Instead of doing the eight movies in three days, we did the movies in five, and I don’t actually think that made much of a difference. You have to wonder, particularly around the fourth or fifth movie (usually toward the end of day 2) whether or not fatigue is weighing on your judgment.
Way back in 2006, when the very first Horror Fest was, and they had some advertising budget, the After Dark folks tried the angle of “horror movies TOO INTENSE for regular release”. This was two years after Saw had been released to general popularity, however, and none of the movies came anywhere near that level of intensity (to say nothing of gore).
Another first time outing for the revenge story The Final, though director Joey Stewart has a substantial assistant director credits. Writer Jason Kabolati has a few credits, too. And the cast is fairly experienced, too. I mention this for no reason in particular.
A group of six young adults rent a boat for a weekend to go out in the marshes. What could possibly go wrong?
If you wanted to put a label on what it is I dislike about “Usher” movies like Skjult, you could use “Dread” pretty accurately. Dread, of course, is not wanting to confront something, generally out of fear. For me, dread quickly turns to boredom and sleepiness. (Just get it out of the way already!)
We started our third day of the Horror Fest with the Norwegian flick, Hidden. One of my idiosyncratic movie genre labels is “Usher” (after Poe’s tale “The Fall of the House of Usher”, not the hippity-hoppity guy). In an “Usher” movie, it is clear that the main character(s) is(are) doomed from the opening scene from events that have occurred in the past. Whatever struggles seem to grant any kind of light or hope of escape are merely teases; there is, in fact, no plot movement whatsoever because the plot happened before scene 1.
This is another movie where the cast and crew were around. In fact, we kept seeing the director hanging around in the lobby while we killed time between movies. In a lot of ways, this movie is the antithesis of The Graves. The direction and editing is fantastic: It’s smart, funny, campy, sharp and pops.
If you’re a regular reader, then you’ve probably grasped that I don’t care particularly for trashing movies. There are a lot of reasons for that. It is fun to make fun of movies, of course, and I can certainly rail with the best of them about things I don’t like.
On the scale of unpromising horror premises, “college kids trapped in house by maniac” has got to be in the top…one. So, when Kill Theory starts with a maniac being released by a doctor and we cut to a bunch of college kids in a van on a way to the Rich Kid’s dad’s lake house, I was not optimistic.
I pondered last year how long the After Dark Horrorfest could go on, with so few people in the audience. This year, there are a total of four venues in all of California, and the closest one (by a margin of 50 miles) is the dreaded Beverly Center 13, located in that monstrous mall in downtown Beverly Hills.
Knox asked me which films I would recommend from previous After Dark festivals, and whether they were things you could actually view on (e.g.) Netflix. Last question first: Yes, they’re all get-able through Amazon.com and get aired on FearNet and sometimes the Sci-Fi channel, so I have to assume they’re available through Netflix as well.
I wouldn’t recommend watching any horror movie on a network that has commercials, with the exception of FearNet because FearNet only puts one commercial break in, early on. (They do the noise at the bottom of the screen, though, which is nasty.)
Recommending movies is a much harder process, because it’s highly personal (and doubly so for horror) and the experience tends to be different at home which affects some movies more than others.
But assuming you’re not a horror fanatic, there are a few recommendations I can make pretty comfortably.
Borderland is probably the most genuinely frightening film of the three festivals, not because it’s based on a true story (which is usually an excuse for lameness) but because it’s so very, very plausible. Americans down in Mexico end up crossing paths with a violent gang. Sean Astin plays a very creepy role. I remember being concerned that it was going to veer into “torture porn” but the horribleness is mostly kept at a very real level–that is, you know, in real life, we’re more rattled by things that we brush off in horror movies–and is still very effective. (UPDATE: My reviews at the time say it is, actually, torture porn-style violence. So, use caution.)
The Gravedancers is probably the most fun. It stars “haunted house” and goes “Poltergeist”, with more than a nod to “Scooby Doo”.
Rinne (Reincarnation)is probably my favorite movie of the three festivals, but it’s not for everybody. It’s a mystery, you have to be very attentive, and it breaks Blake’s law of movie reincarnation (which is that audiences reject using dramatically different actors for the same characters). But it “made sense” to me. (It reveals “the rules” and “follows the rules” without being predictable.) Apparently some people find it slow, though. Subtitled. Must be relatively immune from “they all look alike” syndrome.
I love the atmosphere in Unrest, which is powered almost entirely by the verisimilitude of the situation. The corpses are not just realistic, they’re real. The writer/director having been a med student gets the feel just right.
In an entirely separate way, I loved the “realism” of Mulberry Street,which comes from the setting and the truly excellent characterization. I get the idea that the writer/director pulled his friends out of the neighborhood and said “Here, be in my movie.” Which may be totally false–because they all do their lines excellently and without sounding stilted–but it feels that way. The movie runs out of steam when it goes into standard zombie/plague mode, sort of ironically, or this movie would be a horror classic.
I can’t really recommend The Abandonedbecause I didn’t like it. But I don’t like this kind of movie. No matter how well done, if I know the characters are doomed from the start and yet the movie is going to make them go through the motions of surviving, I get both bored and pissed off. But for whatever reason, this movie is the only one they show on pay cable so maybe it’s a good example of a kind of movie I really dislike.
In the horror-like-Buffy-the-Vampire-Slayer-is-horror category, there’s The Deaths of Ian Stone.This is one of the few films that had a real budget, like $14M or something. It shows. And while it’s darker than Buffy, it feels like it could be a pilot for a Buffy-like series.
Butterfly Effect: Revelationhas a similar feel. I mean, the whole premise isn’t far off from “Quantum Leap”, which always threatened to scramble Sam’s brains. They just do it in this one.
Out of the 24 films, then, I’d feel comfortable recommending six pretty strongly. Sturgeon’s Law and all that.
If you’re okay with campy low-budget type flicks, then I can add Tooth & Nail,Nightmare Manand Autopsy.The camp in T&N may be entirely accidental but director Kanefsky (Nightmare) knows the limits of his medium and knows a laugh is as good as a shriek–and Autopsy is so completely committed to the “funhouse” style, it’s unimaginable that they didn’t know exactly what they were doing.
So, those are my recommendations.
