remember the jokers line from THE DARK KNIGHT about an immovable object meeting an unstoppable force? Well, I SAW THE DEVIL is the result. Insanely violent, absolutely fearless and starkly beautiful. After this bad-boy stares into your soul, you may well require a little spiritual guidance. I recommend whiskey....lots and lots of whiskey. (Review here...)

Super

Anyone who knows James Gunn and his work on SLITHER, (and with Kaufman) will be in alternate reality heaven with this one. SUPER is a comic book movie with as much heart as it has bloodshed, and as much pathos as it has hilarity. Comparisons to KICK-ASS will endure, but SUPER remains a unique and touching look at loneliness, decency and the desire to live a life worth living. oh, and its much better, and much deeper, than KICK-ASS. In fact, its a TOXIC AVENGER for a more cerebral audience. Wonderful (Review coming soon...)

The Woman

Lucky McKee's hugely controversial masterpiece left an indelible mark on my psyche after the first watch, and its only grown in stature, in my mind, since. Disturbing, passionate and compassionate, THE WOMAN is the ultimate treatise on the war of the sex's. (Review here...)

Tucker 'n' Dale VS Evil

Hands down the most charming film of the year, and the funniest damn Horror Comedy I've shared a beer with since SHAUN OF THE DEAD. TUCKER N DALE is a love letter to those of us who know the history of the 'backwoods slasher' like we know our own hands, and yet its characters are so universally recognised that it never fails to win over anyone who's lucky enough to view it. I still grin like a fool just thinking about the scene with the bee's and the chainsaw. (Review here...)

Hobo With A Shotgun

Now this is how you do Grindhouse Cinema. Rutger Hauer turns the cool up to 11, and gallons of gore, sleaze and laughter follow him for the ride. HOBO is an unapologetic rock-n-roller, dropping Grade-A acid and snorting cocaine off a prostitutes tits. Now...who wouldn't wanna do that, huh? (Review here...)

Stakeland

A cold, painful look at the result of a widespread vampire-like infection, STAKELAND is the perfect antidote to Hollywood's so-called 'epic' movies. As dark and despairing as any movie released this year, this is a vampire film filtered through the tear-blind eyes of THE ROAD. Its a hard watch, but a very worthwhile one. (Review here...)

Kill List

This low-budget British gem is the scariest film I've seen in years, perhaps since THE DESCENT. a slow, almost unbearable build up takes us on a hellish ride from working-class drama, to gritty gangster film, and all the way into outright Horror. The fact that, when the whole exhausting experience is over, almost nothing is explained, only adds to the feeling that the messed up shit going down is too vast to fathom. This is the stuff nightmares are made of. Dark, unrelenting and, in its last act, absolutely fucking terrifying; KILL LIST is the years most welcome surprise. Review coming soon...

Honourable mentions :

The Walking Dead

Its not a movie, or it would be perched easily in the top ten. The debate rages on as to whether Season 2 of this brilliant adaptation has focused too much on character and not enough on zombies. Well, the debate is bullshit, folks. Anyone who has read the graphic novels understands that the 'walking dead' are the survivors and that this is their story. For many of us, the show just keeps growing and growing in strength, and the mid-season finale was a jaw-dropper. The best thing to hit the television since my hammer.

American Horror Story

Again, a contender for years best Horror, and its television! (What a year we've had). Season 1 of AMERICAN HORROR STORY was the strangest, most perverted, and often scariest show to hit the airwaves since TWIN PEAKS. Gimp-rape, columbine-style killing, sexy-as-hell withered maids, penis chewing, the Anti-Christ and even the 'Black Dahlia' herself, were among the shows many, many sick wonders. Simply fucking brilliant.

Fright Night

The much dreaded FRIGHT NIGHT remake earns its utterly surprising place on the list due to being a remake that is NOT a remake. I see it more as an adaptation of a classic work. It's a drunken rebellious teen, that really has little in common with its Dad. As such, it stand on its own, and is the best mainstream Horror of the year by a long long way. (Review here...)

Final Destination 5

The definition of unlikely. After a slow downward spiral into bullshit-ville, the FINAL DESTINATION franchise hits what could possibly be its high water mark, with a film that's just as cheesy, cruel and vicious as you could hope for in mainstream cinema. Its funny, gruesome and, alongside last years PIRANHA 3D, the best use of 3D a Horror fan can slap their eyeballs on. Good times. (Review here...)

Contagion

Politically savvy, very realistic and downright worrying....CONTAGION was a quiet, controlled look at at very plausible 'end-world' scenario. The cast was fantastic, the scenes of viral devastation were chilling, and Gwyneth Paltrow died horribly within the first ten minutes. Genius.

Next up, the 'Worst of 2011' . Should be fun....

Book Review : Pay Phone - Brandon Ford

2012-01-01T23:45:00.000-08:00

January 1998.

While a fierce winter falls upon the streets of New York City, a vicious killer is on the hunt for new blood. From his third floor apartment window, he watches, waits, using the pay phone across the street as the key to finding his victims. With his voice and his charms, he lures them to his door...

...and one by one they meet their fate. On a gray morning, he spies someone new. Someone different. Someone who reminds him of someone he knows. Someone very, very special. And he'll stop at nothing to be sure that special someone... is next. What ever you do, don't answer the phone. It just might be for you.

The first time I read the late great Richard Laymon, I was around sixteen years old, and I hated his work, I mean HATED it. I had grown up with Horror literature, but the stuff I had been reading was of the, shall we say, excessively descriptive variety. I believed that a great writer should describe everything in vivid detail for the reader, and that Laymon's minimal approach was amateurish at best. See, I was a kid, with hardly any hair on my balls and no real brain in my head. I knew not what I did.

I soon came to realise that its a sign of a great writer, to be able to place the reader inside the emotional core of the work, be it character or scene, with the use of just a few pinpoint focused lines. I realised that I, the audience, was as much a participant in the transference of the novels power as the writer themselves, and that truly gifted writers had the insight, the self control and the respect for their readership, to temper those Tolkienesque/Kingian forty-page setups, and start cutting into the bone from paragraph one.

Brandon Ford, I'm very pleased to say, is one of those writers, and a damned good one at that. PAY PHONE is my first plunge into this guys rather twisted world, and he delivered the goods with surprising style, skill and confidence. This is a writer who understands that less is more, and has that wonderful ability to draw you into his world and is characters in an instant. Ford paints a fully believable reality here, that is at once completely relatable, and in its familiarity, pretty damn horrifying.

Playing out like a pitch-black, perverted vignette of life in the big city, PAY PHONE is the anti-romance. Here, the city is a desolate, dangerous place; lonely and dispassionate towards its lost, damned inhabitants. Here, the wistful dreams of lives possibilities can, and most likely will, lead to pain, terror and death. The city looks down upon her denizens with a cold gaze, as would a predator on her prey, too fascinated by its hopeless struggle for survival to make the final kill. Of course, for anyone who's lived in a city, this will feel all too damn familiar. Ford's reality is one many will recognise, but wish to God they didn't.

