Tuesday, March 25, 2008
Movie Review: The Deaths of Ian Stone
This film is one of the "Films to Die For" from the 2007 Horrorfest. The main character, the aptly named Ian Stone, dies over and over, eventually realizing that each of his bleak existences (and deaths) are being arranged by some outside force. It's a Gothic cross between Groundhogs Day and The Jacket, with a splash of The Matrix for good measure.
Not really a must-see, pretty much average in all respects, although the sfx were well-done, and more importantly, not overdone. (Except maybe the masks towards the end...)
I tried watching the "Miss Horrorfest 2007 Pageant" in the DVD bonus features, but it's all apparently online for free, and I'd say it's hardly worth the price. Like hockey or football, it's something I'd rather experience than watch.
Art Is Resistance
-Zero
0 Comments
Permalink
Not really a must-see, pretty much average in all respects, although the sfx were well-done, and more importantly, not overdone. (Except maybe the masks towards the end...)
I tried watching the "Miss Horrorfest 2007 Pageant" in the DVD bonus features, but it's all apparently online for free, and I'd say it's hardly worth the price. Like hockey or football, it's something I'd rather experience than watch.
Art Is Resistance
-Zero
Labels: movie reviews
Movie Review: Gabriel
Don't believe the mediocre rating on imdb.com, Gabriel is a pretty amazing film. Great storyline, and fantastic set design, on a budget and tight schedule no less. Ah well, what movie doesn't cry about budget restrictions when they *only* have two-hundred grand to make a feature film? Ha! In Australia, no less.
The story takes place in Purgatory, where a group of angels is sent from heaven to battle against a group of demons for dominance of this middle-ground. The angel Gabriel arrives only to find that the angels who came before him are doing Very Poorly: those who haven't succumbed to their pathetic humanity have disappeared completely, and several powerful demons are in complete control of purgatory.
Fans of gothic films like Blade Runner and The Crow should definitely see this film. And filmmakers will want to watch the "behind the scenes" on the DVD, which are Real Behind The Scenes, and not Production Crew Kissing The Director's Ass.
It was great to see the guy who wrote the music score for the film whine about getting ONLY ten grand and a year to do it! They should have talked to me, I scored a feature film in a month, on a budget one-ten-thousandth of his!
Art Is Resistance
-Zero
0 Comments
Permalink
The story takes place in Purgatory, where a group of angels is sent from heaven to battle against a group of demons for dominance of this middle-ground. The angel Gabriel arrives only to find that the angels who came before him are doing Very Poorly: those who haven't succumbed to their pathetic humanity have disappeared completely, and several powerful demons are in complete control of purgatory.
Fans of gothic films like Blade Runner and The Crow should definitely see this film. And filmmakers will want to watch the "behind the scenes" on the DVD, which are Real Behind The Scenes, and not Production Crew Kissing The Director's Ass.
It was great to see the guy who wrote the music score for the film whine about getting ONLY ten grand and a year to do it! They should have talked to me, I scored a feature film in a month, on a budget one-ten-thousandth of his!
Art Is Resistance
-Zero
Labels: indie movies, movie reviews
Thursday, February 14, 2008
Movie Re-Review: Bloodrayne
Blame Xtina. After hearing the never-ending thrashing my friends and I have given to the movie Bloodrayne and its director Uwe Boll, I finally decided that she shouldn't take our word for it, and experience it for herself firsthand.
So I paid a couple bucks to rent Bloodrayne, The Directors Cut (James suggested it might be better than the original, "Maybe they put the plot back in!" he suggested, which did not make me more enthusiastic to see it...) It took some coaxing on my part (and some bad television) to make Xtina agree to watch it. I was laughing before I loaded the disk into the player.
Oh, the horror! The horrible accents, I mean. Michael Madsen sounded like he was from New York!
Oh the horrible acting! Kristanna Loken wasn't even able to act Stoic!
Oh, the Bad Bad Bad ADR!
Oh, the horrible delivery of lines that sounded like they were read off pieces of paper handed to the actor one word at a time!
Oh, MEATLOAF ADAY!
And lets not forget that somehow Uwe Boll started with this and ended up with this!
Oh the plot LEAPS of faith that were Jet-Propelled-Across-Time-And-Relative-Dimensions-In-Space!
...and yet...a strange thing happened.
I did not find it as bad as I did at the theatre. Not remotely. Somehow, watching Bloodrayne on a TV set instead of a big screen, it seemed more like a bad episode of Xena Warrior Princess. Reviewing it as a B-Movie instead of a $10 Blockbuster, put it in a more acceptable perspective.
The movie had some large-scale sweeping shots, clearly done from a helicopter. There were some large scenes of mounted cavalry, and decent sets. It had Ben Kingsly in it. (Who I had Just seen the previous day as "The Rabbi" in Lucky Number Sleven ) Hell, he wasn't even half bad. The CG was B-Movie quality, and the props were ridiculously B-Movie funny.
Don't get me wrong; there's a reason the movies initial release was cut from 2500 theatres down to 985. There is a reason it went from release to cable in less than a year, bypassing HBO entirely.
The reason is that it sucked. As a real Theatre-Release-Type movie, it sucked.
But hand to Dog, as a B-Movie, its fine. If it cost 50K to make, and went straight to DVD I never would have been so hard on it.
After the movie, we watched the bonus feature, "Dinner with Uwe Boll" where a couple ass-kissing fans got to eat dinner and speak with the man, the myth, the legend himself, Uwe Boll. After seeing it, I think I understand Uwe better. I think he knows what he is, and he isn't deluded about the kinds of movies he is making. He knows that the public views him as a hack filmmaker, cutting as many corners as possible (including hiring prostitutes as actors, because they are cheap and will do Anything, compared to people in the Actors Guild.) and no doubt pocketing as much as he can.
He also explained why all his previous movies sucked; the writers. And that plural is no mistake, because Uwe Boll seems to send scripts through several different people for re-re-rewriting, which no doubt contributes to his disjointed and convoluted plotlines.
But don't worry, for his upcoming masterpiece, "Postal" he will be writing the script himself.
And keep your eyes out for Bloodrayne II (set in the Wild West!) which went straight to DVD, and the rumored Bloodrayne III which might actually have something to do with video game it was based on.
Oh, the horror...
Art Is Resistance
-Zero
1 Comments
Permalink
So I paid a couple bucks to rent Bloodrayne, The Directors Cut (James suggested it might be better than the original, "Maybe they put the plot back in!" he suggested, which did not make me more enthusiastic to see it...) It took some coaxing on my part (and some bad television) to make Xtina agree to watch it. I was laughing before I loaded the disk into the player.
Oh, the horror! The horrible accents, I mean. Michael Madsen sounded like he was from New York!
Oh the horrible acting! Kristanna Loken wasn't even able to act Stoic!
Oh, the Bad Bad Bad ADR!
Oh, the horrible delivery of lines that sounded like they were read off pieces of paper handed to the actor one word at a time!
Oh, MEATLOAF ADAY!
And lets not forget that somehow Uwe Boll started with this and ended up with this!
Oh the plot LEAPS of faith that were Jet-Propelled-Across-Time-And-Relative-Dimensions-In-Space!
...and yet...a strange thing happened.
I did not find it as bad as I did at the theatre. Not remotely. Somehow, watching Bloodrayne on a TV set instead of a big screen, it seemed more like a bad episode of Xena Warrior Princess. Reviewing it as a B-Movie instead of a $10 Blockbuster, put it in a more acceptable perspective.
The movie had some large-scale sweeping shots, clearly done from a helicopter. There were some large scenes of mounted cavalry, and decent sets. It had Ben Kingsly in it. (Who I had Just seen the previous day as "The Rabbi" in Lucky Number Sleven ) Hell, he wasn't even half bad. The CG was B-Movie quality, and the props were ridiculously B-Movie funny.
Don't get me wrong; there's a reason the movies initial release was cut from 2500 theatres down to 985. There is a reason it went from release to cable in less than a year, bypassing HBO entirely.
The reason is that it sucked. As a real Theatre-Release-Type movie, it sucked.
But hand to Dog, as a B-Movie, its fine. If it cost 50K to make, and went straight to DVD I never would have been so hard on it.
After the movie, we watched the bonus feature, "Dinner with Uwe Boll" where a couple ass-kissing fans got to eat dinner and speak with the man, the myth, the legend himself, Uwe Boll. After seeing it, I think I understand Uwe better. I think he knows what he is, and he isn't deluded about the kinds of movies he is making. He knows that the public views him as a hack filmmaker, cutting as many corners as possible (including hiring prostitutes as actors, because they are cheap and will do Anything, compared to people in the Actors Guild.) and no doubt pocketing as much as he can.
He also explained why all his previous movies sucked; the writers. And that plural is no mistake, because Uwe Boll seems to send scripts through several different people for re-re-rewriting, which no doubt contributes to his disjointed and convoluted plotlines.
But don't worry, for his upcoming masterpiece, "Postal" he will be writing the script himself.
And keep your eyes out for Bloodrayne II (set in the Wild West!) which went straight to DVD, and the rumored Bloodrayne III which might actually have something to do with video game it was based on.
Oh, the horror...
Art Is Resistance
-Zero
Labels: indie movies, movie reviews
Tuesday, February 12, 2008
Movie Review: Fido
Stop reading this now, and go see Fido!
Imagine an alternate reality where a comet passes by the Earth and space dust descends on the planet, bringing the dead back to life as your classic mindless zombies, with the desire for human flesh. Done to death, right?
Not like this!
This film is a zombidy mashup of "Terminator", "Shaun of the Dead" and "Leave it to Beaver", and Extremely well-set in the 1950s.
The zombies are controlled by electrical collars made by the giant corporation "Zombicon". The collars turn the walking dead into passive robots who obey simple orders, and are sold as household slaves. One family gets a zombie(played by Billy Connolly), who has more personality then the dad (played by Dylan Baker) and the son (Played by K'Sun Ray) befriends the zombie and names him Fido. There is even some interesting chemistry between the zombie and the wife (Played excellently by Carrie-Anne Moss).
It was more funny than anything I've seen in some time now, and a handful of zombie-gore, but not the least bit frightening. An absolute surprise, because I wouldn't have picked the movie based on the cover (and I *didn't*...) but I give it a 10.
Art Is Resistance
-Zero
0 Comments
Permalink
Imagine an alternate reality where a comet passes by the Earth and space dust descends on the planet, bringing the dead back to life as your classic mindless zombies, with the desire for human flesh. Done to death, right?
Not like this!
This film is a zombidy mashup of "Terminator", "Shaun of the Dead" and "Leave it to Beaver", and Extremely well-set in the 1950s.
The zombies are controlled by electrical collars made by the giant corporation "Zombicon". The collars turn the walking dead into passive robots who obey simple orders, and are sold as household slaves. One family gets a zombie(played by Billy Connolly), who has more personality then the dad (played by Dylan Baker) and the son (Played by K'Sun Ray) befriends the zombie and names him Fido. There is even some interesting chemistry between the zombie and the wife (Played excellently by Carrie-Anne Moss).
It was more funny than anything I've seen in some time now, and a handful of zombie-gore, but not the least bit frightening. An absolute surprise, because I wouldn't have picked the movie based on the cover (and I *didn't*...) but I give it a 10.
Art Is Resistance
-Zero
Labels: movie reviews
Sunday, December 30, 2007
Movie Review: Aliens Vs Predator: Requiem
Can't set your expectations much lower than this. The first Aliens Vs Predator was so Astonishingly bad, I had all but given up on the franchise(s).
100% of the the problem with both of these films is the writing. The original Alien and Predator franchises had interesting characters, and interesting character development, clever plots and plot twists to go with your monster SFX.
But in the first AVP, the plot was written by 9th grade boys who played Traveller while listening to Dio, and hadn't discovered girls yet. I think the original working title for AVP was "Robots Vs Dinosaurs!"
Sad to say, the second one isn't much better. I can't imagine how anyone signed off on the script for AVP-R, perhaps they thought it would be unique to have a bunch of teenagers doing stupid teenager things like, "Lets meet at the pool at midnight!" Did you really think people going to see this movie are interested in teenage relationships? Obviously not, because none of that shit showed up in the preview. Adding it in only reduces the film to another tired remake of Friday the 13th or Halloween.
Of course from a budgetary standpoint, it must be a lot cheaper to find teens who want to be in a movie and film them delivering pizza and getting into fights over the pretty girl...
But there was one advantage to watching a HALF AN HOUR of useless characters doing useless things: It made me happy to see them die. I cheered every time one of the stupid people got killed off, because that meant less contrived domestic / high school bullshit to get in the way of what SHOULD have been a decent horror / sci-fi flick.
The second half of the film can't quite make up for the first half, but if you come in an half an hour late, you will probably enjoy it more.
By the way, you might expect that if someone is going to fuck with the mythos, say for instance, by making an Alien/Predator hybrid, then you would think they might actually DO something with it. Don't count on it. It's just the FX department getting bored...
Art Is Resistance
-Zero
1 Comments
Permalink
100% of the the problem with both of these films is the writing. The original Alien and Predator franchises had interesting characters, and interesting character development, clever plots and plot twists to go with your monster SFX.
But in the first AVP, the plot was written by 9th grade boys who played Traveller while listening to Dio, and hadn't discovered girls yet. I think the original working title for AVP was "Robots Vs Dinosaurs!"
Sad to say, the second one isn't much better. I can't imagine how anyone signed off on the script for AVP-R, perhaps they thought it would be unique to have a bunch of teenagers doing stupid teenager things like, "Lets meet at the pool at midnight!" Did you really think people going to see this movie are interested in teenage relationships? Obviously not, because none of that shit showed up in the preview. Adding it in only reduces the film to another tired remake of Friday the 13th or Halloween.
Of course from a budgetary standpoint, it must be a lot cheaper to find teens who want to be in a movie and film them delivering pizza and getting into fights over the pretty girl...
But there was one advantage to watching a HALF AN HOUR of useless characters doing useless things: It made me happy to see them die. I cheered every time one of the stupid people got killed off, because that meant less contrived domestic / high school bullshit to get in the way of what SHOULD have been a decent horror / sci-fi flick.
The second half of the film can't quite make up for the first half, but if you come in an half an hour late, you will probably enjoy it more.
By the way, you might expect that if someone is going to fuck with the mythos, say for instance, by making an Alien/Predator hybrid, then you would think they might actually DO something with it. Don't count on it. It's just the FX department getting bored...
Art Is Resistance
-Zero
Labels: movie reviews
Friday, December 28, 2007
Movie Review: Disintegration
That blog post title is deceiving, because I can't give a real review for the movie Disintegration, since I only watched the first ten minutes. But in those 10 minutes, I did observe the following:
Bad acting...
Bad direction...
Bad production...
Bad sound... (including bad ADR, bad Foley and bad music/dialog levels...IE: Bad Sound)
Bad lighting...
And absolutely NO sense of timing.
I can't tell you much about the plot, because I couldn't finish the movie. In fact, I couldn't make it past the first 10 minutes of ridiculous, complicated relationship backstory, narrated (yes, NARRATED) by someone who sounded like they were from the cast of Fargo. Really, if the backstory is that complex, then you need to show it onscreen somehow. Work it into the story. Flashback. Dream sequence. Conversation between characters. Something. But for the Lamb Of God, would you please not try to force us to sit through ten minutes of fucking Norwegian narration, rattling off names and relationships as though you were at a High-Schools 5-year Reunion?
I scrolled through the rest of the movie at high-speed, and still couldn't finish it. A bunch of talking heads. Shoulda been a graphic novel instead, and it only would have taken a half-dozen pictures cut-n-pasted over and over. It could have come with a diagram of relationships and family trees, that would have saved all the overdubbed relations/narration...
If I had to rate this movie based off what I saw of it, I'd have to give it a 1 out of 10. The only thing keeping it from a solid "0" would be that I didn't hear any Emo or Country music in the score/soundtrack.
Roger McLeod, you should Watch some movies first, before you go trying to make one yourself...
Art Is Resistance
-Zero
0 Comments
Permalink
Bad acting...
Bad direction...
Bad production...
Bad sound... (including bad ADR, bad Foley and bad music/dialog levels...IE: Bad Sound)
Bad lighting...
And absolutely NO sense of timing.
I can't tell you much about the plot, because I couldn't finish the movie. In fact, I couldn't make it past the first 10 minutes of ridiculous, complicated relationship backstory, narrated (yes, NARRATED) by someone who sounded like they were from the cast of Fargo. Really, if the backstory is that complex, then you need to show it onscreen somehow. Work it into the story. Flashback. Dream sequence. Conversation between characters. Something. But for the Lamb Of God, would you please not try to force us to sit through ten minutes of fucking Norwegian narration, rattling off names and relationships as though you were at a High-Schools 5-year Reunion?
I scrolled through the rest of the movie at high-speed, and still couldn't finish it. A bunch of talking heads. Shoulda been a graphic novel instead, and it only would have taken a half-dozen pictures cut-n-pasted over and over. It could have come with a diagram of relationships and family trees, that would have saved all the overdubbed relations/narration...
If I had to rate this movie based off what I saw of it, I'd have to give it a 1 out of 10. The only thing keeping it from a solid "0" would be that I didn't hear any Emo or Country music in the score/soundtrack.
Roger McLeod, you should Watch some movies first, before you go trying to make one yourself...
Art Is Resistance
-Zero
Labels: movie reviews, Ubersuck
Movie Review: The Reaping
For movies like The Reaping, I'm more than happy to wait till they come out on DVD, because honestly, it's less than half of them that are any good at all.
But I enjoyed The Reaping. It had it's lame moments of Trying Too Hard To Shock to keep the suspense up, (and someone please tell me how a hoard of locusts can kill someone,) but all in all the story was interesting, and the pace didn't let up for long, kept me guessing, and a couple good solid twists at the end.
Stephen Hopkins wisely avoided the temptation to make Hillary Swank uber-sexy by messing with her looks. Hillary Swank is a natural beauty like Milla Jovovich, who doesn't put on her makeup with a trowel like Paris Hilton. Stephen Hopkins also did not force Hillary Swank to carry the movie by stuffing the camera in her face for extended periods. Someone explain this to Peter Jackson before he tries to make King Kong 2.
Art Is Resistance
-Zero
0 Comments
Permalink
But I enjoyed The Reaping. It had it's lame moments of Trying Too Hard To Shock to keep the suspense up, (and someone please tell me how a hoard of locusts can kill someone,) but all in all the story was interesting, and the pace didn't let up for long, kept me guessing, and a couple good solid twists at the end.