Except for Autopsy, there’s not really any heavy gore in any of them (and the gore in Autopsy is right on the line of horrific/comic). Oh, there’s a compound fracture in T&N, that’s always good for an “ew”, and the majority of Unrest features half-dissected corpses as props. (I’m trying to remember if there was a lot of gore in Borderland. If there is, I’ve blocked it out.)
For hardcore fans, most of the movies have something to recommend them. And for would-be filmmakers, these would have to be interesting if only to examine: a) how much can be done on so little; b) how easy it is to go off the rails.
But for entertainment, the six abovementioned are worth the 80-90 minutes.
In total: Eight movies, no monsters. You had two curses, one slasher, two sets of rednecks, one set of zombies, one mad doctor, and one set of doppelgangers. The zombies weren’t even really zombies–and their whole purpose and motivation was murky to say the least. (Were they eating people? Were they using them for interior design purposes?)
Other things not seen: Ghosts. Demons. Alternate realities. Haunted houses. Aliens. Vampires. Were-creatures.
Seven of the eight took the cheap ‘n’ easy horror movie-ending out. That is to say, in six of eight movies, everyone dies. In the seventh, the main character goes insane and the “monster” isn’t really dead.
There were very, very minimal effects this year. I missed having one film that really went over the top, like last year’s The Deaths of Ian Stone and the previous year’s Gravedancers. Even while Unearthed had a laughable CGI monster, nobody even tried this time. I guess in some ways that’s good.
Autopsy was ballsy with its effects, uber-cheap though they were. There are some simple rules for low-budget horror making that these guys don’t seem to know:
1. Don’t be boring.
2. Don’t be forgettable.
I’m assuming they fall into #1 by mistake. I’m sure they know not to be boring but miscalculate. But they don’t seem to get how critical #2 is–even at the expense of your movie getting a laugh that you didn’t want or seeming campy.
Ultimately, it’s the imagery of the horror movie that makes it stick in the mind and makes you want to watch it again. It’s why most of Roger Corman’s movies–even the good ones–don’t tend to get a lot of mention. It’s why the Saw movies get attention when much gorier movies don’t.
The first ADHF, for example, had the imagery of the violent poltergeist in Gravedancers and the authentic “corpse tank” in Unrest, and the second one had the world-shifting effects of Ian Stone, the orange-ish hot-n-sweaty cast to all of Mulberry Street and even a floating, demonically possessed Blythe Metz in Nightmare Man.
The only flick that really brought the funk this time was Autopsy. Ridiculously creepy hospital lighting, naked scary guy unemboweling, and an organ mobile. Nothing else came close. Butterfly Effect was the best movie but its best imagery was in the sex scene.
One scene–the closing scene–is what turned Friday the 13th from just another Halloween knock-off to a mega-franchise. I sort of assume that that’s why so many filmmakers seem eager to trash their entire film for a good “twist”–but they’re doing it wrong. The twists aren’t good. And note that Halloween’s best imagery is not at the end, but in the middle. Frankenstein has a cool closing image–but it’s the lab scenes that make it. Psycho’s shower scene, Invasion of the Body Snatcher’s (’50s) chase scenes, Invasion of the Body Snatchers (’70s) funky dog-with-human-head, the crab-walk in the Exorcist, Alien’s face-huggin’, chest-‘splodin, inner-mouth extendin’…
You get the idea.
One of my all-time favorite horrors is a mess called Dead People. It was a disastrous shoot, I’m told and the film was butchered to incomprehensibility, but there are some scenes in it that are unforgettable: a supermarket where normal looking people are feeding directly out of the butcher’s display, a movie theater where the two normal people sit down and then (from the screen’s POV) you see a bunch of other people file in who are all clearly “wrong”, etc. (They’re restoring the movie now; I can’t wait to see the new print.)
But it’s that kind of thing that keeps the horror movie fan going back.
We ran into a couple of women today that recognized us from last year. They expressed a concern as to whether there’d be a fourth horror fest. That’s always been my concern, since the theaters are far from packed. (We never saw more than 20 people.) This year there was no advertising that I saw.
Worst of all, though, I’d have a hard time recommending it to someone else. It’s a crap-shoot. Though the movies are at least professionally done for the most part (and even cheap ones look better these days and have way better acting), this year I’d only comfortably recommend two at all. (Last year I could recommend seven of the eight to the right people.)
Them’s not good odds.
I’ll keep going if they keep having ’em, though. There are lots of things I like about them:
First, you don’t need a big budget to make a good film (horror or otherwise). Bug is estimated at $4M on IMDB, for example. A lot of these guys are working in that range–though Nightmare Man’s total budget was about $250K and Mulberry Street was closer to $50K, I’m told. Great new things can come out of low budget flicks.
Second, you get to see who the working actors are. Richard Jenkins may get an Oscar this year for The Visitor, but he’s still working it in Broken, as is Lena Heady. Robert Patrick and Jenette Goldstein get to ham it up in Autopsy. This works the other way, too: Maybe Rachel Miner and Rider Strong never make it out of the B-movie ghetto, but that doesn’t make them less enjoyable to watch. (Hell, look at Bruce Campbell, who’s been stuck there going on 30 years.)
Third, they’re a good antidote to “important”, “arty”, award-bait flicks: The filmamkers can’t really indulge themselves–no budget–and their big goal is to hold you for the entire film, so they aren’t going to be stretching out past 90 minutes. (As Roger Corman famously said, “Monster’s dead, movie’s over.”) Not to say that some of the movies don’t have pretensions, but there are distinct limits.
Just for your edification, I’ve listed below the films shown in the three After Dark Horror Festivals. I’ll link them up to my reviews later. For now I must sleep. And dream.
Year 1: Dark Ride, Gravedancers, Unrest, Rinne (Reincarnation), The Abandoned, Penny Dreadful, the Hamiltons, Wicked Little Things
Year 2: Unearthed, The Deaths of Ian Stone, Borderland, Lake Dead, Mulberry Street, Tooth and Nail, Nightmare Man, Crazy Eights
Year 3: From Within, Butterfly Effect, Dying Breed, Slaughter, Perkins 14, Autopsy, Broken, Voices
Theme of the day: Mirrors. Meh. It has been done. A lot.
