So, I’ve finally reached that point. It’s that one question all movie buffs dread but know that they must at some point figure out an answer for: “What are your favorite movies?” Honestly, I really really love a TON of movies. I have special equipment like a region free DVD player for imports, a VCR for things that aren’t even released on DVD and even a Laserdisc player for movies that either have a feature not on the DVD or don’t have a version I prefer on DVD. I just really LOVE film and I just couldn’t decide how many movies to include. Ten seemed too little, and then I thought maybe 50 but that was just pushing it, so I eventually decided on 25. So intermittently through the rest of the year, I will count down from 25 to my all time number one. I’m not doing this as a normal top 10 for one major reason, I have a very specific and personal reason for picking these movies and ranking them as I do. Just devoting simply a paragraph to them just doesn’t feel like I’d be doing them justice, so I’m giving a full breakdown of why I picked it and like it as much as I do. But I would like to clarify, these are FAVORITES, not what I feel are the BEST, granted I know there would be some of these on that list, this is more about my personal experience with film and the ones that stand out for me as especially enjoyable. Therefore, at long last, let the countdown proper begin:
Number 25:
Creature From The Black Lagoon (1954)
I’ve made it no secret that I have a love for the old B style movies, and especially those from the 50’s and 60’s, and this movie’s the reason why. I was about eight or nine years old when I first saw this movie and I was hooked. Not only was it the first movie I saw in black and white, but it was just so much fun to watch. Scientist exploring an ominous area that no one had apparently seen and lived to tell the tale, a monster that terrorizes them while at the same time looking pretty goofy when you stop to think about it, and just copious amounts of hammy acting.
Why this one over things like “The Blob” or “Them!”? Pretty simple, nostalgia. I can’t help it, the fact that this was the one I saw first is probably just me being all sentimental, but if I’m ever feeling like watching something cheesy and silly with a goofy monster, I reach for this one.
A lot of it has to due with the acting and directing, this movie does not ever stop taking itself seriously, you have actors playing scientists that do things no scientist would ever do, and yet you buy it because they just have this air to them that feels truly genuine. Even if you ignore that aspect, a lot of the different characters are just fun and they have some great lines delivered hilariously. I have a feeling director Jack Arnold was aware of this because he really goes all in with some great inserts of the monster that hold off the reveal until just the right time, not to mention the movie has a very ensemble feel to it.
While the story is nothing special it does have a lot of the troupes of the genre; the beauty and beast touches, the monster carrying the girl away limp in its arms, the good scientist and the in it just for fame and glory “evil” one, the quirky local, etc. Even if it’s not wholly original and the movie when combined with its 1955 sequel is just a huge rip off of 1933’s “King Kong”, I still enjoy it for how fun all the characters are and how nicely paced it is. Especially at the beginning and end when movies like this tend to drag at that time.
But of course, a monster movie is nothing without a monster and man do I have lots of love for the Gill man. From the great suit designed by Bud Westmore and his team (Millicent Patrick, Jack Kevan, Chris Mueller, Robert Hickman) to the great portrayal by dual team Ben Chapman (while on the surface) and Ricou Browning (while underwater). All this gives the creature such a depth to even make his menacing of the scientists seem almost like he was the victim (also potentially due to Jack Arnold) and his antagonism only brought to life by the bombastic theme that plays anytime he shows up.
Really the reason I pick this movie is that it is a perfect example of what I hope to see when I see a popcorn movie. It’s goofy, but not stupid. It’s silly, but passionately so. In a word, it just a ton of fun. I have seen it many times and I’ll probably see it many times more before it ever loses this spot that it has here, at number 25.
Saturday, April 28, 2012
Friday, April 20, 2012
You Might Not Have Seen It: John Woo's The Killer
You know in this day and age, I'm getting sick of action movies. I know this is going to make me sound old, but seriously, action movies used to be so much better. These days it's nothing. No really, nothing. No characters, no stakes, nothing to really make you care. Just dumb vapid crap meant to just impress you with the pretty 'splosions, fast cars and women with no personality in skimpy outfits. And I really want this to end.
Did we forget that half the fun of the "Die Hard" series was actually the character of John McClaine? Or that editing doesn't mean cutting every two seconds to cover up lazy shot design? Or even that an action movie CAN have a good story? Apparently! So as I'd rather not stew on this throughout the whole review, I'd like to talk about one of my favorite action movies of all time, John Woo's "The Killer".