Stephen Hopkins wisely avoided the temptation to make Hillary Swank uber-sexy by messing with her looks. Hillary Swank is a natural beauty like Milla Jovovich, who doesn't put on her makeup with a trowel like Paris Hilton. Stephen Hopkins also did not force Hillary Swank to carry the movie by stuffing the camera in her face for extended periods. Someone explain this to Peter Jackson before he tries to make King Kong 2.
Art Is Resistance
-Zero
Labels: movie reviews
Movie Review: The Simpsons Movie
Matt Groening thoughtfully provides his own review of the Simpson's Movie in the movie itself. At the start of the show, Homer stands up and announces that anyone who pays to see something that they can see on TV for free is an idiot, and points to the audience, "...and that includes you."
Sorry, but I can't sum it up better myself.
Art Is Resistance
-Zero
0 Comments
Permalink
Sorry, but I can't sum it up better myself.
Art Is Resistance
-Zero
Labels: movie reviews
Sunday, November 25, 2007
Movie Review: Hitman
The expectations for Hitman were average. I didn't like the video game; staring at the back of some one's shaved and tattooed head was less than gratifying, and the game was nearly uncontrollable, I almost garroted myself more than once.
So I was pleased to see the movie merely paid homage to the game. There were a couple funny references to the game, the best being when Agent 47 interrupts a couple kids playing the Hitman video game.
Did you know the movie was produced by Vin Diesel? When is the last time you heard his name mentioned?
Anyway, Hitman was a hit. Better than several of the James Bond films. The plot was good. The fact that there was a plot was better. The fact that there was a plot and it was good was better yet. The main character was played by Timothy Olyphant, and he did a great job of being stoic. The other acting was good to average. Fight scenes were mostly well choreographed, except the train fight scene when everyone agrees to put down guns and draw swords in order to 'die with some dignity...' Hmmph.
What made the film better yet was what got left out. There is so much product placement in the James Bond films that I actually noticed there was Very Little product placement in the Hitman film. Sobe, Audi, and McDonalds notwithstanding. I never saw a closeup of his cellphone or wristwatch.
And the hot female lead Nika, played by Olga Kurylenko does a realistic job as well, and gets mostly naked. In a daring First for male-lead-shooter-films, the hero does NOT have a sex scene with her, (despite her advances) although he does treat her poorly at first.
Let's see, take a James Bond film with a good plot, remove the sex scene, remove the main characters hair and sense of humor (possibly the entire personality), and remove the product placement, add a Scotch with Ice instead of a Vodka Martiti, and some great locations in Russia, Istanbul and Bulgaria, then you're pretty close to Hitman.
Art Is Resistance
-Zero
0 Comments
Permalink
So I was pleased to see the movie merely paid homage to the game. There were a couple funny references to the game, the best being when Agent 47 interrupts a couple kids playing the Hitman video game.
Did you know the movie was produced by Vin Diesel? When is the last time you heard his name mentioned?
Anyway, Hitman was a hit. Better than several of the James Bond films. The plot was good. The fact that there was a plot was better. The fact that there was a plot and it was good was better yet. The main character was played by Timothy Olyphant, and he did a great job of being stoic. The other acting was good to average. Fight scenes were mostly well choreographed, except the train fight scene when everyone agrees to put down guns and draw swords in order to 'die with some dignity...' Hmmph.
What made the film better yet was what got left out. There is so much product placement in the James Bond films that I actually noticed there was Very Little product placement in the Hitman film. Sobe, Audi, and McDonalds notwithstanding. I never saw a closeup of his cellphone or wristwatch.
And the hot female lead Nika, played by Olga Kurylenko does a realistic job as well, and gets mostly naked. In a daring First for male-lead-shooter-films, the hero does NOT have a sex scene with her, (despite her advances) although he does treat her poorly at first.
Let's see, take a James Bond film with a good plot, remove the sex scene, remove the main characters hair and sense of humor (possibly the entire personality), and remove the product placement, add a Scotch with Ice instead of a Vodka Martiti, and some great locations in Russia, Istanbul and Bulgaria, then you're pretty close to Hitman.
Art Is Resistance
-Zero
Labels: movie reviews
Saturday, October 20, 2007
Movie Review: 30 Days of Night
Finally, a vampire movie where vampires aren't a bunch of Anne-Rice-penned-pussies sitting around drinking wine with their pinkys out. According to imdb, Sam Raimi decided to step back from directing "30 Days of Night" and only act in a producing role. After seeing Spider-Man 3 I have to say...
...good call.
I mean, I went to Spider-Man 3 to see comic book action, and got a shitload of Blubbering-Emo-Boy that was almost as bad as Batman and Robin, and that is no simple feat.
Finally, a movie where people make REALISTIC choices despite the abstract situations. They did what you or I would do under the same bizarre circumstances. Too many movies go so far over the top that it's impossible to suspend your disbelief (or your gag reflex). 30 Days of Night 'kept it real' with a simple and tight story, and that kept the horror real. Sadly, this technique is the exception for American horror films.
30 Days of Night is Really graphic, I mean chopping someones head off with a dull axe...well, it's pretty gritty, grim, dark and bloody; in other words a damn good horror film.
Art Is Resistance
-Zero
1 Comments
Permalink
...good call.
I mean, I went to Spider-Man 3 to see comic book action, and got a shitload of Blubbering-Emo-Boy that was almost as bad as Batman and Robin, and that is no simple feat.
Finally, a movie where people make REALISTIC choices despite the abstract situations. They did what you or I would do under the same bizarre circumstances. Too many movies go so far over the top that it's impossible to suspend your disbelief (or your gag reflex). 30 Days of Night 'kept it real' with a simple and tight story, and that kept the horror real. Sadly, this technique is the exception for American horror films.
30 Days of Night is Really graphic, I mean chopping someones head off with a dull axe...well, it's pretty gritty, grim, dark and bloody; in other words a damn good horror film.
Art Is Resistance
-Zero
Labels: movie reviews
Monday, September 24, 2007
Movie Review: Resident Evil - Extinction
You have to love the entire concept of Zombies. It requires the utmost in audience 'Suspension of Disbelief'. For example:
Career Guidance Councilor: "OK, Mr. Zombie, welcome to career counseling. Lets start by filling out this application form. I see the first pen I gave you...you seem to have...eaten. Hmm. Well, that is certainly a unique approach, it shows you aren't limited to imperialistic dogma, and you are willing to think outside the, um, the box. Ok, I'll just ask you the questions, and fill this all in for you alright? So, first question, what is your primary long term goal?"
Mr Zombie: "Brains!"
CGC: "Excellent. Brains are very important. Now, can you think of a short term goal that will help you to reach that primary goal?"
Mr Zombie: "Brains!"
CGC: "OK...I suppose it does take brains to get brains doesn't it? Heh. Now, what time frame were you thinking of for the completion of your primary goal?"
Mr Zombie: "BRAINS!"
And so on. My point here is that you know what you're getting into when you go to Resident Evil: Extinction, and seeing the other Resident Evil movies beforehand is nice, but not necessary.
Extinction ditches the video game feel that the other two R.E. movies had, and I'd say that is a good thing. All three R.E. movies are gritty and bloody, this one takes the prize for being the grittiest, bloodiest, and most ridiculously violent of the three. As a matter of fact, although they relied on some of the old sets (and footage) from the first film. Extinction branches away from the constricted underground research-lab feel of the first movie, and into the barren wastelands of post-apocalyptica. At this rate, the next R.E. movie will be in outer space.
After a disjointed and slow start (including a dyslexic encounter between Alice and some zombie-dogs), the movie works out to be a remake of Road Warrior done by George Romero. I mean that in a good way, although I didn't care for any of Romero's "[Fill in the Blank] of the Dead" movies. The concept of 'domesticating' the zombies comes up, and people will make all the comparisons to Zombie Consumerist Culture (and all the reactions against it), but I don't think there is much reflective/educational/societal commentary value to Resident Evil: Extinction.
Soundtrack was good (Including the fantastic remake of White Rabbit from Collide's "Chasing the Ghost" LP which was my first online music purchase, and is only seven years overdue for recognition)
They need to hire back Marilyn Manson to do score and sound design. The ambient sound in the first R.E. movie was some of the best ever done, and really lacking in the second and third R.E. films.
And I have mixed feelings about Alice finally finding some clothing, after running around the first two films half-nekked. But don't worry, you will get to see plenty of Milla. Let's just say an exponentially exposed amount of Milla, and leave it at that.
Since your mind was already on the topic of having sex with Milla Jovovich, I have heard rumors that she is pregnant, and I just wanted to officially state for the record that no matter what you might have heard, I had nothing to do with it.
So the Executive Summary Review would be that R.E.3 is better than the second, but not quite as good as the first. Definitely worth seeing in the theatre.
Art Is Resistance
-Zero
0 Comments
Permalink
Career Guidance Councilor: "OK, Mr. Zombie, welcome to career counseling. Lets start by filling out this application form. I see the first pen I gave you...you seem to have...eaten. Hmm. Well, that is certainly a unique approach, it shows you aren't limited to imperialistic dogma, and you are willing to think outside the, um, the box. Ok, I'll just ask you the questions, and fill this all in for you alright? So, first question, what is your primary long term goal?"
Mr Zombie: "Brains!"
CGC: "Excellent. Brains are very important. Now, can you think of a short term goal that will help you to reach that primary goal?"
Mr Zombie: "Brains!"
CGC: "OK...I suppose it does take brains to get brains doesn't it? Heh. Now, what time frame were you thinking of for the completion of your primary goal?"
Mr Zombie: "BRAINS!"
And so on. My point here is that you know what you're getting into when you go to Resident Evil: Extinction, and seeing the other Resident Evil movies beforehand is nice, but not necessary.
Extinction ditches the video game feel that the other two R.E. movies had, and I'd say that is a good thing. All three R.E. movies are gritty and bloody, this one takes the prize for being the grittiest, bloodiest, and most ridiculously violent of the three. As a matter of fact, although they relied on some of the old sets (and footage) from the first film. Extinction branches away from the constricted underground research-lab feel of the first movie, and into the barren wastelands of post-apocalyptica. At this rate, the next R.E. movie will be in outer space.
After a disjointed and slow start (including a dyslexic encounter between Alice and some zombie-dogs), the movie works out to be a remake of Road Warrior done by George Romero. I mean that in a good way, although I didn't care for any of Romero's "[Fill in the Blank] of the Dead" movies. The concept of 'domesticating' the zombies comes up, and people will make all the comparisons to Zombie Consumerist Culture (and all the reactions against it), but I don't think there is much reflective/educational/societal commentary value to Resident Evil: Extinction.
Soundtrack was good (Including the fantastic remake of White Rabbit from Collide's "Chasing the Ghost" LP which was my first online music purchase, and is only seven years overdue for recognition)
They need to hire back Marilyn Manson to do score and sound design. The ambient sound in the first R.E. movie was some of the best ever done, and really lacking in the second and third R.E. films.
And I have mixed feelings about Alice finally finding some clothing, after running around the first two films half-nekked. But don't worry, you will get to see plenty of Milla. Let's just say an exponentially exposed amount of Milla, and leave it at that.
Since your mind was already on the topic of having sex with Milla Jovovich, I have heard rumors that she is pregnant, and I just wanted to officially state for the record that no matter what you might have heard, I had nothing to do with it.
So the Executive Summary Review would be that R.E.3 is better than the second, but not quite as good as the first. Definitely worth seeing in the theatre.
Art Is Resistance
-Zero
Labels: movie reviews
Saturday, September 01, 2007
Halloween Remake (Open Letter to Rob Zombie)
Someone asked if I was going to see the remake of Halloween. My initial response was 'Hell Yeah!', because the first Halloween is a truly scary classic.
Unfortunately, I had to change my decision after I realized that you were behind the filming. I can't really bring myself to see anything you are involved with after watching "House of 1000 Corpses" and "The Devil's Rejects" (You can read my review of The Devil's Rejects here)
Sorry Rob, but I can't even give you the benefit of the doubt now. I don't believe that you are capable of making a horror movie without making blowing the Hokey-Meter off the charts, and I won't let you wreck a timeless classic.
You should stick to the song you keep releasing over and over, it's really good, but your movies are worse than Suck-Squared.
KTHXBYE,
-CZ
0 Comments
Permalink
Unfortunately, I had to change my decision after I realized that you were behind the filming. I can't really bring myself to see anything you are involved with after watching "House of 1000 Corpses" and "The Devil's Rejects" (You can read my review of The Devil's Rejects here)
Sorry Rob, but I can't even give you the benefit of the doubt now. I don't believe that you are capable of making a horror movie without making blowing the Hokey-Meter off the charts, and I won't let you wreck a timeless classic.
You should stick to the song you keep releasing over and over, it's really good, but your movies are worse than Suck-Squared.
KTHXBYE,
-CZ
Labels: anti, Movie News, movie reviews, Open Letter, Ubersuck
Tuesday, August 28, 2007
Movie Review - Yo-Yo Girl Cop
It's tough to rate this movie. I'm not truly sure whether I liked it or not.
The story was straightforward, and fine if you could overlook plot holes big enough to float the Motherland through, but hey, you weren't watching this for the plot anyways. The fight scenes were kind of sparce, but plenty of action, chase scenes, and the most Non-Twist on an ending you will ever see. I'm not even giving anything away when I tell you that the bad guy reveals his secret identity at the end and you go, "Um, who the hell are you?" Mel Brooks already did that, in Spaceballs, when Dark Helment announces that he is Lone Star's "...father's brother's nephew's cousin's former roommate!" Well, I can only assume Kenta Fukasaku hadn't seen Spaceballs.
What threw me most about the film was the dialog. It has to be tough to translate the film directly, but some sayings that were supposed to be threats came out really really funny. For instance, when the Yo-Yo Girl's enemy grabs her by the throat, and is about to beat her to a pulp, she yells, "You will die Very Soon!"
Perhaps I will watch it again with the sound off and listen to Kamelot's 'Ghost Opera' while watching Asian schoolgirls have a standoff in a warehouse with Government Issue HyperPowered Yo-Yos.
KTHXBYE,
-CZ
0 Comments
Permalink
The story was straightforward, and fine if you could overlook plot holes big enough to float the Motherland through, but hey, you weren't watching this for the plot anyways. The fight scenes were kind of sparce, but plenty of action, chase scenes, and the most Non-Twist on an ending you will ever see. I'm not even giving anything away when I tell you that the bad guy reveals his secret identity at the end and you go, "Um, who the hell are you?" Mel Brooks already did that, in Spaceballs, when Dark Helment announces that he is Lone Star's "...father's brother's nephew's cousin's former roommate!" Well, I can only assume Kenta Fukasaku hadn't seen Spaceballs.
What threw me most about the film was the dialog. It has to be tough to translate the film directly, but some sayings that were supposed to be threats came out really really funny. For instance, when the Yo-Yo Girl's enemy grabs her by the throat, and is about to beat her to a pulp, she yells, "You will die Very Soon!"
Perhaps I will watch it again with the sound off and listen to Kamelot's 'Ghost Opera' while watching Asian schoolgirls have a standoff in a warehouse with Government Issue HyperPowered Yo-Yos.
KTHXBYE,
-CZ
Labels: movie reviews
Friday, August 24, 2007
Movie Review: A Perfect Creature
It's easy to quickly pass Judgement; on matters especially that of aesthetics; most notably what is or is not Beautiful or Ugly, Good, or Evil. Of course, no one is ever objectively Right or Wrong about these things, because the very concepts are synthetic, man-made.
With that in mind, I've tried to review several new bands, books and movies with what my Philosophy teacher called a "charitable interpretation". Having helped make several movies, songs and with a very-nearly completed book on the way, I am giving other works of art the same kind of review I would like to receive. Which means I try to work past the first impression. I will give bands three songs before I say I like or don't like them. I will read 20 or so pages of a book instead of 20 or so words, before deciding whether I want to keep reading or not, and I will try to maintain my maniacal laughter when looking at poor quality artwork on CD/DVD inserts.
Take this movie for example: A Perfect Creature.
Check out the cover for it. Awful. And comparing your lame-ass vampire move to 'Children of Men' on the cover? Wow, the Audacity. I didn't like the movie right there on the shelf at Hollywood Video, and I didn't even know what it was about...
...First Impressions, heh. Like I was sayin', let's try to move past those, shall we? So I actually took the DVD case down and flipped it over. The synopsis was interesting, a completely different take on the entire vampire mythos. Good, because the one we got could use some "completely different"-ing.
Don't get me wrong, I'm pleased as punch that Anne Rice recovered the Vampire from a B-Movie bloodsucking machine back into the sophisticated evil anti-hero I think Bram Stoker intended when he wrote Dracula. But is this all we got? Cause if no one has anything new, then it's time we packed up and moved on. I might have mentioned this before.
Anyway, I'm glad I moved through my initial perception of this and rented "A Perfect Creature", because it was an extremely good movie.
First off, despite the very very Very poor quality graphics on the DVD case, the movie was, in fact, Not Independent as I initially thought. It has the 20th Century Fox brand on it, although the handful of production companies sound as dodgy as a used car salesman's last day at work.
Second, it wasn't just the plot that was good. The whole alternate-reality mythos created by Glen Standring (an Archaeologist!!!) is amazing and well thought out. Humans and vampires get along in a completely mutually beneficial, sacred, and peaceful relationship! Wow, wrap your mind around that one, then add in the fact that the movie was given a grayish 60-s feel, especially regarding technology.
Aside from these things, it uses a pretty standard good-guy/bad-guy action adventure plot, that moves along just quick enough. The movie had decent scoring, and Excellent art direction, esp. some great angular shots that added to the strangeness of this alternate universe.
After seeing it, I would have to agree that A Perfect Creature is a reasonable cross between Children of Men, 28 Days Later, and of all things "The Chronicles of Riddick" No, really!
Anyway, the lesson is to not judge a book, DVD or local band by their covers.
KTHXBYE,
-CZ
0 Comments
Permalink
With that in mind, I've tried to review several new bands, books and movies with what my Philosophy teacher called a "charitable interpretation". Having helped make several movies, songs and with a very-nearly completed book on the way, I am giving other works of art the same kind of review I would like to receive. Which means I try to work past the first impression. I will give bands three songs before I say I like or don't like them. I will read 20 or so pages of a book instead of 20 or so words, before deciding whether I want to keep reading or not, and I will try to maintain my maniacal laughter when looking at poor quality artwork on CD/DVD inserts.