Look, I love Lena Heady. She’s hot and she can act. But she’s not in her late 20s. In fact, part of the reason she is so hot is that her skin looks lived in. (Seriously, the whole botox thing evokes images of embalming.) So, you know, if there’s no plot reason she can’t be in her 30s, change the character to be in her 30s.
Oh, she is skinny though. It’s funny to me that actresses are required to be super-thin to look good on film, and yet all they have to do to fit in a horror film is be lit to show the bones that must absolutely be visible for their non-horror work.
One last word on Lena: Nobody could’ve carried Broken. Not Dame Judy freakin’ Dench. Not Anthony Hopkins. Not Zombie Jimmy Stewart. The movie was fundamentally, well, broken.
The Koreans are a beautiful people. This limits their ability to be scary.
Hey, cool: Korean moviemakers turn a hot chick into a cold braniac by putting a pair of fairly sexy glasses on her, just like everyone else.
Speaking of Koreans, they’re pretty lax when it comes to people trying to kill other people. The police never seem to get involved. One girl gets a transfer to another school.
Apparently every low-budget horror filmmaker in the world has one of those cranes that allows you to raise up and look down on a shot. Well, except for these two guys. These seemed to be the only movies that didn’t use that shot.
Eight movies is a lot for three days. In the previous years, the really dull films came on the first or second day, which helped. Broken didn’t get any boost from making 90 minutes seem like two years when it was the seventh film we saw.
You can do “atmosphere” and you can do “tension” but you’d better bring ‘em if you’re not going to have some real scares through big chunks of your movie. When you think about it, Kubrick was the king of this stuff–and a lot of people find him insufferably boring.
I was pleased when the credits started rolling and this turned out to be a Korean film. ADHF #2 didn’t have any foreign films, and were it me, I’d be trying to push the foreign stuff, since you have the chance of a high quality film that can’t get access just because it’s subtitled. Also, my favorite film of ADHF #1 was the Takashi Shimizu (of The Grudge–trust me, he’s better in Japanese) film Rinne.
This film is actually similar in some ways to The Grudge, in the sense that there’s a curse causing people to act out their jealousies by killing their rivals. Call it The Blame.
The problem with all of these abstract-concept-comes-to-life films–and other killer ghost story movies like The Ring or One Missed Call–is that without defining some clear parameter for your boogen to operate in, you give the game away that you’re just making it up as you go and ending the movie in the 6th reel.
Really, it’s vital for a horror movie to have rules. (Or any fantasy film.) Without it, you’re not performing the “trick” of art that your audience wants.
For example, The Ring is powered by the idea that the ghost can be stopped by doing something for it. That gives the characters a task to undertake that can help them avoid their fate. Then, when the truth is revealed, this gives them another, different task. This is good.
Another good example can be found in The Sixth Sense, even though the characters and the audience are not ever made explicitly aware of the rules. In fact, it can be fun to go back and look at all the clues (the colors, the effects, etc.) that indicate when ghosts are around.
Without rules, the audience feels cheated, which is unfortuantely what happens here. I’m not going to rag on this movie much because it wasn’t boring, which is the absolute worst crime for a horror film (or perhaps any film, although being unfunny may be even worse).
Basically, anyone can turn on you at any time. There’s no rhyme or reason to it. Worst of all, one of the characters admonishes that you can’t even trust yourself. Well, that’s like the deus ex machina of any horror story, since you can always end it by having the character do soemthing unintended by fooling with their perception. That can done well, but it’s very tricky. (See Fight Club for a good example–but once again there are rules.)
The end tries to make us believe that, somehow, the events of the film are set into action by the characters, as if they had control over it all along, but that just feels like a big cheat. There’s no reason for it and no control.
So it wasn’t the worst we saw, but it was disappointing. It should have worked: The whole concept of your family and friends having the urge to kill you–which you know they all do, or is that just me?–could’ve made a tight, paranoid film like Bug.
Instead, the film is unfocused, having the lead meander about as person after person harms or kills themselves trying to kill her.
Then the movie tags on an epilogue which would’ve perhaps helped the film hang together had it been filmed with the lead and stuck at the beginning of the movie, but just ends up feeling like a cheat.
Kind of a disappointing ending to the whole festival, which itself was kind of disappointing.
Doppelgangers were big for a brief while in the ‘70s, but they’ve had a resurgence of late because of Geoul sokeuro (remade as Mirrors). And, actually, if I’m not mistaken, the evil doppelganger is a common “effect” in Asian horror, if not as an entire plot. (That is to say, I think there are a lot of Asian horror movies where a person sees an evil version of someone else.)
This was actually our “big name” movie, even more so than the mad doctor flick Autopsy, which we saw yesterday. This one featured the hot (in more ways than one) Lena Heady (of 300 and “The Sarah Connor Chronicles”) and Richard Jenkins (who should get an Oscar nom for The Visitor but it’s not looking good).
And, essentially, what we have here is Invasion of the Body Snatchers.
It’s so, so boring.
I mean, okay, it was obvious to us within the first few minutes what was going on, but you know, I can watch Invasion over and over again, even though I know exactly what’s happening. The ’50s one or the ’70s remake, even. (I draw the line at the two latest ones, though.)
This has the similar problem as Slaughter in that they expect atmosphere to carry them through the uneventful parts, and it just plain doesn’t. Remember that all eight movies are under 90 minutes–this one was really short, they say 88 minutes but I’m thinking under 85 if you don’t count the credits.
But it seems so much longer.
You’re waiting for something to happen. And waiting, and waiting. There are two or three good chilling moments, but that works out to nearly a half-an-hour of nothing in-between them–or it would, if they were spread out, which they’re not. They all come at right around the same point.
And the reveal is tortuously slow.
Despite the good production qualities and acting, this would be my pick for worst of fest.
OK, let me see if I can think of something else to say about it. Well, it doesn’t make a whole lot of sense, really. Which was something of a trend this year: Directors and writers so obsessed with having a “twist”, they make their whole movie nonsense–and then the twist is actually “generic horror ending #4”.
