"A self-conscious bride is tormented by the memory of her husband's dead first wife."
Although I'm the first to admit that I'm not much of a Hitchcock expert, this Oscar winning gothic thriller seems ideal (at least atmospherically) for my second recommendation in the run up to Hallowe'en.
There's not much I can tell you which you can't find out for yourself by Googling or reading Wikipedia, as it all seems fairly typical of an Alfred Hitchcock wartime film noir to me. "Rebecca" was Hitchcock's first American movie and his second adaptation of a book by Cornish author Daphne du Maurier.
Apparently, David Selznick wasn't happy with losing control as producer to the whims of Alfred Hitchcock and reshot several scenes, but I have no clue what they were or even if it matters that much. The movie ran way over budget for all kinds of reasons, and I don't think anyone involved was completely happy with it either during or after production.
Much like any other movie of the time, "Rebecca" is all very dated with mostly awful overacting and line delivery, and effects such as rear projection during the driving scenes are glaringly obvious. There's even what appears to be roadkill in the background of the second day out in Monte Carlo (actually California) with Maxim and the future Mrs de Winter.
"There will only be 8 planets left... after I destroy Uranus."
With several changes to the original novel by Daphne du Maurier, the standout amd most memorable character becomes the sinister housekeeper Mrs Danvers (as played by Judith Anderson) rather than the romantic leads. Danvers is quite the looker, hardly ever blinks, and has the worst kind of fangirl crush on the dead former mistress of the house. Weirdly, we never get to see the titular Rebecca de Winter in flashbacks, and have to learn nearly everything about her from the rose-tinted memories of her obsessed servant. But just like the novel, the new Mrs de Winter doesn't even get a first name.
The only big problem with "Rebecca" is that it's hard to care about any of the characters other than Laurence Olivier's cuckolded Maxim, and to some extent, George Sanders as the opportunistic adulterer Max Favell. A very young Joan Fontaine is simply far too mousey, awkward, and scared of her own shadow as she comes to terms with her new position among the upper classes to be a sympathetic character for modern audiences who have never encountered domestic service themselves. Except for period TV dramas such as "Upstairs Downsatirs" and "Downton Abbey", I'm glad to say that I've never had much to do with the antiquated British feudal system either.
What makes "Rebecca" worth watching for its two-hour duration is the set design for the interiors of Manderley, the atmosphere, and the anticipation of revelations with a twist. Getting there may not be worth the trouble for some people (including anyone who has seen or heard any of the remakes and clones), but as a precursor to "The Uninvited" (1944)—an equally dated ghost story which I've often recommended for Hallowe'en—it's certainly interesting to see how certain moral codes were only everso slightly more relaxed four years later.
Due yet another remake any time now, "Rebecca" is still worth checking out if you don't want to wait. A certain British newspaper gave away barebones DVDs of the movie several years ago (which you can now pick up for pennies on eBay), and of course, it's been uploaded all over the internet streaming sites (despite not being officially in the Public Domain as far as I know) for those who want to search for it.
As an old black and white movie, I don't know if there's any benefit in buying a blu-ray version, but I'm sure at least one exists. The existing DVDs have several grainy moments near the end which could be the result of an intentional effect shot through a piece of net (perhaps to simulate fog or smoke), but they are all good enough for most people.
"An unstable mental patient goes on an overnight rampage to terrorize an ex-rock star and his friends, only to discover she is linked to him in mysterious ways."
It's not often that I watch and review two indie horror screeners in a row. In previous years, I've tended to be more of a mainstream horror movie reviewer and would have preferred to keep things that way. Unfortunately, the theatrical horror releases this year have been fewer and further between than in the mid '90s, and like a lot of other bloggers, I found myself without anything to write about.
Instead of trying to compete with "zero day reviews" for movies in genres which I don't particularly care for, I've even been desperate enough to try reading books in my spare time (oh, the horror!), and I've now offered my services (dubious as they may be) to absolutely anyone who has a new horror movie to keep me entertained. I suppose it could be worse. At least I'm not watching any more sci-fi movies or comedies.
Unfortunately, for my review of the "Reunion" screener, I've only just finished reading Joe Hill's "Heart-Shaped Box" (2007), and ignoring the supernatural elements from that novel, I noticed more than a few coincidental similarities.