Take this movie for example: A Perfect Creature.
Check out the cover for it. Awful. And comparing your lame-ass vampire move to 'Children of Men' on the cover? Wow, the Audacity. I didn't like the movie right there on the shelf at Hollywood Video, and I didn't even know what it was about...
...First Impressions, heh. Like I was sayin', let's try to move past those, shall we? So I actually took the DVD case down and flipped it over. The synopsis was interesting, a completely different take on the entire vampire mythos. Good, because the one we got could use some "completely different"-ing.
Don't get me wrong, I'm pleased as punch that Anne Rice recovered the Vampire from a B-Movie bloodsucking machine back into the sophisticated evil anti-hero I think Bram Stoker intended when he wrote Dracula. But is this all we got? Cause if no one has anything new, then it's time we packed up and moved on. I might have mentioned this before.
Anyway, I'm glad I moved through my initial perception of this and rented "A Perfect Creature", because it was an extremely good movie.
First off, despite the very very Very poor quality graphics on the DVD case, the movie was, in fact, Not Independent as I initially thought. It has the 20th Century Fox brand on it, although the handful of production companies sound as dodgy as a used car salesman's last day at work.
Second, it wasn't just the plot that was good. The whole alternate-reality mythos created by Glen Standring (an Archaeologist!!!) is amazing and well thought out. Humans and vampires get along in a completely mutually beneficial, sacred, and peaceful relationship! Wow, wrap your mind around that one, then add in the fact that the movie was given a grayish 60-s feel, especially regarding technology.
Aside from these things, it uses a pretty standard good-guy/bad-guy action adventure plot, that moves along just quick enough. The movie had decent scoring, and Excellent art direction, esp. some great angular shots that added to the strangeness of this alternate universe.
After seeing it, I would have to agree that A Perfect Creature is a reasonable cross between Children of Men, 28 Days Later, and of all things "The Chronicles of Riddick" No, really!
Anyway, the lesson is to not judge a book, DVD or local band by their covers.
KTHXBYE,
-CZ
Labels: movie reviews, Philosophy
Sunday, August 12, 2007
Movie Review: Dead Clowns
Dear Mr Sessions, thank you for sending me the copy of your movie "Dead Clowns" to review here on conradzero.com. You have heard correctly, I really enjoy reviewing quality low-budget horror films, and upon review of your feature film, I can say without a doubt that it was certainly, um, low-budget.
Where should I start...how about the sound? I thought it was interesting the way you added a heavy reverb to all ambient sound effects in the movie, as though they were recorded in a subway tunnel, but left the vocals dry. Can't say I've heard this done before, but it certainly made the sound, um, unique.
Another interesting aspect of the sound was your choice to make sounds that were far away from the camera louder than those that were close to the camera. For instance, the sound of rain outside the hotel room was louder than the dialog of the people talking to each other an arm's length apart, and in some cases, their dialog was nearly inaudible. A wise choice, as most of the dialog was unimportant and pretty bad. Did you actually make the actors read the script for the first time right there on camera? It explains why most of the dialog sounded so unnatural and contrived, and definitely added to the 'indie' feel of your movie.
The multiple plot threads were a nice touch. It was refreshing to see that for the most part, they never really meshed together into any form of a coherent 'whole'; a process I agree is overused in Hollywood, and you will no doubt be hailed as a visionary for abandoning it. Leaving the audience to contemplate just why those other people were in the movie at all is sheer genius. Making the audience think? Who does that anymore?
I liked your twist on the classic revenge formula. Usually people seeking revenge were wronged in some way, but in Dead Clowns, they come back from the dead and attack the town that loved them, and had nothing to do with the accident that killed them! Ha! Not to mention they waited for fifty years before coming back, so I doubt there was anyone left in the town who was around back when they bit it. That will certainly teach them for being the offspring of people who liked clowns!
BTW: Why fifty years? Why not forty-nine-and-two-fifths of a year due to rounding errors?The movie never explains why, and it's *that* kind of unresolved tension that makes independent film what it is today, that is to say, ah... independent.
Without a doubt, Brinke Stevens was the highlight of the movie. She did a fantastic job. Her character also looks remarkably young for someone who is an expert on the clown/train accident that happened fifty years ago, and the town completely forgot. Her description of the incident made it sound like she was actually there when it happened, which would make her...well, at least fifty. Using a young actress to play an older character, but still make her look young sounds like a makeup department's nightmare, but your crew handled the task swimmingly, because she doesn't look a day over thirty.
I couldn't help but notice many long, introspective shots of non-dialog/non-action/non-story, usually with the camera locked on someones face, (a trick you no doubt learned from Peter Jackson's version of 'King Kong') while many might find this annoying and unprofessional, it really shows you how overrated pacing is in the movie media. It was also nice not to have to pause the movie when going to the bathroom, or going to the kitchen to get another Tequila-Whisky-Coke, or going to the garage to replace the serpentine-belt tensioner in my 96 Saturn.
Regarding the songs in your movie, well...Switchblade Symphony was an excellent choice, but the rest of the songs sucked...oh wait a minute! I see you did the score yourself? Well, that explains it then! For future reference, I know of a band called Jagged Spiral who write some fantastic songs for horror movie soundtracks, and they don't involve the use of Every Single Cliche Known To Man. You should check them out if you are allowed...I mean, if you ever make another movie.
The effects were pretty good. The effect of clowns that had been buried underwater for fifty years and came out wearing brand-spanking-new costumes must have been difficult to manage. I'd have also thought them to be wet, after being in the water for fifty years and all, but no doubt your SFX crew must have had one hell of a time making them look clean and dry. Not to mention that for all their running around town and dismembering/skewering/eating people, none of the clowns get a drop of blood on their outfits. Kudos to the clowns for their fine table manners, and to your wardrobe department for keeping their outfits in pristine condition throughout the bloodbath.
Thanks again for the opportunity to review your film. Enclosed please find my invoice payable immediately on receipt. I generally charge by the hour, but in the case of your 95 min movie, you may notice that I've charged for six hours of labor. This may be especially confusing after I explain that I only spent about half an hour actually watching the movie. In your case, I made an exception and charged the amount of time IT SEEMED TO TAKE to watch your movie, even though I mashed the FF button so often during Dead Clowns that the batteries in the remote control died, (hence the extra charge for replacement batteries.)
You may also notice the an additional expense for a replacement DVD player. No, your DVD did not actually break my player, it simply seemed more prudent to burn my DVD player with your disk in it, and bury the ashes in my backyard, than to take the chance that the disk might fall into the hands of others. (The time spent burning/burying is NOT included in the six hours previously mentioned, but there is no charge for that ; I consider it a public service.)
And of course, as you requested, I will keep this review strictly confidential.
Sincerely,
Conrad Zero
0 Comments
Permalink
Where should I start...how about the sound? I thought it was interesting the way you added a heavy reverb to all ambient sound effects in the movie, as though they were recorded in a subway tunnel, but left the vocals dry. Can't say I've heard this done before, but it certainly made the sound, um, unique.
Another interesting aspect of the sound was your choice to make sounds that were far away from the camera louder than those that were close to the camera. For instance, the sound of rain outside the hotel room was louder than the dialog of the people talking to each other an arm's length apart, and in some cases, their dialog was nearly inaudible. A wise choice, as most of the dialog was unimportant and pretty bad. Did you actually make the actors read the script for the first time right there on camera? It explains why most of the dialog sounded so unnatural and contrived, and definitely added to the 'indie' feel of your movie.
The multiple plot threads were a nice touch. It was refreshing to see that for the most part, they never really meshed together into any form of a coherent 'whole'; a process I agree is overused in Hollywood, and you will no doubt be hailed as a visionary for abandoning it. Leaving the audience to contemplate just why those other people were in the movie at all is sheer genius. Making the audience think? Who does that anymore?
I liked your twist on the classic revenge formula. Usually people seeking revenge were wronged in some way, but in Dead Clowns, they come back from the dead and attack the town that loved them, and had nothing to do with the accident that killed them! Ha! Not to mention they waited for fifty years before coming back, so I doubt there was anyone left in the town who was around back when they bit it. That will certainly teach them for being the offspring of people who liked clowns!
BTW: Why fifty years? Why not forty-nine-and-two-fifths of a year due to rounding errors?The movie never explains why, and it's *that* kind of unresolved tension that makes independent film what it is today, that is to say, ah... independent.
Without a doubt, Brinke Stevens was the highlight of the movie. She did a fantastic job. Her character also looks remarkably young for someone who is an expert on the clown/train accident that happened fifty years ago, and the town completely forgot. Her description of the incident made it sound like she was actually there when it happened, which would make her...well, at least fifty. Using a young actress to play an older character, but still make her look young sounds like a makeup department's nightmare, but your crew handled the task swimmingly, because she doesn't look a day over thirty.
I couldn't help but notice many long, introspective shots of non-dialog/non-action/non-story, usually with the camera locked on someones face, (a trick you no doubt learned from Peter Jackson's version of 'King Kong') while many might find this annoying and unprofessional, it really shows you how overrated pacing is in the movie media. It was also nice not to have to pause the movie when going to the bathroom, or going to the kitchen to get another Tequila-Whisky-Coke, or going to the garage to replace the serpentine-belt tensioner in my 96 Saturn.
Regarding the songs in your movie, well...Switchblade Symphony was an excellent choice, but the rest of the songs sucked...oh wait a minute! I see you did the score yourself? Well, that explains it then! For future reference, I know of a band called Jagged Spiral who write some fantastic songs for horror movie soundtracks, and they don't involve the use of Every Single Cliche Known To Man. You should check them out if you are allowed...I mean, if you ever make another movie.
The effects were pretty good. The effect of clowns that had been buried underwater for fifty years and came out wearing brand-spanking-new costumes must have been difficult to manage. I'd have also thought them to be wet, after being in the water for fifty years and all, but no doubt your SFX crew must have had one hell of a time making them look clean and dry. Not to mention that for all their running around town and dismembering/skewering/eating people, none of the clowns get a drop of blood on their outfits. Kudos to the clowns for their fine table manners, and to your wardrobe department for keeping their outfits in pristine condition throughout the bloodbath.
Thanks again for the opportunity to review your film. Enclosed please find my invoice payable immediately on receipt. I generally charge by the hour, but in the case of your 95 min movie, you may notice that I've charged for six hours of labor. This may be especially confusing after I explain that I only spent about half an hour actually watching the movie. In your case, I made an exception and charged the amount of time IT SEEMED TO TAKE to watch your movie, even though I mashed the FF button so often during Dead Clowns that the batteries in the remote control died, (hence the extra charge for replacement batteries.)
You may also notice the an additional expense for a replacement DVD player. No, your DVD did not actually break my player, it simply seemed more prudent to burn my DVD player with your disk in it, and bury the ashes in my backyard, than to take the chance that the disk might fall into the hands of others. (The time spent burning/burying is NOT included in the six hours previously mentioned, but there is no charge for that ; I consider it a public service.)
And of course, as you requested, I will keep this review strictly confidential.
Sincerely,
Conrad Zero
Labels: indie movies, movie reviews, Open Letter, Ubersuck
Sunday, July 15, 2007
Movie Review: Harry Potter and the [Fill in the Blank]
The great thing about the Harry Potter series of films is that because they keep making almost the exact same movie over and over, I can keep writing the same review over and over.
[Editors Note: Start cut here]
I saw the new Harry Potter film this week, Harry Potter and the [Fill in the Blank]. It was great. Rich sets, deep plot, amazing SFX. Not really for kids.
-The movie starts with Harry getting the short end from Muggles in the real world.
-Then he goes to magic school.
-Then the shit hits the fan.
-Someone dies. This is important, and controversial, and a spoiler to fans, so if you know who dies, Don't just go barking it out in public, you might get beat up.
-There is a Quiddich match [Editors Note: Scratch the Quiddich Match, there was no Quiddich Match in this one.]
[Zero's Note To Editor: Well, they flew through London on Broomsticks, dodging boats and bridges, didn't they?]
[Editor's Reply: Right, but it wasn't a Quiddich Match...]
[Zero's Abrupt Interruption of the Editor's Reply: They were on flying broomsticks dodging boats and bridges that THEY COULD HAVE EASILY FLOWN OVER. A waste of time which would have been better served advancing the plot instead of fueling ideas for video games; no better than a Quiddich Match...]
[Editor's Reply to Interruption: Good point.]
-Lots of colorful characters are introduced throughout the story. They change from "Good" to "Bad" quite often, so it is handy to have some paper and a pencil available during the movie to keep notes.
-Harry Potter very nearly dies. This is Not important. We know there are more books in the series, so we aren't too concerned.
-Even though this is a Fantasy movie, Harry Potter does not get laid.
-At the end, Harry takes the train home to his crappy life with his crappy guardians. Like I said: Fantasy movie.
I hear-tell the book is quite good, but just too complicated to convert into a 2+ hour movie. They managed to do it anyway by paring down on annoying character development and simply teleporting from one subplot to another with little or no grace. If there is anything left out, the director just assumes you read the book, or hopes you will go back and watch the movie again a few times to make sense of it.
[Editors Note: End Cut here, paste and publish!]
KTHXBYE,
-CZ
0 Comments
Permalink
[Editors Note: Start cut here]
I saw the new Harry Potter film this week, Harry Potter and the [Fill in the Blank]. It was great. Rich sets, deep plot, amazing SFX. Not really for kids.
-The movie starts with Harry getting the short end from Muggles in the real world.
-Then he goes to magic school.
-Then the shit hits the fan.
-Someone dies. This is important, and controversial, and a spoiler to fans, so if you know who dies, Don't just go barking it out in public, you might get beat up.
-There is a Quiddich match [Editors Note: Scratch the Quiddich Match, there was no Quiddich Match in this one.]
[Zero's Note To Editor: Well, they flew through London on Broomsticks, dodging boats and bridges, didn't they?]
[Editor's Reply: Right, but it wasn't a Quiddich Match...]
[Zero's Abrupt Interruption of the Editor's Reply: They were on flying broomsticks dodging boats and bridges that THEY COULD HAVE EASILY FLOWN OVER. A waste of time which would have been better served advancing the plot instead of fueling ideas for video games; no better than a Quiddich Match...]
[Editor's Reply to Interruption: Good point.]
-Lots of colorful characters are introduced throughout the story. They change from "Good" to "Bad" quite often, so it is handy to have some paper and a pencil available during the movie to keep notes.
-Harry Potter very nearly dies. This is Not important. We know there are more books in the series, so we aren't too concerned.
-Even though this is a Fantasy movie, Harry Potter does not get laid.
-At the end, Harry takes the train home to his crappy life with his crappy guardians. Like I said: Fantasy movie.
I hear-tell the book is quite good, but just too complicated to convert into a 2+ hour movie. They managed to do it anyway by paring down on annoying character development and simply teleporting from one subplot to another with little or no grace. If there is anything left out, the director just assumes you read the book, or hopes you will go back and watch the movie again a few times to make sense of it.
[Editors Note: End Cut here, paste and publish!]
KTHXBYE,
-CZ
Labels: movie reviews
Friday, July 06, 2007
Movie Review: Black Sheep
Black Sheep is one of those films that if you don't "get" the premise, or think that a horror/comedy about genetically altered sheep in New Zealand that go on a bloody, man-eating rampage. is funny before you see it, then you probably won't like it.
Never mind that the SFX crew are the wizards at WETA, whom you might remember from the Lord of the Rings trilogy, yes the effects are top-notch, (there's even a tip-of-the-cap to older movie effects like "American Werewolf in London" and "The Howling" but the movie could have been just as good as a "B" horror flick with cheesy, lo-tech effects.
The idea pretty much sells itself - genetically mutated sheep become evil and attack humans. Humans bitten by the sheep become...weresheep.
Yes, you read that right. Before you laugh too hard, know this: weresheep are actually kinda scary. And tough. Tall, too. So don't go poo-poohing them before you see Black Sheep
The movie was great fun, much like "Shawn of the Dead"; horrific like a horror/comedy should be, and funny like a horror/comedy should be. It probably wasn't that hard to do, because the very idea of man-eating-sheep and people getting bit and turning into were-sheep is so preposterously funny that it would be difficult for it Not to work. Just showing pictures of sheep milling about with spooky music had the audience in stitches.
If you decide to go to the Lagoon Theatre in Minneapolis to see Black Sheep, make sure to stop by Bar Abilene and ask for Jill. Not only will three Tequila/Whisky/Cokes help you enjoy the movie, but Jill is hands down the Greatest Server In The World. I told her so myself, and her manager happened to be there when I said it, which worked out great.
KTHXBYE,
-CZ
0 Comments
Permalink
Never mind that the SFX crew are the wizards at WETA, whom you might remember from the Lord of the Rings trilogy, yes the effects are top-notch, (there's even a tip-of-the-cap to older movie effects like "American Werewolf in London" and "The Howling" but the movie could have been just as good as a "B" horror flick with cheesy, lo-tech effects.
The idea pretty much sells itself - genetically mutated sheep become evil and attack humans. Humans bitten by the sheep become...weresheep.
Yes, you read that right. Before you laugh too hard, know this: weresheep are actually kinda scary. And tough. Tall, too. So don't go poo-poohing them before you see Black Sheep
The movie was great fun, much like "Shawn of the Dead"; horrific like a horror/comedy should be, and funny like a horror/comedy should be. It probably wasn't that hard to do, because the very idea of man-eating-sheep and people getting bit and turning into were-sheep is so preposterously funny that it would be difficult for it Not to work. Just showing pictures of sheep milling about with spooky music had the audience in stitches.
If you decide to go to the Lagoon Theatre in Minneapolis to see Black Sheep, make sure to stop by Bar Abilene and ask for Jill. Not only will three Tequila/Whisky/Cokes help you enjoy the movie, but Jill is hands down the Greatest Server In The World. I told her so myself, and her manager happened to be there when I said it, which worked out great.
KTHXBYE,
-CZ
Labels: movie reviews
Friday, June 01, 2007
Reality Czech
[Editors Note: Well, I'm not sure what happened with Blogger, but I lost some draft posts I was working on. Strangely the titles and labels are still intact, like this, cleverly-named, "Reality Czech". The post was pretty long, and I tend to sit on those, and re-read them when I'm sober (or if I originally wrote the post sober, then I re-read it when I'm drunk. Either way, it manages to get filtered from two perspectives.) Regardless, I will reconstruct as much of this post as I can remember.]