I don’t find windows particularly menacing, I’ve discovered. I don’t find the London skyline very menacing, though I do wonder what’s up with the giant penis building and the Brobdingnagian Ferris wheel. Dripping water doesn’t threaten me. Whatever technology they have that allows them to simulate (or just super slow down) car collisions is cool, but not really very interesting after the 14th or 15th time you’ve seen it.
Seriously, there’s a car collision which is the focal point of this movie, but the actual purpose it plays in the story is murky. That is, it hides behavior from the main character that is part of the Big Reveal, but since the events of the Big Reveal occur before the collision, there’s no real reason for the events prior to the Big Reveal to have occurred at all.
The ultimate problem, though, is that while the menace in Body Snatchers comes from an increasing awareness of the intent of the invaders and the scope of their plan, at the end of this movie, you don’t know anything about the doppelgangers. Why are they doing this? Are they just evil? If so, how is the premise of the movie even possible?
As I said, worst in show.
Another in the generically named series, this was probably our favorite movie of the day. It’s also misnamed: There are, in fact, no autopsies. This reminds me most, I suppose, of Horror Hospital, from the mid-70s.
A bunch of college-age kids get into a car accident and are taken to a hospital (in New Orleans? Katrina is mentioned!) whereupon they one-by-one get to “see the doctor”.
This is a mad-doctor-tries-to-save-his-wife movie, in the vein of The Brain That Wouldn’t Die, e.g. It’s really kind of old school. And it helps that the mad doctor is none other than the T-1000 himself, Robert Patrick.
And, speaking of James Cameron alumni, in the Nurse Ratched role, we have none other than Jenette Goldstein (Sgt. Vazquez in Aliens, John Connor’s foster mother in Terminator 2), looking more than a bit frumpy if not downright frowzy.
This is the movie equivalent of a fun-house ride. There are a lot of set-ups for scares, and the scares and done knowingly, in such a way that you’re set up for one thing but get a completely different surprise. These don’t always make sense but, seriously, why should you care?
This is also the first movie that wasn’t unrelentingly grim. There are some good, deliberate laughs in the movie. And this movie gets the “best image” award for the fest (so far), involving a great deal of let’s say “floating viscera”.
It’s a little bit campy and a lot creative. A fun, fast-moving watch!
Basically, our movie features the interesting face of Patrick O’Kane as Dwayne Hopper, a cop who’s been brooding over the loss of his boy since his abduction 10 years previously. He’s jeopardized his job and is on the verge of losing his family. When we meet him, he’s about filling in for a friend on the night shift at the precinct.
The residents that night include a “usual” (who amusingly turns out to be an eco-terrorist) and a guy named Roland Perkins (portrayed by excellent heavy Richard Brake, who played Joe Chill in Batman Begins) who tried to flee a traffic stop. As the night progresses, Dwayne becomes more and more convinced that Perkins is the serial abducter who kidnapped 14 kids ten years ago.
The title is, of course, the giveaway there.
So, this part of the movie works. A little mystery, some nice interaction between O’Kane and Brake.
The next part of the movie involves the 14 Perkins “kids” but is, essentially, a zombie movie. O’Kane powers this, as he becomes determined to rescue his daughter (the gorgeous Shayla Beesley) and his wayward wife (Mihaela Mihut). All three do a good job here and the build-up to the final act is pretty good.
At last, they decide to barricade up in the police station. A logical choice on paper, this is where the movie falls apart. After risking life and limb to get to the police station, they move around dangerously and ultimately decide they need to leave. Rather than, say, holing up in a cell until at least the morning.
This act only has the vestiges of the family dynamic from the second act, and Dwayne’s hope that he can somehow connect again with his long-lost son.
The ending goes totally obvious and cliché, unfortunately.
Director Craig Singer’s last appearance at the fest was at the helm of #1’s Dark Ride, which suffered from a similar problem: The first third of the movie is funny, referential (to the slasher genre), and fast-moving. When they finally get to the amusement park, it’s as if amnesia set in, and they were unaware anyone had ever directed a slasher-in-a-funhouse flick.
So, hey, you know, this is better.
Inspired by true events. Few words strike fear into my heart than those. Usually it’s a poor substitute for a well-plotted movie with a lot of really awful stuff that’s based on nothing but the film maker’s attempt to pander to the lowest common denominator.
The generically named Slaughter claims to be so inspired. How generic is the name? Well, I thought this Slaughter was the one where a bunch of actors find themselves in a Japanese snuff film. When, in fact, this is the Slaughter where a woman on the run from an abusive boyfriend finds herself on a farm populated by menacing rednecks.
The Boy opined that he would like to see rednecks be cast as the heroes once.
The “true events” may be a 100 year old story where a farm family lured city folk to their doom to steal their stuff and then fed them to their pigs. (I think I saw that on HBO’s “Autopsy”. ) That sort of fits, though very loosely.
Anyway, the story as it’s told here is that Faith (Amy Shiels) is fleeing her abusive boyfriend, and ends up befriending Lola (Lucy Holt) and staying with her at the family farm. The first half of the film abounds with menace: Men in clubs, the old boyfriends, the men at the farm–hey, they don’t call it menace for nothing.
This film’s biggest problem is that the menace is dull, virtually Lifetime movie-of-the-week girl stuff about Faith and Amy’s horrible upbringings. This does come in to play later, but that doesn’t actually make it any less slow.
When the action gets going, the movie picks up tremendously. It veers into a slightly unexpected territory and plays out in slightly unexpected ways. It only goes off the rails at the end–which, unfortunately, is the by-word for this festival’s movies. (Four, maybe five, depending on how you reckon it, out of the six movies so far have pretty much gone the “everyone dies” route which is just a cheap out.)
The only other thing I’d add, maybe weirdly, is that the actresses seemed to old for their parts. It’s not something I notice, usually, but Faith is between 18-21 and Amy is under 18. This is important to the plot, but I would’ve guessed both girls were in their mid-20s.
Verdict: The action parts are better than the scare parts.
Ooh, I hope they’re not all super-vanilla type horrors. I like the different ones, even if they’re not great. Last year’s Mulberry Street was wonderfully atmospheric in the relatively unused horror location of Brooklyn. (Or is it the Bronx? I forget.)
Last year’s theme? Leggy brunettes in their underwear.
This year’s theme? Bear traps used on humans.
