Thursday, January 30, 2014

25 - The Human Race

    A collection of people find themselves placed in a race, with a variety of rules.  Breaking the rules results in death.  Whoever wins, survives.
    Really pretty good, despite the limitations.  The budget limits show through, with most of the effects shots being done on the cheap.  The story is strong enough that this problem is trivial.
    The rules are that the contestants must stay on the track.  If they step on the grass, they die.  If they are lapped twice, they die.  The rules declare a few locations as being "safe," but we never get an understanding of what that means.
    The poster for this tries to compare it to Battle Royale, which I haven't seen in a long time.  This is only vaguely similar.  It serves as a metaphor for the problems that mankind has.  Our goal is to get ahead, but the rules typically encourage screwing other people over in order to accomplish that goal.  The entire race is possible to short-circuit by everyone cooperating.  It's nice to see that this approach is attempted, but it only takes a single person to ruin things.
    It's actually a little frustrating, but it's easy to identify with the ideas that this brings up.
    the ending is a bit of an awkward thing.  Some people might be disappointed with it.  I liked it, and I think it explained everything I wanted to know.
    I'm impressed.  The exploding heads might turn some people away, but I actually liked this one.
    I have one gripe, and that's about the photography.  During certain shots and sequences, large portions of the frame were in very fuzzy focus.  In some cases, I understood why.  In others, it seemed like a technical problem.

24 - Zero Effect

    An awkward but brilliant private detective takes on a case involving a wealthy man being blackmailed.
    Bill Pullman plays the detective, and Ben Stiller plays his assistant.  This came out back in 1998, and it effectively disappeared.  I have no idea why.  The box art is pretty dull and doesn't inspire excitement.  It also may have been a little ahead of the curve.
    I first saw this as a VHS rental during high school.  Since then, I've probably watched it around four times.  Every time, it's been a really pleasant surprise.  It's clever, it feels unpredictable, there's a very human element to it.  This time through, I did feel like Pullman is a little less likable, since he makes reference to being on meth, something that completely slipped my attention when I was younger.
    There's something very charming about this.  Pullman's Zero is awkward, but his awkwardness isn't as specific as a character like Monk.  Zero is unpredictable, but to make him a bit more interesting, when he's on task, he remains focused and very skilled.  This is in contrast to other detectives who have flaws that infiltrate their ability to do their job.
    As far as this plot moves, it ends up feeling like a very small, intimate story.
    I recommend this movie to almost anyone.  It's a real shame that it doesn't seem to be available on Blu-ray.

Monday, January 27, 2014

23 - Vile

    A bunch of people wake up in a sealed house, with a variety of tools and weapons.  In order to be released, they need to fill a vial attached to the back of their heads with certain chemicals the brain produces when in pain.
    A premise that needed some stretching to make it work.  It's not a terrible idea.  But the problem is that it has a logical flaw.  These chemicals are produced not as a result of pain.  They're produced as a result of fear.  This means that the nervousness they all feel should be creating a steady, if small, flow of these chemicals.  The threat of immediate violence, and the tension of having an unstable person in the room, would probably be enough to reach their goal.
    The movie is probably more dull than it should be.  It's nice to see the characters actually thinking through their situation a little, and understanding that when a person dies, they're pretty much useless.  The problem is that there's nothing else happening.  Once the setup concludes, we get about 50-60 minutes of inflicting pain without much development.
    There are a few developments at the end, which actually do enhance the enjoyability of the movie.  But it's just not worth the effort that led to it.

Sunday, January 26, 2014

22 - The Hunt for the BTK Killer

    Based closely on the truth, Dennis Rader is a nice, everyday man, who is secretly the BTK killer.  This focuses on how Rader operated, and how he was captured.
    I wasn't too excited to see this.  I had read about Rader years ago, and I found the story remarkable not for his crimes, but for the silly way he was caught.  He asked police if they would be able to trace a floppy disk to the user that used it.  After he sent them a floppy, they found it was used at a specific church, and that the user was Dennis.
    I found this considerably more creepy than Henry was.  BTK is supremely unsettling, because he doesn't act crazy.  In fact, he seems mostly likable, and very in-control of himself.  As I was watching it, there was one sequence that really threw me off.  He manages to have someone's dog euthanized.  This was much more upsetting, and it seemed a little strange.  After finishing the movie, it became apparent that this was included for a good reason; otherwise, he's far too likable.  He's kind to his wife.  He seems to like people in general.  It's strange, but it's welcome, and much more believable.
    It isn't just the character that sells this movie.  The cast is generally great.  There are two halves to the movie - there's the half that follows BTK and Wichita - then there's the procedural investigation side of the story.  The procedural cast isn't as engaging, possibly because cop shows have diluted the effectiveness of that kind of storytelling.  But the BTK material is fantastic.  The residents are… perfect.  They behave normally.  Most amazingly, the actually look right.  No one is too attractive.  Some people are a bit overweight.  This allows the movie to take place in the real world.
    I don't know if I have any particular complaints.  Perhaps the movie could do with a little more violence.  Most of the violence that happens onscreen is kept in shadow or is treated with blurring effects.
    This is chilling for the sense of authenticity the story has.  For the right audience, this works.  For traditional fans of horror, this would be pretty dull.  But I'm glad to have seen it.

     One little thing; The cover for this movie is ridiculous.  Nothing even vaguely close to that is shown.