Recently I was talking with Saveau when he mentioned he liked the blog, and especially my book review of Lilith Saintcrow's 'Dead Man Rising' Near as I could tell, he found the review both Negative and Entertaining.
It's strange how frequently I forget that other people read the crap I write here, and how I often treat this blog as simply a journal of thoughts like in the movie Seven, "...his mind just poured out on paper". So I suppose I would expect it to be negative, since I'm the kind of person who sees the glass as not only half-empty, but the half that is left tastes like shit and the service sucks too.
But Entertaining? Remembering back to English Comp I and the "Aims and Modes of the Writing Process" if you aren't writing for Informative, Educational or Persuasive reasons, then you either better be Entertaining, Possessed, or Being Forced To Write at Gunpoint, so I suppose Entertaining is a good thing.
But I wanted to clear up a slight point: I know of lots of writers (especially blog writers) who think that simply being negative is enough to be entertaining, and ranting about how utterly, horrifically bloody-gawd-awful something is is enough to make them entertaining. (Comedians like Rush Limbaugh make entire careers out of it.) I try to be Entertaining AND Negative, not Entertaining BY BEING Negative. The difference is slight, but important, and I try to never say things on this blog that I didn't really believe, or wouldn't say to anyone in person. I want to read this blog fifty years from now and see what the hell I was like 'back then'. So if I rail on things like "Dead Man Rising" or "King Kong" for instance, it's because I really didn't like them - no more, no less.
Blog on,
-Z
2 Comments
Permalink
Recently I was talking with Saveau when he mentioned he liked the blog, and especially my book review of Lilith Saintcrow's 'Dead Man Rising' Near as I could tell, he found the review both Negative and Entertaining.
It's strange how frequently I forget that other people read the crap I write here, and how I often treat this blog as simply a journal of thoughts like in the movie Seven, "...his mind just poured out on paper". So I suppose I would expect it to be negative, since I'm the kind of person who sees the glass as not only half-empty, but the half that is left tastes like shit and the service sucks too.
But Entertaining? Remembering back to English Comp I and the "Aims and Modes of the Writing Process" if you aren't writing for Informative, Educational or Persuasive reasons, then you either better be Entertaining, Possessed, or Being Forced To Write at Gunpoint, so I suppose Entertaining is a good thing.
But I wanted to clear up a slight point: I know of lots of writers (especially blog writers) who think that simply being negative is enough to be entertaining, and ranting about how utterly, horrifically bloody-gawd-awful something is is enough to make them entertaining. (Comedians like Rush Limbaugh make entire careers out of it.) I try to be Entertaining AND Negative, not Entertaining BY BEING Negative. The difference is slight, but important, and I try to never say things on this blog that I didn't really believe, or wouldn't say to anyone in person. I want to read this blog fifty years from now and see what the hell I was like 'back then'. So if I rail on things like "Dead Man Rising" or "King Kong" for instance, it's because I really didn't like them - no more, no less.
Blog on,
-Z
Labels: Blogging, Culture, movie reviews, Writing
Thursday, May 31, 2007
Movie Review: Impaler
The film "Impaler" is mostly about Jonathon Sharkey, self proclaimed Hecate Witch, Satanic High Priest, and a Sangu...Sangwe... um, some kind of Vampire.
I've written about Jonathon Sharkey before, and attended the premier of "Impaler" on 30 May 2007 to get a better glimpse into this colorful character running for President in 2008.
Jonathan Sharkey is a pretty exciting guy. Besides being a Witch/Satanist/Vampire, he was a pro wrestler, a drill sergeant, and a race car driver. Jonathan isn't terribly well-spoken, and he tends to ramble a bit, but these things haven't kept others out of office, and Jonathan does have several things going for him. He isn't ever uncomfortable or nervous in front of the camera, and he does have an abundance of Moxie. Undoubtedly, his non-traditional party status, his former wrestling career, and his powerful charisma will get him more than one comparison to Jesse Ventura.
Unfortunately, the documentary "Impaler" did more damage than good to his potential governmental career. The filmmaker/director W. Trey White clearly has no idea what he's doing. The movie is not so much a 'documentary' as it is a cameraman without a tripod (or lights, or a good microphone) following Jonathan around for a while, taping stuff and then cutting the interesting bits together in more-or-less chronological order.
During the filming of "Impaler", Jonathan was arrested in Indiana and jailed for 175 days, Mr. White admitted that he didn't know what to do with his main character literally 'out of the picture', so he had the idea to interview other people who knew Jonathan. Just think, a documentary about a person with input from OTHER PEOPLE! Imagine what the movie would have been like if Jonathan hadn't been jailed.
Strangely, in this so-called 'Documentary', we never find out what Jonathon Sharkey currently does for income. There is No mention of any previous political experience. He mentions a political science degree, but does not tell us where he got it. There is also No mention of his 2004 campaign for the presidency, or his several failed attempts to be elected to congress. However, we do get to see his girlfriend drink his blood several times, which is ridiculous and pathetic. We get to see the cards made for Jonathan's girlfriend by the kids she drove to school before she lost her job, accompanied by sappy music, because...um, well... perhaps Mr. White was hoping that if you felt sorry for her, you might give Jonathan a sympathy vote. Oh yes, you also get to see Jonathan's girlfriend try to light her blood on fire...um, I really can't even try to justify that one...
Jonathan repeatedly asks us to 'ignore his beliefs', but that's difficult to do when more of the film was about his lifestyle and strange relationships than his political platform.
In the end, "Impaler" isn't about a man running for the presidency, it's a man's rebuttal to all the fucked up relationships and events in his past. The speech at the end of the movie confirms this.
I was disappointed with Mr. White's discussion after the premier. In part of the film, Jonathan asked Mr. White to turn the camera off, but he left it running, catching pieces of a conversation 'the audience wasn't meant to hear'. Right. Anyway, when asked about it, Mr. White said it wouldn't be right to censor the facts, because the audience deserved to hear the whole story. But not five minutes later, he admitted that Jonathan's children had said some incriminating things about Jonathan, and he felt that the children weren't being entirely honest, so it was decided to cut those accusations out of the movie. This proves that W. Trey White has a slanted sense of journalism, and isn't smart enough to hide it (like a real journalist.)
Jonathan Sharkey is an interesting, charismatic, angry and probably dangerous person, which makes him someone I want to have a beer with someday. I might even vote for him, I mean I voted for Jesse Ventura. His promise to Impale criminals is refreshing. (Although if you read this blog at all, you will know that as King of The United States, I have brought back 'Burning at the Stake' as a real punishment.)
Jonathan showed up at the premier with a large spear and threatened to impale W. Trey White if he found the movie "Impaler" mocked him in any way. I was surprised to find he allowed Mr White to live after seeing the movie.
Blog on,
-CZ
1 Comments
Permalink
I've written about Jonathon Sharkey before, and attended the premier of "Impaler" on 30 May 2007 to get a better glimpse into this colorful character running for President in 2008.
Jonathan Sharkey is a pretty exciting guy. Besides being a Witch/Satanist/Vampire, he was a pro wrestler, a drill sergeant, and a race car driver. Jonathan isn't terribly well-spoken, and he tends to ramble a bit, but these things haven't kept others out of office, and Jonathan does have several things going for him. He isn't ever uncomfortable or nervous in front of the camera, and he does have an abundance of Moxie. Undoubtedly, his non-traditional party status, his former wrestling career, and his powerful charisma will get him more than one comparison to Jesse Ventura.
Unfortunately, the documentary "Impaler" did more damage than good to his potential governmental career. The filmmaker/director W. Trey White clearly has no idea what he's doing. The movie is not so much a 'documentary' as it is a cameraman without a tripod (or lights, or a good microphone) following Jonathan around for a while, taping stuff and then cutting the interesting bits together in more-or-less chronological order.
During the filming of "Impaler", Jonathan was arrested in Indiana and jailed for 175 days, Mr. White admitted that he didn't know what to do with his main character literally 'out of the picture', so he had the idea to interview other people who knew Jonathan. Just think, a documentary about a person with input from OTHER PEOPLE! Imagine what the movie would have been like if Jonathan hadn't been jailed.
Strangely, in this so-called 'Documentary', we never find out what Jonathon Sharkey currently does for income. There is No mention of any previous political experience. He mentions a political science degree, but does not tell us where he got it. There is also No mention of his 2004 campaign for the presidency, or his several failed attempts to be elected to congress. However, we do get to see his girlfriend drink his blood several times, which is ridiculous and pathetic. We get to see the cards made for Jonathan's girlfriend by the kids she drove to school before she lost her job, accompanied by sappy music, because...um, well... perhaps Mr. White was hoping that if you felt sorry for her, you might give Jonathan a sympathy vote. Oh yes, you also get to see Jonathan's girlfriend try to light her blood on fire...um, I really can't even try to justify that one...
Jonathan repeatedly asks us to 'ignore his beliefs', but that's difficult to do when more of the film was about his lifestyle and strange relationships than his political platform.
In the end, "Impaler" isn't about a man running for the presidency, it's a man's rebuttal to all the fucked up relationships and events in his past. The speech at the end of the movie confirms this.
I was disappointed with Mr. White's discussion after the premier. In part of the film, Jonathan asked Mr. White to turn the camera off, but he left it running, catching pieces of a conversation 'the audience wasn't meant to hear'. Right. Anyway, when asked about it, Mr. White said it wouldn't be right to censor the facts, because the audience deserved to hear the whole story. But not five minutes later, he admitted that Jonathan's children had said some incriminating things about Jonathan, and he felt that the children weren't being entirely honest, so it was decided to cut those accusations out of the movie. This proves that W. Trey White has a slanted sense of journalism, and isn't smart enough to hide it (like a real journalist.)
Jonathan Sharkey is an interesting, charismatic, angry and probably dangerous person, which makes him someone I want to have a beer with someday. I might even vote for him, I mean I voted for Jesse Ventura. His promise to Impale criminals is refreshing. (Although if you read this blog at all, you will know that as King of The United States, I have brought back 'Burning at the Stake' as a real punishment.)
Jonathan showed up at the premier with a large spear and threatened to impale W. Trey White if he found the movie "Impaler" mocked him in any way. I was surprised to find he allowed Mr White to live after seeing the movie.
Blog on,
-CZ
Labels: movie reviews, Politics
Saturday, May 05, 2007
Movie Review: Spider Man 3
Ooooh, Ouch. Swing-and-a-Miss.
Spider Man 3 had a lot going for it before anyone set foot in the theatre. Cool villains picked out, lots of money for CG, perfect casting, and best of all, it had the coattails of Spider Man 1 and 2 to ride on. All that Sam Raimi had to do was have some lame thread tying the action scenes together, and it would be a big hit.
It is with a deep sadness that I report to you that he couldn't pull it off. Spider Man 3 is a soap opera rarely interrupted with action scenes, when it should have been the other way around. What really made the first two Spider Man movies great was the pacing; there was plenty of 'day-in-the-life-drama' in 1 and 2, but it was well balanced out with plenty of action, while Spider Man 3 drowns in its own sappiness. Spider Man cries more often than he fights anyone, and every character in the movie bursts into tears at least a dozen times. I almost cried myself, because the movie should have been much better.
At this point, I would like to shatter to a paradigm in Movies-Based-On-Comic-Books:
NEW VILLAINS DO NOT NEED TO HAVE THEIR GENESIS DURING THE MOVIE.
The creation of villains is often so contrived that it would make the movie better if they just left it out. The Batman movies should have taught us this, and the makers of the X-men movies prove that it works, but the Sam Raimi hasn't figured this one out yet. The genesis' of Sandman and the symbiotic suit known later as Venom, are so silly that you will wish they left them out and made the movie shorter.
That brings me to another paradigm-shattering point that I've brought up before, but since no one reads my blog, it never gets implemented:
MOVIES RARELY NEED TO BE OVER TWO HOURS LONG!
How about you make a movie that is one hour long, and charge half the price? This goes for all movies, but especially Spider Man 3, which forgot where the hell it came from: A Comic Book, not a Danielle Steele Novel.
While I'm at it, I will add this one:
ALL WOMEN ARE NOT HELPLESS!
I would appreciate it if we saw the 'woman dangling from a high place as bait for the superhero' LESS OFTEN. In fact, a female Super Hero (Like Dazzler? Ha! LOL! or maybe Dagger from 'Cloak and Dagger') or perhaps a female Super Villain (Belladonna? Plastique?) would be much appreciated.
By the way, my guess for one of the villains for Spider Man 4 will be The Lizard, since the character of Dr Curt Connors was introduced in 3. But, I think next time, I will wait for the reviews of 4 to come out before I go see it. If Spider Man 4 turns out to be another 3, I'll just wait for the DVD, it so I can scan past the boring parts, and cut the movie length down to a reasonable time.
I can tell you funniest part of the movie is that as Peter Parker wears the symbiotic suit for a longer period of time, it makes him look more and more like the lead singer for Panic at the Disco. Hysterical.
Blog on,
-CZ
0 Comments
Permalink
Spider Man 3 had a lot going for it before anyone set foot in the theatre. Cool villains picked out, lots of money for CG, perfect casting, and best of all, it had the coattails of Spider Man 1 and 2 to ride on. All that Sam Raimi had to do was have some lame thread tying the action scenes together, and it would be a big hit.
It is with a deep sadness that I report to you that he couldn't pull it off. Spider Man 3 is a soap opera rarely interrupted with action scenes, when it should have been the other way around. What really made the first two Spider Man movies great was the pacing; there was plenty of 'day-in-the-life-drama' in 1 and 2, but it was well balanced out with plenty of action, while Spider Man 3 drowns in its own sappiness. Spider Man cries more often than he fights anyone, and every character in the movie bursts into tears at least a dozen times. I almost cried myself, because the movie should have been much better.
At this point, I would like to shatter to a paradigm in Movies-Based-On-Comic-Books:
NEW VILLAINS DO NOT NEED TO HAVE THEIR GENESIS DURING THE MOVIE.
The creation of villains is often so contrived that it would make the movie better if they just left it out. The Batman movies should have taught us this, and the makers of the X-men movies prove that it works, but the Sam Raimi hasn't figured this one out yet. The genesis' of Sandman and the symbiotic suit known later as Venom, are so silly that you will wish they left them out and made the movie shorter.
That brings me to another paradigm-shattering point that I've brought up before, but since no one reads my blog, it never gets implemented:
MOVIES RARELY NEED TO BE OVER TWO HOURS LONG!
How about you make a movie that is one hour long, and charge half the price? This goes for all movies, but especially Spider Man 3, which forgot where the hell it came from: A Comic Book, not a Danielle Steele Novel.
While I'm at it, I will add this one:
ALL WOMEN ARE NOT HELPLESS!
I would appreciate it if we saw the 'woman dangling from a high place as bait for the superhero' LESS OFTEN. In fact, a female Super Hero (Like Dazzler? Ha! LOL! or maybe Dagger from 'Cloak and Dagger') or perhaps a female Super Villain (Belladonna? Plastique?) would be much appreciated.
By the way, my guess for one of the villains for Spider Man 4 will be The Lizard, since the character of Dr Curt Connors was introduced in 3. But, I think next time, I will wait for the reviews of 4 to come out before I go see it. If Spider Man 4 turns out to be another 3, I'll just wait for the DVD, it so I can scan past the boring parts, and cut the movie length down to a reasonable time.
I can tell you funniest part of the movie is that as Peter Parker wears the symbiotic suit for a longer period of time, it makes him look more and more like the lead singer for Panic at the Disco. Hysterical.
Blog on,
-CZ
Labels: Hollywood, movie reviews
Monday, April 09, 2007
Movie Review: Grindhouse
It was a moral and ethical struggle to build up the motivation to see the latest double-feature movie from Quentin Tarantino and Robert Rodriguez Grindhouse.
On the one hand, I've enjoyed Robert Rodriguez' previous work, and the trailer looked like a preposterous zombie/comedy that I might actually enjoy. On the other hand, I've wanted my money back from every Quentin Tarantino movie I've ever seen. In the end, I decided to go because my friends were going, and to gather some good material for the blog. I tried not to let the machine-gun prosthesis keep me from changing my mind.
For the most part, the movies were made up to look like poor quality film reel movies, and the only notable CGI effects were aged-film effects like scratches and hair on the film. Between the two 'features' were several trailers for movies that were really funny. "Machete", "Don't!" and "Thanksgiving" had the audience rolling with laughter, and the trailer for "Werewolf Women of the SS" (By Rob Zombie) was probably the funniest part of the entire movie. Rob Zombie's feature films are completely awful tasteless shit, but for ridiculous movie previews, his was top-notch. Looks like he found his calling.
Planet Terror - The first part of the double-feature was Robert Rodriguez' Planet Terror, a blood-soaked zombie rampage of gross fun. Rodriguez made great use of the aged-film-effects throughout the movie, and introduced a film burn and jump to the next reel at a perfect spot that was very funny.
The music (Mostly done by Rodriguez himself) was great, lots of grungy low-strung guitars.
The writing was good, although it didn't have to be. The story kept moving with good pacing and almost nonstop action. The machine-gun prosthesis was preposterous, but so was everything else about the movie.
Death Proof - The second part of the double-feature was Quentin Tarantino's "Death Proof", a boring homage to old-school road movies like Vanishing Point. The best way to describe it was to take all the things that made Planet Terror good, and remove them.
Tarantino really should be creating Radio Plays, because he doesn't understand what the video is for. Very much like "From Dusk Till Dawn" Tarantino's writing is Overdone Unnecessary Dialog followed by a bloody crescendo of ultra-violence, at which point you realize that all the dialog and character development throughout the movie was pointless. Throughout the dialog, he points the camera at smokin-hot babes who jabber on endlessly until the audience is screaming "We Got The Fucking Point Already! Move On, Please!"
While Planet Terror and Death Proof were about the same length, around 90 min, Planet Terror FELT like an hour long, and Death Proof FELT like three hours by itself. Many people were yawning and taking bathroom breaks during Death Proof, and they didn't miss anything.
Tarantino wasn't able to incorporate the aged-film effects into his movie very well. He put them in at first, and during some transitions, but they seemed to get lost or forgotten a few minutes later. One 'missing reel' during one of the few 'action' scenes of the movie only moved the plot from Unnecessary Dialog to More Unnecessary Dialog. The trailer for Grindhouse showed Action/Adventure/Excitement, but it looks like the only parts of the trailer were cut from Planet Terror, because there was very little Action/Adventure/Excitement in Death proof; its a Chick-Flick with a car-chase ending. Look, if I wanted clever dialog, I would have rented one of Kevin Smith's movies.