I prefer the brunettes. Sure, it’s cliché, but so is the bear trap thing.
Including us, 4-5 people in the theater in toto for the 6PM show. The 2pm one had 8-10. How can they afford this?
The IMDB times are wrong. Also, they start the movies early! They did this last year, too.
Three movies and no Rider Strong. I hope he’s feeling well.
Inbred hillbilly cannibals menace city folk.
Sure, we’ve seen it before. But have we seen it in Tasmania? I think not! (Joe Bob Briggs is going to sue me for stealing his shtick.)
Leigh Whannel is best known as the writer of the first three “Saw” movies and producer of the whole series. But before that, he was an actor, as he is here, in this rather by-the-numbers hillbilly horror flick.
Seems his movie-girlfriend is on the hunt for a rare Tasmanian beastie (which I believe they have found but don’t disclose the location of in real life) and also for answers as to her sister’s drowning eight years previous. He invites jerky buddy along for the trip and buddy brings along girlfriend, so that we have plenty of potential victims.
Before you know it, they’ve pulled up in a small “town” in out-of-cell-tower-range territory and are being menaced by the locals. Although the locals actually seemed pretty nice to me. Maybe it’s just the Aussie accent.
Actually, tThe accents are somewhat Irish which is confusing to me since I didn’t know if they were Aussies trying to do Irish accents or if some Aussies actually have Irish-ish accents.
Then they’re 10 miles into the out–well, not the Outback because it’s Tasmania, but whatever the Tasmanian equivalent is–and walking around trying not to fall into mineshafts.
The jerky guy–who’s really very jerky–brandishes a crossbow, which upsets the lead, but I was thinking if it were me, everyone would have a pistol, a rifle, a knife and possibly some small explosives (or optional automatic weaponry).
There’s not much to write here because it’s mostly pretty standard, with a little twist at the climax which sort of gets untwisted at the end, which gives us a kind of twist-ish stinger. Except it wasn’t surprising in the least. It was sort of like, “Oh, yeah. I guess that makes sense. Or something like it.”
Not horrible, and less cliché-driving than From Within (which was really merciless as far as the stereotyping goes), still a lot less than I was hoping for.
Butterfly was definitely the winner of day 1.
I didn’t see the first Butterfly Effect due to my severe allergies to Ashton Kutcher. (I don’t know why. I barely know who the guy is. I’m probably just pissed he wouldn’t do a sequel to Dude! Where’s My Car?) So I don’t know what, if anything, this has to do with the previous two movies.
I didn’t see the second installment because I blinked.
The basic premise is that the lead character can change the past by–em–well, he time travels by sitting in a bathtub fill of ice in the dark. I gather that this is given a more plausible treatment in the first film but in this one we don’t waste any time justifying it. (In fact, I think they get around it by saying he doesn’t actually time travel.)
Look, the guy can time travel, let it go already. Think of it as “Quantum Leap” with gore and a gratuitous sex scene.
When the movie opens, he’s doing what he does for the cops: Basically, he travels back in time to the scenes of crimes and IDs the perps. This falls within the confines of “the rules”, the things you can and can’t do without frying your mind or unleashing the dreaded butterfly effect.
The butterfly effect, of course, is when you make a change, however minor, to the timestream. The ripple effects from that cause massive changes in history, and in the case of this movie, the time-traveler ends up with a mashed-up memory of both timelines. (I think. It’s a little hard to tell what the main character knows and doesn’t know.)
So, the trouble begins when a childhood friend–the sister of his murdered girlfriend, in fact–exhorts him to use his talent (nobody knows the icy bath thing, they just know he knows stuff) to clear a wrongly accused man about to be put to death and to find the real killer.
But going back to your own life causes all kinds of problems and God help you if you change your own timeline.
You can see where this is going, can’t you?
Every time our hero goes back in time to right something, he wakes up in a new present with new people dead and his own life worse off than before. Before you know it, he’s created a serial killer and gone from taking care of his shut-in sister (whom he saved in a previous incident but at the cost of his parents dying) to being taken care of her.
The sister, by the way, is played by Rachel Miner, who I always figure should be the daughter of horror-meister Steve Miner, but doesn’t appear to be. Ms. Miner has the distinction of being the only actress I know of who has appeared in all three Horrorfests: In #1, she was the eponymous Penny Dreadful and in #2, she was in the much enjoyed Tooth and Nail.
The Boy liked this one a lot, as did I. Chris Carmack in the lead has to play an increasingly confused and unstable character, and you do feel sorry for him even if you wonder how smart he is to keep going back trying to fix stuff.
The aforementioned gratuitous sex scene is pretty funny, just because it goes on way longer than necessary, only to end with a “I guess I’m just not in the mood.”
Anyway, this film does follow a nice dramatic arc, pulls you in, gives a sense of real danger, and then a pretty satisfying climax and denouement. There is a certain preposterousness to it, even accepting the time-travel stuff. The plot hinges on a looseness in “the rules” that isn’t really explained or justified, and the ending is a little too neat (though with an obligatory “…or is it?” feel).
But, hey, not complaining. It was different enough and fun enough.
A curse afflicts members of a small town, causing them to “commit suicide”. Crazy Christian community members decide to blame the local witches.
Sure, we’ve seen it before, but have we seen it…uh…have we seen it…have we seen it…
OK, yeah, we’ve seen it. There’s nothing really original about this film. The old “witch’s curse” thing hasn’t really been big since the ‘70s, but they’ve sauced it up a bit with Japanese-style horror effects. Actually, come to think of it, that part is highly reminiscent of Mirrors.
The boy pronounced it “run of the mill”. At the same time, we both agreed it wasn’t boring. One reason is that it’s mercifully short. Another reason is that the general production quality is good: Good cinematography, good acting, lighting, sound, etc.
But it is relentlessly clichéd: Screenwriter Brad Keene wrote one of my favorite films of the first After Dark Horrorfest, Gravedancers. It was also rife with clichés but it sort of takes them to the wall, with the movie getting progressively more outrageous. It was a light, sorta funny-scary that moved from “haunted house” to “Frighteners”-style.