Friday, January 24, 2014

21 - Elevator

    Nine people are in an elevator on their way to a fancy dinner, when the elevator gets stuck.  It turns out that one of the passengers has a bomb, and they're under a ticking clock to get rescued.
    Coming out so close to Devil, which has a similar setup, this one plays much more in the real world.  This has no supernatural bent to the story, and as a result, is much more palatable, even if there are several strange problems.
    First, I'm really glad that they have full use of their cell phones during the movie.  No one has a lack of reception.  The only dead battery is on the security guard's walkie-talkie, which was probably written out in the interest of not having to spend time on that direction.  However, I'm much more disappointed with how poorly they handle using those cell phones.  When a 911 call is made, the guy talking to them skips all of the obvious information - like their location, and just complains about either being trapped in the elevator, or whatever has just happened.  This took me out of the movie.
    Second, there's a lot of time spent establishing how badly behaved the little girl is.  She is responsible for them being trapped in the elevator to begin with, and she causes an accident causes some serious, bloody injuries.  With her evilness so firmly established, I expected something else to come from that part of the story, but it never seemed to pay off.
    But there are some things that I like.  The comic, who comes across as a jerk for a good chunk of the movie, has an arc that turns him into a more likable, and more human character.  There's a subplot that establishes their motivation that I liked, dealing with the inappropriate behavior of investment firms.  Very pleasing to see these themes appear in movies now.
    Somehow, by the time that I finished the movie, I felt like something was missing.  I couldn't tell what.  It was some strange thing, but it felt like the story didn't satisfy the way that movies normally do.
    I have no idea what the deal is with the poster.  It has just about nothing to do with the movie.

Thursday, January 23, 2014

20 - Mr. Brooks

    A successful man deals with his daughter in trouble, being blackmailed, and a police investigation while being a methodical and organized serial killer.
    I wish I liked this more.  I admire it.  It's really packed with ideas and side plots.  It must have been a pain to put together.  And each of the ideas that are being explored are good ones.  The problem is just that there are too many of them.  It gets harder to follow than it should.  This might make it more rewarding on repeat viewings, but at least for the first one, it's just too much.
    The plot at the center of the movie is the relationship between the father and his daughter.  This story is by far the most interesting.  Then we get a cat-and-mouse story between the father and an investigator.  This is where I got bored.  They develop the investigator the same way that nearly every serial killer investigator works - the investigator is driven, and is unusually skilled.  Well, that's the only way that a cat-and-mouse story works.  I think what I didn't like is that more time was spent on developing what amounts to a stock character.
    This actually brings me to a secondary point.  I'm not too picky about actors.  I think that the material guides the cast, for the most part, and a skilled writer can raise up weak actors.  But for some reason, I just don't care for Demi Moore.  There's a chance that I don't mind her elsewhere, since I've seen her in a few movies before.  In this movie, she just seemed like she was not a supporting character; she was playing the role as if she were a lead.
    Most of these plots are enough, and a carefully balanced script would be able to juggle them perfectly.  The one plot that really helps to derail things is the exploration of another killer that is coming after the investigator.  Once that one kicks in, it gets nearly impossible to pay attention.
    Still, it's not a bad movie.  With some editing, I think it could be really good.  As it is, it won't have the broad appeal it could have.  It's hard to say that's a bad thing.  We need more movies that break convention a bit.

     One thing that bothered me.  There's a plot point, that involves someone claiming that urine is DNA evidence.  This is not true.  It's only DNA evidence if the person happens to be unhealthy, but a normal person's urine is not DNA evidence.  The fact that I knew this, and that it jumped out at me, is a bad sign.

Monday, January 20, 2014

19 - The Innocents

    A lady goes to work as a governess for two neglected children of a wealthy man.  The longer she stays with them, the more she's convinced that ghosts are at work in the house, and that the children are involved.
    Based on The Turn of the Screw.  Whew, this is a good movie.  And I have no idea how I've missed it until now.  It pre-dates The Haunting by about two years, but it's very similar.  They have a similar rhythm and approach to dialogue.  The photography is similarly great.  If The Innocents has a failing, it's that the roots of being a stage play are too obvious.  There are many scenes that are a bit more talky than they should be, but the movie really does a great job once they spread to outdoor locations.
    For a ghost story, it's pleasingly ambiguous.  There are more layers to the story than are obvious, and most of the sub-currents take a long time to recognize.
    One of the weirdest elements is the peculiar relationship between the lead and the male child.  They share two kisses in the movie, both of them uncomfortably long.  I wish I could explain this, but with just one viewing, and not much time put into thinking about it, I have no clue.
    I'm not sure how much I'll come back to this.  Much like The Haunting, I have nothing but the highest respect for it.  But I have a hard time getting myself to re-watch it.  It probably plays better on a big screen, in a very dark theater.  I probably shouldn't have watched this during the day.

Sunday, January 19, 2014

18 - Star Trek Into Darkness

    Kirk and crew are sent on an unusual mission to retrieve a terrorist that is hiding out on the Klingon home world.
    I've been wanting to re-watch this.  I remember enjoying it when I saw it in theaters, though not quite as much as the first movie.  I actually like it a little less on a second viewing.
    It's not a terrible movie at all.  I've read some comments from people who think it's unacceptably bad.  It's a step down from the previous Star Trek, but I think this one fulfills something that was missing in the Trek movies.  It's dark.  It gives a bleaker presentation of what Starfleet is like.  The threat isn't entirely external.  There are more complicated moral and ethical questions.  It's true that the various Trek TV series have been able to focus on more complicated issues, the movies have been remarkably simplistic.
    My biggest complaint about this movie is how forced the action sequences feel.  There are just set pieces, one after another.  Combined with direction that doesn't leave much room for breathing, it's an exhausting movie to watch.  This can work, but there's something that doesn't feel right with this one.
    I still don't hate it.  I wish things had been adjusted a little.  I don't like the sequence of Kirk and Kahn jetting across space between ships.  It goes on longer than it should, there isn't that much tension.  The highlight of it is seeing Simon Pegg hamming it up.
    Still, I wonder how I'll feel about it later.  I might feel a little less annoyed with it.  Maybe I just need to be in the right mood.