“Reunion” and “Heart-Shaped Box” both tell stories which feature a former rock star, contain scenes of domestic abuse fuelled by alcoholism, have characters with memories blotted out, exposition is revealed in flashbacks, and of course, their protagonists get stalked and sliced-up. There are other things, but I'm not allowed to say what they are at this time. My hands are tied, but I'm sure you'll finger it out... I mean figure it out for yourselves. Oops.
Although I've agreed not to give away any spoilers, some key elements also remind me of several of the late Richard Laymon's novels from my misspent youth, and I'll tentatively throw-in that there may also be some nods to "Halloween II" (1981), "Halloween" (2007), and ""Fright" (1971) as well. That being said, "Reunion" is far more modern and more in the realms of "extreme horror" than its precursors.
Lest I be misconstrued, I'm not saying that writer Bert Havird or director Shawn Chou consciously "borrowed" anything, especially as the movie adaptation of "Heart-Shaped Box" has been stalled for years, but "Reunion" is very much in the same vein and will definitely keep Joe Hill fans satiated. I know that I was.
With its non-linear storytelling and somewhat harrowing subject matter, "Reunion" might be a struggle for regular people to get through. There's a lot of shakycam for one thing, and there are several borderline arty moments which could put traditionalists off. If I wanted to be overcritical and harsh, I'd call the cinematography "pretentious and overambitious", but it's always better to be overambitious than to have no ambition at all, isn't it?
It's all very involved, and there's quite a lot (maybe too much) to keep track of. Even with a standard running time of just over an hour and a half, "Reunion" feels much longer and is emotionally draining to watch even for the most hardcore slasher aficionado. Underneath it all, however, you'll be pleased to know that the usual slasher tropes, character flaws, and stupid decisions abound. Yes, there's some fun stuff here too.
As I'm sworn to secrecy about the major plot points, I can't reveal anything more about “Reunion” other than it's a classy production with great performances and gallons of blood. I'm not sure if this movie is going to be as well received by the general horror fandom as something like “Starry Eyes” (2014), but it's likely to be very highly rated by millennial indie horror fans.
“Reunion” stars Maria Olsen, Jack Turner, Sarah Schreiber, Reign Morton, and Cara Santana. The supporting cast includes Ruth Reynolds, Arielle Brachfeld, Christopher Wolfe, Leif Gantvoort, and Matthew Jaeger.
"Set in the depression era, Gore Orphanage shows that some things are worse than losing your family."
Sharing the title and same urban legend with an earlier low-budget horror movie from 1980 which I've never seen, "Gore Orphanage" adds to one of Ohio's most famous (albeit extremely fanciful) ghost stories by successfully slipping the motivation of real life English murderer Mary Bell into the mix.
Obviously, being British myself, I wouldn't have ever known about the Gore Orphanage urban legend, but I did know about Mary Bell who was all over the news in the early 1980s and caused another kerfuffle during the Tony Blair era when the government failed to prevent her (as a convicted murderer) from profitting financially through sales of her published story.
Of course, if you don't know or care about any of those things, it doesn't really matter. "Gore Orphanage" is a work of fiction whether you choose to read Emily Lapisardi's "Gore Orphanage: The Novel" right now or wait a few months longer to watch this movie which Emily Lapisardi has directed and co-written (with producer/actor Cody Knotts) when it's officially released in October. I've been one of the lucky few reviewers who was selected to see the screener, and I mostly enjoyed it.
"Gore Orphanage" stars Maria Olsen as a sadistic proprietor of a privately owned orphanage in a role reminiscent of the latest incarnation of prison governor Joan "The Freak" Ferguson from the Australian "Wentworth" TV series. Mrs. Pryor (Maria Olsen) is a nasty piece of work with mental health issues which may excuse but not condone any legal justification for her actions. You'll hate her, but you're supposed to. As usual, Maria looks attractive in some scenes and appropriately horrible in others, but either way, she can certainly act.
As a foil to Maria Olsen's character, Keri Maletto plays the younger and nicer Miss Lillian who also shows similarities to an early Joan Bennett from "Wentworth". I'm not saying that there are any borrowings as such here, just stereotypical and easily recognisable genre characters. I may have noticed them in "Wentworth" (the rebooted "Prisoner: Cell Block H") most recently, but such characters have been part of every prison and orphanage drama.
I don't know why Miss Lillian never takes her hat off when she's indoors.
Sharing the burden of looking after the orphanage is Bill Townsend playing Ernst the German janitor/handyman. I won't spoil it for you, but things may or may not be as they first appear with Ernst. There's certainly some good work there with the script and characterisation. More screen time for Ernst would have been nice, but maybe a little more depth would have wrecked his subplot too.