This one starts as standard coven ‘n’ curse and ends that way, too, though I guess you might give the ending a few points for not totally Scooby-Dooing out. It has a kind of a “Twilight” vibe, too, with the Christian girl liking the, uh, Witch boy.
Curiously, IMDB lists this as having a planned sequel for 2010.
There’s a peculiar problem with this sort of film: It’s almost necessary (apparently) for the Christians to be clueless and powerless against the real witchy, and to show them as narrow-minded bigots. At the same time, they sorta have to be right. So we’re confronted with at least one character who has to be both sympathetic and murderous.
The movie could’ve been better without that constraint. If there’s a plot more stale than “small town narrow-minded Christians go wrong” I am not aware of it.
I actually enjoyed this more than the first film last year (Unearthed) which, while beautifully produced, was really dull.
The last movie we saw was probably the biggest budget flick. Not for any special effects but for name actors.
Frank Whaley, Traci Lords, Gabrielle Anwar and Dina Meyer star with George Newborn and co-writer Dan DeLuca as grownups who (as kids) were institutionalized together as part of a behavioral experiment (and such things did happen, although this is not based on any particular incident as far as is detectable). They meet at the funeral of one of their friends and relive aspects of the past as the memories return.
So, sort of a The Big Chill with ghosts.
Last year, you may recall, I gave up on the fest with The Abandoned, which is a genre of film I just don’t care for. This movie actually falls in to the same genre—as becomes apparent when the six travelers drive past the same house over and over again—but this wasn’t so off-putting.
The good parts of this film include the acting, the setting, and the back-story. Well, sort of on the whole back-story thing. The problem with this movie is that it never decides what it wants to be.
Tantalizing things are hinted at. Nothing is ever truly settled upon. I suppose this could work. But here it just leaves questions without any strong motivation to pursue the answers to.
Obviously, these characters know each other and know that they know each other. But they don’t know that they were institutionalized. Or maybe they do, but they don’t know for how long. Or what happened while they were there. They’ve committed some kind of terrible crime; but in actual fact what is finally described sounds more like an accident of childish ignorance.
There’s an implication that they lack the capacity for guilt, and so are sociopathic, yet nothing at all about their characters suggests anything extraordinary about their emotional state (under the circumstances).
The stinger seems to be a pointless flashback. But it might be suggesting that none of what we’ve seen actually happened.
The characters are being tormented by a ghost. Or they’re doing it themselves.
Here’s the thing: The frisson in horror comes from a re-adjustment of perspective. Think of the marvellously chilling scene in Misery where James Caan discovers how tiny Kathy Bates really is. Think of the aftermath of the Alien bursting out of John Hurt’s chest and the realization that everything has changed forever—and things aren’t going to be okay.
I’m avoiding spoilers here, so I won’t detail The Sixth Sense, The Others, and similar films where the chilling parts were often twists in the story line. The only way it works, however, is to take an unclear or incorrect audience perspective and throw it into contrast by illuminating something previously unknown.
In other words, we have to see how small Kathy Bates is in order to throw our view of her as a psychopath into contrast. We have to see the hulking killer Malcolm and understand his relationship to the vulnerable hooker Paris in order to make everything come together in Identity.
If we have no clear idea what’s going on and are presented with imagery that suggests yet another unclear idea, we get no frisson. And that, in a nutshell, is what’s missing from this potentially classic film.
The home stretch of our festival experience began with Rolfe Kanefsky’s Nightmare Man, probably the lowest budget feature after Mulberry Street. Curiously enough, the effects used on Mulberry Street allowed me to watch the whole thing without thinking, “Wow, this was shot on video.” (And Mulberry was even shot on mini-DV, which I understand is even crappier than regular video.)
The outdoor day shots, especially the tracking shots, absolutely scream “shot on video”, which definitely kicks in some prejudices. (Think “Spanish Soap Opera”.) Once the night rolls in, though, the camerawork is nice enough to distract from the cheapness.
Anyway, the story concerns the emotionally fragile Ellen (Blythe Metz) whose dim-witted husband William (Luciano Szafir) is having her committed, as she is constantly haunted by nightmares. (I don’t think you can actually commit someone for having nightmares, no matter how real, or even outright schizophrenia unless you can prove a danger to themselves or others, but roll with it.) Oh, and I guess William isn’t really dim-witted, but he really seems like it.
Actually, all the men in the movie seem dim-witted, when you get down to it, even “Night Court”’s Richard Moll, who has a small role as a cop.
Kanefsky does a lot here with his budget. The story moves along with the action, giving us a bit more than the usual “10 Little Indians” plot, and he’s not afraid to exploit comic moments when they arise. This is smart, the audience is going to do it unless you do it for them—as in Tooth & Nail—and the movie ends up feeling like it’s still under his control, when the big reveal happens in the third act.
We happened to see Rolfe and Esther Goodstein in the lobby on Friday handing out autographs for this movie and she was pushing the surprising twists and turns at the end. I’m sorry to say that I knew more-or-less exactly what was going to happen from the opening scene of the movie, sans a few details that didn’t fill in until Tiffany Shepis showed up in the second act
I’m not good at that sort of thing, really. I didn’t see The Sixth Sense coming, for example. (But all subsequent M. Night Shyamalan movies have been devoid of surprise for me because I know how he thinks now.) But really, there was only one way for the story to go.
The key thing is that you have fun getting there.
Veteran Tiffany Shepis is as believable as any of the other 90lb-5’3” ass-kicking chicks we saw over the weekend but I’d give a special nod to relative newcomer Blythe Metz. She never gets to Brinke Stevens level crazy—it’s not really that kind of film—but you feel like she could.
The only real negative on this film for me was the stinger. The final battle makes everything as plain as need be as to what’s going to happen after the credits roll. The subsequent scene gilds the lily.
Although I’ve never read anything that mentions it, I think it’s apparent that the Evil Dead series was a big influence on Kanefsky. There are definitely worse influences to have.
I love a good post-Apocalyptic thriller. It’s too bad one’s never been made. No, no, there are a few—very few—classics of the genre, but mostly they’re quite bad. And perhaps worse than just badness, they’re stupid. Take the Triple A title Children of Men: It posited all kinds of horrors that stemmed from women not being able to get pregnant, and missed the obvious ramifications of such a situation. (For example, if youth is exceedingly rare, it would also become exceedingly valuable; the idea that there would be youth running around unemployed seemed far-fetched.)