John Woo is a director that some of you may have heard of, he had a few big budget studio movies like the John Travolta/Nicolas Cage actioner "Face/off" and the WWII film "Windtalkers". But what got him noticed was he stylized Hong Kong action flicks such as "A Better Tomorrow 1&2", "Hard Boiled" and of course, "The Killer".
To explain why I love "The Killer" so much is both simple and at the same time tricky, but let's get the easy out of the way first. The movie has a great story. Action legend Chow Yun-Fat plays an assassin for the Triad, but he actually is not an evil psychopath, he has a moral code and during one of his hits, he ends up essentially blinding a young woman. To make amends for this, he goes out of his way to try and make her life better, in the process falling in love with her, leading to him accepting one last job. At the same time, there's a police detective (Danny Lee) that's trying to track him down and added to this the Triad now wants him dead since he wants out, and while this is all going on he and the detective begin to form a mutual respect and eventually friendship paid off on in the film's truly amazing climax. The acting is superb on all fronts. Chow Yun-Fat just owns this character from the word go, with an imposing presence during his gun fights, but during the character scenes an undeniable charisma that makes you like him despite how he earns a living because he literally just sees it as a job. At the same time Danny Lee blends the right amount of determination and moral justice onto his character, not to mention that he and Chow Yun-Fat have great chemistry together and you really see a friendship develop between the two. Not to mention the way the bad guys act just adds so much suspense to every encounter with them there is. These are guys to do not mess around and you really want to see the heroes come out on top because they both have great motivations and because of the films shockingly brilliant climax has a huge amount of weight that the audience is greatly invested in. Especially when the ending goes a different direction than what you'd think, but is much more fitting for the story.
And on top of all this, the great story, terrific acting, we have Woo's amazing direction. There's an elegance to every scene and you can tell that every shot was planned, and every gun fight was staged so intensely and yet at the same time looks almost improvisational in how natural it feels. Woo grabs the viewer from the word go and keeps you on the edge of your seat during all the intense action, which has such a frenzied chaos and yet isn't jarring, or over done, at the same time finding ways to let the audience breathe while still keeping a pace that is engaging and adding to the story and even more dramatic weight to each successive action sequence. Plus this movie drips of nice mood and yeah, it's 80's-ness shows but that truly adds to how interesting a watch it is and it just feels so right.
The photography is gorgeous compliments of Wong Wing-Hang. Creating a nicely morose color palate to give rise to that great atmosphere I was just talking about and the editing actually takes the time to let you see it and doesn't need to cut all the time to allow for a feeling of chaos and tension, just a well thought out and executed pace with cuts made when they are needed for dramatic effect, not to cover up directorial failings.
There's nothing that Woo didn't think of for this movie. It's just a classic of the entire action genre and I can't recommend it enough. I actually showed this to a friend while re-watching it for this review and at one point he turned to me and ask: "Why don't they make action movies like this anymore?" I don't know, but I honestly think it has to do with the fact that action movies just seem lazier these days. There's no passion to them and that doesn't make for an engaging movie. "The Killer" is just a great film and if you claim yourself to be any kind of action movie fan, you owe it to yourself to see this movie. You won't regret it.
The Killer gets
5 awesome shoot outs out of 5
Did we forget that half the fun of the "Die Hard" series was actually the character of John McClaine? Or that editing doesn't mean cutting every two seconds to cover up lazy shot design? Or even that an action movie CAN have a good story? Apparently! So as I'd rather not stew on this throughout the whole review, I'd like to talk about one of my favorite action movies of all time, John Woo's "The Killer".
John Woo is a director that some of you may have heard of, he had a few big budget studio movies like the John Travolta/Nicolas Cage actioner "Face/off" and the WWII film "Windtalkers". But what got him noticed was he stylized Hong Kong action flicks such as "A Better Tomorrow 1&2", "Hard Boiled" and of course, "The Killer".
To explain why I love "The Killer" so much is both simple and at the same time tricky, but let's get the easy out of the way first. The movie has a great story. Action legend Chow Yun-Fat plays an assassin for the Triad, but he actually is not an evil psychopath, he has a moral code and during one of his hits, he ends up essentially blinding a young woman. To make amends for this, he goes out of his way to try and make her life better, in the process falling in love with her, leading to him accepting one last job. At the same time, there's a police detective (Danny Lee) that's trying to track him down and added to this the Triad now wants him dead since he wants out, and while this is all going on he and the detective begin to form a mutual respect and eventually friendship paid off on in the film's truly amazing climax. The acting is superb on all fronts. Chow Yun-Fat just owns this character from the word go, with an imposing presence during his gun fights, but during the character scenes an undeniable charisma that makes you like him despite how he earns a living because he literally just sees it as a job. At the same time Danny Lee blends the right amount of determination and moral justice onto his character, not to mention that he and Chow Yun-Fat have great chemistry together and you really see a friendship develop between the two. Not to mention the way the bad guys act just adds so much suspense to every encounter with them there is. These are guys to do not mess around and you really want to see the heroes come out on top because they both have great motivations and because of the films shockingly brilliant climax has a huge amount of weight that the audience is greatly invested in. Especially when the ending goes a different direction than what you'd think, but is much more fitting for the story.