17 - Butcher Boys

    A group of kids out partying run afoul of an unusual gang, which leads to a long chase, and eventual captivity.
    I was a little bored by the first half of the movie, but I actually felt a little mixed.  While there wasn't much plot, there was at least a mystery of motivation, and there seemed to be enough curiosity generated about what exactly the villains have in mind.
    The bigger problem with the first half is that every single person is terrible.  The teens that are partying are entirely dislikable, and they make decision after decision to make sure that we don't care when they die.  Normally, this should make us feel a little closer to the villains.  Except that the villains are just completely bizarre.  Their behavior is totally unpredictable.
    So there's no one in the movie that I like.
    The second half of the movie gets really weird.  While I felt like I was starting to understand the story at first, the second half throws all the characters into a big pot, and makes them all argue and fight in different combinations.  I came out of it more confused than I should be.
    Then the last act gets really strange, but the insanity of it is much more enjoyable.  It turns into a weird free-for-all in the street.  The main benefit?  After spending about a third of the movie is almost completely dark conditions, we get some well-lit sequences.
    About halfway through this, I started thinking of how much this was borrowing from Texas Chainsaw Massacre.  It is, and it's been a long time since I've seen that.  But man, I'm getting sick of this kind of editing.  I shouldn't be so bored and annoyed with cheaply made movies.  Tell a story WELL, don't try to show off your editing skillz.  No one can stand this kind of crap editing.
    Notably, I've read that the script was written by the same person who wrote Texas Chainsaw Massacre, and was intended to be a direct sequel.  Then he rewrote it to be a new franchise.  Really risky move.  I would be amazed if this accumulated a following.

Saturday, January 18, 2014

16 - Dawn of the Dead

    As an epidemic of the living dead grows, a group of four people take a helicopter, and wind up securing a mall to keep themselves safe and well supplied.
    The Romero classic.  It's well-regarded critically.  I've liked it quite a bit, although now and then I find it a little formless.
    My appreciation for the pacing has grown as I've gotten older.  I've liked the quiet moments more, and felt like more of the violence is just padding the length.  From a screenwriting point of view, it's a weird, almost unstructured movie.  It's linear, but it doesn't seem to hit the peaks as expected.  The opening act feels strangely disconnected from the rest of it, the second act is way too long, and the third act feels like a desperate move to give some plot to the story.
    As bad as that sounds, it's still a very good movie, but by modern standards, it's not acceptable.
    This brings up a problem with modern movies.  A luxurious movie like Dawn of the Dead would never get made today.  (Well, maybe it could, if Paul Thomas Anderson wanted to make it.)  Horror movies provide a certain return on investment, and something this sprawling would never be approved by producers.
    This made me think of the stories about Day of the Dead, how Romero had written a much bigger epic that was going to cap off the series perfectly.  But they didn't want to spend the money on financing it.  I wonder what kind of movie could have been?

15 - Shut Up Little Man!

    A documentary exploring the popularity of a series of tapes of two arguing roommates, Peter and Ray.
    One of my brothers has been into these tapes for awhile.  I've had a very casual interest in them.  I couldn't take longer stretches of them, but I think I appreciated the humor of it.  This is an effective documentary, because I came out of it feeling more strongly about the tapes.
    Their arguments are drunken, and packed with a terrible sense of cruelty.  They're mean enough that it seems like it would have been difficult to live near them, let alone be anywhere near them.
    The story of the creation of these tapes is fascinating though.  Initially created out of sense of self-preservation, it seems remarkable that the subjects were aware that they were being taped, but never seemed to care.  The two guys who taped their neighbors seem to be remarkably decent, too.  They have clearly had a lot of time to wonder about their moral and ethical position.  More importantly, they've reached an unusual relationship to the tapes.  I understand this, and it's strange.  The humor is mostly gone, and they're left with a very intimate portrait of these two men, roommates, fighting savagely.  As much as they argue and fight, they seem to have a strangely intimate relationship.
    I once taped one of my roommates in college.  He was unintentionally hilarious.  He wasn't terribly bright, and he would say incredibly ignorant things constantly.  I occasionally have a sense that maybe I shouldn't have taped him.  But I haven't spread the recordings of him around the world.  But I understand their quandary.
    The one area that I find more confusing is how the play based on the tapes was possible.  It looks absurd, but it also looks remarkably dull.  It loses all sense of truth.

Friday, January 17, 2014

14 - Cheerleader Massacre 2

    Two competing teams of cheerleaders head to a cheerleading camp for some face-off.  While there, they seem to be stalked by a strange robot.
    I'm all in favor of standard nudity and gore in slashers.  The is one of the more incompetent movies I've seen.  Loads of nudity, the the point where it enters self-parody, rather than just a winking eye at the audience.  The gore is absolutely terrible though.  It's almost entirely CGI, and it's pretty poorly done.  I have to wonder if this is cheaper than practical effects.  The only reason I can think that it's desired is because it can be altered in post-production.  I would think that most filmmakers - even really low-budget ones - have seen enough movies to know that these terrible effects never get a good reaction.  They take people out of the movie, and it's hard to forgive them.  It just looks like a real lack of effort.
    The movie itself is one of the weirdest movies I've seen.  The Room had Wiseau's sensibilities imprinted all over the script.  This script reads like a bizarre first draft, where people respond to situations and questions in ways that don't ring true.
    The amount of nudity is completely confusing, mostly because it conflicts with the way people behave in real life.  Cheerleaders sleep topless, and chat with their friends topless.  There are lengthy scenes with characters topless in the shower, sunbathing, waking up after sleeping at a friend's house.  Really strange.  Almost makes you feel like you're watching a alternate universe kind of movie.
    There's a reveal near the end that explains who the killer is, which seemed a bit forced.  The killer gives an explanation for their motivation, which seems even more forced.  But then the movie pulls out the one trick it has going for it - the implication of a much larger conspiracy.
    This raises a different problem.  I would much rather see a direct sequel to this, if it existed, than watch this movie.  The sequel has so much more promise for an interesting story.
    The short version - if you really are desperate for lots of nudity, or enjoy low budget slashers.  (I mean, low, low budget)  Otherwise, not worth your time.