PAY PHONE is many things. First and foremost, it a very effective and at times damned distressing Horror story. Yet its much, much more. Its also an ensemble character study...a look into the microscope at a select few of the cities lost souls. It's a perceptive and thoughtful take on loneliness, desire and dreams, and the often devastating results they have on those who live within them. And, surprisingly, it's also a jet-back comedy, at least when it chooses to be, (when Ford decides its time for you to start hurting...hurt you shall).

Ford seems to understand the human condition pretty well. He knows that in tragedy, lies humour, and vice-versa. He understands that horrors basis lies in compassion, and that the vital element in garnering our empathy, (and fear) is through character. With PAY PHONE, he's created a very memorable bunch of misfits. From the gentle, instantly loveable lead, and her ballsy best friend, to a hilarious landlord (who's misery is as contagious as it is funny), theres a lot of good stuff to dig into here. We have career girls with some very unsavoury methods of climbing the corporate ladder, social workers who's motives may not be altogether noble, gap-toothed ladies of the night, and even a vividly realised, (and twisted as hell), relationship between psyche and psycho. Its all great stuff.

And as for the psycho...he's a pretty frightening sumbitch. A smooth talking, self deluded 'Patrick Batemen' type, (if he was too damn fucked up and busy killing to even bother climbing the Wall Street ladder). He's damaged, authentic, and complex; often very funny and, just as frequently, very disturbing. This guy has some pretty dark pastimes, and grooming random lost souls on the phone is the least of them. I won't spoil any of the fun here, but this guys exploits had me hooked, eager for more and wondering why in the hell I was doing so.

PAY PHONE is, on occasion, a very violent work. Ford doesn't pull away from the carnage, yet, wisely, doesn't bombard us constantly, either. While the Horrors are balanced by the building of character, when they hit, they hit hard. More than that, (our monster), Jake's inner demons, when unleashed, can have the effect on the reader of taking a bludgeoning. I enjoyed each and every one of these city folk, and some of them I loved. So by the time the story reached its inevitable conclusion, I was pretty damn distressed. And the novels finale authentically upset me. It the last few chapters, the humour is bled out, and a sense of real terror, danger and despair took hold. The Horror goes full throttle and in a genre where many writers have problems with closure, Ford seems to have none. He also has some pretty big balls to be pulling this sort of thing. Its as strong and effecting a finale, as I've read in many a moon.

I'm glad I found this guy. I'm pretty selective when it comes to my Horror literature, and I often find myself re-reading many of my beloved books, (God knows how many times I've revisited the works of Brian Keene or Laymon, to name just two). It's nice to have a new voice to discover, and one that fits so well with what I see as true Horror lit. Sharp, concise, fearless and fun, PAY PHONE is a blast from start to finish. It's a one/two sitting read, and yet manages to pack more emotion, insight, comedy, character and lovely red stuff into its wiry frame than many of the genre's supposed 'titans' can hope to muster. It's sick, hilarious, intelligent, perverted and disturbing.

Richard Laymon would be proud.

9 Pissed-off Landlords out of 10

Editorial : Horror Hotel Managements 'Christmas Antidote'

2011-12-25T01:42:00.000-08:00

Its that time of year again when huge corporations hook your children in with a barrage of advertising media, and your already half empty wallet is bled dry in the name of material possession. It's that time of year again when your drug-addict uncle throws up all over your X-Box, and your drunken father lets you know, in no uncertain terms, that you were a ripped condom, and have impoverished him ever since. A time for unwanted gifts to be received and over-expensive gifts to be given in order to save face. A time for burned Turkey dinners, and overdosing on Disney movies till the stinging sugar pours from your eyeballs.

Yep, its Christmas. The most stressful time of the year for the poor among us, and the most fun time of year for the Wal-mart, Tesco and Amazon shareholders of the world. Hallelujah, indeed.....

If the mere mention of this most Christian, (or, if we're being honest, Pagan), holiday sends shivers up your spine for all the wrong reasons...fear not, troops. All those relatives who ignored your plea's to share in some Horror Cinema during the season of the witch, can be harassed once again. This time in the name of seasonal cheer.

See how they like them rotten apples!

Your old pal, Santa Kyle, is taking a break from decorating the Hotel walls with Intestinal Tinsel and decking the halls with offal, to bring you a little guide to some of the films that you can take along with you to view with all the family on this most materialistic of days. Films that take the Christmas spirit outside and bury his face in the snow till the screaming stops. Films that take that kid from A CHRISTMAS STORY and actually DO shoot his eye out. Its the Horror Hotel's 'Christmas Antidote'.....

RARE EXPORTS

An underrated little gem that takes a very dark look at the origins of the Santa Clause legend. It feels like a 'none-more-black' take on early Spielbergian adventures, and while often creepy, it somehow manages to be a feelgood, honest-to-god Christmas film by the time all is said and done. As a bonus, it reveals that fat, red bastard as the child hating creep-show we always suspected he was. Review here!

SILENT NIGHT DEADLY NIGHT

An absolute classic of exploitation cinema, that follows the mis-adventures of a kid who witnesses a psycho (dressed as Santa), rape and kill his mother. Years pass as the kid gets more and more unstable, until he grows up and lands a job as....Santa! Axe-wielding madness ensues. The outrage this film caused on release from rampant drooling Christians, is reason enough to make your gran watch it.

GREMLINS

Another dark Christmas classic. This film has everything. Cute Mogwai's, vicious little bastards, and a totally unnecessary monologue about a chicks dad getting stuck in the chimney on Xmas eve, (as he impersonates Santa), only to be found rotting by his loving family, later. Legendary! Its also set in the most 'Christmassy' town in Cinema, (it recalls the quaint township featured in ITS A WONDERFUL LIFE). Watch it with the kids, and they'll love you for it.

BLACK CHRISTMAS

Arguably the original slasher, this is a yuletide Horror that's still as profoundly disturbing today, as it was on release. It manages to take all the festive sounds and sights we relate to family, warmth and good cheer, (including Christmas Carols), and turns them into wholly threatening portents of death and tragedy. One of the greatest Horror movies ever made. Review here!

CHRISTMAS EVIL

Considered by some to be the quintessential seasonal fright-flick. This one, like SILENT NIGHT, follows a traumatised kid into adult loopy-land. This time, the poor little bugger catches his Dad banging his Mum, (dressed as Mr Clause, of course). And as with the previous film, he dons the red suit and opens a can of 'naughty or nice' on the populace. This one is actually a rather intelligent look at the Santa myth, and is a perfect 'fuck you!', to whichever relative forces you to sit through THE SANTA CLAUSE for the twentieth damn time.

AND ALL THROUGH THE HOUSE....

Not a full movie, but a very creepy episode from the much-adored EC-based TALES FROM THE CRYPT. Obviously fake snow, and the semi-retarded guy from L.A LAW, (as a fucking creepy Santa) can't dilute the awesome. And it's willing to chop up a kid on Christmas Eve. What more do you want?