Since this story is set in an orphanage, the rest of the cast is mostly comprised of child actors including Emma Smith, Nora Hoyle, and Brandon Mangin Jr. I believe that this is their first movie, so I'm not going to judge any of them too harshly. Some of their performances are better than others (and some made me cringe), but generally, they do an acceptable job. None of them are up to the same standard as kids in movies such as "The Bad Seed" (1956) or "Stephen King's It" (1990), but they're as good as any Children's Film Foundation actors from back in the day.
If I had to pick one child actor out of all of them who looks like she will have a big future ahead of her, it would be little Nora Hoyle who plays Esther. She has some great expressions, is aware of the other actors, and makes her scenes convincing. I simply wasn't very impressed by Emma Smith in the lead role as Nellie, but she does have her moments.
To be brutally honest, the camerawork and the direction doesn't work in the favour of many of the children. Wrong angles, some bad framing, and keeping them on their marks tends to show through. In particular, faults are most apparent when the children are speaking to each other and eye contact isn't made at the right angle, and there are unnatural movements when these young actors have to walk or run to a certain point.
Again, I also have to make some allowances because this is Emily Lapisardi's debut feature and she still needs to learn her craft. Giving credit where it's due, she's done a lot better than I could ever do, but that's a redundant point since I'm not a filmmaker and have no desire to ever be one. I'm just an often overly critical viewer.
Mealtimes involve a lot of playing with food rather than eating it.
The cinematography by Nicholas Carrington is inconsistently but mostly competent. I prefer the scenes where he clearly used a tripod rather than the shaky handycam, but that's because I'm old-fashioned that way. The best of these is when Mrs. Pryor reads a passage from the Bible to the kids before they eat. Only in one scene near the end does the handycam accidentally make you think that you're watching a "killer's point-of-view", and this could possibly be stabilised more in post-production to remove that slight problem.
Editing is a laborious process for anyone, so I fully appreciate the effort which has gone into "Gore Orphanage", but even as a slow-burn murder/mystery/horror, it would benefit from being a bit tighter. The pacing is okay as it is, but... yeah, if I knew how to do it, I would swap a few scenes around and excise a couple of others. The soundtrack is also very basic and occasionally echoey as well. All these things are standard problems with low-budget productions, so you can take what I'm saying with the usual pinch or sackful of salt.
The 1930s depression era setting works well, and care has been taken with the various props, costumes, and location. "Gore Orphanage" is not quite as good in that respect as the movies which have inspired it, but it's noticeable that someone cared enough about attention to detail within the contraints of the budget.
Similar looking and themed movies such as "Flowers in the Attic" (1987), "The Others" (2001), "The Devil's Backbone" (2001), "House of Voices" (2004), "The Orphanage" (2007), "The Awakening" (2011), and ""The Secret pf Crickley Hall" (2012) do more or less the same thing, but "Gore Orphanage" doesn't have anywhere near the same budget as even the cheapest of those productions.
She still has that hat on!
One final (and very minor) gripe is that Chris "The Irate Gamer" Bores is listed in the credits but doesn't appear until after them. Apparently, he was in a cut scene which involved paranormal investigators. The only bit that remains is a post-credits bonus in which you only see him running away with three other people and have no idea who any of them are. Oh well, I guess that he won't be promoting this movie much on his YouTube channel now.
If you think from my critique so far that I hated a lot of this movie, you'd be wrong. In fact, I enjoyed the storytelling despite "Gore Orphanage" not being the supernatural or even bloody event which I initially thought that it was going to turn into. I truly enjoyed the acting, and I definitely got a kick out of the "twist" element. The wraparound scenes give that away more than I just have.
"Gore Orphanage" may not be brilliantly or slickly realised, and it's predictable for those of us who've seen too many movies, but it's generally okay. A little nod to "The Shining" doesn't become a cliché, and I totally respect and am grateful for the restraint shown there. I'm also grateful that no holds were barred when it came to the more taboo subject matter.
Having said that, I'm not entirely convinced that "Gore Orphanage" should be classed as a horror movie. It may be within the wider scope of the genre and contains a few slasher elements, but it's more of a drama and mystery than a "shit-yer-pants-scary" affair anyway.
For that reason, more than any other, I can only give "Gore Orphanage" a slightly below average rating as it stands at the moment. As much as I'm tempted to hypocritically gush about this movie and drop a marketing-friendly "quote" into my review to get a mention on the DVD sleeve, I just can't do it. "Gore Orphanage" isn't scary, and horror movies should be scary.