    I found myself wondering about the market for nudity in rental movies.  With the internet supplying as much porn as anyone could use, the titillation of this kind of nudity seems unnecessary.

13 - Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer

    A drifter, Henry shares an apartment with Otis.  Becky comes to stay with them, and Henry winds up teaching Otis to kill.

    I first watched this sometime during high school, as it had been referenced as being a really powerful horror movie.  I remember liking it, but it wasn't quite as powerful as I had expected.  I've put off watching it again for a long time, but I wanted to break it down for the sake of analyzing serial killer horror stories.
    It's better than I remembered, and a bit more effective.  There are two things in particular that stand out.  First, there's a slow, distant quality to most of the movie.  Depending on your expectations, and how much you're willing to invest in the movie, this could be a problem for some people.  My high school self found this just too slow.  Now, it seems to be a really pleasing approach.  Second, the location does a lot to sell the feel of the movie.  It's in the midwest, somewhere outside Chicago.  We see the city a few times, but most of the movie is spent in a dreary, beer-soaked existence.
    I always think it's interesting to pair more than one killer.  To assume they would agree on their ideas is naive, and it's remarkable how well this movie sells the idea.  Henry is an accomplished killer.  He tries to explain the ideas to Otis, specifically ideas about hiding his tracks, and making sure that police don't tie all of the murders into one case.  Henry has an unusual refusal to let sexuality permeate his murders.  This does conflict with one murder scene we see, with a mostly disrobed prostitute with her arms bound.  Henry's uncomfortable behavior with sexuality is kind of welcome.  Most horror movies try to tie sexuality in so tightly with death.
    Otis is sloppy, and is much more sexually motivated to murder.  He gets so wound up about killing that he doesn't seem to think much of being safe.
    There's a third character, Becky, and she serves as a means to distinguish Henry and Otis.  What I found, at least during this viewing, was that she drives home a more tragic element to the movie.  She's dealing with having a child at a distance, her husband was abusive, she was raped by her father as a child.  By the end, she looks at Henry as a savior.
    I took massive notes on this movie, breaking down each scene, and I think it will be an invaluable aid.

Thursday, January 16, 2014

12 - Her

    A recently-divorced man and his new operating system AI fall in love with each other.
    Kind of the definition of a high concept movie.
    I've liked Spike Jonze.  And this one started off well, but it drags.  It drags a lot.  There are loads of situations to be explored with this concept, but it seems like we jump straight into material that would have normally been reserved for later (like how he goes about having sex with the AI) and instead spend about half of the movie in "how do you feel" discussions.  Having those talks in a romantic drama on maybe two occasions during a movie is okay.  Having it the centerpiece just hurts.
    I know I'm making it sound like it's terrible.  It's not.  In fact, there's a whimsical air to most of the first half, which is engaging and provocative.  As the story goes further along, their relationship seems to have lost all of the charm it had.  Maybe this is intentional.  Maybe it isn't.  Regardless, I found it hard to focus on the second half.
    The world-building was kind of nice though.  It reminded me of Gattaca, in a strange way.  This plays out as a hipster universe.  Nearly every guy in the movie has a thin build, and wears tight pants.  The lead is well played, but I found myself feeling like I couldn't quite identify with him - which is strange, because I felt closer to him from the trailer.  There seems to be no crime.  The city is well lit, a generally carefree environment.
    The weird thing is how this world-building also seems to have worked against the story.  No one seems to be surprised that this guy loves his OS's AI.  It's established that this seems to be happening a lot, I still would expect some people to pass judgment.
    It's an interesting curiosity, but it seemed to miss out on the promise of the premise.

Tuesday, January 14, 2014

11 - Raze

    A lot of women are held captive by some organization that pits them in death matches against each other.
    I saw that AV Club gave this a terrible rating - D+.  I saw it only out of vague curiosity.
    I can say that it's better than a D+.  But it's a limited-appeal market.
    The action is strangely the least interesting part.  And the movie takes a bit longer to get to the more interesting elements.  Once we see the contestants in a group, the movie gets more interesting.  We get a bit of personality in each character.  We figure out who we should care about.  This development makes everything get more interesting.
    What I found much more engaging was the mystery of the backstory.  It reminded me a little of Hostel.  Or maybe, if Hostel had ended a little bit earlier, and we only found out that there was a gaming organization, but didn't learn anything about it.  I find this organization much more frightening though.  The Elite Hunting Club of Hostel is largely patronized by individuals.  The horror comes from the idea that some anonymous Joe you know from work might be interested in torture and murder on the side.  Despite being organized through a club, it's still an individual interest.  In this case, the interest in the event seems to be treated almost like a horse race.  It's a family event.   This is a significant spoiler, since it's revealed in the last few minutes.
    My reaction to this movie is even more puzzling, because I normally don't feel invested in a particular ending.  To spoil the movie completely; the heroine teams up with a new competitor to fake her death.  Using this method, she survives, and kills her way out of the place - killing the organizers, medics, guards, eventually reaching a ground level where there's a party.  She kills two guards, takes their guns, and runs through a crowd of family spectators.  She runs out into the sunlight, and runs across a bridge.  Halfway across it, she is shot by a marksman.
    I don't know if I mind the sad ending.  I think I just didn't like that she gave up so easily at the end.  She could have easily killed those who were a threat as she made her way out, she just got distracted by the sunlight.