And last but not least.....(Apologies in advance)

THE MUPPET'S CHRISTMAS CAROL

Yes, I know its as far from Horror as you can possibly get, and I have no excuse for it's inclusion. It's got ghosts in it, though, and stars Micheal Caine as Ebeneezer Scrooge, so be at peace! It's my one weakness during the holiday season. So if all that groovy Horror wears you out, just sit back, grab some mulled wine, and watch a truly lovely take of Dickens's classic morality tale. Again, sorry....

Let me make it up to you, with a cosy little reading of a Christmas classic, from our old pal, The Crypt-Keeper....

MERRY CHRISTMAS, AND PEACE AND LOVE TO ALL!!!

Yours,
Hotel Management

Review : Retreat (2011)

2011-12-19T02:34:00.000-08:00

Director:

Carl Tibbetts

Writers:

Janice Hallett, Carl Tibbetts

Stars:

Cillian Murphy, Jamie Bell and Thandie Newton

I remember vividly the first time I saw ROSEMARY'S BABY.

It wasn't so much the concept, or even the terrifying final moments, that struck such a strong chord with me. Instead, it was the sense I had of being completely doubtful of all that was taking place, while watching it. I was questioning everything. Rosemary's sanity, her husbands motivations, her neighbours strange, overbearing behaviour. I had absolutely no idea who the good guys were and who, (if any) the bad guys were. It was a wonderful feeling, to experience a movie from exactly the perspective the director intends you do. The feeling of questioning everything was intoxicating, and the pay-off was so expertly handled, I immediately proclaimed its director, Roman Polanski, a 'master of suspense', ( of course, everyone else already knew this. I was rather late to the party) Had I known his work I would've known just how well he could pull my psychological strings. For the duration of that movie, he owned me.

Amazingly, first time Writer/Director, Carl Tibbets, has managed to pull off a similar feat with his quietly excellent debut, RETREAT. He's created a work that draws you in slowly and subtly, until you have no idea what the hell is going on. Second guessing has rarely been as much fun.

The plot is deceptively simple. An emotionally damaged couple are vacationing on a remote Scottish island, in an attempt to find some sort of closure and healing regarding a recent tragedy that has befallen them, when one windy morning, they find a stranger washed ashore with a pretty severe head wound, and a very scary tale to tell. He informs them that the mainland has been decimated by a lethal virus, and that the only hope of survival is to remain entrenched on the island, locked airtight within the cottage they inhabit.

That's it. That's the whole plot. The entire movie, (besides a few lines of dialogue from a local sailor), is a three hander. Tibbetts quickly sets up its premise and then allows the great writing and brilliant performances to do the rest. Almost immediately, you find yourself doubting the stranger who's arrival heralds in the Horror. Is he telling the truth about the situation on the mainland? Is it really a death sentence to leave the cottage? Is he some cruel, manipulative psychopath? Or is he simply a mentally ill soul seeking company out of desperation.Maybe he's just fucked up from that wound on his dome....

How would you handle the situation our young couple find themselves in? Would you leave the cottage, assuming this guy was a dribbling nutcase, or would you think maybe, just maybe, he could be telling the truth? Its a delicious set-up, and I guarantee you'll be bouncing back and forth in a state of confusion for the entire run-time. Tibbetts, and co-writer, Janice Hallett, have created one hell of a calling card.

The film, with its tiny cast and sparse locations, is obviously a low-budget number, but its ideas are big. Tibbetts knows that we Horror kids have pretty wild imaginations, and will do the groundwork ourselves when it comes to envisioning a (possible) apocalypse. Sure, the end of the world is not the point, but the simple thought of a world turning to shit gives RETREAT a sense of scope that's akin to Romero's seminal NIGHT OF THE LIVING DEAD. Its actually easy to imagine this film being sold on the following concept : 'Imagine Ben enters the 'living dead' farmhouse ranting on about undead cannibals outside, and rapidly demands they other occupants board the place up, yet no-one else has actually seen the zombies. What do they do?'. Like all genius ideas, its simple as can be.

The few locations that are utilised are also brilliant in their simplicity. The desolate, lonesome coastlines of Wales give a real sense of alienation, and the films long, wide shots of the beautiful Scottish island work perfectly in contrast to the suffocating confines of the cottage's interior, as it becomes a prison. It's great stuff.

Whatever budget RETREAT'S producers may have secured must have been spent on the eccellent cast. All three leads are brilliant. We expect greatness from Cillian Murphy, (who has faced a lethal virus before in 28 DAYS LATER, lest we forget), and Thandie Newton has always been able to back up her beauty with raw talent, yet they both really excel here. As a character driven suspense piece, the films backbone is character nuance, and these two are engaging, sympathetic, and bring added complexity to an already complex relationship dynamic.

As for Jamie Bell; well, he's finally become the honest to god actor many of us hoped he always could be. In BILLY ELLIOT his youthful exuberance carried the film, and perhaps led us all to believe he was a far more accomplished young actor than he was at the time. The underrated DEATHWATCH, (his first Horror film, and well worth a look), afforded him the chance to make the transition from child actor to adult, and while he done okay, he appeared slightly unsure of his footing. He's always seemed a likable kid, with passable talent. Likable but not a very memorable actor. with RETREAT, he should see himself finally becoming a name to be reckoned with. His performance here is brilliant, and one of teh highlights of the cinematic year. Had this vital role fallen into the hands of anything less than a very skilled actor, the whole house of cards would have fallen, and Bell doesn't let the film down, at all. I never thought the porter kid from KING KONG could be so threatening, so intimidating or so scary. He's come of age with this performance. All the questions that the audience ask themselves rely on his portrayal of the mysterious, and possibly dangerous stranger. As well written as the character is, had the performance not sustained a very delicate balancing act between possible hero or villain, the game would be given away. As it stand, you find yourself hating him with one breath, and justifying his actions with the next. The choice to cast Bell was a risky one, but a wise one, indeed.

Now, with all excellent movies, you feel that familiar fear that the finale will somehow manage to blow the whole deal. And with a film where the search for answers is the whole journey, it had damn well hold up, come the final moments. Without saying anything else...it does. With finesse and with poignancy. There is little violence/gore, but it does hit pretty hard.

The only downside is that certain elements may remind the Horror-centric viewer of a little known film from a number of years back. I wont name it here, but it was a fucking good film, and overall, RETREAT really does plough's its own field.

If your in the mood for some slow-burn suspense, atmosphere to burn and some fantastic writing and performances, you could do much worse than check out this vastly underrated work. Carl Tibbetts is without doubt, a man to watch closely. This haunting psychological Horror is one of the years best.

8 Ballet Dancing Bad-asses out of 10

Review : Little Deaths (2011)

2011-12-18T05:43:00.000-08:00

Directors:

Sean Hogan, Andrew Parkinson,

Writers:

Andrew Parkinson, Simon Rumley,

Stars:

Scott Ainslie, Mike Anfield and James Anniballi

Sometimes I feel like I'm from a different planet, friendo's. If anyone knows directions to Earth, draw me a fucking map, will ya?!