"Juggling angry Russians, the British Mi5, and an international terrorist, debonair art dealer and part time rogue Charlie Mortdecai races to recover a stolen painting rumoured to contain a code that leads to lost Nazi gold."
As I've moved further and further away from the purest forms of the horror genre with nearly every review this year (mainly because there aren't any new horror movies left other than a few bottomfeeder indie ones on the VOD streams which I'm not likely to ever care about anyway), I thought that I might as well watch something completely different for this "Surprise Sunday".
Although I freely admit to disliking comedies in general (especially since the American ones are usually more spiteful and mean-spirited than horror), sometimes people need a little bit of comic relief in their lives. I have no problem with that. Just because comedy isn't really meant for me, it doesn't mean that I can't still objectively appreciate the merits of a film within that genre. Drama is drama, and a good story will usually entertain me regardless.
Thus, I decided to watch "Mortdecai". Having heard nothing but bad things about this R-rated box office flop from the "critics" (and the usual snarky assholes all over the internet), I also set myself a challenge to see if I would agree with them or end up being a contrarian.
This is the poster. Obviously.
Unfortunately, despite "Mortdecai" having a great cast of credible acting talents, a huge budget, and quite beautiful camerawork in places, I have to come down on the side of the critics. "Mortdecai" looks like a Brosnan-era "James Bond" film, but the story is both confusing and drawn out in equal measures, and the best thing it has going for it is the amusing Johnny Depp and Paul Bettany double-act which reminds me (and everybody else) of Inspector Clouseau and Cato (albeit with British accents).
I've never actually watched any of the "Pink Panther" movies in their entirety, mind you, but I saw substantial parts of most of them on television as a child. Mainly due to clip show quizzes such as the BBC's "Screen Test", some of the slapstick fighting scenes stuck in my memory. Therefore, whether the homages in "Mortdecai" are intentional or accidental, I have no real way of knowing. I have absolutely no desire to ever attempt to watch them again. Fans of Inspector Clouseau, however, will know for sure.
No funny caption for this. Something about carrying the film, maybe?
Moving on to things which I can properly appreciate, the stunts are very good, the locations were well chosen and dressed beforehand, and I don't have any real problem with the script. Other than Johnny Depp channelling Terry Thomas, none of it is that funny though, and the moustache gags are very repetitive and overused. "Mortdecai" also clearly suffers from pacing problems and padding more than a few times, but that still doesn't completely wreck the somewhat challenging non-linear narrative which is its own worst enemy.
Including small roles for Paul Whitehouse (who Brits like me tend to love) early on and Jeff Goldblum two-thirds in, the main problem with "Mortdecai" is that it doesn't allow any of the supporting players apart from Ewan McGregor to really stand out. Although I'm pretty sure that nobody involved wanted to create anything other than a Depp-centric product to entertain an audience for an hour and a half, sadly, it shows.
"Mortdecai" won't be winning any Oscars or major awards (unless the world goes even more batshit insane than it has done in the last two years), and it's not the most original comedy-spy movie that I've ever seen either, but it's relatively okay for what it is. It's not as good as any of the "Austin Powers" movies by any stretch of the imagination, but it has many intentionally amusing moments and a couple of extremely nauseating ones.
"A teenage girl is terrorized when she spends two nights alone on a remote island as part of her camp counselor [sic] initiation."
My second movie today is this extremely generic Canadian "Friday the 13th"-esque clone.
Don't watch the trailer because it gives away all the good bits!
"Solo" is typically Canadian with better acting than it deserves, more clichés and borrowings mixed together with a big paddle of predictability, and no chance at ever getting a higher rating than "just average". The main character's backstory provides some originality, but as it's lost in favour of a traditional "kidnap, escape, and chase through the woods" third act, it's hardly worth mentioning.
Nothing much happens horror-wise until the end, and the gory money shot is far too short, but everything looks okay. Decent production values, competent camerawork (albeit sometimes shaky), and solid acting tend to cover a multitude of sins in the pacing, lack of atmosphere, and script.
Annie Clark is satisfactory as the lead, and the bad guy gives a damned good try at being nutty as a fruitcake, but neither performance is outstanding or very memorable. As usual, I have no idea if anyone involved in this production is famous in other respects such as TV, and I can't be bothered to look them up.