And on top of all this, the great story, terrific acting, we have Woo's amazing direction. There's an elegance to every scene and you can tell that every shot was planned, and every gun fight was staged so intensely and yet at the same time looks almost improvisational in how natural it feels. Woo grabs the viewer from the word go and keeps you on the edge of your seat during all the intense action, which has such a frenzied chaos and yet isn't jarring, or over done, at the same time finding ways to let the audience breathe while still keeping a pace that is engaging and adding to the story and even more dramatic weight to each successive action sequence. Plus this movie drips of nice mood and yeah, it's 80's-ness shows but that truly adds to how interesting a watch it is and it just feels so right.
The photography is gorgeous compliments of Wong Wing-Hang. Creating a nicely morose color palate to give rise to that great atmosphere I was just talking about and the editing actually takes the time to let you see it and doesn't need to cut all the time to allow for a feeling of chaos and tension, just a well thought out and executed pace with cuts made when they are needed for dramatic effect, not to cover up directorial failings.
There's nothing that Woo didn't think of for this movie. It's just a classic of the entire action genre and I can't recommend it enough. I actually showed this to a friend while re-watching it for this review and at one point he turned to me and ask: "Why don't they make action movies like this anymore?" I don't know, but I honestly think it has to do with the fact that action movies just seem lazier these days. There's no passion to them and that doesn't make for an engaging movie. "The Killer" is just a great film and if you claim yourself to be any kind of action movie fan, you owe it to yourself to see this movie. You won't regret it.
The Killer gets
5 awesome shoot outs out of 5
Monday, April 9, 2012
Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn Part 1 and The Hunger Games
We've been in an interesting time for bad movies, where it used to be luck of the draw if a critic had a bad one on their hands we've now been blessed with a consistent whipping boy for the past four years in the form of the "Twilight Saga" based on a series of four books aimed at young adults, specifically tween aged girls. While on the surface being harmless enough as a book, (apparently, I've never actually read them as, you know, I'm a guy.) the films have been very harshly bashed for their terrible acting, bland direction, awful scripts (all written by the same screenwriter I might add.) and a flat out horrible message for younger girls. However, things are finally coming to a close, as last year saw the release of the fourth movie, and this year saw the release of the light at the end of the awful tunnel.
To go over why "Breaking Dawn Part 1" is a terrible movie would be like sounding off on the twilight check list. So, allow me to make it more interesting by asking you to take a shot from whatever alcoholic beverage of your choosing as I run down my response to this movie. This time around, worst female character ever Bella Swan has finally gotten her somewhat reluctant boyfriend Edward to marry her and all is right with the world. But on the honeymoon when Bella says she wants to have sex with him BEFORE he turns her into a vampire, (yeah if you didn't know, Edward's a vampire and there's a love triangle involving another guy, Jacob, who is a werewolf. if you didn't know this already, color me surprised.) said sexual encounters end up with Bella getting pregnant with a vampire human hybrid and Jacob breaks off from his tribe to protect her from them, as the werewolves are pissed about this for a reason I'm still trying to figure out.
So the first big problem with this movie is the acting (take a shot). Again Kristen Stewart plays the non entity that is Bella Swan and again all her scene are dull, emotionless and just making you wish the character had died in the last movie to end this series (take a shot). Robert Pattinson returns as her boyfriend/husband that seems to be physically ill at her existence (take a shot) and proves that the only satisfying thing he's ever done in a movie is die (Seriously, I love "Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire" so much more now in hindsight). No one in this movie acts, they more go through the motions while thinking about what this and the next movie's paychecks will net them. The direction doesn't matter (take a shot) because the film maker is working with terrible material (take a shot) and the script is just awful (take a shot). The movie really hammers home how pointless it is in this one because there was no reason for them split the fourth book into two parts, but Summit entertainment and Lionsgate would have lost their cash cow and that would be bad. So horribly is this movie padded, that it is constantly clawing for the very right to exist. It's a pointless movie plain and simple. This is why I've never reviewed the "Twilight" movies, there is literally NOTHING new to say! The movies are bad and there's only so many ways to say that. So instead I'll just comment on what everyone has a problem with in these movies, it's terrible message.