I had read nothing but good things about LITTLE DEATHS, and had even been recommended it by a very close, very drunk and very enthusiastic friend. Most of the more established Horror websites have proclaimed it a worthy addition to the much beloved 'Horror-Anthology' sub-genre. Some have claimed it has depth, style, great acting, satisfying stories and its fair share of gore-filled set pieces.

Well, I'm not buying any of that shit...

I love a good Horror Anthology. At least I have that in common with my peers. I mean, who doesn't love those short sharp blasts of Horror? The broadly drawn characters, the inevitable (twisted) twist in the tale, the cornucopia of well-known faces and the literal guarantee of at least two or three payoffs. They resemble nothing so much as E.C's 50's Horror comics writ large, and when done properly, they can be a hell of a lot of fun.

Some of my all time favourite films are anthologies. Romero and Kings CREEPSHOW, (which basically was an E.C Comics adaptation, in style and content), Roger Corman's TALES OF TERROR, Ealing Studios' DEAD OF NIGHT and last but not least, the magical TRICK 'R' TREAT are all stone cold classics in my world. I've seen them all countless times and love them inside-out, and the reasons for this are tenfold. These films, (and others that successfully work within the template), have a number of very vital things in common that make them work. Most importantly, they all have a sense of fun, and a certain playfulness to their presentation; be it CREEPSHOW'S EC inspired animated wraparound story, DEAD OF NIGHTS alternately terrifying and fascinating 'deja-vu' grounding, or TRICK 'R' TREATS inverted, twisting, turning and converging plot-lines. These film all shine. They each have a unique sensibility. LITTLE DEATHS has none of that.

The three stories presented here are linked by the themes of sex and death, but its a very tenuous link. There is no wraparound, no commonality, (other than some half perceived notions of intellect), and apparently very little inspiration. What you essentially have is three short-length 'art-house' movies that are neither artful, nor feel short. It feels like three very poor episodes of FEAR ITSELF have been placed back to back with practically no through-line, and labelled an anthology. Some will argue that the three films are a study of the deep, dark relationship between sex, and death, (the title, after all is taken from the French term for orgasm, 'Le Petite Morte'), but that just isn't the case. All three feature varying degree's of sexual perversion (or not, depending on how you roll), and all climax in acts of violence, but other than that, there really isn't much food for thought here, at all.

Only the first, and by far the best tale HOUSE AND HOME, has some depth to it. In dealing with a perverted couple who abduct and rape the homeless of (I assume) London, it does manage to say some pretty interesting things about the class system in Britain. It has the best performances too, especially from the downtrodden, sick as fuck husband character. The pay-off is decent, its well paced, and it supplies some much welcome gore in its final moments. In another anthology it would be a middling entry, but in LITTLE DEATHS its as good as things are gonna get. It's all downhill from here, troops.

The second ditty, MUTANT TOOL, is a total mess. It's an altogether incomprehensible collision of Nazi experimentation, a drug made from cum, and a study of addiction and its effects on the individual. It aims high and lands flat on its ass. Theres no characters to get behind, (in HOUSE AND HOME we had the abducted gal), no sense of threat, no cohesive plot and frankly, no point to the whole venture. Its the low mark of the collection, but that's not to say things get much better.

BITCH, the third, and thankfully, final story, is a tale of a guy who likes to dress like a dog and piss on his better half's underwear, and then be punished via a strap-on dildo up his rear-end. That's fine, man. Whatever floats your boat, its all good. But these people aren't the sort of protagonists I can get behind, (although I wouldn't wanna get in front of 'strap-on girl, either, kids). The girls a fucking lunatic, and the guys a damned wimp, so by the time the bloodless, pointless and altogether dull finale arrives, I couldn't give two shits who's killing who, or for what reason. This tale felt like it lasted hours. They may have failed at making a shocking portrait of sexual dominance, but they fucked up the space-time continuum with fucking flying colours.

LITTLE DEATHS sees itself as an elegant treatise on the symbiotic relationship between sex and death. It wants to be shocking, edgy and perceptive. It ain't...

LITTLE DEATHS wants to be Clive Barker, but its R.L Stine with some tit-shots and a rubber dick. Other than the passable opening tale, its about as monotone, dull and pretentious as any Horror movie I've ever seen. Its not even bad enough to be fun, its just downright dull. The acting is almost all 'stagey', theres barely one character worth giving a shit about, the violence is set to 'none', the cinematography shoots for 'gritty' and hits on 'depressing', and the whole thing feels like a tacked together, art-school project. Overindulgent, wannabe profound, self-important nonsense that deserves to be ignored.

As I said, the first tale is alright, (although any episode of TALES FROM THE CRYPT kicks the shit out of it, by a long long way), but its not good enough to make this worth your while.

Now, supposedly I'm wrong on this, as the 'film' has its admirers, but if this is what passes as Horror and/or Art nowadays, I'd rather be wrong, than hanging with the 'right' guys. If your looking for some intelligent, challenging Horror-shorts, there are many out there, which receive zero publicity or distribution. Seek them out. And if your looking for a fun little Horror buffet, you already know where to look. It's a free world, ladies and gentlemen, but time is short; and in a world where we have TRICK 'R' TREAT and CREEPSHOW, why in the hell would this film be worth 90 minutes of your wonderful existence? You decide.

3 Cum-Tablets out of 10 ( 2 for the opening tale, 1 for the third, and none for the second).

Review : Hostel 3 (2011)

2011-12-15T08:29:00.000-08:00

Director:

Scott Spiegel

Writers:

Michael D. Weiss, Eli Roth (characters)

Stars:

Thomas Kretschmann, Zulay Henao and Kip Pardue

While attending a bachelor party in Las Vegas, four friends are enticed by two sexy escorts to join them at a private party way off the Strip. You know the rest, or do you....?

HOSTEL 3 has arrived, and its a DTV movie. The third in a series that looked dead in the water, and made on very limited financing...its must be terrible, right? Wrong.

Its by no means a classic, but HOSTEL 3 is a solid example of the dominance of imagination over finance. This film feels far more expansive than it has any right to, as it's clearly underfunded. It may have the look of a DTV movie, but its has ideas far bigger than that, and Director Scott Spiegal manages to pull them all together admirably.

I'm not the worlds biggest advocate of the HOSTEL series. I like em, though. I own the first two, and I think they have a lot to offer. The Eli Roth hatred bandwagon is something I've never understood. He's a competent filmmaker, and seems like a genuinely nice cat. The HOSTEL movies were a little smarter than they were given credit for, and they had their fair share of memorable moments, (usually involving bodily dismemberment), but what they truly lacked was a story. They had a brilliant concept, but the story and the characters were a little flat. HOSTEL 3 may not have the scope or shine that 1 and 2 have, but it does go some way to remedying the flaws of those films, while suffering from some flaws of its own....

Its no secret that the first two movies are very similar in structure to one another. HOSTEL 2's addition of some female leads and a few admittedly fascinating scenes with 'Elite Hunting Club' customers, wasn't quite enough to set it apart from its obvious similarities to the original. This was a series that looked to have burned itself out before it really took off, but after watching this third entry, I'm having to rethink that. HOSTEL 3, in its own humble and limited manner, feels fresh, unique and engaging, when I expected it to feel stale, repetitive and inferior.