Sunday, January 12, 2014

10 - Insidious: Chapter 2

    Picking up at the end of the first movie, the family deals with the possession of their father.
    I'm glad I re-watched the first movie before seeing this.
    Similar to the first one, I'm a bit conflicted.  The expectations created by the first one are impossible to live up to.  There was plenty of mystery in the first half of the first one.  The loss of that mystery made the second half feel like a different movie.  This one starts with no mystery, and the mystery that gets manufactured isn't very demanding.  This means that the tension is lowered, making it less effective as a horror movie.
    There's no bigger problem than the setup that they have to start out with.  The audience knows that the father is holding the evil spirit.  It seemed obvious that the mother knew.  Now the movie has to start out by casting doubt on that ending?  It's not an enviable position.
    There are two specific things that made this movie shine.  First, the effects work is great.  I'm very pleased with the shots involving the lettered dice.  The scene where the ghost appears while the mother is walking through the house on the phone - very well done.  I actually rewound to be sure that I saw it.  The reveal right after that was just fantastic.  I'm very, very impressed with how that turned out.
    The other thing that pleased me, and saved the movie in my mind, was the tethering of the plots.  It's one thing to make a direct sequel.  That can work pretty well - I like Halloween II.  This was retroactively tying these stories together, and it worked very well.  This is hard to detail, but there are scenes from the first movie that are explained by inclusion in this one.  This reminds me of what I like about the Paranormal Activity movies, and I wish more movies would do this type of thing.  It's a difficult thing to do, but the payoff is great.  It can make a lesser story feel more important.  Almost like it transfers some of the goodwill from the other movies.

    Horror-research wise, I felt like it repeated a few similar horror cliches - sexual identity issues, abusive mothers leading to kill (a la Psycho or Sleepaway Camp).  The possessed father trying to kill a young son (The Shining, obviously).
    But I did realize that there's a power to be had in using these elements like teeth.  Teeth are a primal kind of thing, and a lot of people have strange phobias or preoccupations with them.  Their inclusion isn't terribly important to this story, but it's an interesting device.

     Another addition - I noticed when Carnival of Souls was playing on a TV, and thought it was a tasteful reference.  There's a scene later when a bunch of ghosts reach for one of the kids, which seemed to be emulating that movie.  Also a nice reference.

Friday, January 10, 2014

9 - You're Next

    A family, and their significant others, gathers for a fancy dinner.  They are attacked by masked assailants, picking the family off one by one.
    it took a long time before I was able to see this.  I've heard good things.  Most reviews have been very positive.  Now that I've seen it, I'm a little mixed.
    It's a clever movie.  The direction is generally good, including some very cool shots.  (There's an overhead shot of people ascending stairs that looks great.)  Ti West plays a small part, which is great to see.  It's very enjoyable to see a resourceful character in a horror movie.
    What makes me a little more ambivalent about this one is the structuring.  It's fairly straightforward until the midpoint, at which point there's a big reveal.  Normally, a reveal this big is saved for the point at which we break into the third act - or it's a last minute reveal in the last 5 or 10 minutes.  In either case, this development completely reshapes the audience expectation of the movie.  Yes, the second half is much more enjoyable than the first.  But the sense of disconnect makes it hard to feel like that development was earned.
    There are a few references sprinkled throughout.  There's a spot that is trying to channel The Shining.  There's a music cue that weirdly tries to channel John Carpenter's scores.  And even weirder, there was a homage to Rear Window.  No idea why.  I could also make an argument that there is a reference to Night of the Living Dead, but I can't quite stretch that far.
    The action is shot well.  I never felt annoyed by the direction.  But I do have to say that two of the last deaths were a little too silly for me.  One of them is a special one, which was intentionally wacky.  The other one is just a knife in the head.  I have some issues with knives being used for stabbing into the skull.  While it's possible, it's just not that likely.  In shows like Walking Dead, I usually give the benefit of the doubt, assuming that their skulls have rotted a bit.
    I might return to this movie eventually.  It might play better once I know what to expect of it.

8 - Monster Camp

    A documentary about NERO, a live-action role-play game, focusing specifically on a chapter running in Seattle.
    This was recommended because I had watched Darkon.  I'm a bit disappointed with this one.  Darkon created a specific event that the documentary focused on; a power struggle between two competing players.  Monster Camp is much more unfocused.  It's interesting, mostly because the game is so much more complicated than Darkon.
    I find most of this behavior is stuff I can't do.  I can't play things like D&D because I can't lose myself to a fiction the way some people can.  And yet, I feel comfortable acting when I know my lines.
    The structure of NERO seems much more interesting.  I like the division between participating as a player character, or as a non-player character.  That's a great way to approach the game, and it allows people to play in a way that better suits their personality.
    The lack of focus does hurt this.  Normally, a skillfully-made documentary doesn't have to rely on having an audience that is interested in the subject matter; they get sucked in despite their interests.  In this case, if you don't have much interest in the LARPing culture, there's nothing to see.

7 - For The Love of Movies: The Story of American Film Criticism

    A documentary tracing the development and trends in film criticism in America.
    Not a terribly exciting documentary.  There's remarkably little conflict.  There are a few interesting ideas that are tossed out, but most of the movie is pretty dull.
    The one thing that came out that I found interesting is how much the auteur theory of film criticism was a dividing point.  The auteur theory viewed the director as the person who shaped the film, more than the script, genre, or actors.  Pauline Kael strongly disagreed with this idea.  It seems obvious that neither camp is correct.  Some directors place more of their stamp on their projects than others.  Some directors try to create a more comprehensive body of work.  Some directors don't.  Some of them just do what they can with what they get.  Maybe the disagreement is when to apply that interpretation, and when not to.
    Not much else to say about it.
    It's kind of a shame.  There's a tense relationship between most directors, actors, and film critics.  That conflict is glossed over and forgotten.