Basically, when you get down to it, "Twilight" is a bad lifetime movie without the actual physical abuse. It's all about how Bella loves Edward so much she marries him and wants to become a vampire to spend forever with him. It's not so much that this is the idea that "Twilight" is selling as it is people looking a little too deeply into it. My girl friend who HAS read the books pretty much summed up the whole thing like this: They're about having a boyfriend. That's it, it's basically a trashy romance novel without the sex instead opting for a wait until your married abstinence message. I personally don't really see a lot of what people have issues with when I watch these things, but I will agree that Bella Swan is a terrible female role model. She's just a horrible person, every action she does is selfish, all her justifications are despicable, and the way she treats people is just down right cruel. I would actually love someone to remake this entire series without changing a thing except playing Bella's actions like SHE was the main villain. That'd be an interesting movie in my book and you'd barely have to change a damn thing. I bring all this up because I don't think younger girls should look up to this character, and now there is thankfully better one to fill the gap.
"The Hunger Games" is the Lionsgate follow up to the wild success of things like the "Harry Potter" and "Twilight" franchises with another this time trilogy of books by Suzanne Collins. In it's story, set in a somewhat post apocalyptic America, the country has been divided into a bunch of different zones and each year one male and one female between the ages of 12 and 18 to fight to the death in what are known as the Hunger Games. Our hero, Katniss Everdeen, has volunteered for the latest Games to save her sister. In the lead up to the actual Games, she and her cohort Peeta are taken to the Capitol to promote themselves to get sponsors to help them out in the arena.
So at it's core the story is basically using the old gladiator games to make a deeper point gimmick and I feel it really works. Not having an entirely original story doesn't instantly make a movie bad, but I'm already starting to hear some backlash much in the same vain as "Dances with Wolves" in space with this being a more watered down version of things like "Battle Royale". I get that, I'm actually reading THAT book at the moment and when I went to "The Hunger Games" yeah it came to my mind, but really, this kind of plot is more about it's point than it's story. "Battle Royale" was more making about about Japanese culture and the "entitlement" generation while "The Hunger Games" is more making points about things like The 1% and reality tv shows. Even with all that it is a very well told version of said "unoriginal" story. The characters are all fleshed out and all the main characters have interesting arcs sprinkled with fun supporting characters.
The director on this was Gary Ross, famous for "Pleasantville" and "Seabiscuit", and he really goes all in on this one. He proves once again that he can get great performances out of great actors while at the same time making the movie interesting to look at... for the most part, but I'll get to that. Jennifer Lawrence is Katniss, and once again proves that she's a truly incredible talent and I'm glad to see her getting more high profile work. But the real show stealer, like always, is Woody Harrelson as a former Games survivor that's become a somewhat embittered drunk that's supposed to be Katniss and Peeta's mentor. He's just great fun every time he's on screen. In fact if I was to go on about how fun Stanley Tucci is as on of the hosts, or how great an over top caricature Elizabeth Banks turns in, but that would get really long and I have better things to talk about, just know that the acting in this movie is really entertaining.
Honestly I really liked this movie and the only real problems I have are nit picks like how the pacing at the beginning feels kind of rushed or how in some of the action scenes the shaky cam, while justified gets a little tiresome as it makes it hard to see what's happening, but those are just nit picks. Overall the movie is great and knowing that it's roughly being marketed to the same demographic as "Twilight" is a real win in my book. So while I'm giving "Twilight Saga: The Set Up for the next one" a total zero for just being a terrible movie. I'm more than happy to give "The Hunger Games" a 4.5 on my scale. It's a smart, interesting sci fi story with a great cast, don't miss this one.
To go over why "Breaking Dawn Part 1" is a terrible movie would be like sounding off on the twilight check list. So, allow me to make it more interesting by asking you to take a shot from whatever alcoholic beverage of your choosing as I run down my response to this movie. This time around, worst female character ever Bella Swan has finally gotten her somewhat reluctant boyfriend Edward to marry her and all is right with the world. But on the honeymoon when Bella says she wants to have sex with him BEFORE he turns her into a vampire, (yeah if you didn't know, Edward's a vampire and there's a love triangle involving another guy, Jacob, who is a werewolf. if you didn't know this already, color me surprised.) said sexual encounters end up with Bella getting pregnant with a vampire human hybrid and Jacob breaks off from his tribe to protect her from them, as the werewolves are pissed about this for a reason I'm still trying to figure out.