The writers have made some very smart choices with this film, and have managed to take the concept in a new and interesting direction. They've taken all that worked in the previous films, (EHC, the sense of helplessness and hopelessness), and discarded with the character flaws that held those movies down. And as fun as its prequels were, they had a whole lot wrong with them. The moments of left-field comedy felt completely out of place, the characters were barely tolerable, (in HOSTEL, they were fucking unbearable), and the whole structure of the movies felt like it was built solely to get our dimwitted characters into those bloodstained torture chambers. This one remedies all those problems with aplomb. It was a real surprise to see where they took the concept this time, and this is a movie FULL of surprises, not to mention some bold changes to the plan.

The most notable change, and the selling point, is that we're no longer exploring the darker recesses of Eastern Europe. This time, the horror takes place in a far more familiar environment, and a very interesting one...Las Vegas.

For some this may be a problem, but not so for me. It seems only fitting that the EHC would evolve as an organisation and spread their wings abroad. And where better to set up shop than in Sin City? Those evil bastards were pretty professional, after all, so the concept of an underground society embedded amidst the blinding lights of Las Vegas seems incredibly apt. It also affords some very disturbing takes on the whole concept of EHC, too. This time, there are no grubby torture chambers, and no one-on-one between EHC customer and victim. This time, its a spectator sport, where bets are made by a gleeful audience on just how the victim will bite the big one. Not only does it add a new dimension to how this organisation operates, but its creepily plausible that this sort of nasty shit would go down in a place so decadent.

The 'new improved' torture chambers resemble a particularly fucked up doctors surgery, and are all the more disturbing in their sterility. It doesn't help that high-flying rich scum-balls are watching your agony as they sip fine wines served by topless hotties. Its a level of elitism that I find all too believable, and its a welcome addition to the franchises mythology, (HOSTEL 2's bidding scene touched on the expansive nature of this, also). Some viewers may pine for the dark, dank nightmare rooms of the first two films, but for many this will be a welcome change. I found it every bit as horrifying an environment as the previous ones. The sense of familiarity we feel with the surroundings could be a double edged sword, though, as its a matter of individual perception as to whats more frightening, the fear of a foreign enemy, or the fear of a domestic one. A good example of this dichotomy can be felt in the use of American security guards. Remember those burly, block headed bastards in the original movies? Well, this time we have burly, block headed bastards who speak english, often and at length. For me, it diluted the fear factor ever so slightly, but I'm sure for others it will work in reverse.

The change of setting is not the biggest subversion to the template, though. That accolade belongs to how well the whole thing is written. We have likable, reasonably relatable characters that we can get behind and fear for, and we have an honest-to-god plot here, complete with character motivations, some pretty effective villains and a whole ton of well implemented twists.

I really cant empathise how effective some of these twists were, either. Misdirection is the order of the day in HOSTEL 3, and its a film that constantly pulls the rug our from under you. HOSTEL 3 knows you've seen the other two films and know the predictable formula, and it actually uses this against you in some smart and amusing ways. You'll most likely be blindsided by most of them, too, as your actually invested in the characters and the events taking place this time around, and not looking for clever clues in the set-ups.

I'm not suggesting this is a character study, folks. Its a fucking HOSTEL movie, but it really tried hard to make these guys likable, and it works. There are no racist, sex crazed assholes here, (well, maybe one or two, but its a stag night, so its acceptable). Instead, we get a bunch of decent lads whose friendship feels believable and who its easy to care for. The acting is strong all round, from the male leads to the females who they meet on their 'adventures', everyone puts in good work. I guarantee you'll feel more compassion for these poor fools than you have in the previous entries, (HOSTEL 2's lead being the exception), and that, of course, is a vital element in effective Horror.

Unless, of course, your entire film is built around gore scenes, a-la parts 1 and 2. Some may be a little disappointed to learn that the gore/torture scenes here are the most tame of the series, by quite some way. It still has some pretty gruesome set pieces, but the red stiff is turned way down, and a fair amount of carnage takes place off screen. Its a real shame as there is some brutal shit going down here, but its often diluted by the effects work, or lack thereof. Conceptually, the kills could be considered even more intense than those that have came before, but in practice they can be a little underwheleming.

The first big kill is extremely cruel, and as I happened to really enjoy the character; it made the whole heartless event feel even more disturbing. The lack of blood really wasn't an issue in that scene. It will be for many, but I actually enjoyed the fact that in that instance, the characters reactions were the focus, and not the onscreen viscera. Sadly, the budgetary restrictions do lead to some very noticeable CG, especially in a bug-filled scene that should be horrifying, but instead looks so fake that it could and most likely will remove the viewer from the action. Its nothing game-breaking, though, and is far easier to overlook in a film of this scale than it would be in a huge movie, such as THE THING (2011). Overall, HOSTEL 3 is not the gore-lovers wet dream we all hoped for, and it really should be a tad more exploitative, especially in that it's a direct-to-video unrated film. If you can accept that this is less a 'torture' movie, and more a Horror-centric thriller, then you'll enjoy it a lot more.

HOSTEL 3 is a well made work. It lacks the potent atmosphere of dread and doom that the first and second film boasted, and its nowhere near as artful as the sequel, but it has a solid story, a very capable, empathetic cast and has more clever twists and turns than you have any damn right to expect from a third film. In turning the HOSTEL blueprint upside down and inside out, the series has become fresh again. After watching this little bad boy, I'm ready for more. I'd like to see a HOSTEL movie that takes the best elements of the original and this one, and melds them into an experience that's both extremely violent and plot/character driven.

While lacking the finesse of HOSTEL and HOSTEL 2, this is a strong third entry which improves much of whats come before. Had this film had the budget of the previous movies, and perhaps Eli behind the camera, it would probably be the best of all three, as its easily the better written and acted of the trilogy. As it stands, it's standing in the shadow of part 1, and its a little behind part 2, but its still worth your time. What it lacks in gravitas, it makes up for in smarts, twists, and misdirections. If you enjoy the series, then you'll have fun with HOSTEL 3, and if the prequels predilection for extended scenes of torture left a sour taste in your mouth, this one may well be the breath-mint your looking for. Its not high art, its not any kind of masterpiece, but its a fun, tense and relatively nasty little venture that should put a smile on your face. Give it a shot.

6.5 Bloodthirsty Betting Men out of 10

Horror Hotel Cinema : Dark Night of the Scarecrow (1981)

2011-12-12T07:32:00.000-08:00

Every self respecting Horror lover appreciates a scarecrow themed Horror film....

So for this weeks show, I have an absolute stunner for you. DARK NIGHT OF THE SCARECROW was originally made for TV, and while its roots were humble, its developed something of a cult following over the last few decades, and for many, is the last word in 'scarecrow horror'.