Tuesday, January 7, 2014

6 - Best in Show

    A pseudo-documentary about a variety of people and their dogs, competing in the Westminster Kennel Club show.
    When I first watched this, it was back sometime shortly after it came out on VHS or DVD.  I remembered enjoying it, but I don't think I could recall most of the jokes.  So I finally got it on Blu-ray.  And this is probably one of the worst transfers I've seen.  It looks passable, but not clean.  It looks like it's roughly the same quality as a DVD.
    I wasn't sure what I was going to think of this.  Since I first saw it, I've gotten a dog, and gotten much more immersed in dog culture.  Luckily, the movie works in either case.  The dogs are really not a focus.  If anything, being knowledgable about dogs made me feel worse for the weimaraner, who deals with terrible humans.
    The humor is a little more broad than the other Guest movies.  This isn't a problem, just an observation.  Waiting for Guffman was a little harder to appreciate without a theater background.  This Is Spinal Tap is a cult classic for a reason - it's harder to appreciate without being a musician.  Best in Show is almost completely character-driven comedy, and dog culture has very little to do with it.

5 - Insidious

    After moving to a new house, an accident leads to a son being in a coma, and they all have to deal with some spooky hauntings.
    I've been waiting to re-watch this one.  I wanted to give it a watch before watching the sequel, since I couldn't quite remember this one too clearly.  And this time, I watched it with Cathy.
    What makes Insidious a remarkable horror movie is the budget.  Around 1.5M.  To compare, The Room was shot for around 6M.  I'm not comparing the scripts, either.  I'm talking about just the quality of the picture, the editing, the acting.  Everything about Insidious looks very professional.  The direction, the editing, the photography, the music.  From the appearance, the effects work, I would probably peg the budget at closer to 15-20M.
    The movie is a strange one, and it makes it hard for me to unreservedly say that it's great.  But I find myself wondering if the weaknesses make it more effective for more viewings.
    The main problem is how disjointed the movie is.  Once the medium comes into the movie, it seems to drastically change the direction of the movie.  It changes from a very effective haunted house-type movie into a possession-type movie.  On the second viewing, I didn't mind this too much, since I saw it coming.  Since this is an event that happens about halfway through the movie, it makes sense, but… maybe the problem is that the change in approach feels like it abandons everything that the audience was thinking about the first half.
    The second problem is possibly related to the first.  For some reason, there's nowhere near enough danger in the second half.  We get a few more creepy images.  We get a quick chase.  The most memorable weirdness happens during the last act, but there's also some material that doesn't live up to our expectations.  The demon becomes less scary the more we see of him.
    This disjointed quality makes it easier to forget how the movie fits together, which does make it a bit more interesting for repeated viewings.
    For research purposes, I suppose that the horror in this comes from the son being in peril.
    I look forward to watching the second one soon.

Sunday, January 5, 2014

4 - D3: The Mighty Ducks

    The team gets scholarships for an exclusive private school.  They have to deal with the varsity team, fitting in with a prep academy crowd, and losing their normal coach.
    I saw this in theaters when it came out.  I also burned out on the first two Mighty Ducks movies.
    This is…. better than I remembered.  It still doesn't have the same level of heart as the first two.  But it's just as calculated as most Disney movies are.  In another way, I'm impressed with this effort.  It's simultaneously more juvenile, and more adult, than the other movies.
    To make it more juvenile, there's a lot more silliness.  There's a fun skating sequence to kick things off.  At one point, one of the kids actually jumps over a car that's driving at him.  There are plenty of pranks in this movie, and they range from good natured to being surprisingly sadistic.  Setting fire ants loose on sleeping victims is really cruel.
    But the overall message of the movie is strangely adult.  The kids need to grow up if they're going to get any better.  Their challengers aren't like the old teams.  The first team was just the rich kids.  The second team was a brutal foreign team.  This one is just the varsity team.  The movie makes a few efforts to make them into evil people, but they seem to be just upperclassmen.  By turning the real opposition in the movie into Charlie's unwillingness to let go of being a strictly offensive player, it's a surprisingly adult idea.  The new coach doesn't have much definition either.  They sell him as being a compassionate father.  But he doesn't seem to be much of a coach.
    This may be what made the movie do poorly, at least compared to the other movies in the franchise.  If kids can't quite identify with the themes, and adults feel like there's something too silly about it, no one leaves the theater feeling good.
    The one thing that I did learn, which I really liked, is that the female goalie is played by Marguerite Moreau, whom I thought was very cute - and found that she was the romantic interest in Wet Hot American Summer!  It's good to see she's still working!

     In looking around, I found this review of the movie, explaining how the Ducks are the villains.  While I don't agree to all of their points (in particular, the scholarships argument) they make a good case.

Saturday, January 4, 2014

3 - In the Mouth of Madness

    An insurance fraud investigator is called in to look into the disappearance of a bestselling horror novelist, Sutter Cane.  His investigation reveals a bizarre insanity that will destroy the world.
    A very hard movie to summarize.  When I first saw this movie, on VHS, back probably around 8th grade or so, I didn't think too much of it.  I liked a few of the images.  When I revisited the movie later, during college, I liked it much more.  Now I really like it.  It's the Lovecraft movie we've never gotten.  None of the standard Lovecraft movies have been able to capture the atmosphere, and the wild loss of sanity that makes his stories interesting.  This one does.  It has lots of references to Lovecraft's work, but more importantly, it captures the odd things that happen in his stories, combined with a lack of understanding of why things happen.  And more importantly, the theme of losing one's mind.
    This is part of my effort to identify what things make horror scary.  I'm not relying on things like gore, editing tricks, or sound-related jumps.  I'm talking about the core ideas, or the structural elements that make things creepy or tense.
    First, repetition stands out as a major element.  Repetition combined with variation.  We see the same scene play out a few times in this movie.  Our hero walks down a street, looks at a large ad for a Sutter Cane novel, hears some noise from an alley.  He walks over to it, and sees a man in a police uniform beating another person.  Each time this plays out, there are changes.  Graffiti on a wall says "I C" at one time.  Later, it says "I CAN SEE"  The policeman turns from being a snarling normal guy, to being a deformed monster.  As our hero observes this, on one occasion, a group of infected people gather around him with axes.  These sequences work because we've seen the setup, and it was filmed in a distinct way.  Each shot runs long enough to sink into our brains.
    This actually made me think of The Ring.  Once the video was shown, the movie was able to use the symbols that appeared as a tool to raise tension.  This was an ingenious tool.  It allowed fairly normal things, like a ladder, to appear creepy, and heavily symbolic.  What does the ladder mean?  We don't find out until the end!
    Second, the sense of unpredictability that permeates the movie.  A lot of the things that set this up aren't things I care about.  They involve arms reaching out unexpectedly, shadows dashing in the extreme foreground.  The scene where the investigator and the girl are approaching Hobb's End.  They're driving in the darkness.  She sees the same person riding a bike; both directions, and the person is aging.  It isn't clear if the person is coming or going, or even if they're supposed to be the same person.  When we see them a second time, we don't know what's going to happen.  Are they a threat?
    Third, there's a huge sense of world-building in this movie.  This is unique in horror movies.  Most of them have a small focus.  This one has a huge one.  We get the impression that what happens in this movie has a huge, huge span.  And it's been going on for a long time.  Sutter Cane is a conduit for some ancient, evil force.  Something beyond time.  We don't understand how the black church came to be, only that it has a longer history than we can gather.  This is where world building has a risk.  This movie would probably suffer if it had a sequel.  It would suffer if it had a prequel.  We get exactly the right amount of information in the movie.  Anything more or less would be unsatisfying.
    There's also a theme that I consider to be a core of horror.  Loss of identity and control.  One of the ideas of the movie is that free will is an illusion.
    All of these traits work together.  Repetition, variation, symbols, unpredictability, and world-building.