No, it’s really best if the whole reasons behind the apocalypse are ill-defined and not much discussed.
Tooth and Nail brings the stupid with its theory of apocalypse being “we run out of gas”. And the world collapses so quickly and thoroughly, there’s no time to adapt to coal, nuclear, natural gas, or whatever. Why? Because everyone floods south to warmer climates and wars ensue. As we all know from history lessons, prior to the refining of oil, everyone had to live in temperate zones.
Despite the apparent amnesia regarding “fire”—something that might have been handy with a bunch of people running around Philadelphia in light clothing—the heroes of our film seem to have acquired virtually no survival skills in their two or three years in the apocalypse.
I’m gonna keep ripping on this movie for a while longer, so you might be surprised to know that I did enjoy it quite a bit. But make no mistake, it’s dumb enough to have been a Michael Bay film.
And it really served no purpose to make this a post-apocalyptic thriller, except as a premise for locking up a bunch of college kids in a hospital so that a bunch of cannibals could come after them. Surely they could have thought of something else. Even the setting was dumb, though: Anyone who’s ever been in a large, modern hospital could tell you that six people could hide for weeks without being found by a dozen or so people searching for them.
In the dark.
So, the premise of the movie is that Ford (Rider Strong again!), Viper (Michael Kelly) and Dakota (Nicole DuPort) are out scavenging one day when they come across an injured girl, Neon (Rachel Miner). They bring her back to the hospital, where Professor Darwin (Robert Carradine) sets her to work fixing the water purifiers.
‘cause, you know, there’s a real shortage of water in Philly. Or maybe running out of gas ruined the water, even though everyone has moved south.
This causes stress because Viper (Michael Kelly) doesn’t trust Neon and wants to spend time fixing on the barriers instead of the damn water purifiers like the Professor wants. We never see “the barriers” by the way. When Michael Madsen and Vinnie Jones, and their band of cannibalistic freaks invades the hospital, they walk in through one of the “dozen” entrances to the hospital.
Because, you know, despite civilization collapsing into violence, you wouldn’t worry about finding a defensible position to settle down in.
You also would be sure to let everyone follow their whims as far as relationships, even if it meant two of your young men were without women and therefore ties to your group. (Darwin is hooked up with Dakota, Torino is hooked up with Ford, and Viper and Yukon are celibate because Victoria is picky enough to make good on that “last man on earth” threat.)
You may have noticed that while our crew hasn’t picked up any worthwhile skills, nor done anything but sit around contemplating the future, they have found the time to rename themselves after automobiles.
Things go bad when Neon fesses up that she was fleeing a bunch of cannibals who will now be coming after Darwin’s gang. Needless to say, our crew acts like an apocalypse-hardened team who is used to defending themselves against any and all attacks.
Ha. Just kidding. They act like a bunch of pampered college kids who don’t know how to fight, strategize or set traps.
I should probably point out that if you love uber-nerd Robert Carradine and tough guy Michael Madsen like I do, you will want to keep in mind that, generally, the big name on a low-budget horror flick works for a couple of days. The star gets quick cash and the movie gets the name on the box. (I hope that’s not too big a spoiler.) Interestingly, Madsen is one of the producers of the film.
The movie actually gets increasingly preposterous. At one point, one of the characters suffers a compound fracture. No problem, right? These guys have been living in a hospital for 2-3 years, they’ve probably been studying first-aid, bandaging and splinting techniques, even minor surgery. They have all the supplies organized; that’s the smart part of using the hospital, right?
No, they never bother with any of that. This leads to a whole bunch of giggling in the audience whenever a medical matter comes up.
I could go on like this. Really. For days. As I said, nobody does post-apocalyptic stuff right. It takes too much thought. We’re all way too comfortable to think through what life would be like without society to take care of us.
The upshot, though, is that if you’re a master at suspending disbelief, this is a fun little movie. Carradine and Madsen’s brief performances are what you’d expect, and Vinne Jones (X-Men 3’s Juggernaut) is over the top. Rider Strong turns in a typically good performance, and I thought Alexandra Barreto and Michael Kelly were fairly believable characters in a context where little was believable.
One thing that makes the movie work is that it moves. Not to draw ridiculously high comparisons, but Road Warrior is not really less absurd than this film, but it also moves. That’s how you keep people from questioning the absurdities. (Where the hell do they get their tires from in that movie?)
The other thing that makes it work is the interplay between Rachel Miner and Nicole DuPort. Not unlike Emmanuelle Vaugier in Unearthed, neither actress looks particularly plausible as the strong-headed tough-minded leader in a crisis situation. Miner’s eyebrows are exquisitely sculpted and her skin flawless while Nicole DuPort’s hair looks salon styled whether she’s just set a bone or painted herself with half-camouflage/half-tiger face paint.
I guess you could say the film was thought-provoking, since I’ve been rambling about it for so long, but really, you shouldn’t watch this film with any sort of pretensions. There’s a review on IMDB talking about its Nietzsche-ian undertones, for example, and I think that’s probably setting the bar a little high.
But some folks would say that Children of Men was thought-provoking, where I would say a speculative fiction movie needs to make sense on its own terms before it can actually provoke thought about real life.
“By the numbers” was probably the watchword for Day 2. Our second film, Mulberry Street, was a by-the-numbers modern zombie flick, only instead of zombies/ghouls, we have wererats.
But that description doesn’t really do this film justice. It excels in some ways and falls down in some others. First of all, this film is New York. Lower East Side, Bowery-type New York City. I’m no expert on the city, but it felt completely authentic to me.
The characters are drawn wonderfully, too. Co-writer Nick Damici plays ex-boxer Clutch, single father to war vet, the striking Kim Blair. The feminine touch in the parenting done by Coco (Ron Brice) a gay black man with feelings for Clutch, and no hidden resentment toward aging beauty queen Kay (Bo Corre). We have a cranky superintendent, a Vietnam war vet, an Anzio(!) war vet, and just buckets of local character.
This stuff is mostly lightly touched upon as the story unfolds of Manhattanites being infected by rats with a disease that turns them into flesh-hungry were-rats. That’s the good.