Its a genuinely eerie work. A haunting story that will stay with you, and it boasts perhaps the creepiest damn scarecrow ever put on screen. If you haven't seen this little known masterpiece, your in for a good time, folks. Scarecrows are a sparsity in Horror, sadly. I've never understood why, as for me, theres something fundamentally frightening about those silent figures, deep within the corn-rows, lifeless and poised. They freak me out, man. Ever patient sentinels waiting to strike the unaware.

I think us Horror fans are about due a really good film dealing with these weirdos, and seeing as we've had to suffer some seriously cheesy movies over the years dealing with them, its a real trip to be able to sit back, dim the lights and experience such a chilling work.

DARK NIGHT OF THE SCARECROW tells the sad tale of a mentally disabled man named Bubba, who befriends a young girl, much to the chagrin of her family and the townsfolk, who eye him with suspicion and contempt. When the girl is mauled by a rabid dog, some of the local rednecks jump to the conclusion that the child has been molested, and decide to take matters into their own hands. Their hunt for an innocent man comes to an end when they find him hiding out in a field, disguised as a scarecrow, and in a heartbreaking and frightening scene, they take his life.

Soon afterwards, the killers begin to be hunted, one by one, by a mysterious figure, dressed in the rags in which Bubba met his sad end.....

Its a great film, with a stellar cast at the top of their game. And its a genre defying one, too. Part slasher, part drama, and part supernatural tale. Dark, poignant and intense all at once. Enjoy.......

Review : The Shrine (2010)

2011-12-10T05:48:00.000-08:00

Director:

Jon Knautz

Writers:

Jon Knautz (screenplay), Jon Knautz (story), and 3 more credits »

Stars:

Aaron Ashmore, Cindy Sampson and Meghan Heffern

A group of young journalists looking for the 'big break' investigate the disappearances of a number of travellers in rural Poland, but their ambitious ways may lead them to becoming the next victims of a sacrifice practising cult who may be behind the mystery. Ya think.....?

Its two days since I watched this little ditty, and though the weekend beckons, Ive put aside my Budweiser Lites and turned the music down low, in order to review this flawed yet relatively fun movie. I feel its worth it, as theres an enjoyable time to be had here, and its worth sharing.

I hate to lower the standards once again by writing the whole, 'something meets something' bullshit, but I really have to, here, so forgive me for my sins....

THE SHRINE is, essentially, the outcome of splicing THE WICKER MAN with HOSTEL. At least for the first two thirds. After that we head directly down 'EXORCIST alley', for our hokey and enjoyable finale. More on that later. For now, lets step back a bit, and have a look at this bad-boy from start to finish.

As the film opens, we're witness to some sort of pagan/satanic sacrifice taking place, during an indeterminate time period. Everyone is dressed in druid-style frocks, flowing robes and face-concealing hoodies, so this could just as easily be a Saturday night in the city of Glasgow, as it could be a 'medieval period-piece', (it's neither, for the record). Its a fine introduction to the story, and it offers a glimmer of hope that there may be some satisfying nastiness ahead to alleviate the feeling you immediately get that this thing may well be an extended episode of XENA : WARRIOR PRINCESS. See, it looks like one of the shows. It has that cheesy, overly colourful look to it that sets it apart from a cinematic work. Not that this is a problem, its just a little jarring as the film has at least one relatively well known actor, in Aaron Ashmore. Its also directed by the cat behind JACK BROOKS : MONSTER SLAYER; a film which looked every inch an indie movie, but a movie nonetheless. THE SHRINE feels significantly different, and not just in the tonal shift. Strange that this film most likely has a bigger budget than Knautz' previous work, yet looks somehow cheaper. Go figure.

The 'made for TV' vibe the film emanates stretches to its acting, too. There aren't any bad performances here, they just have that overwrought, overcompensating flavour to them that we're used to seeing on a 90's Sunday afternoon fantasy show, (yeah, you too HERCULES, I haven't forgotten about you, mate). Ashmore does put in his usual efforts and comes out way ahead of the rest of the pack in terms of authenticity, but everyone is watchable and believable enough in their parts that the whole thing goes down smooth, (it doesn't hurt that the super-hot Meghan Heffern is one of the main players, either). You'll quickly get your head into the right space, and from there on out, its a fun, throwaway little mystery/horror film, that blends its influences well. Humbly, but well.

The one issue I had with the movie from the outset was the main female lead, played by Cindy Sampson. She does her job well, but the character is pretty damn slap-able from the first time we meet her, and shit doesn't change as the plot progresses. Shes a liar, a manipulative career bitch, and is selfish to the point of putting her companions lives in danger just to get her story. Were her two companions not so likable, her character might derail the fun-train before it leaves the station, but she serves as a foil for the audiences exasperation as much as she does for her co-workers, as THE SHRINE is a film that has its characters act in the most cretinous fashion imaginable. Were it not for this cold-hearted wench being the leader and the choice maker, (until finally good old Ashmore proclaims, 'Fuck this shit!'), we may not stick around for the conclusion.

That would be a shame as the finale is something of a bloodbath, and takes the film in a whole new demonic direction. It also boasts some very cool plot-twists for the 'intellectually challenged' among us, such as myself. It should be noted, though, that the main character isn't alone in her idiocy, either, as the villagers could use a good slap at times as well. Without spoiling this for you, lemme just say that this whole mess could be solved with the use of a fence.......that's right, a fence. Just build a relatively sturdy one, put up a warning sign, and move the fuck on with your lives, folks. Its a good thing I'm not the type of asshole who picks apart a film in order to look intellectually superior, (yes, fuckers, we KNOW that the eagles could have just dropped the One Ring into Mount Doom, stop wasting our time and go get laid!). If you are that type, this one should keep your mind off your devastatingly desolate sex life for just under 90 minutes. Its win/win, kids.

The pace is spot on too, as we're introduced to our three leads and allowed a little time to get to know them, (no halfwit teenagers here, thank Christ), and then we're off to sunny Poland for some torture, sacrifice and satanic silliness at the hands of hooded priests and blond muscle-men. Its hard not to smile along with this shit. I'm sure this was meant to be a deadly

THE SHRINE may fail as the outright terrifying film it aims to be, but its intentions are good, and its aspirations are commendable. The gore during the final act is great, and the scenes of sacrifice manage to be pretty damn disturbing, especially if you have a fear of ocular carnage. Yet the overall feel is that of a film best enjoyed with a few beers and a couple of buddies.

As for that scary scene I mentioned...damn is it scary. About midway through the film our characters encounter the movie's namesake. A huge shrine, encroached in a perpetual fog, and the scene is creepy as hell. I wont give away the moment, but its brilliant, and it points to good times ahead for Knautz as a serious Horror director. The guy could easily have cruised on the spoof vibe of JACK BROOKS, but he's made his first steps in the other direction, and this one scene is fried gold. I gotta say though, that as with the rest of the film, this scene borrows heavily from other sources. Anyone who's read THE SHINING, or seen that scary-as-fuck DR WHO episode with the weeping angels, will feel the sting of familiarity, though the effect remains just a freaky as it did before. This scene alone, makes THE SHRINE worth a look, though the whole show is a fun time from top to bottom.