    Unrelated to my research, this was the first time I watched this on Blu-ray.  It was great - I could actually see an effects shot that was always obscured on DVD.

Friday, January 3, 2014

2 - About Time

    On his twenty-first birthday, a man is informed that the males in his family have the ability to travel back in time, within their own life.  This allows him to re-do anything he wasn't happy with, and re-direct his life as he desires.
    I had some good hopes for this movie when I saw the trailer.  I've come to really love Love Actually, and I think Richard Curtis has an ear for writing ensemble pieces that balance some tricky issues.  Unfortunately, this one tries to replicate the magic of Love Actually in style, but not in substance.  There's still a whimsical, and occasionally manipulative romantic edge, but the depth isn't there.
    What makes Love Actually work is that the variety of plots explore some very different types of stories, and not all of them end well.  This ends with good news for everyone, and a terribly dumb lesson learned.
    There are a lot of little things that bothered me in this movie.  First, it focuses on a tight-knit family that spends a lot of time together.  They have a fairly secluded estate, no one seems to work.  Why should I care about this family?  They seem aristocratic.  Once our protagonist - Tim - learns of his ability, he uses it in an effort to undo his awkwardness at a New Year's Eve party.  Then he does what he can to try to woo a girl staying with the family for the Summer.
    What bothers me about this is that he doesn't do anything that isn't selfish.  The first thing that he does that isn't selfish is an obvious plot hole.  (This is when he helps out the playwright.  He derails his romance in helping him, but he doesn't seem to understand that he can try different methods of helping the guy out.)
    The thing that bothered me the most was that the movie spends about half of the running time focusing on Tim's romance and life with Mary.  Then suddenly, it shifts focus to being about Tim's relationship with his father.  That's a reasonably satisfying story.  But neither of these stories are well-defined.  There are subplots, some of them good, some of them bad.
    Spoilers abound below.
    The father gives Tim a plan for happiness that he found.  Live each day twice.  First, live it normally, then the second time through, live it while enjoying it.  This is absurd!  How dumb does Tim have to be?  When we first see him going through the normal day, he seems to be actively trying to be a tool.  He didn't need to re-live the day in order to appreciate it!  At the end of the movie, he makes reference to not using his ability to re-live, and that he just does it right the first time.
    How can I care about such a thick-headed lead?
    His romantic interest, Mary, is a mixed character.  I like that she's an introvert.  There aren't enough of them in movies.  But as the movie moves along, I like her less and less.  She isn't much of a character.  She exists as an object of desire for Tim.  And later, as a baby-machine.
    Two other complaints, both the same idea.  Tim is a lawyer.  We see him at work twice.  He seems to have a lot of free time on his hands.  After having a baby, Tim and Mary don't seem to have any problems doing whatever they want.  Both of these problems could be addressed by giving Tim a different job.

    Despite how much I'm ranting about this, I actually found the movie enjoyable for the most part.  I don't know if I can overcome these weaknesses.  Maybe when I revisit it in another year or so.

Thursday, January 2, 2014

1 - The Room

    Johnny, a successful, well liked man, is cuckolded by his fiancĂ©, Lisa.  His perfect world crumbles.
    I bought the Blu-ray of this back when it came out - probably about a year ago.  I love this movie.  It's remarkable on so many levels, and ever time I watch it, I discover new things.  This time was no exception.  The higher quality really brought out a few elements I hadn't noticed before.
    The element I was focused on this time was the problem of scene construction.  With most movies, each scene leads to the next.  Even if you don't remember exactly what comes next, there's a logical order to the chain of events.  This doesn't exist in The Room.  I kept thinking about the possibility of a re-edit of the movie.  Re-ordering the scenes might actually bring a better sense of cohesion to the movie.  Not to mention, trimming scenes, dialogue, establishing shots.
    This time through, I felt more sorry for Greg, playing Mark, and Juliette, playing Lisa.  Both of them are actually pretty decent actors, and during a few scenes, I could feel them struggling to put the best spin possible on the material.
    Denny is one of the strangest characters.  He's supposed to be a young guy, and sometimes he projects that.  Other times, he gives a look.  It's a very creepy smile.  I don't know how intentional this is.  I wonder how essential Denny is to the story.  He doesn't really add anything to the main plot, but his scenes do tend to spice things up a little.
    Who knows.  I can't recommend The Room enough.  It's an experience like no other.