As in all his other films, Tarantino tries to impress us with his eclectic knowledge of music, giving entire songs cameos in "Death Proof". I'm sure he is very impressed by his own music selection. I'm also sure the audience could do without ten minutes of actors headbanging and singing along to his selection of Quentin's Kewl Tunez, which do nothing to advance the plot or the characters. Again, I suggest he work on Radio Plays instead of wasting the entire visual element of the media he is working with.
I'm glad I saw Grindhouse, it did help me solidify what I don't like about Tarantino's films by putting his movie right alongside a movie from a good writer/director.
Blog on,
-CZ
2 Comments
Permalink
On the one hand, I've enjoyed Robert Rodriguez' previous work, and the trailer looked like a preposterous zombie/comedy that I might actually enjoy. On the other hand, I've wanted my money back from every Quentin Tarantino movie I've ever seen. In the end, I decided to go because my friends were going, and to gather some good material for the blog. I tried not to let the machine-gun prosthesis keep me from changing my mind.
For the most part, the movies were made up to look like poor quality film reel movies, and the only notable CGI effects were aged-film effects like scratches and hair on the film. Between the two 'features' were several trailers for movies that were really funny. "Machete", "Don't!" and "Thanksgiving" had the audience rolling with laughter, and the trailer for "Werewolf Women of the SS" (By Rob Zombie) was probably the funniest part of the entire movie. Rob Zombie's feature films are completely awful tasteless shit, but for ridiculous movie previews, his was top-notch. Looks like he found his calling.
Planet Terror - The first part of the double-feature was Robert Rodriguez' Planet Terror, a blood-soaked zombie rampage of gross fun. Rodriguez made great use of the aged-film-effects throughout the movie, and introduced a film burn and jump to the next reel at a perfect spot that was very funny.
The music (Mostly done by Rodriguez himself) was great, lots of grungy low-strung guitars.
The writing was good, although it didn't have to be. The story kept moving with good pacing and almost nonstop action. The machine-gun prosthesis was preposterous, but so was everything else about the movie.
Death Proof - The second part of the double-feature was Quentin Tarantino's "Death Proof", a boring homage to old-school road movies like Vanishing Point. The best way to describe it was to take all the things that made Planet Terror good, and remove them.
Tarantino really should be creating Radio Plays, because he doesn't understand what the video is for. Very much like "From Dusk Till Dawn" Tarantino's writing is Overdone Unnecessary Dialog followed by a bloody crescendo of ultra-violence, at which point you realize that all the dialog and character development throughout the movie was pointless. Throughout the dialog, he points the camera at smokin-hot babes who jabber on endlessly until the audience is screaming "We Got The Fucking Point Already! Move On, Please!"
While Planet Terror and Death Proof were about the same length, around 90 min, Planet Terror FELT like an hour long, and Death Proof FELT like three hours by itself. Many people were yawning and taking bathroom breaks during Death Proof, and they didn't miss anything.
Tarantino wasn't able to incorporate the aged-film effects into his movie very well. He put them in at first, and during some transitions, but they seemed to get lost or forgotten a few minutes later. One 'missing reel' during one of the few 'action' scenes of the movie only moved the plot from Unnecessary Dialog to More Unnecessary Dialog. The trailer for Grindhouse showed Action/Adventure/Excitement, but it looks like the only parts of the trailer were cut from Planet Terror, because there was very little Action/Adventure/Excitement in Death proof; its a Chick-Flick with a car-chase ending. Look, if I wanted clever dialog, I would have rented one of Kevin Smith's movies.
As in all his other films, Tarantino tries to impress us with his eclectic knowledge of music, giving entire songs cameos in "Death Proof". I'm sure he is very impressed by his own music selection. I'm also sure the audience could do without ten minutes of actors headbanging and singing along to his selection of Quentin's Kewl Tunez, which do nothing to advance the plot or the characters. Again, I suggest he work on Radio Plays instead of wasting the entire visual element of the media he is working with.
I'm glad I saw Grindhouse, it did help me solidify what I don't like about Tarantino's films by putting his movie right alongside a movie from a good writer/director.
Blog on,
-CZ
Labels: anti, movie reviews
Wednesday, April 04, 2007
Movie Review: Die You Zombie Bastards!
Die You Zombie Bastards! is...um...
strange.
But I liked it.
But I'm strange, so that makes a strange sort of sense.
But you might not be strange, so you might not like it.
I can tell you that the movie is preposterous, and the hero is a serial killer / cannibalist who wears a cape made of human flesh.
But that's not really selling it, is it?
I can tell you that it contains naked hottie scientist cheerleaders with green breasts.
It's a tough call. I guess I won't recommend it to you, but I won't NOT recommend it to you either (neither?).
Blog on,
-CZ
0 Comments
Permalink
strange.
But I liked it.
But I'm strange, so that makes a strange sort of sense.
But you might not be strange, so you might not like it.
I can tell you that the movie is preposterous, and the hero is a serial killer / cannibalist who wears a cape made of human flesh.
But that's not really selling it, is it?
I can tell you that it contains naked hottie scientist cheerleaders with green breasts.
It's a tough call. I guess I won't recommend it to you, but I won't NOT recommend it to you either (neither?).
Blog on,
-CZ
Labels: indie movies, movie reviews
Wednesday, March 28, 2007
Fearless Filmmakers: 28 March 2007
The Fearless Filmmakers event this month was another mixed bag of great independent films, and...um....not so great independent films.
Joe Johnson: "Girl Next Door" - A cross between "Silent Hill" and "Scream", and somehow a parody of them at the same time. Would make a great Rob Zombie video (and I mean that in a good way), half-naked (actually 90% naked) smokin-hot babe gets covered in blood while battling creepy-looking creeps in her home, which has mysteriously inadequate lighting. Unfortunately, the ending was a complete Cheap Shot, one of those "Oh my Dog, look at the time! Damn, and we're almost out of tape too! Anyone know how we can end this in less than thirty seconds?"
355 Productions: "Love" - Hysterical mockumentary about a white-collar office guy who decides to encourage "Love" in his coworker's lives. Hints of "The 40 Year Old Virgin" crossed with "Office Space" and Poor quality sound. This worked great as a short, but I have a hard time imagining how it could be extended into a full-length feature film. I guess we will find out, because the full-length version, "Love: A Documentary" is in Post Production, and slated for release in Summer 2007.
Aaron Gelperin and Steve Blehert: "The Man Who Couldn't Stop Eating Cake" - Far and away the best short of the evening. Well done, funny, and although I didn't understand the ending AT ALL, I didn't even care. I laughed my ass off.
Orange Apple Productions: "It's Killing Me" - This film is based mostly on a poorly-written nursery rhyme, narrated by a child with cancer, who is killed by his own parents to put him out of his misery. This film is positively atrocious, and directly opposed to their 'Mission Statement'
to bring a positive message to its audience through the projects it produces. To show its viewers that the right choice made in even a bad situation can affect everyone involved in a positive way.
From: http://www.orangeappleproductions.com/aboutus.html
Not. Even. The writer/director/producer seemed to think it was "Pretty good". He was wrong.
Matt Osterman: "Turtle" - Square White Guy is commissioned by the Lord (in the shape of a turtle, hence the name) to build an ark. I was expecting hilarity to ensue, but instead the story moved from silly comedy to sad tragedy to disturbing thriller.
Ryan Schaddelee: "Manfant" - Billed as a 'Horror/Comedy with a Twist' This film was the exact opposite to "Turtle" in that "Turtle" went from comedy > tragedy > disturbing, "Manfant" moved from thriller > comedy > lighthearted fluff. During the Q&A after the showing, Ryan admitted that the entire movie was based off one of his friend's abilities to make accurate baby noises, and they got drunk and decided it would be an interesting plot for a short about a full-grown man who acted as an infant. He also apologized. This was one of the best produced movies shown tonight, but not nearly as good as his "Scream Like A Girl"
Justin Pierre of Motion City Soundtrack: "Karen" - This is what happens when a musician decides to make a movie. Writing was thin and abstract. Way more attention was paid to the soundtrack, which was very good, and included the band 'Sweet J.A.P.' The end credits were WAY too long. If that many people were really involved, it should have been better.
Benjamin Martin of Chow Projects: "$$$ (In:love)" - Animation over audio conversations with a telemarketer. Very funny, and got the most laughs of the evening. This is part of a larger series of audio called "Wrong Answers" all of which are available on the web for free at this site.
Ryan Taylor from Prime Productions "MVP" - This entry in Grain Belt's 2006 "Make Your Own Commercial Contest" won Prime Productions first place, and a year's supply of beer. (I don't know how much a year's supply of beer is, and I forgot to ask at the afterparty, but they said it arrived in a truck.) "MVP" is Very pro, it looked like a real commercial.
Blog on,
-CZ
0 Comments
Permalink
Joe Johnson: "Girl Next Door" - A cross between "Silent Hill" and "Scream", and somehow a parody of them at the same time. Would make a great Rob Zombie video (and I mean that in a good way), half-naked (actually 90% naked) smokin-hot babe gets covered in blood while battling creepy-looking creeps in her home, which has mysteriously inadequate lighting. Unfortunately, the ending was a complete Cheap Shot, one of those "Oh my Dog, look at the time! Damn, and we're almost out of tape too! Anyone know how we can end this in less than thirty seconds?"
355 Productions: "Love" - Hysterical mockumentary about a white-collar office guy who decides to encourage "Love" in his coworker's lives. Hints of "The 40 Year Old Virgin" crossed with "Office Space" and Poor quality sound. This worked great as a short, but I have a hard time imagining how it could be extended into a full-length feature film. I guess we will find out, because the full-length version, "Love: A Documentary" is in Post Production, and slated for release in Summer 2007.
Aaron Gelperin and Steve Blehert: "The Man Who Couldn't Stop Eating Cake" - Far and away the best short of the evening. Well done, funny, and although I didn't understand the ending AT ALL, I didn't even care. I laughed my ass off.
Orange Apple Productions: "It's Killing Me" - This film is based mostly on a poorly-written nursery rhyme, narrated by a child with cancer, who is killed by his own parents to put him out of his misery. This film is positively atrocious, and directly opposed to their 'Mission Statement'
to bring a positive message to its audience through the projects it produces. To show its viewers that the right choice made in even a bad situation can affect everyone involved in a positive way.
From: http://www.orangeappleproductions.com/aboutus.html
Not. Even. The writer/director/producer seemed to think it was "Pretty good". He was wrong.
Matt Osterman: "Turtle" - Square White Guy is commissioned by the Lord (in the shape of a turtle, hence the name) to build an ark. I was expecting hilarity to ensue, but instead the story moved from silly comedy to sad tragedy to disturbing thriller.
Ryan Schaddelee: "Manfant" - Billed as a 'Horror/Comedy with a Twist' This film was the exact opposite to "Turtle" in that "Turtle" went from comedy > tragedy > disturbing, "Manfant" moved from thriller > comedy > lighthearted fluff. During the Q&A after the showing, Ryan admitted that the entire movie was based off one of his friend's abilities to make accurate baby noises, and they got drunk and decided it would be an interesting plot for a short about a full-grown man who acted as an infant. He also apologized. This was one of the best produced movies shown tonight, but not nearly as good as his "Scream Like A Girl"
Justin Pierre of Motion City Soundtrack: "Karen" - This is what happens when a musician decides to make a movie. Writing was thin and abstract. Way more attention was paid to the soundtrack, which was very good, and included the band 'Sweet J.A.P.' The end credits were WAY too long. If that many people were really involved, it should have been better.
Benjamin Martin of Chow Projects: "$$$ (In:love)" - Animation over audio conversations with a telemarketer. Very funny, and got the most laughs of the evening. This is part of a larger series of audio called "Wrong Answers" all of which are available on the web for free at this site.
Ryan Taylor from Prime Productions "MVP" - This entry in Grain Belt's 2006 "Make Your Own Commercial Contest" won Prime Productions first place, and a year's supply of beer. (I don't know how much a year's supply of beer is, and I forgot to ask at the afterparty, but they said it arrived in a truck.) "MVP" is Very pro, it looked like a real commercial.
Blog on,
-CZ
Labels: indie movies, Minneapolis Event, movie reviews
Friday, March 23, 2007
Movie Review: The Horrible Flowers
Last night I attended the premier of the dramedy (that's Drama/Comedy) "The Horrible Flowers at the Riverview Theatre.
Overall the movie was really good. Emily Cline was positively delicious as the lead character, Bettina, leader of a Just-About-To-Make-The-Big-Time band, passing through her hometown of Minneapolis when... things go wrong. Plenty of conflict, drama, and Ms. Cline played it all very well. Great acting. Very expressive. Maybe Eric Tretbar (Writer/Producer/Director) could give Peter Jackson some tips on how to edit the leading lady's close-ups..
The character Billy plays a slacker drummer from Seattle, and love interest to Bettina. Billy seemed to suffer from some kind of multiple personality syndrome. In one scene, he is quiet/shy. The next scene he is loving/caring. The next he is a wise philosopher. Awkward lines were given to him that even the best actor would have a hard time with, (the dressing room scene with Linda comes to mind.) I couldn't tell if the problem was the writing or the performance, although treating each scene individually, Scott Foster did a fine job, but overall the character came off as disjointed.
Lines of dialog throughout the movie were contrived, and several of the conversations would have made more sense if you cut the last sentance off. You'll have to see the movie to understand, but several times when characters were walking away from each other and one would say something, I was left there wondering what the fuck the person was talking about. "You diddn't even try!" was one I recall. "Try what?" I replied to myself.
The plot was unique and interesting, involving Rock and Roll, and the sacrifices people are willing to make for it. Unfortunately, there were some serious twists in the plot which threw my suspension of disbelief straight off the tour bus. For instance, there was an occurance of something I have coined 'The English Patient Effect'. This is when two people argue/fight/scream at each other, this typically culminates in one person hitting the other or pushing them down...
...and then they have sex.
Um. Yeah. Right.
This doesn't work. Don't ask me why it doesn't work. Don't go down to Martini Blu and try it to find out for yourself. It didn't work in The Horrible Flowers either. Instead, I wondered if the projectionist got the reels mixed up.
The musical score was good. The songs the bands were performing on stage sounded like uninspired standards, but that was OK. They were not in the big leagues yet, they were not superstars, so that made sense. The background music was much better: simple, emotional guitar/drum/tambourine. Someone compared the guitarwork to Neil Young's score for "Dead Man" and I completely agree.
More than anything, the movie has a high 'coolness' factor. Lots of local Minneapolis places that musicians and music lovers will recognize. The characters are believable, they have the right 'attitude'. All in all, a great local indie film, in which the plot, acting and Minneapolisism outweighed the drawbacks.
Blog on,
-CZ
0 Comments
Permalink
Overall the movie was really good. Emily Cline was positively delicious as the lead character, Bettina, leader of a Just-About-To-Make-The-Big-Time band, passing through her hometown of Minneapolis when... things go wrong. Plenty of conflict, drama, and Ms. Cline played it all very well. Great acting. Very expressive. Maybe Eric Tretbar (Writer/Producer/Director) could give Peter Jackson some tips on how to edit the leading lady's close-ups..
The character Billy plays a slacker drummer from Seattle, and love interest to Bettina. Billy seemed to suffer from some kind of multiple personality syndrome. In one scene, he is quiet/shy. The next scene he is loving/caring. The next he is a wise philosopher. Awkward lines were given to him that even the best actor would have a hard time with, (the dressing room scene with Linda comes to mind.) I couldn't tell if the problem was the writing or the performance, although treating each scene individually, Scott Foster did a fine job, but overall the character came off as disjointed.
Lines of dialog throughout the movie were contrived, and several of the conversations would have made more sense if you cut the last sentance off. You'll have to see the movie to understand, but several times when characters were walking away from each other and one would say something, I was left there wondering what the fuck the person was talking about. "You diddn't even try!" was one I recall. "Try what?" I replied to myself.
The plot was unique and interesting, involving Rock and Roll, and the sacrifices people are willing to make for it. Unfortunately, there were some serious twists in the plot which threw my suspension of disbelief straight off the tour bus. For instance, there was an occurance of something I have coined 'The English Patient Effect'. This is when two people argue/fight/scream at each other, this typically culminates in one person hitting the other or pushing them down...
...and then they have sex.
Um. Yeah. Right.
This doesn't work. Don't ask me why it doesn't work. Don't go down to Martini Blu and try it to find out for yourself. It didn't work in The Horrible Flowers either. Instead, I wondered if the projectionist got the reels mixed up.
The musical score was good. The songs the bands were performing on stage sounded like uninspired standards, but that was OK. They were not in the big leagues yet, they were not superstars, so that made sense. The background music was much better: simple, emotional guitar/drum/tambourine. Someone compared the guitarwork to Neil Young's score for "Dead Man" and I completely agree.
More than anything, the movie has a high 'coolness' factor. Lots of local Minneapolis places that musicians and music lovers will recognize. The characters are believable, they have the right 'attitude'. All in all, a great local indie film, in which the plot, acting and Minneapolisism outweighed the drawbacks.
Blog on,
-CZ
Labels: indie movies, movie reviews
Monday, March 19, 2007
Movie Review: The Host
Finally, a Real Monster!
The Host is a great movie, even if it does make Americans look like evil, polluting, cowboy bullies. [Editor's Note: We're Not?] The plot is simple, the characters are believable, the monster is incredible.
There were only two things that bothered me about the movie. First, the mix of the sound was strange. At times when there was no dialog or sound effects, the musical score was Obscenely Loud. This happened several times during the film, so I cannot believe it was an accident. The rest of the volume was fine, so it was not an issue with the theatre sound system.
Also, the sense of humor was strange. Some things I thought were funny...well, I'm not sure they were *intended* to be funny, if you know what I mean. The other way 'round too, some things I think were meant to be funny, but I didn't get it. I suspect Sense Of Humor is the most difficult thing to translate between cultures.
But these are trivial issues. Some people will let the subtitles dissuade them from seeing the movie. Fine, then wait for the DVD, but if you love a good 'creature feature', you won't want to pass this one up.
Blog on,
-CZ
0 Comments
Permalink
The Host is a great movie, even if it does make Americans look like evil, polluting, cowboy bullies. [Editor's Note: We're Not?] The plot is simple, the characters are believable, the monster is incredible.
There were only two things that bothered me about the movie. First, the mix of the sound was strange. At times when there was no dialog or sound effects, the musical score was Obscenely Loud. This happened several times during the film, so I cannot believe it was an accident. The rest of the volume was fine, so it was not an issue with the theatre sound system.