Its hard to throw punches at a film that's so effortlessly entertaining, despite its inherent flaws and weaknesses. In many ways its these perceived weaknesses that actually elevate it to a higher status. The overacting, the 'too bright' colours, the head-scratching plot holes, (build a fucking fence!!) and the cheesy costume designs all add to its charm. If, like your host, you missed this kid on its release; give it some time. Its nonsense, but its good nonsense, and I'll drink to that.

6.5 Polish Morons out of 10

Review : Straw Dogs (2011)

2011-12-08T06:45:00.000-08:00

Director:

Rod Lurie

Writers:

Rod Lurie (screenplay), David Zelag Goodman (earlier screenplay), and 2 more credits »

Stars:

James Marsden, Kate Bosworth and Alexander Skarsgård

L.A. screenwriter David Sumner relocates with his wife to her hometown in the deep South. There, while tensions build between them, a brewing conflict with locals becomes a threat to them both.

(Brief History Lesson : In 1971, legendary Director Sam Peckinpah shocked audiences worldwide with STRAW DOGS. At the time, the films violence was pretty extreme, but it was the films unflinching look at male aggression that got the censors dicks in knots. Not to mention a rape scene in which the victim appears to be quite enjoying the whole thing. Long story short, the film was banned for 25 years, and finally found its home on DVD. End of lesson. Now onto the review.....)

Another hangover....another unnecessary remake. That's two for two in so many days.

I cant complain too much though, some of these recent remakes have been ego-crashingly good. FRIGHT NIGHT and MOTHERS DAY are sitting proudly atop that list. And while there will always be cash grab movies that piss all over the intent and artistry of the originals, (NIGHTMARE ON SHIT STREET), there seems to be a greater trend of late towards actually paying respect to the original works. Basically, it seems the less remakes are made by those fuck-nuts at Platinum Dunes, the better our cinematic environment shall be.

This much hyped, yet entirely unwanted remake of STRAW DOGS fits neatly into that strange category inhabited by LAST HOUSE ON THE LEFT and DAWN OF THE DEAD. Yep, its the 'Pointless, Yet Respectful Remake, That Doesn't Shit All Over Horror History', remake....

Now I'm not too sure, but in my circles the original STRAW DOGS isn't very well known, or particularly beloved. It barely merits being labelled a Horror film, and as great as the film is, it seems to be verging on the forgotten. Its a shame, because it really IS a great film. It plays as more of an intellectual treatise on the male condition, or more accurately, the perception of masculinity in modern society, than an outright Horror/Revenge thriller. Don't get me wrong, if you havent seen it, its a pretty vicious film, and at the time if its creation, it was pretty fucking fearless, (it was banned in the UK for 25 years for a reason), but its not QUITE a Horror movie, per-se. It lacks the exploitative kicks of similarly themed works like I SPIT ON YOUR GRAVE, and instead takes a more thoughtful path into darkness and vengeance. All of this can be said for the remake., too, yet in some very important ways its an entirely different beast. Let me explain....

As I mentioned in the brief history up-top, the original film was directed by legendary hard-case and all around macho nut-job, Sam Peckinpah, and it shows. While both films deal with the nature of masculinity, its very clear that both directors are coming from a different perspective. Sam's take on the material is far more elemental. He sees man as an essentially violent and aggressive beast that has merely been caged by social mores, essentially looking for an excuse to attack, whereas Director, Rod Lurie sees violence as something forced upon man by his surroundings. Both ideals are very valid, and both are worth exploring, and its for this reason that the remake of STRAW DOGS is actually a very worthwhile watch. Its nice to see a different take on very similar material. In fact, its fascinating.

Both movies follow the same template almost beat for beat, yet the feel is subtly different. This new version seems to represent a sign of our times, in which men are a more domesticated beast. Less prone to acts of rage or retaliation. At least some men....

See, each and every male character in this remake is a male 'type' We have the upstanding, upper-middle class writer who tends to avoid violence at all costs, as he sees it as a sign of intellectual weakness, and we have the more rugged male types that occupy the town of 'Wherever the fuck'. Men who see the lack of physical action as a sign of physical weakness. Both are right and both are wrong, but what makes the whole thing so interesting is that although these men are 'types', they are never one dimensional. The rednecks who taunt and humiliate our protagonist are more than simply mindless cretins. They feel like real people. Dickheads yes, but not dickheads without charm and/or wit. The same can be said for the victim of their taunts. He could be viewed as a coward, but that's all a matter of perception. Is taking the higher moral ground a sign of weakness? And if not, what and where is the line that can be crossed when intellect has to take a back seat to good old-fashioned bloodshed?

These questions and more make this version a journey worth taking. Its a slow-paced film, and some will surely find the whole thing tedious and cliched, but it does have a brain working behind the scenes, if you choose to look for it. If your looking for an ultra-gory rape-revenge tale like the recent, (and awesome) remake of I SPIT ON YOUR GRAVE, you'd best look elsewhere. STRAW DOGS has very little violence, and what little is does have, all takes place during the finale. When it hits, it hits hard, yet its impact is more on an emotional level than a visceral one.

While some may find the slow-burn style of storytelling monotonous, many will enjoy it for what it is...a well-crafted build of suspense and discomfort that efficiently draws you into the story and the characters, before the inevitable collision of ego's and ideas that makes up the brilliant finale.

The performances are all tip-top, including a surprisingly believable turn by Cyclops himself, James Marsden. He plays David, the smart and decent husband perfectly, and the gradual deterioration of his calm is pretty damn enthralling to watch. Ive only ever seen this guy in X-MEN, so I was pleased as punch to find out that he's a talented actor who has more arrows in his bow than simply playing second fiddle to Wolverine. He's great. As his counterpoint, the charming yet imposing redneck, 'Charlie', Alexander Skarsgard is equally engaging. Not only does the guy have towering presence, he imbues his rough, old-school tough guy with pathos, intelligence, and even regret. This is a human being in all respects. You'll hate the fucker, but you'll recognise him.

On the completely opposite side of the 'authentic' spectrum is James Woods, of all people, playing the now-retired football coach who's something of a legend around hicks-ville. For some reason, good-ole James seems to think he's in an exploitation movie, and he overacts in every single scene he's in. Where all the other characters have depth and subtlety, Woods is a cartoon character. A caricature that threatens to sink the whole damn movie. I love the guy but this is not his finest hour. Were everyone else not fighting in heavyweight, Woods performance would ruin the feel of the film. Luckily, everyone ignores his overacting like the drunk uncle at Christmas dinner, and instead concentrate on making an effective thriller.

As I mentioned, this is a very masculine movie, both in its concept and in its ideals, yet there is one female character in here, and she is every bit as vital a component as any of the men, (after all, why bother being masculine at all, if not to impress the ladies?). In the role of Davids wife, Kate Bosworth plays the returning small-town gal who done good, (shes now a famous actress), and in many ways shes the catalyst for all that takes place. Shes great in the movie, although from my perspective she was very unlikable. I'm sure you all know that this film features a rape-sequence, (its why the original got banned, folks), and while I have my own theories on this shit, I'm not gonna throw them out here for fear of being assassinated, yet it does appear in many ways that our lead gal sort of brings this shit upon herself. Now, I know theres never an excuse for rape but go easy on me here, you'll know what I mean when you watch the film. Her behaviour is pretty vile, and irresponsible, and just like the original, I'm sure its supposed to be that way. Bosworth is damn good in the role though.