So the first big problem with this movie is the acting (take a shot). Again Kristen Stewart plays the non entity that is Bella Swan and again all her scene are dull, emotionless and just making you wish the character had died in the last movie to end this series (take a shot). Robert Pattinson returns as her boyfriend/husband that seems to be physically ill at her existence (take a shot) and proves that the only satisfying thing he's ever done in a movie is die (Seriously, I love "Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire" so much more now in hindsight). No one in this movie acts, they more go through the motions while thinking about what this and the next movie's paychecks will net them. The direction doesn't matter (take a shot) because the film maker is working with terrible material (take a shot) and the script is just awful (take a shot). The movie really hammers home how pointless it is in this one because there was no reason for them split the fourth book into two parts, but Summit entertainment and Lionsgate would have lost their cash cow and that would be bad. So horribly is this movie padded, that it is constantly clawing for the very right to exist. It's a pointless movie plain and simple. This is why I've never reviewed the "Twilight" movies, there is literally NOTHING new to say! The movies are bad and there's only so many ways to say that. So instead I'll just comment on what everyone has a problem with in these movies, it's terrible message.
Basically, when you get down to it, "Twilight" is a bad lifetime movie without the actual physical abuse. It's all about how Bella loves Edward so much she marries him and wants to become a vampire to spend forever with him. It's not so much that this is the idea that "Twilight" is selling as it is people looking a little too deeply into it. My girl friend who HAS read the books pretty much summed up the whole thing like this: They're about having a boyfriend. That's it, it's basically a trashy romance novel without the sex instead opting for a wait until your married abstinence message. I personally don't really see a lot of what people have issues with when I watch these things, but I will agree that Bella Swan is a terrible female role model. She's just a horrible person, every action she does is selfish, all her justifications are despicable, and the way she treats people is just down right cruel. I would actually love someone to remake this entire series without changing a thing except playing Bella's actions like SHE was the main villain. That'd be an interesting movie in my book and you'd barely have to change a damn thing. I bring all this up because I don't think younger girls should look up to this character, and now there is thankfully better one to fill the gap.
"The Hunger Games" is the Lionsgate follow up to the wild success of things like the "Harry Potter" and "Twilight" franchises with another this time trilogy of books by Suzanne Collins. In it's story, set in a somewhat post apocalyptic America, the country has been divided into a bunch of different zones and each year one male and one female between the ages of 12 and 18 to fight to the death in what are known as the Hunger Games. Our hero, Katniss Everdeen, has volunteered for the latest Games to save her sister. In the lead up to the actual Games, she and her cohort Peeta are taken to the Capitol to promote themselves to get sponsors to help them out in the arena.
So at it's core the story is basically using the old gladiator games to make a deeper point gimmick and I feel it really works. Not having an entirely original story doesn't instantly make a movie bad, but I'm already starting to hear some backlash much in the same vain as "Dances with Wolves" in space with this being a more watered down version of things like "Battle Royale". I get that, I'm actually reading THAT book at the moment and when I went to "The Hunger Games" yeah it came to my mind, but really, this kind of plot is more about it's point than it's story. "Battle Royale" was more making about about Japanese culture and the "entitlement" generation while "The Hunger Games" is more making points about things like The 1% and reality tv shows. Even with all that it is a very well told version of said "unoriginal" story. The characters are all fleshed out and all the main characters have interesting arcs sprinkled with fun supporting characters.
The director on this was Gary Ross, famous for "Pleasantville" and "Seabiscuit", and he really goes all in on this one. He proves once again that he can get great performances out of great actors while at the same time making the movie interesting to look at... for the most part, but I'll get to that. Jennifer Lawrence is Katniss, and once again proves that she's a truly incredible talent and I'm glad to see her getting more high profile work. But the real show stealer, like always, is Woody Harrelson as a former Games survivor that's become a somewhat embittered drunk that's supposed to be Katniss and Peeta's mentor. He's just great fun every time he's on screen. In fact if I was to go on about how fun Stanley Tucci is as on of the hosts, or how great an over top caricature Elizabeth Banks turns in, but that would get really long and I have better things to talk about, just know that the acting in this movie is really entertaining.