Also, the sense of humor was strange. Some things I thought were funny...well, I'm not sure they were *intended* to be funny, if you know what I mean. The other way 'round too, some things I think were meant to be funny, but I didn't get it. I suspect Sense Of Humor is the most difficult thing to translate between cultures.
But these are trivial issues. Some people will let the subtitles dissuade them from seeing the movie. Fine, then wait for the DVD, but if you love a good 'creature feature', you won't want to pass this one up.
Blog on,
-CZ
Labels: movie reviews
Monday, March 12, 2007
The Worst Reviewed Movies of All Time
Ouch! Rottentomatoes.com just put out a list of the Worst Reviewed Movies of ALL TIME! The list is harsh but mostly fair, and only verifies rottentomatoes.com as a semi-objective indicator of awfulness.
A quick peek at just a couple of the movies I saw on the list:
#100 - Catwoman. I agree. For a movie to have so much potential and the perfect casting, they really must have worked hard to screw this up.
#86 - Elektra. I know this movie could have been better for the same reasons as Catwoman, but I don't agree that it is one of the 100 Worst, and it certainly is not a worse movie than Catwoman.
#62 - Ultraviolet. Disagree. I think someone got this movie mixed up with Aeon Flux.
#55 - Gigli. How would anyone know this movie is bad? Who would have seen it?
#46 - Pluto Nash. I didn't get it. I think it was a comedy...action...thing...?
#41 - The Fog. This movie should be ranked much worse. Top 25 for sure. If you can't do better than the original, then do different. If you can't do better OR different than the original, you will end up on lists like this.
#33 - Bloodrayne. Disagree. This movie is TOP TEN BAD, possibly the worst of all.
#30 - The Darkness. Disagree. I didn't think it was that bad, certainly no better or worse than all the Almost-Horror movies like The Grudge or Dark Water.
#26 - House of the Dead. Didn't see it myself, but Uwe Boll = Automatic Worst Movie List. [Update July 2008 - Finally saw this movie, which had clips in it which were cut out from the video game! Wow. Even Uwe Boll admitted it was a bad call, although he said, "it seemed like a good idea at the time..."]
#16 - The Covenant. I just saw this movie last week, and I think #16 might be sugar-coating it a bit. This was really bad.
#2 - Alone In The Dark. Agreed. Uwe Boll in his prime. Horseshit. I would have walked out if I Xtina hadn't fallen asleep in my lap during the movie.
#1 - Ballistic. Well, if there was a movie arguably worse than Bloodrayne, this would be it. Certainly worthy of the top ten.
I'm trying to think of movies that Should have been on the list but weren't? Comments?
Suck on,
-CZ
1 Comments
Permalink
A quick peek at just a couple of the movies I saw on the list:
#100 - Catwoman. I agree. For a movie to have so much potential and the perfect casting, they really must have worked hard to screw this up.
#86 - Elektra. I know this movie could have been better for the same reasons as Catwoman, but I don't agree that it is one of the 100 Worst, and it certainly is not a worse movie than Catwoman.
#62 - Ultraviolet. Disagree. I think someone got this movie mixed up with Aeon Flux.
#55 - Gigli. How would anyone know this movie is bad? Who would have seen it?
#46 - Pluto Nash. I didn't get it. I think it was a comedy...action...thing...?
#41 - The Fog. This movie should be ranked much worse. Top 25 for sure. If you can't do better than the original, then do different. If you can't do better OR different than the original, you will end up on lists like this.
#33 - Bloodrayne. Disagree. This movie is TOP TEN BAD, possibly the worst of all.
#30 - The Darkness. Disagree. I didn't think it was that bad, certainly no better or worse than all the Almost-Horror movies like The Grudge or Dark Water.
#26 - House of the Dead. Didn't see it myself, but Uwe Boll = Automatic Worst Movie List. [Update July 2008 - Finally saw this movie, which had clips in it which were cut out from the video game! Wow. Even Uwe Boll admitted it was a bad call, although he said, "it seemed like a good idea at the time..."]
#16 - The Covenant. I just saw this movie last week, and I think #16 might be sugar-coating it a bit. This was really bad.
#2 - Alone In The Dark. Agreed. Uwe Boll in his prime. Horseshit. I would have walked out if I Xtina hadn't fallen asleep in my lap during the movie.
#1 - Ballistic. Well, if there was a movie arguably worse than Bloodrayne, this would be it. Certainly worthy of the top ten.
I'm trying to think of movies that Should have been on the list but weren't? Comments?
Suck on,
-CZ
Labels: Movie News, movie reviews
Saturday, March 10, 2007
Movie Review: 300
300 was based on work by Frank Miller (Who also did the Sin City graphic novels) I'm not sure which occurs more in this movie: Washboard Abs or Blood. The movie is crosses testosterone and homo-eroticism to a degree I didn't think was possible. People who enjoy the unending non-violence of "Like Water For Chocolate" or "Sisterhood of the Travelling Pants" might get bored with the nearly unending violence of "300", but they will still have plenty of washboard abs to watch. And plenty of blood.
I loved the art direction and cinematography in this film. Lots of interesting camera angles, and plenty of slow-motion and stop-action fighting that reminded me of Hero.
But "300" is what it is, a bunch of half-naked Greeks getting their fight on.
If you decide to see 300, please don't be like the people at the Regal Theatre on Friday night and bring your kids to see this! The movie is Rated R for a reason. I'm talking closeup-on-severed-head-spinning-in-the-air-type-Rated-R. So get a sitter, or your kids will be fucked up. I mean, worse than they already are...
Blog on,
-CZ
1 Comments
Permalink
I loved the art direction and cinematography in this film. Lots of interesting camera angles, and plenty of slow-motion and stop-action fighting that reminded me of Hero.
But "300" is what it is, a bunch of half-naked Greeks getting their fight on.
If you decide to see 300, please don't be like the people at the Regal Theatre on Friday night and bring your kids to see this! The movie is Rated R for a reason. I'm talking closeup-on-severed-head-spinning-in-the-air-type-Rated-R. So get a sitter, or your kids will be fucked up. I mean, worse than they already are...
Blog on,
-CZ
Labels: movie reviews
Monday, February 19, 2007
Movie Review: Ghost Rider
I saw Ghost Rider on Friday. I've been a long-time fan of the comic, and still have much of the first and second series(es?). I see the movie brought around enough interest to revive the comic for a third series, start up another limited-issue series (Trail of Tears) and got them funding to release the Finale of the second series, which got pulled when Marvel hit hard times in the 90's.
I had low expectations for the movie, (as those who read my previous blog posts would attest) and I would say that helped a lot, because I thought the movie was great. I hear it is doing well at the box office, so I might have been wrong to rail on them for refusing to let critics review the movie before it's release date. That is usually the Kiss of Death for movies, but it sounds like it might have been a good strategy, because the bad reviews from the critics could have had a huge effect on ticket sales.
As it was, the review-seeking public was pushed more towards bloggers and word-of-mouth, which (arguably) would give a more-favorable-than-average review, and almost certainly a more-favorable-than-a-real-movie-critic review. I mean come on, it's a comic book movie, not Cinema. Do you really think that Donald Logue will get Best Supporting Actor? People tell me he kind of looks like me. Or maybe it's that I kind of look like him...
I didn't mind that the movie took liberties with the original story, because what movies-remade-from-comix don't? And I didn't mind Nicholas Cage as Johnny Blaze, although I thought I would. Cage has a goofy-cool about him which is hard to explain. I know he doesn't really act much, he's just that-a-way, but I'm not sure anyone else could have done this movie with the proper level of 'goofiness'. Johnny Depp maybe? Val Kilmer? (BTW, Where IS Val Kilmer?) Maybe Edward Norton? Certainly NOT Brad Pitt, and shame on you for even thinking such a thing.
John Cusack, that's it. He would have been a great Johnny Blaze. But Cage was fine.
The bad guys were cool, but Way too wimpy. I suppose they sacrificed quality for volume. Effects were typical Hollywood-Overdone, but hey, in Hollywood they say, "You want CG with that?" like it was French Fries or something. I would expect no less than to see Ghost Rider drive up one side of a skyscraper and down the other.
The story was just right. As a matter of fact, fighting off the elements of Air, Earth, Fire and Water is a great idea! Maybe I should write a book like that!
Oops, too late. I already did. Oh well, I guess there's plenty of room in the genre for interpretation. Besides, I think a sexy, dark, Asian female assassin who uses throwing knives and short swords is Way cooler than a biker with a flaming skull.
Way.
Sam Elliott did a tremendous job, reprising the voice and role of The Stranger from The Big Lebowski.
All in all a reasonable value for your entertainment dollar, er, eight-and-a-half dollars.
For those looking for a solid standalone Ghost Rider comic, Ghost Rider: The Road to Damnation 6-issue series is top-notch, both with art and story.
Flame on,
-CZ
0 Comments
Permalink
I had low expectations for the movie, (as those who read my previous blog posts would attest) and I would say that helped a lot, because I thought the movie was great. I hear it is doing well at the box office, so I might have been wrong to rail on them for refusing to let critics review the movie before it's release date. That is usually the Kiss of Death for movies, but it sounds like it might have been a good strategy, because the bad reviews from the critics could have had a huge effect on ticket sales.
As it was, the review-seeking public was pushed more towards bloggers and word-of-mouth, which (arguably) would give a more-favorable-than-average review, and almost certainly a more-favorable-than-a-real-movie-critic review. I mean come on, it's a comic book movie, not Cinema. Do you really think that Donald Logue will get Best Supporting Actor? People tell me he kind of looks like me. Or maybe it's that I kind of look like him...
I didn't mind that the movie took liberties with the original story, because what movies-remade-from-comix don't? And I didn't mind Nicholas Cage as Johnny Blaze, although I thought I would. Cage has a goofy-cool about him which is hard to explain. I know he doesn't really act much, he's just that-a-way, but I'm not sure anyone else could have done this movie with the proper level of 'goofiness'. Johnny Depp maybe? Val Kilmer? (BTW, Where IS Val Kilmer?) Maybe Edward Norton? Certainly NOT Brad Pitt, and shame on you for even thinking such a thing.
John Cusack, that's it. He would have been a great Johnny Blaze. But Cage was fine.
The bad guys were cool, but Way too wimpy. I suppose they sacrificed quality for volume. Effects were typical Hollywood-Overdone, but hey, in Hollywood they say, "You want CG with that?" like it was French Fries or something. I would expect no less than to see Ghost Rider drive up one side of a skyscraper and down the other.
The story was just right. As a matter of fact, fighting off the elements of Air, Earth, Fire and Water is a great idea! Maybe I should write a book like that!
Oops, too late. I already did. Oh well, I guess there's plenty of room in the genre for interpretation. Besides, I think a sexy, dark, Asian female assassin who uses throwing knives and short swords is Way cooler than a biker with a flaming skull.
Way.
Sam Elliott did a tremendous job, reprising the voice and role of The Stranger from The Big Lebowski.
All in all a reasonable value for your entertainment dollar, er, eight-and-a-half dollars.
For those looking for a solid standalone Ghost Rider comic, Ghost Rider: The Road to Damnation 6-issue series is top-notch, both with art and story.
Flame on,
-CZ
Labels: Hollywood, movie reviews
Friday, February 09, 2007
Movie Pre-reveiw - Ghost Rider
The mega-block-busting Spider Man and X-Men movies have opened the floodgates on the Comic-Book-To-Movie business, and for the last few years Hollywood has been tripping over itself to get them pumped out fast enough. Punisher, Daredevil, Elektra, The Hulk, Superman and The Fantastic Four are only the first wave; there are more to come. Spider Man 3 is on the way. Iron Man as well. Silver Surfer? Power Pack? I hear a Doctor Strange movie is in production. I am already in line.
Of all the upcoming comic-book movies, I've really been looking forward to the Ghost Rider, despite Nicholas Cage. I am still a huge Ghost Rider fan, and have almost the entire collection of the original series comics. As dreary as this article is, what it is Not telling you is that Ghost Rider was supposed to be released over a year ago, around Xmas 2005. It got bumped to Jan06, and then to summer 06, and then...well, I guess they couldn't hide the movie any longer. The foreknowledge that the producers don't want the movie reviewed by critics until After its release should help lower my expectations to a more reasonable level.
I will be seeing Ghost Rider, but you don't have to follow my example. It's too late for me, but for you there is still hope.
Blog on,
-CZ
1 Comments
Permalink
Of all the upcoming comic-book movies, I've really been looking forward to the Ghost Rider, despite Nicholas Cage. I am still a huge Ghost Rider fan, and have almost the entire collection of the original series comics. As dreary as this article is, what it is Not telling you is that Ghost Rider was supposed to be released over a year ago, around Xmas 2005. It got bumped to Jan06, and then to summer 06, and then...well, I guess they couldn't hide the movie any longer. The foreknowledge that the producers don't want the movie reviewed by critics until After its release should help lower my expectations to a more reasonable level.
I will be seeing Ghost Rider, but you don't have to follow my example. It's too late for me, but for you there is still hope.
Blog on,
-CZ
Labels: Hollywood, movie reviews
Thursday, February 08, 2007
Movie Review: The Zodiac Killer
Last night I saw Ulli Lommel's Zodiac Killer (2003) on DVD. Note that this is NOT the same as the upcoming movie (simply called Zodiac) which had a budget of 85 Million. No, no, no, this budget was um, somewhat less...
Its fun to do reviews of movies this bad, because it gives you a lot of material to work with. Where to start...where to start...
The voiceovers are Painful. They sound like a high-school student on Thorazine reading from a script they are handed one word at a time.
The acting is worse.
The concept is poorly based on the real-life Zodiac killer. Any fool with a library card or internet connection could have done better research.
The editing is bad. If you take your movie project shot on DV, and splice in stock footage and clips from a film camera, it DOES NOT MAKE IT BETTER. Instead, it makes the rest of your movie look worse. It's like you doing a drunken finger painting of a street scene, and then having Rembrandt paint the flowers, or you hack together a Key Lime and Spinach Desert Medley, and then have Wolfgang Puck design a lovely chocolate-carmel creme sauce for it. Then, we can't even say the movie is Consistantly bad, which means, even at sucking you suck.
The writing and directing are so bad that they fight to see which of them can wreck the movie hardest. Completely contrived conversations and lines that come out of nowhere. (I dont mean out of Somewhere, I mean Out Of Nowhere.) For instance, a book author meets a fan of his at a coffee shop, and after some chit-chat and after a sterile, stoic conversation of about three lines, he says, "Would you like to come over? And watch some Vid-e-ohs?" The answer? "Uh, Sure."
'Uh, Sure,' Of Course.
Also, Everyone in your movie does Not need a full-on-lingering-close-up-shot. Christ, are you making a movie or a High-School-Video-Yearbook?
And when your killing scenes are boring, you got a problem. At least watch other movies to see how it is done before you try to make your own.
By the way, DSM-IV is not an illness. Anyone who took basic Psyc knows that DSM-IV is a book. To say that you are treating your DSM-IV disorder with pills is funny, and it was the only funny thing about Zodiac Killer movie. Oh wait, there was the scene with the guys around the table wearing black hoods and applauding, that was funny too. I mean, who applauds at a table of six people?
There is a review on IMDB which beat me to the punch, 'the only good thing about this movie is that the opening/credits song by Pink is pretty good.'
Hey Ulli, what was the name of the pole you smoked at Lion's Gate to get distribution?
Blog on,
-CZ
0 Comments
Permalink
Its fun to do reviews of movies this bad, because it gives you a lot of material to work with. Where to start...where to start...
The voiceovers are Painful. They sound like a high-school student on Thorazine reading from a script they are handed one word at a time.
The acting is worse.
The concept is poorly based on the real-life Zodiac killer. Any fool with a library card or internet connection could have done better research.
The editing is bad. If you take your movie project shot on DV, and splice in stock footage and clips from a film camera, it DOES NOT MAKE IT BETTER. Instead, it makes the rest of your movie look worse. It's like you doing a drunken finger painting of a street scene, and then having Rembrandt paint the flowers, or you hack together a Key Lime and Spinach Desert Medley, and then have Wolfgang Puck design a lovely chocolate-carmel creme sauce for it. Then, we can't even say the movie is Consistantly bad, which means, even at sucking you suck.
The writing and directing are so bad that they fight to see which of them can wreck the movie hardest. Completely contrived conversations and lines that come out of nowhere. (I dont mean out of Somewhere, I mean Out Of Nowhere.) For instance, a book author meets a fan of his at a coffee shop, and after some chit-chat and after a sterile, stoic conversation of about three lines, he says, "Would you like to come over? And watch some Vid-e-ohs?" The answer? "Uh, Sure."
'Uh, Sure,' Of Course.
Also, Everyone in your movie does Not need a full-on-lingering-close-up-shot. Christ, are you making a movie or a High-School-Video-Yearbook?
And when your killing scenes are boring, you got a problem. At least watch other movies to see how it is done before you try to make your own.
By the way, DSM-IV is not an illness. Anyone who took basic Psyc knows that DSM-IV is a book. To say that you are treating your DSM-IV disorder with pills is funny, and it was the only funny thing about Zodiac Killer movie. Oh wait, there was the scene with the guys around the table wearing black hoods and applauding, that was funny too. I mean, who applauds at a table of six people?
There is a review on IMDB which beat me to the punch, 'the only good thing about this movie is that the opening/credits song by Pink is pretty good.'
Hey Ulli, what was the name of the pole you smoked at Lion's Gate to get distribution?
Blog on,
-CZ
Labels: indie movies, movie reviews
Thursday, February 01, 2007
Fearless Filmmakers - Jan 07
I attended the Fearless Filmmakers last night. If you didn't go, here is a summary of what you missed:
The preview for Darkon got some MAJOR laughs. I can't wait for this to come out.
The Sleepy Eye crew were there with their latest work called 'Buzzkill'. The production was good, but it could easily have been cut in half (literally turn it off right in the middle), and made better. The movie hits the punchline, but drags that dead dog of a joke for another 4-5 min. Too long of a short? I guess you could say my attention span is that of an A.D.D. teen after a 6-pack of Red Bull.