It’s so clearly New York, that the introduction in the middle of a long montage accompanied by a blaring folksy tribute to New York makes you want to say, “OK! We get it! It’s New York! It’s weird!”
But the thing that really sinks this film is its lack of focus. It’s sort of 28 Days Later in the Bowery. The rat-people are killing people for food, but in the worst tradition of the zombie flick, they’re also turning them into rat people, and only the needs of the plot determine who gets what treatment.
It’s really a shame, too. This is a movie you just want to be better. Apparently, it was made on $60,000, but I didn’t actually see that as it’s weakness. In fact, the video is made deliberately grainy and cheap looking to considerable effect.
It just needed a tighter plot.
We closed the first night with one of my least favorite genres: The crazy cult coming to cill, er, kill you genre. These were big in the ‘70s and were usually unpleasant affairs, both predictable and unsatisfying. They also tended to feature, as a “twist”, an actual appearance by Satan or some other demon at the end.
So I sat down to this one—which had a dismal 3.8 rating on IMDB—with more than a little trepidation. And the beginning is grotesque, probably the goriest thing we saw all weekend. Yet the movie holds together by being dedicated in its realism and tightly focused. (It claims to be “based on true events”.)
Brian Presley, Jeff Muxworthy and Rider Strong play three post-grads on a “last fling” to Mexico who fall afoul of a Santeria cult looking for, em, emotive contributors to their black magic. The cast is rounded out with excellent performances by Sean Astin (in an almost Dennis Hopper-ish role), and Mexican actors Damian Alcazar and the gorgeous Martha Higareda.
The cultists are menacing and arrogant, with my favorite being Marco Bacuzzi, who reminds very strongly of the great Michael Berryman. And yet, there’s no cheating: The director doesn’t try to straddle the line convincing you these guys are supernatural; he gives you the facts, and dares you to believe them.
The film is actually only marred by (God help me, I’m not making this up) a political statement. Muxworthy plays jerky, greedy, Republican Henry who hates the poor and can’t figure out why his friend Ed wants to go dig ditches in Malawi. He also talks trash and buckles when the pressure is on.
I suppose with Joe Dante’s shameless episode of “Masters of Horror” (“Homecoming”), even horror can’t be spared the daily grind of partisanship. But I have to wonder: With party enrollment dropping to all-time lows, does it really make sense to possibly alienate most of your audience? (I’m a decline-to-state and always have been, and I was appalled by the gratuitous slap.)
Besides, if he’d really been a Republican, he would have had a gun, right?
OK, enough stereotyping. Zev Berman is clearly a talented director with a good eye for story. Let’s hope he uses it to make good movies rather than making “important” movies.
This was Day 1 for us, and Borderlands ended it on a high note. Day 2 would be less enjoyable, unfortunately.
The Deaths of Ian Stone
Probably my favorite premise of the festival: A man is killed by some sort of crazies/monsters, then wakes up in a new life, only to be killed by them again. And over and over. Groundhog Day, if the groundhog had a chainsaw and a bad attitude.
But in fact, this feels at first more like Dark City meets The Matrix, with some sort of alien force rearranging reality for some reason we are unable to fathom. Another thing that we’re unable to fathom is why Ian Stone is an American (Mike Vogel) living in London.
No, I guess that’s not really important but it does sort of stand out without ever being explained.
The middle of the movie drags a bit, as we get some torture of our hero, and some dominatrix-inspired costume changes for hot ‘n’ sexy Jaime Murray (best known to Americans as Dexter’s “anonymous” sponsor on Showtime’s Dexter).
The movie actually veers away from horror into more of an action style that reminded me more of “Buffy” and “Angel” than anything else, and I didn’t really care for that, but overall this was a fun flick.
Oh, won’t someone free the horror movie alien from the grip of H.R. Giger? Ever since Ridley Scott’s seminal 1979 film, Alien, it seems like all malevolent aliens are slime dripping, mouth articulated, baroque-carapaced xenomorphs.
In this movie, the alien is mixed with a little bit of predator as well, though that aspect of the film isn’t strongly fleshed out. More strongly fleshed out is the overwrought plot, concerning hot ‘n’ sexy Emmanuelle Vaugier as the sheriff of a small town haunted by a terrible mistake in her past as hot ‘n’ sexy Tonantzin Carmelo does plant biology for Grandpa Russell Means (who’s apparently taking a break from delivering anti-pollution PSAs) while hot ‘n’ sexy blondes Beau Garret and Whitney Able breakdown after picking up hot ‘n’ sexy hitchhiker Tommy Dewey. Did I mention the hot ‘n’ sexy drug dealer/pimp Charles Q. Murphy who runs out of gas? No? Consider him mentioned.
Despite being awash in clichés and unlikelihoods, I was actually pretty impressed by this film at first. The cinematography exploited the beauty of the New Mexico setting (even if it was shot in Utah) and you can’t really complain about a horror flick putting a hot and sexy chick in a role, no matter how improbable the role.
And, in this case, Vaugier is reprising Ben Affleck’s role in Phantoms. Funny thing is that while she’s 31, which is a perfectly respectable age for a sheriff, she looks 20, and since she’s supposed to have hit the skids, she doesn’t really come off sheriff-like. I’d suggest this was a bad combination. It’s made worse by the fact that her backstory is just noise, unlike Affleck’s character in Phantoms.
And, seriously, why would anyone say, “Yeah, Affleck was the bomb in Phantoms! Let’s remake it with hot chicks!”
But they did and it almost works. There’s competent groundwork in the filming, editing and music. The story is, as mentioned, derivative and overwrought, but even that’s not really the death knell. The thing that kills this movie? The alien itself.
It’s a common problem with low-budget monster flicks and I hate to bash them for it but it’s truly disastrous. I think at some point they had a puppet-type alien, and where that is used, it’s okay, but whenever CGI is used to show the thing moving, it totally destroys the atmosphere. This is compounded by the fact that the creature isn’t running around in shadows but is mostly fully lit up.
So, it’s diminished by being an Alien rip-off to begin with, and knocked flat by being poorly animated, until all you’re left with is a mess of a story that rips off Phantoms, Alien and Predator.
Nonetheless, I was still optimistic going into the next film.