So there you have it, a remake no one wanted, yet everyone seems to have an opinion on. Is it a 'nature vs nurture' thesis? A study of masculinity in modern America? A look at what drives a man to violence? Or simply a misogynistic piece of trash that should be burned in a bonfire? Who the fuck knows. All I know is, I enjoyed it a great deal. Its hasn't got the balls of the Peckinpah original, but it doesn't aim to have them. Its a remake that will most likely be thought to be an original by today's audiences, and that's cool. Yet of your one of those who hasn't seen either version and are reading this, you really are better off sticking with the original. This version is good, but the original remains the superior film. Sadly, for many that will render this remake obsolete, when it deserves some loving. If you enjoy contrasting, or are a fan of the original and would like to see it from a different viewpoint, check it out. Its a solid work.

7 Bra-less Joggers out of 10

Review : The Thing (2011)

2011-12-06T06:37:00.000-08:00

Director:

Matthijs van Heijningen Jr.

Writers:

Eric Heisserer, John W. Campbell Jr. (short story "Who Goes There?")

Stars:

Mary Elizabeth Winstead, Joel Edgerton and Ulrich Thomsen

Near an isolated Norwegian outpost in Antarctica, a discovery full of scientific possibility becomes a mission of survival when an alien is unearthed by a crew of international scientists.An alien that can mimic any living thing perfectly, including humans....

There are two kinds of people in this world....those who love John Carpenters THE THING, and those who haven't seen it, (never trust these people, folks). Its that sort of film. A film so perfect in each and every detail that it transcends genres as effectively as it blends them. For me, its the single greatest Sci-fi Horror in the history of cinema, even surpassing Ridley Scott's ALIEN. So it was with great trepidation that I approached this 'prequel'.

I say prequel in quotations, as this film could very easily be viewed as a remake. Not only of Carpenters masterpiece, but of the equally brilliant Howard Hawks original, THE THING FROM ANOTHER WORLD. It takes Hawks genesis story, and transports it to the desolate landscape created by Carpenter in his version. I'm sure you all know by now that this film follows the fate of the Norwegian camp who originally unearthed our shape-shifting hombre. No one ever really gave two shits about seeing what went down at the camp, as we've all spent years dreaming up the scenario in our own imaginations, and no film could ever come close to rivalling the bloodbath we all dreamt of. Despite being unnecessary, word that the Norwegians tale would be detailed did raise interest in the Horror community. Interest and fear...

See, THE THING's monster is, without any doubt in my mind, (and many others), the most fascinating creature ever put on screen, and if you think theres one that's MORE fascinating, well, 'The Thing' can replicate it perfectly, so its got that base covered too, sucker. Its a monster that demands the greatest respect in how its treated on film, both on a physical level and an intellectual one. Of course, the possibilities are endless when it comes to creature design here, as the great Rob Bottin proved with his stellar designs in Carpenters movie. He brought to the screen nightmares that to this very day, still piss all over any CG creations that Hollywood has churned out in the last few decades.

On an intellectual level, the 'thing' is equally as enthralling. Its an unknowable being. We don't know how it thinks, how it shape-shifts, where its from. We don't even know if it can mimic us so perfectly that we actually believe we're still human. Its just a fucking wonderful creation, and in the right hands, I'd happily watch a whole army of films dealing with this creature. John Carpenters hands were the right hands, Hollywood's hands are not....

Now I'm not saying that this 2011 version was directed by the wrong hands, quite the opposite, in fact. Director Heinenngin is clearly in love with the source material, and goes out of his way to pay great respect to the atmosphere, environment, sound effects, and camerawork that all combined to make THE THING (1982) such a perfect film. It should be noted that he originally stated that almost all the creature effects would be 'in-camera', with very little CG. Hell, all the scenes we witness in the movie were created with prosthetics, and then replaced by studio demand. Bastards...

Its here that the film falters. The CG just cannot match what came before. It looks rushed, and holds no weight. Theres no pain involved in the transformations, nowhere near enough gore, and very little to inspire awe. Hollywood, as usual, has no fucking idea what fans want, and thinks that the upcoming generation need CG to enjoy a movie. Its just not true. THE THING would have been far superior were it handled old-school, as the director intended. The good news? There are still some prosphetics used, and they look just fantastic, as do some of the creatures incarnations, (though the CG does them no favors).

The film is also very much a mixed bag when it comes to suspense, too. The opening 40-45 minutes are actually pretty damn good. Sure, its all a little too polished, but they did hire mostly unknown and very capable actors, and as the story kicks off, the tension, and essentially, the paranoia runs really high. I found myself loving the damn thing, (pun intended), and I was engrossed in the characters plight, and in trying to identify who was human and who was an interstellar bad-ass. The second half, though, drags the whole damn show in a very different direction. It becomes, essentially, a monster movie. The paranoia and suspense are replaced by extended scenes of a monster/monsters chasing our heroes down dark tunnels. Theres nothing wrong with this in theory, but that's not what THE THING is about. Its a creature that wants to hide, that is as cunning and unknowable as it is deadly, and so when the fucker reveals itself to all and sundry, and begins a rampage around the Norwegian camp, you find yourself watching a merely capable monster flick. Why the film went this route is up for grabs, but for a film that opens so strong to devolve into (admittedly very fun), stock entertainment, really feels like another case of studio-fuckery at play.

That girl from FINAL DESTINATION 3 is surprisingly good too, and its to the producers benefit that shes never belittled or objectified in the film. She wears big old woolly tops and jackets throughout, and the focus remains on her character and not her looks. I was really impressed by the gal. Theres also no 'tacked-on' love story to ruin the experience, and that really does sweeten the deal. Shes fine in the film, and alongside a cool-as-fuck silent Norwegian called Lars, shes really the only memorable character in here.

As a card carrying fan-boy of the original, I could hate up a storm on this fucker, but I'm not gonna do it. I believe that hidden inside the so-so CG and the multiplex pandering action sequences during the final run, theres a really entertaining film here. It could never match the Carpenter movie, minus a miracle, but it doesn't taint that movies memory, either. For those unfamiliar with the original, this'll probably be a far above average monster movie, but for the fans, it cant quite seal the deal.

Still, I'm glad it exists. Its good enough that it will definitely draw a new audience to the Carpenter film, (while leaving fans of the original very keen to revisit the film), and that can only be a good thing. It helps that its a prequel, (mostly), rather than a straight up remake, and its a perfectly acceptable film, it just stings to know that the prosthetics were abandoned and that its only really half a 'Thing' movie, and half a B-Movie.. I say check it out, but don't expect miracles. Its good enough to leave you wanting more, but its a long, long way from Carpenter and Bottins nightmarish world.

7 Crazy Swedes out of 10