Honestly I really liked this movie and the only real problems I have are nit picks like how the pacing at the beginning feels kind of rushed or how in some of the action scenes the shaky cam, while justified gets a little tiresome as it makes it hard to see what's happening, but those are just nit picks. Overall the movie is great and knowing that it's roughly being marketed to the same demographic as "Twilight" is a real win in my book. So while I'm giving "Twilight Saga: The Set Up for the next one" a total zero for just being a terrible movie. I'm more than happy to give "The Hunger Games" a 4.5 on my scale. It's a smart, interesting sci fi story with a great cast, don't miss this one.
Monday, April 2, 2012
The Beyond
If you were to ask me what my personal favorite genre of movies is, I'd probably have to go with Horror, at least as I am currently writing this. This probably isn't that much of a shock considering how much I like to bring the genre up in my previous reviews and the fact that I get so infuriated by the recent string of horror remakes. (As an aside, I have recently seen that god awful remake posing as a prequel for John Carpenter's excellent version of "The Thing" and I almost reviewed that instead but all I could say was FUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUCK!!!! It's terrible plain and simple and I want people to know that they must avoid it like the plague. Buy, yes BUY the John Carpenter version to show Universal Studios how ashamed they should be for green lighting that movie.) On the subject of remakes, a thing that one might note about this string of them is that before it was american horror films from the 80's, it was remakes of foreign and specifically Japanese horror films. I mention this because right in that time I was really starting to hit my main interest in horror and finding this out interested me in horror fodder from other countries, and thus I found the wondrous world of Euro-Horror. Most of what I have watched is from England, with things like Hammer, and Italy, thus bringing us to today's movie, Lucio Fulchi's "The Beyond".
Fulchi didn't really make too many waves over here in the states until his film "Zombi 2" known here simply as "Zombie" an unofficial sequel to the European cut of George Romero's "Dawn of the Dead" (Called "Zombi" in Europe hence why there isn't a "Zombi" 1 as pretty much all the home media for "Dawn" has simply kept the title.) Jumping on the success he had there he very quickly became a horror guy through and through with titles like "City of the Living Dead" and "The Beyond".
"The Beyond" is actually my favorite piece of Fulchi's work, but it has taken me forever to track down a copy for my home collection. Upon my first viewing of the film I immediately went out to get it, but the anchor bay edition I wanted had gone out of print, and all the remaining copies were far too expensive for my poor high school self. Now, thanks to the grace of someone not knowing what they had, I picked up a copy for a steal at my local haunt for used DVD's and thus this review is born.
So, plot! A woman buys a hotel in in Louisiana to renovate and re-open, not aware that it's actually built over one of the seven gateways into hell and when the wall blocking the gate way is torn down, well, really bad stuff happens. It's odd that I pick this as my favorite out of Fulchi's work because the movie is kind of a mess. The script likes to meander around with no real rhyme or reason, featuring a lot of horror set pieces that, while well done and creepy, don't really seem to be there for any good reason.
It feels weird and at times disjointed, not helped by the age old problem that many Italian horror films featured both American and Italian actors speaking English, but several of the Italian actors were re-dubbed due to not actually knowing English that well or to speaking it with a thick accent, the effect of this just really brings you out of the movie but strangely, this movie just works for me. It's just drips creepy mood and atmosphere, not to mention its just terrifying imagery.
In the scheme of things, "The Beyond" is basically Fulchi doing another movie about the living dead, and as far as zombie fare goes, it's solid. The dead get up and shamble about, people can't kill them without destroying the head, etc. It sports some pretty well done zombie make ups and the gore effects that come with that territory are well executed and impressive. The only real flaw is the story and pacing. It's clear fulchi was all about the set pieces and because of that, the story gets to hang with several scene that consist of clunky exposition and a few moments that really feel like they're in their to pad the run time. I mean, I've crucified other movies for this kind of problem mercilessly and yet I really like this one. Why is that?
Well, while it has flaws that I could understand some people being unable to overlook, it has numerous set pieces that I really dig, but acknowledge just come out of nowhere sometimes. Like the film's infamous spider sequence. It's really well done, but it brings the movie to a screeching halt saying "Look! Creepy spiders!". It's a well built scene that is genuinely weird and creepy, not to mention has a well done pace in it's own right. I really can't fully explain what it is about this movie that just does it for me other than the way it looks and it's amazingly good climax. It's just a moody flick, with some real interesting horror scenes and while it's technical failings are rather large when you think about it, I just can't help it. This movie, for me at least, really works and I highly recommend it. Hey, what do you have to lose? I can promise you won't see anything quite like it coming out in the near future.
3 out of 5.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)