Wednesday, January 1, 2014

The Best and Worst of 2013

Movies of unexpected quality
     We have some expectations of what levels a movie will reach, based on the budget, genre, or the people involved in making them.  These were some of the movies that stood out as surprisingly good for having a limited budget, or being simply less-known.

Cashback
     The poster for this is really misleading.  It's almost an inverse version of Fight Club.  There are a few weaknesses, but it's a very interesting story.

Robot & Frank
     If my father were still alive, I think he would enjoy this one.  Most of the fun comes from the interaction between Frank and the Robot, which sets up appropriate robotic rules, and it rings true.  The twist to the story makes it a bit more sad, but it's probably one of the only positive-tech stories I've seen in a long time.

Exam
     It's solidly performed.  I can't give away too much, but it made me think of The Experiment, another limited cast drama that sucks you in.

The Brass Teapot
     A pleasant balance between the moralistic Twilight Zone sort of story, a good hint of comedy, and a bit of darkness.  A very well-handled script that explored all of the appropriate possibilities of the premise.

Ms. 45
     A not-quite-revenge-exploitation movie.  Shot well, very memorable images.  I haven't seen much like it.

The Paranormal Activity movies
    I know these aren't for everyone.  Part of why I like them is that there's nothing else like them out there.  It's a simple kind of story, but it's hard to say exactly how it will unfold.  The tension is managed well, and it doesn't feel forced.  There's a minimum of shaky-cam work.  Best of all, the stories create a larger narrative, which rewards the viewer for paying attention.

Unwatchably weird
Keyhole
    


Strangest acceptably good movie
 Rubber
     While I can explain the steps that the movie takes, I can't explain the way in which it makes sense.  Some people might be turned off by the weirdness of the premise, but others might accept it for being what it is.

Most overrated classic
Saturday Night Fever
     A bleak, bleak movie.  I have no problem with that, but it's the lack of self-awareness that seems to be there.  The characters have no redeeming moments.  No one seems to consider doing the right thing.

The worst thing I watched…
No idea.  A Brush With Death?  Possibly Bloody Mary?  Nothing stood out as being wildly bad.

2013 Wrap-up

    Well, my stats for the year were impressive.  I met all of my goals, exceeded a few of them, and watched more movies than any of the other years I've tracked.  I also focused much more heavily on watching first viewings.
    Here are the goals, which I set at the start of last year, and the movies that fulfilled those requirements.
    Documentary - 8
        Bronies, Darkon, Nightmares in Red, White and Blue…, Heckler, Life 2.0, Best Worst Movie, After Porn Ends, Tabloid, Star Warriors, Life after Django Reinhardt, I Think We're Alone Now, Tales From the Script
    Musical - 7
        Into the Woods, Singin' in the Rain, The Muppet Movie, How to Succeed in Business Without Really Trying, The Muppets, My Little Pony: Equestria Girls, Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band
    Sci-Fi - 18
        The Host, Star Trek IV, Men in Black 3, Star Trek, Star Trek into Darkness, Silent Running, The Day the Earth Stood Still, Westworld, Futurama: Bender's Game, Starcrash, Super 8, Phase IV, The World's End, Branded, Hell, The One, The Angry Red Planet, Pacific Rim, Disturbing Behavior, Europa Report, The Asphyx, Robot & Frank
    20s - 2
        The Man Who Laughs, The Gold Rush
    30s - 3
         Dracula, Frankenstein, The Mummy, Reefer Madness
    40s - 5
        Saboteur, Shadow of a Doubt, Rope, The Phantom of the Opera, The Wolf Man
    50s - 5
        How to Marry a Millionaire, The Trouble with Harry, North by Northwest, The Man Who Knew Too Much, Singin' in the Rain, The Day the Earth Stood Still, The Angry Red Planet, The Creature From the Black Lagoon
    60s - 6
         Marnie, A Fistful of Dollars, Torn Curtain, For a Few Dollars More, Topaz, From Russia With Love, How to Succeed in Business Without Really Trying, The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly, 8 1/2, The Odd Couple, Eyes Without A Face, The Trouble With Angels
    70s - 18
        The Muppet Movie, Frenzy, Summer of '42, The Sting, Jaws, Badlands, The Sentinel, Being There, Silent Running, Westworld, The Godfather, Starcrash, The Omen, Phase IV, Apocalypse Now, Blue Summer, The Conversation, Saturday Night Fever, Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band, Madhouse, The Asphyx

The same breakdown as I made last year-
20s    2
30s    4
40s    5
50s    8
60s    12
70s    21
80s    25
90s    12
00s    34
10s    83
Action            42
Anthology        8
Comedy        43
Documentary    12
Drama        49
Fantasy        5
Horror            74
Musical        7
Romance        4
Sci-Fi            22
Superheros        11
Zombies        1

          Total Viewed        Repeat percentage        First Time Percentage
2011         151                 1.98                                  58.94
2012         186                 3.76                                  63.97
2013         206                 9.7                                    90.29

Notable information
I realized that determining what qualifies as sci-fi is a really difficult thing.  There are a few really obvious ones, like Silent Running, which is almost purely sci-fi.  But when it comes to movies like The Host, it's a monster movie, which uses a sci-fi background to make it come to fruition.  Sci-fi is a prism that other genres get filtered through.

My repeat viewing percentage is high.  I wish I could explain that.  But my first time percentage is much higher than usual.

What did I learn from this?
I liked the goals at first.  And I saw a lot of things I normally wouldn't have put the time into, and I became better-rounded as a result.  As the year wore on, I became a bit more annoyed with the goals, and with my focus on only watching new movies.  I had some horror movies on disc that I really wanted to watch, and I've been putting them off.

So, for next year - no goals.  I'm not going to try to outdo myself.
But I suppose I have one goal, but it's not something I can quantify.  I want to learn more about horror, and about screenwriting.  I've been wanting to review all of the horror movies I own, and see if I can identify the things that make me scared.