Smokin Yogi Films showed the trailers for the pilot episode of 'Abnormally Normal'. I hated it about fifteen seconds in, and it went on for another ten minutes, the longest damn trailer I've ever seen. Makes me wonder how long the movie is. Maybe it just felt like ten minutes. I wanted to say that people with emotional problems shouldn't make movies, but then we wouldn't have movies. I also don't want to say that people shouldn't work out their emotional bullshit on film and pan it off as art, because we have got great films that were motivated by suffering and loss. I think Spoon nailed the problem; 'Abnormally Normal' is a drama. I don't think dramas work well as internet shorts, and at the very least, they can't compete with comedy in this market.
Uncle Forehead Filmworks showed "Suspension" which I thought was awesome and artsy, but a little laggy. Tension was built up pretty well, but the length could have been cut back on this one too. Good effects and mood music.
Kevin Meyers showed "Intermural Glory" a really funny thirty second spot...that went on for ten minutes. I guess this one has done really well on the net. If you like mockumentaries then you will most likely like this. What tends to make or break these is the character personalities, and whether the actors can pull them off. If they can, then you have a hit, and that seems to be the case with Intramural Glory. I am amazed at the level of work that goes into this production, they are an actual intramural basketball team, that tours and is looking for a sponsor. Clever marketing.
SER International Corp was the sleeper hit of the night, Jesus Christ Action Figure (With Water Walking Action). It actually got him death threats. It also got him the biggest laughs with the audience. SER also showed a series of commercials for Butterfinger candy bars Excellent, although you cannot credit SER with these, they simply picked the best from those who sent in homemade commercials. Cheating, if you ask me, but they were really funny.
Melody Gilbert showed some spots for Best Buy which were made for the companies internal website. Strange I thought, and she agreed during the panel discussion, as she isn't an Independent Filmmaker by any means. The spots were auditions of Best Buy Employees trying out to be in Best Buy commercials. (Sorry, they weren't Employees, we call them Blue Shirts...) It is pretty easy to make fun of people put on the spot in front of a camera, but she is getting paid to do it...
Of course, the real reason to go to this Fearless was to see the premier of Ryan Wood's Fear of Girls 2. The first installment was a work of genius and a web cult phenomenon, which attracted the attention of networks and landed Wood the funding for Fear of Girls 2 as well as the launch of a comedy website later this year. Finally, a real success story about a great moviemaker who makes entertaining movies. From the Midwest. Wow.
After the films, the moviemakers held a panel discussion about the 'viral market'.
The discussion was disappointing for me. The pitch was that these people had a grasp on the viral market, and were manipulating it to make money off internet short films. When asked about how they did it, they said, "...Um, we just put it on the interweb, and uh...got lots of hits...then Hollywood called, and we partied with Kevin Spacey. It was cool..."
Thanks. I suppose that was helpful if you don't know what viral marketing is. It occurred to me later that they never did define or explain how viral marketing works. Since I already knew, it didn't bother me.
Not one mention of SEO, Technorati, or Digg. If you're trying to schlepp your .mov on the internet, then you better be a master of all three. As far as online distribution, they mentioned Revver, YouTube, and Google Video. That's it. But that is not all that there is.
All in all a good time, a few pits to spit out, but the fruit was worth it. I think what really set apart the good from the bad here was pacing, and Ryan Wood even mentioned it. Someone asked what the 'standard' length of a 'short' was, he said it doesn't matter so much if the pacing is correct. Amen. Online video shorts are new territory, and you can tell the moviemakers are having a hard time trimming their projects down. I think they need to have the mentality of advertisement commercial makers, but make sure they are boiling down a good plot into a short with good pacing, and leaves the viewer wanting more, instead of fluffing up a funny idea into a short that is way too long.
Blog on,
-CZ
0 Comments
Permalink
The preview for Darkon got some MAJOR laughs. I can't wait for this to come out.
The Sleepy Eye crew were there with their latest work called 'Buzzkill'. The production was good, but it could easily have been cut in half (literally turn it off right in the middle), and made better. The movie hits the punchline, but drags that dead dog of a joke for another 4-5 min. Too long of a short? I guess you could say my attention span is that of an A.D.D. teen after a 6-pack of Red Bull.
Smokin Yogi Films showed the trailers for the pilot episode of 'Abnormally Normal'. I hated it about fifteen seconds in, and it went on for another ten minutes, the longest damn trailer I've ever seen. Makes me wonder how long the movie is. Maybe it just felt like ten minutes. I wanted to say that people with emotional problems shouldn't make movies, but then we wouldn't have movies. I also don't want to say that people shouldn't work out their emotional bullshit on film and pan it off as art, because we have got great films that were motivated by suffering and loss. I think Spoon nailed the problem; 'Abnormally Normal' is a drama. I don't think dramas work well as internet shorts, and at the very least, they can't compete with comedy in this market.
Uncle Forehead Filmworks showed "Suspension" which I thought was awesome and artsy, but a little laggy. Tension was built up pretty well, but the length could have been cut back on this one too. Good effects and mood music.
Kevin Meyers showed "Intermural Glory" a really funny thirty second spot...that went on for ten minutes. I guess this one has done really well on the net. If you like mockumentaries then you will most likely like this. What tends to make or break these is the character personalities, and whether the actors can pull them off. If they can, then you have a hit, and that seems to be the case with Intramural Glory. I am amazed at the level of work that goes into this production, they are an actual intramural basketball team, that tours and is looking for a sponsor. Clever marketing.
SER International Corp was the sleeper hit of the night, Jesus Christ Action Figure (With Water Walking Action). It actually got him death threats. It also got him the biggest laughs with the audience. SER also showed a series of commercials for Butterfinger candy bars Excellent, although you cannot credit SER with these, they simply picked the best from those who sent in homemade commercials. Cheating, if you ask me, but they were really funny.
Melody Gilbert showed some spots for Best Buy which were made for the companies internal website. Strange I thought, and she agreed during the panel discussion, as she isn't an Independent Filmmaker by any means. The spots were auditions of Best Buy Employees trying out to be in Best Buy commercials. (Sorry, they weren't Employees, we call them Blue Shirts...) It is pretty easy to make fun of people put on the spot in front of a camera, but she is getting paid to do it...
Of course, the real reason to go to this Fearless was to see the premier of Ryan Wood's Fear of Girls 2. The first installment was a work of genius and a web cult phenomenon, which attracted the attention of networks and landed Wood the funding for Fear of Girls 2 as well as the launch of a comedy website later this year. Finally, a real success story about a great moviemaker who makes entertaining movies. From the Midwest. Wow.
After the films, the moviemakers held a panel discussion about the 'viral market'.
The discussion was disappointing for me. The pitch was that these people had a grasp on the viral market, and were manipulating it to make money off internet short films. When asked about how they did it, they said, "...Um, we just put it on the interweb, and uh...got lots of hits...then Hollywood called, and we partied with Kevin Spacey. It was cool..."
Thanks. I suppose that was helpful if you don't know what viral marketing is. It occurred to me later that they never did define or explain how viral marketing works. Since I already knew, it didn't bother me.
Not one mention of SEO, Technorati, or Digg. If you're trying to schlepp your .mov on the internet, then you better be a master of all three. As far as online distribution, they mentioned Revver, YouTube, and Google Video. That's it. But that is not all that there is.
All in all a good time, a few pits to spit out, but the fruit was worth it. I think what really set apart the good from the bad here was pacing, and Ryan Wood even mentioned it. Someone asked what the 'standard' length of a 'short' was, he said it doesn't matter so much if the pacing is correct. Amen. Online video shorts are new territory, and you can tell the moviemakers are having a hard time trimming their projects down. I think they need to have the mentality of advertisement commercial makers, but make sure they are boiling down a good plot into a short with good pacing, and leaves the viewer wanting more, instead of fluffing up a funny idea into a short that is way too long.
Blog on,
-CZ
Labels: Hollywood, indie movies, movie reviews
Friday, January 26, 2007
Blood and Chocolate
Looks like someone is trying to make a movie that's worse than Bloodrayne.
Blog on,
-CZ
3 Comments
Permalink
Blog on,
-CZ
Labels: anti, Hollywood, Movie News, movie reviews, new release
Wednesday, December 20, 2006
Fear of Girls 2
Hopefully, you have all seen Fear of Girls I
Fear of Girls 2 should be kicking about soon, and I just got to see it last weekend. Way, way funny. The talent behind this project is amazing, the writing, the acting, the direction, sound and lighting... but the best part is the timing. No, I take that back. The best part is that it is an indie film made here in Minnesota. Sadly, if you don't know what 'Hit Points' or 'Alignment' are, you might miss out on some of the humor.
Alright, so making fun of people who play D&D is easy (like cow-tipping), but after hearing multiple reviews of what a horseshit movie Eragonwas, I wish more indie films like Fear Of Girls 1 and 2 would rise up and tip the cow that is Hollywood right into the ocean of obscurity.
[Potential reality, years from now]
"Daddy, what is a Hollywood?"
"Well, you know how when we go to the zoo, and see all the wierd and interesting animals?"
"Sure, so Hollywood was like going to the zoo?"
"Kind of, except it was really expensive, and not as interesting; just wierd."
"Did they throw their own poo? (giggle)"
"They certainly did! They threw it all over the world, and they even named it; Star Wars - The Phantom Menace, Bloodrayne, King Kong, Eragon..."
Blog on,
-CZ
0 Comments
Permalink
Fear of Girls 2 should be kicking about soon, and I just got to see it last weekend. Way, way funny. The talent behind this project is amazing, the writing, the acting, the direction, sound and lighting... but the best part is the timing. No, I take that back. The best part is that it is an indie film made here in Minnesota. Sadly, if you don't know what 'Hit Points' or 'Alignment' are, you might miss out on some of the humor.
Alright, so making fun of people who play D&D is easy (like cow-tipping), but after hearing multiple reviews of what a horseshit movie Eragonwas, I wish more indie films like Fear Of Girls 1 and 2 would rise up and tip the cow that is Hollywood right into the ocean of obscurity.
[Potential reality, years from now]
"Daddy, what is a Hollywood?"
"Well, you know how when we go to the zoo, and see all the wierd and interesting animals?"
"Sure, so Hollywood was like going to the zoo?"
"Kind of, except it was really expensive, and not as interesting; just wierd."
"Did they throw their own poo? (giggle)"
"They certainly did! They threw it all over the world, and they even named it; Star Wars - The Phantom Menace, Bloodrayne, King Kong, Eragon..."
Blog on,
-CZ
Labels: Hollywood, indie movies, Movie News, movie reviews
Monday, December 11, 2006
The new fez of Horror!!!
If this is the new trend in Horror movies,
http://www.apple.com/trailers/touchstone/primeval/
http://www.tribute.ca/player/enhancePlayer.asp?isWM=1&isQT=1&filePath=Trailers&fileName=blackchristmas
Then somebody stop the fucking planet and let me off. Thanks to movies like The Grudge and The Ring and The [Fill in the blank] we now have to sift this crap off the shelf to get to the good horror movies.
Blog on,
-CZ
2 Comments
Permalink
http://www.apple.com/trailers/touchstone/primeval/
http://www.tribute.ca/player/enhancePlayer.asp?isWM=1&isQT=1&filePath=Trailers&fileName=blackchristmas
Then somebody stop the fucking planet and let me off. Thanks to movies like The Grudge and The Ring and The [Fill in the blank] we now have to sift this crap off the shelf to get to the good horror movies.
Blog on,
-CZ
Labels: Hollywood, movie reviews
Tuesday, October 10, 2006
Director Review: Sam Raimi
Sam Raimi is a good director. I really liked his TV work (Xena, Cleopatra 2525, Hercules, Jack of all Trades, were all fair shows, (let's skip right by M.A.N.T.I.S., shall we?) But those were TV *action* shows.
Sam Raimi has no concept of Horror. NONE. The little naked kid dipped in flour and wearing mascara and dark contact lenses (typically played back with dropped frames) was pretty spooky...back when I first saw it in The Ring. But then it was done. And like any fad, that one got beat to death. I don't think there is a single video from Asia Tartan Extreme at Hollywood Video that Doesn't have a pic of the spooky kid on the cover. I've seen it so much now, that if I woke up in the middle of the night and saw the spooky kid hanging from my bedroom wall, I would tell him to piss off, roll over and go back to sleep. Sam still thinks it's scary, and bases entire movies around his No-Trick-Pony.
However, Sam has learned about the Sting. Sam knows that there is an instinctual thing that makes you jump, or gasp or scream in reaction to sudden visual or audio cues (Stings). This will always work, but it is NOT HORROR. It is a tool used in Horror Movies, but by itself it is no more Horror than a cup of flour is a pancake. (For example, The Forgotten, relied on Stings throughout the movie to keep the audience from falling asleep). No matter how many times I pretend to punch you in the face, and stop an inch from your eyes, you will blink. You can't not blink. Like I said, it is instinctual. Sam knows this, and he thinks this is Horror.
But it is not.
Because it ain't scary no more. That's right Sam. Not scary Sam. Like Crazins. Not Scary. Like Aspartame. Not Horror.
Of course Sam Raimi will probably never realize this, since he doesn't read my blog, and since he made about a bazillion dollars off the most unhorrifying horror movies ever made. The Boogyman and The Grudge. Yes, I saw them both. I even gave The Grudge the proper environment, watching it late at night with the lights off. Not Horror. Annoying perhaps, like being on hold with Comcast Tech Support, but not Horror.
Using stings as a crutch to make your unscary Flour-Boy seem scary is not Horror. It is Startling. It is Jarring. It is going to cause even normal people to launch into an epileptic seizure. Of course it is also going to make him another bazillion dollars when he does it again in Grudge 2. Check out the trailer here. Warning: May induce epileptic seizures.
We need to come up with a different genre for this dogshit. When I go to the Horror section to rent a Horror movie, I want to see something Horrific. Startling alone is not Horror, and does not count. Put it in the Jumpy section.
Hey Sam, here is an idea for Grudge 3, just run a black slate for 90 min, and randomly drop in a couple still pix with a giant audio hit. Watch the crowd jump! Best part is the pictures can be of anything at all, and the crowd will still jump!
"Oh my God, an Ostrich!"
"AAA! Crazins!"
"Holy Shit! A little boy dipped in flour! Did you see that?"
"Oh! I think I'm having a seizure!"
Blog on,
-CZ
2 Comments
Permalink
Sam Raimi has no concept of Horror. NONE. The little naked kid dipped in flour and wearing mascara and dark contact lenses (typically played back with dropped frames) was pretty spooky...back when I first saw it in The Ring. But then it was done. And like any fad, that one got beat to death. I don't think there is a single video from Asia Tartan Extreme at Hollywood Video that Doesn't have a pic of the spooky kid on the cover. I've seen it so much now, that if I woke up in the middle of the night and saw the spooky kid hanging from my bedroom wall, I would tell him to piss off, roll over and go back to sleep. Sam still thinks it's scary, and bases entire movies around his No-Trick-Pony.
However, Sam has learned about the Sting. Sam knows that there is an instinctual thing that makes you jump, or gasp or scream in reaction to sudden visual or audio cues (Stings). This will always work, but it is NOT HORROR. It is a tool used in Horror Movies, but by itself it is no more Horror than a cup of flour is a pancake. (For example, The Forgotten, relied on Stings throughout the movie to keep the audience from falling asleep). No matter how many times I pretend to punch you in the face, and stop an inch from your eyes, you will blink. You can't not blink. Like I said, it is instinctual. Sam knows this, and he thinks this is Horror.
But it is not.
Because it ain't scary no more. That's right Sam. Not scary Sam. Like Crazins. Not Scary. Like Aspartame. Not Horror.
Of course Sam Raimi will probably never realize this, since he doesn't read my blog, and since he made about a bazillion dollars off the most unhorrifying horror movies ever made. The Boogyman and The Grudge. Yes, I saw them both. I even gave The Grudge the proper environment, watching it late at night with the lights off. Not Horror. Annoying perhaps, like being on hold with Comcast Tech Support, but not Horror.
Using stings as a crutch to make your unscary Flour-Boy seem scary is not Horror. It is Startling. It is Jarring. It is going to cause even normal people to launch into an epileptic seizure. Of course it is also going to make him another bazillion dollars when he does it again in Grudge 2. Check out the trailer here. Warning: May induce epileptic seizures.
We need to come up with a different genre for this dogshit. When I go to the Horror section to rent a Horror movie, I want to see something Horrific. Startling alone is not Horror, and does not count. Put it in the Jumpy section.
Hey Sam, here is an idea for Grudge 3, just run a black slate for 90 min, and randomly drop in a couple still pix with a giant audio hit. Watch the crowd jump! Best part is the pictures can be of anything at all, and the crowd will still jump!
"Oh my God, an Ostrich!"
"AAA! Crazins!"
"Holy Shit! A little boy dipped in flour! Did you see that?"
"Oh! I think I'm having a seizure!"
Blog on,
-CZ
Labels: Hollywood, Movie News, movie reviews, Ubersuck
Monday, August 21, 2006
Movie Review: Snakes on a Plane
Snakes on a Plane has snakes, and they're on a plane. Sells itself, really. Going into the film with low expectations (and three Long Island Iced Teas) helps, but is not necessary. Surprisingly, whether the movie disappoints or not is up to you.
You could have written the review for S.O.A.P. yourself, before you ever saw the movie. If you liked the trailer, you would probably like the movie, and if you didn't like the trailer, then you probably wouldn't see the movie. This might explain the high movie rating at imdb.com. So there is little point in mentioning the acting, the FX, the audio, or the plot (well, take a fucking guess at what the plot is....) because what matters most is your own expectation.
What I learned from seeing S.O.A.P. is that I prefer a good "B" movie like Cube, PI, or S.O.A.P., over a bad "A" movie anyday.
If you and your friends made Star Wars Episode One in your backyard on a budget of one hundred thousand, I would hand you a great big thumbs up. But when George Lucas does it for a bazillion dollars with all marketing guns blazing and the unavoidable happy meal hype - I tell him his thumbs were up his ass when he could have been making a better movie.
When S.O.A.P. promises a planefull of snakes, and then shows us a planefull of snakes, I'm there to put down eight-fifty. When Peter Jackson promises the movie of the year, and hands you King Kong, I'm there to drop a black mamba in his bathtub.
In both cases, the movies would still be the same, so what's the difference? The difference is the difference between the movie being 'better than you thought', versus it 'not living up to the hype'.
S.O.A.P. delivered better than I expected, and therefore I give it eight out of ten cottonmouths.
It is truly sad when peoples movie ratings are based on how much the movie Doesn't Disappoint...
Blog on,
-CZ
1 Comments
Permalink
You could have written the review for S.O.A.P. yourself, before you ever saw the movie. If you liked the trailer, you would probably like the movie, and if you didn't like the trailer, then you probably wouldn't see the movie. This might explain the high movie rating at imdb.com. So there is little point in mentioning the acting, the FX, the audio, or the plot (well, take a fucking guess at what the plot is....) because what matters most is your own expectation.
What I learned from seeing S.O.A.P. is that I prefer a good "B" movie like Cube, PI, or S.O.A.P., over a bad "A" movie anyday.
If you and your friends made Star Wars Episode One in your backyard on a budget of one hundred thousand, I would hand you a great big thumbs up. But when George Lucas does it for a bazillion dollars with all marketing guns blazing and the unavoidable happy meal hype - I tell him his thumbs were up his ass when he could have been making a better movie.
When S.O.A.P. promises a planefull of snakes, and then shows us a planefull of snakes, I'm there to put down eight-fifty. When Peter Jackson promises the movie of the year, and hands you King Kong, I'm there to drop a black mamba in his bathtub.
In both cases, the movies would still be the same, so what's the difference? The difference is the difference between the movie being 'better than you thought', versus it 'not living up to the hype'.
S.O.A.P. delivered better than I expected, and therefore I give it eight out of ten cottonmouths.
It is truly sad when peoples movie ratings are based on how much the movie Doesn't Disappoint...
Blog on,
-CZ
Labels: movie reviews
Friday, August 11, 2006
Movie Review: Guardian of the Realm
[Ed Note: This movie review is dedicated to pattonjr5. See? I don't just watch blockbuster movies...]
Xtina and I were walking through our local Hollywood Video, and the cover of this DVD caught her eye.
"Oh my Gawd," she said, "Would you *Look* at this!"
"Ewww," I said, and made the face I usually reserve for people who put vinegar on their French Fries.
It was pretty bad. Scratch that - it was Mega-Bad. In a bad way. The cover was something I would never have even picked up off the shelf, a screaming blue face with poorly CG-ed hooks pulling on the skin. Whatever picture you have in your head right now, this was worse.
Not wanting to judge a DVD only by its cover, I immediately read the back. Turning the DVD over revealed a much Much MUCH better graphic, Tanya Dempsey (whom we All remember from The Coven, right? Um, Right?) holding a wicked looking shiv, in a total hero pose. I read the blurb on the back - a group of cultists unwittingly release a demon into LA, and two demon-hunters have to track it down.
Hmm, sounds familiar, since that's the basic premise of the book I'm currently writing, with the exception that my story is set in Minneapolis. I'm certain that there are plenty of demons walking around LA right now, but that town is so fucked up that no one notices. If a demon popped up here in flyoverland, we would be rolling out that giant semi truck with the big lightning-beam-gun-thing, and those trucks with the fifty or so rockets on it, that you see in the Godzilla movies (Yes, we have those.)
But I digress.
The plot outline alone was worth the three dollar rental; call it 'research' if you like, but honestly I'm always game for quality indie horror, although I know that sounds as much of a oxymoron as Jumbo Shrimp or Reality TV. But, I assure you it is out there, you just need to be brave, and take chances, and not be afraid to slog through a lot of shit to find the good ones. (They aren't even Crap, they are Shit, plain and simple).
So J-manand Spooncame over, and bravely volunteered to give 'Guardian of the Realm' a right proper MST3K viewing with the obligatory 2-drink minimum.
Wow. I was more than just pleasantly surprised. The movie refused to accept indie-mediocrity, and strove for a standard movie formula. They refused to let their own shortcomings hold them back, as so many B-grade horror films do. (By adding in Laughably Bad Effects or dialog, preposterous plot jumps, breaking the fourth wall, etc...) This is the movie I think a lot of indie horror filmsters wish they could make, and I wish more of them would try. Not that all indie filmers should take themselves seriously, but rather, the specific genre of B-Horror films could do better with their budgets, and remember that fake blood and bad jokes are no substitute for good writing.
This isn't to say that the movie was not funny. I mean, come on; when the demon-slayer is yelled at by his boss for wearing too much black leather? When the slain demons dissolve into Styrofoam packing peanuts? Spoon had a good point, "why didn't they use kitty litter?" Good question.
The acting varied, but the main characters were solid, likeable and even more-or-less believable. I was able to hold the dialog in check with a small suspension of disbelief.
The plot was really good, and well thought out. Maybe a touch contrived, but then again, if the plot involves supernatural beings, you gotta contrive a bit.
The music throughout the movie was bad. Not really bad, but just plain, lower-case-b bad. The music over the end credits was phenomenal, and made me want to bust out all my Enigma and Delirium CDs... Sound as a whole was OK, a little quiet overall, and when the demons talked it sounded like someone used every single audio effect plug-in at once.
The makeup job for the demons is better than I expected. I have always preferred monster-type monsters (Aliens, The Thing, etc...) to humans wearing masks, but I realize how difficult this is to pull off without blowing the HokeyMeter off the charts, and I have come to accept the contacts/mask/fangs/makeup as a reasonable 'monster' facsimile in lower budget films. I am not as forgiving for bigger budgets (you heard me, Star Trek...)
The CG deserves special mention, because the movie has plenty of After Effects in it. Mostly the FX were OK, but the elevator scene was unnecessary and overdone, and the ending turns a little 'ghostbuster-ish' with the sky and all.
The fight scenes were top notch. Tasteful wire-work, and short, solid bursts of fighting, which accentuated the story without becoming the story, like in many martial arts flicks. (...which is what makes them "martial arts" flicks, I suppose.)
...And what of the cover? The screaming blue face with the hooks through it? It had NOTHING to do with the movie whatsoever. (Although it looks the way I imagine Hollywood would look if I told it that 'Guardian of the Realm' was a better movie than 'King Kong'...) So the lesson of this sermon is not to judge movies solely based on the cover art.
Blog on,
-CZ
1 Comments
Permalink
Xtina and I were walking through our local Hollywood Video, and the cover of this DVD caught her eye.
"Oh my Gawd," she said, "Would you *Look* at this!"
"Ewww," I said, and made the face I usually reserve for people who put vinegar on their French Fries.
It was pretty bad. Scratch that - it was Mega-Bad. In a bad way. The cover was something I would never have even picked up off the shelf, a screaming blue face with poorly CG-ed hooks pulling on the skin. Whatever picture you have in your head right now, this was worse.
Not wanting to judge a DVD only by its cover, I immediately read the back. Turning the DVD over revealed a much Much MUCH better graphic, Tanya Dempsey (whom we All remember from The Coven, right? Um, Right?) holding a wicked looking shiv, in a total hero pose. I read the blurb on the back - a group of cultists unwittingly release a demon into LA, and two demon-hunters have to track it down.
Hmm, sounds familiar, since that's the basic premise of the book I'm currently writing, with the exception that my story is set in Minneapolis. I'm certain that there are plenty of demons walking around LA right now, but that town is so fucked up that no one notices. If a demon popped up here in flyoverland, we would be rolling out that giant semi truck with the big lightning-beam-gun-thing, and those trucks with the fifty or so rockets on it, that you see in the Godzilla movies (Yes, we have those.)
But I digress.
The plot outline alone was worth the three dollar rental; call it 'research' if you like, but honestly I'm always game for quality indie horror, although I know that sounds as much of a oxymoron as Jumbo Shrimp or Reality TV. But, I assure you it is out there, you just need to be brave, and take chances, and not be afraid to slog through a lot of shit to find the good ones. (They aren't even Crap, they are Shit, plain and simple).
So J-manand Spooncame over, and bravely volunteered to give 'Guardian of the Realm' a right proper MST3K viewing with the obligatory 2-drink minimum.
Wow. I was more than just pleasantly surprised. The movie refused to accept indie-mediocrity, and strove for a standard movie formula. They refused to let their own shortcomings hold them back, as so many B-grade horror films do. (By adding in Laughably Bad Effects or dialog, preposterous plot jumps, breaking the fourth wall, etc...) This is the movie I think a lot of indie horror filmsters wish they could make, and I wish more of them would try. Not that all indie filmers should take themselves seriously, but rather, the specific genre of B-Horror films could do better with their budgets, and remember that fake blood and bad jokes are no substitute for good writing.
This isn't to say that the movie was not funny. I mean, come on; when the demon-slayer is yelled at by his boss for wearing too much black leather? When the slain demons dissolve into Styrofoam packing peanuts? Spoon had a good point, "why didn't they use kitty litter?" Good question.
The acting varied, but the main characters were solid, likeable and even more-or-less believable. I was able to hold the dialog in check with a small suspension of disbelief.
The plot was really good, and well thought out. Maybe a touch contrived, but then again, if the plot involves supernatural beings, you gotta contrive a bit.
The music throughout the movie was bad. Not really bad, but just plain, lower-case-b bad. The music over the end credits was phenomenal, and made me want to bust out all my Enigma and Delirium CDs... Sound as a whole was OK, a little quiet overall, and when the demons talked it sounded like someone used every single audio effect plug-in at once.
The makeup job for the demons is better than I expected. I have always preferred monster-type monsters (Aliens, The Thing, etc...) to humans wearing masks, but I realize how difficult this is to pull off without blowing the HokeyMeter off the charts, and I have come to accept the contacts/mask/fangs/makeup as a reasonable 'monster' facsimile in lower budget films. I am not as forgiving for bigger budgets (you heard me, Star Trek...)
The CG deserves special mention, because the movie has plenty of After Effects in it. Mostly the FX were OK, but the elevator scene was unnecessary and overdone, and the ending turns a little 'ghostbuster-ish' with the sky and all.
The fight scenes were top notch. Tasteful wire-work, and short, solid bursts of fighting, which accentuated the story without becoming the story, like in many martial arts flicks. (...which is what makes them "martial arts" flicks, I suppose.)
...And what of the cover? The screaming blue face with the hooks through it? It had NOTHING to do with the movie whatsoever. (Although it looks the way I imagine Hollywood would look if I told it that 'Guardian of the Realm' was a better movie than 'King Kong'...) So the lesson of this sermon is not to judge movies solely based on the cover art.
Blog on,
-CZ
Labels: Hollywood, indie movies, movie reviews
Monday, July 31, 2006
Movie Review: King Kong
I hate being right.
The heat of the weekend found me cowering on the couch next to the air conditioner with a bowl of Peppermint Ice Cream, and a handful of movies picked out by someone else, of which, King Kong seemed a reasonable time waster. I had refused to see King Kong in the theatres for two reasons: First it is a story about a giant ape. Second, I was concerned that it would be long, CG-laden, and primarily about a giant ape.
Like I said, I hate being right.
Not to say that King Kong wasn't exciting. No no, there was adventure-a-plenty, I assure you, but...
...have you Ever gotten Bored during a Monster Fight Scene? Well watch King Kong, and then you will. Over and over.
Here is a tip (and after watching LOTR, I Never thought I would have to give Tips to Peter Jackson) - just because you have access to a top notch CG department good does Not mean that every CG scene rendered needs to be in the movie.
It seems Peter Jackson's philosophy is 'screw the pacing, the fight scene / chase scene / bug scene / Naomi Watts closeup scene takes as long as it takes!' That's a great philosophy for your first sexual encounter, but not for movies. Well, not for Good movies anyways.
I lost count of how many people died trying to save Naomi Watts, but I gotta say, she ain't worth it. I also lost count of how many times she fell down in the movie, but that was far, far, far, far, far, far, far outnumered by the number of times she stared blankly towards the camera, trying to convey some kind of emotion through telekenesis and not through facial expressions. It never did work, but they tried. Oh, how they tried. Over and over and over they tried, and then they tried some more.
Well, to be fair, sometimes she looked to the *right* of the camera and sometimes she looked to the *left* of the camera, which was a nice attempt to break up the monotony. It didn't work, but it was a nice try.
I give King Kong a 3.5 out of 10. All in all, the movie that is too big for its britches. Cut the budget in half, cut the script in half, cut the running time in half, cut Naomi Watts in half, and replace her with an actress with the ability to convey emotion, and trade King Kong for Godzilla, and then you will have a far better movie.
Oh yes, the last line of the movie? I won't spoil it for you, and I'm guessing it's from the book, but it would have been a wise choice to remove that line from the movie. That line is so dumb, that removing it could have raised my review score one whole point.
Blog on,
-CZ
11 Comments
Permalink
The heat of the weekend found me cowering on the couch next to the air conditioner with a bowl of Peppermint Ice Cream, and a handful of movies picked out by someone else, of which, King Kong seemed a reasonable time waster. I had refused to see King Kong in the theatres for two reasons: First it is a story about a giant ape. Second, I was concerned that it would be long, CG-laden, and primarily about a giant ape.
Like I said, I hate being right.
Not to say that King Kong wasn't exciting. No no, there was adventure-a-plenty, I assure you, but...
...have you Ever gotten Bored during a Monster Fight Scene? Well watch King Kong, and then you will. Over and over.
Here is a tip (and after watching LOTR, I Never thought I would have to give Tips to Peter Jackson) - just because you have access to a top notch CG department good does Not mean that every CG scene rendered needs to be in the movie.
It seems Peter Jackson's philosophy is 'screw the pacing, the fight scene / chase scene / bug scene / Naomi Watts closeup scene takes as long as it takes!' That's a great philosophy for your first sexual encounter, but not for movies. Well, not for Good movies anyways.
I lost count of how many people died trying to save Naomi Watts, but I gotta say, she ain't worth it. I also lost count of how many times she fell down in the movie, but that was far, far, far, far, far, far, far outnumered by the number of times she stared blankly towards the camera, trying to convey some kind of emotion through telekenesis and not through facial expressions. It never did work, but they tried. Oh, how they tried. Over and over and over they tried, and then they tried some more.
Well, to be fair, sometimes she looked to the *right* of the camera and sometimes she looked to the *left* of the camera, which was a nice attempt to break up the monotony. It didn't work, but it was a nice try.
I give King Kong a 3.5 out of 10. All in all, the movie that is too big for its britches. Cut the budget in half, cut the script in half, cut the running time in half, cut Naomi Watts in half, and replace her with an actress with the ability to convey emotion, and trade King Kong for Godzilla, and then you will have a far better movie.
Oh yes, the last line of the movie? I won't spoil it for you, and I'm guessing it's from the book, but it would have been a wise choice to remove that line from the movie. That line is so dumb, that removing it could have raised my review score one whole point.
Blog on,
-CZ
Labels: movie reviews
Tuesday, July 25, 2006
Movie Review - Pirates of the Caribbean Dead Mans Chest
I wanted to write a good review for the latest Disney Blockbuster With The Longest Movie Name Ever, but I found one that is better than I could ever write.
Who am I to argue with a ninja?
Blog on,
-CZ
4 Comments
Permalink
Who am I to argue with a ninja?
Blog on,
-CZ
Labels: Funny, movie reviews, Videos
Wednesday, June 28, 2006
The Vote Is: In
Several members of Team Chiaroscuro and I attended the "Best of the 48 hour film festival" last night. Like most awards ceremonies, most of the winners deserved what they got, and some did not. I was sad to hear that one of the best films was disqualified for using footage that was shot prior to the start of the contest. That is cheating, but I know of other teams who used ideas and plots that were developed prior to the start of the contest. The same kind of cheating, but more difficult to get caught at.
There will be those, let's call them 'Americans' for the lack of a better term, whose goal is to 'win' the contest - to get the vote or award, to get on the DVD no matter what, and cheating is OK as long as you don't get caught. Too bad really, because there are other festivals those people could go to, and they can take ten years to make their movie if they like, but the 48-Hour contest is really about accessing that spark of creativitiy and spontenaiety that gets washed out when processed too much - like the difference between raw strawberries and strawberry jelly.
I was glad to see that Central Services "Dangerous Proximity" won the Best Cinematography and Best Picture awards at the 48. They deserved it. Their movie was simply based around one funny and interesting idea, and that idea made the movie entertaining. Anyone else could have had the same idea, and with some reasonable lighting and editing skills come out with a similar movie. I certainly don't mean to say that Central Services are a bunch of hacks, they did a very pro job. I'm saying that same movie with average lighting, sound and acting still would have had my vote.
When you limit the resources of time and format and movie length, it makes it easier for a hobbyist to compete with professionals in this contest. You don't need to be a wizard at Premiere or Final Cut to make a respectable movie in 48 hours. I should know, because Team Chiaroscuro did it. The video will be posted to the web soon, check back here for the link.
It also makes me feel better that our movie was beat out by "Dangerous Proximity", the same way I wouldn't feel bad losing in Snooker to Graeme Dott.
Blog on,
-CZ
0 Comments
Permalink
There will be those, let's call them 'Americans' for the lack of a better term, whose goal is to 'win' the contest - to get the vote or award, to get on the DVD no matter what, and cheating is OK as long as you don't get caught. Too bad really, because there are other festivals those people could go to, and they can take ten years to make their movie if they like, but the 48-Hour contest is really about accessing that spark of creativitiy and spontenaiety that gets washed out when processed too much - like the difference between raw strawberries and strawberry jelly.
I was glad to see that Central Services "Dangerous Proximity" won the Best Cinematography and Best Picture awards at the 48. They deserved it. Their movie was simply based around one funny and interesting idea, and that idea made the movie entertaining. Anyone else could have had the same idea, and with some reasonable lighting and editing skills come out with a similar movie. I certainly don't mean to say that Central Services are a bunch of hacks, they did a very pro job. I'm saying that same movie with average lighting, sound and acting still would have had my vote.
When you limit the resources of time and format and movie length, it makes it easier for a hobbyist to compete with professionals in this contest. You don't need to be a wizard at Premiere or Final Cut to make a respectable movie in 48 hours. I should know, because Team Chiaroscuro did it. The video will be posted to the web soon, check back here for the link.
It also makes me feel better that our movie was beat out by "Dangerous Proximity", the same way I wouldn't feel bad losing in Snooker to Graeme Dott.
Blog on,
-CZ
Labels: indie movies, Minneapolis Event, movie reviews, Videos
Blog Feeds
Subscribe to this Blog by E-Mail
Zero Links
Jagged Links
Search
Blog Archives
- April 2006
- May 2006
- June 2006
- July 2006
- August 2006
- September 2006
- October 2006
- November 2006
- December 2006
- January 2007
- February 2007
- March 2007
- April 2007
- May 2007
- June 2007
- July 2007
- August 2007
- September 2007
- October 2007
- November 2007
- December 2007
- January 2008
- February 2008
- March 2008
- April 2008
- May 2008
- June 2008
- July 2008
- August 2008
- September 2008
- October 2008
- November 2008
- December 2008
- January 2009