One thing I picked up on is that all the male characters smoke and don't seem to be able to get through a scene without lighting up. It's not important to the story in any way, just a theme which runs throughout. Maybe there's an in-joke there which someone can explain to me later. As a smoker myself, it amused me that I was puffing away along with them.
Unfortunately, "Solo" isn't very scary. I had hopes that more would be made of the ghost story about the island being haunted, but alas, it was not to be. It's a mystery thriller with some horror elements, and only a minor upgrade from Syfy Originals and other "filler" genre movies.
I have a feeling that "Solo" is pretty much a directorial debut. Sometimes I tend to be more lenient with new talent, and there's enough talent involved in this movie to make it watchable. If you want something more exciting, however, I recommend one of the earlier "Friday the 13th" movies or "Sleepaway Camp" instead.
"An American college student studying in Japan risks her own life to save the spirit of her dead mother, who killed herself in the notorious Suicide Forest."
Have you heard of Aokigahara Forest before? No? Me neither. Apparently, it's the trendy place to go if you want to commit suicide in Japan, and there's a famous book about it from the 1960s called "Black Sea of Trees" by Seichō Matsumoto. It's also the setting for Steven R. Monroe's vengeful ghost movie "Grave Halloween".
Since Hallowe'en is a Western custom, if you're now wondering what Japanese ghosts have to do with it, remember that this is a "Syfy Original" movie. Even the most tenuous links will suffice when Syfy are putting titles together for their "31 Days of Halloween" month. The Japanese may not celebrate Hallowe'en as such (although many of them are aware of it), but this movie is primarily about a group of American and Canadian exchange students who decide to film their investigation of the haunted Aokigahara Forest on Hallowe'en anyway. Additionally, it was all shot in Vancouver.
Director Steven R. Monroe is, of course, famous (or infamous) for the "I Spit on Your Grave" remake, its sequel, and nearly a dozen more cheap and nasty Syfy Channel movies. Basically, he's a professional director for hire rather than an auteur, but he usually manages to slip a nice bit of gore into his movies as a kind of trademark. Thus, "Grave Halloween" may surprise a few people with the level of gore in a made-for-TV movie. There's a stick through the throat, an "Evil Dead"-style pulling of arms and legs off, and a fairly realistic broken leg among the effects. Obviously, there's no swearing or nudity this time because "Grave Halloween" is another hypocritical MA-14.
Canadian Kaitlyn Leeb and a taller American guy.
Fans of Asian horror will certainly find something to enjoy in this movie even if it's only to ogle half-Chinese Kaitlyn Leeb (the three-breasted woman from the "Total Recall" remake). Her character, Maiko, is the one responsible for everyone going to the forest due to her birth-mother's suicide there and having received a mysterious box of trinkets through the mail which she wants to use for a Sadake (or blessing/atonement) ritual. If you aren't down with the kids who all seem to be obsessed with Japan these days, or have never heard of "Sadake" before, simply replace the word with Sudoku because it's only a MacGuffin. The students never get to perform their ritual or play Sudoku because they're too busy getting killed by long-haired ghosts!
Ignoring the Japanese elements, "Grave Halloween" is essentially a backwoods slasher which homages "The Evil Dead" and "The Blair Witch Project". Unlike the latter, however, it's not a found footage movie, just one that's quickly filmed with slightly shaky handycams. It's bickering "teenagers" getting bumped off, one by one, by various ghosts (some of which look a lot like zombies) with all the usual clichés and tropes.
The main actors are a mix of bit part players from American and Canadian TV, but they do okay in their poorly differentiated and two-dimensional roles. It's not worth mentioning their names because nobody has ever heard of them. One of the more obnoxious Americans says, "That's super comforting!" at 42 minutes in, and if you already know my feelings about this bloody annoying valley girl intensifier, you'll probably be surprised that I didn't switch the movie off right there and then. But I made it to the end (with my teeth-clenched in fury) just so that I could pan it some more.
Apart from being predictable, the worst thing about "Grave Halloween" is that the backstory is more interesting than the mystery which unfolds or the creepiness of the setting. The details about Japan, its laws and customs, and how ignorant gaijin (foreigners) often behave like disrepectful assholes (and deserve to be cursed) are spot-on, but for all the positives, too much relies on xenophobia. Maybe that's a good thing, though, if it keeps people away from the real Suicide Forest.
"The ghost of a teenager who died years ago reaches out to the land of the living in order to save someone from suffering her same fate."
Remember Vincenzo Natali the director of "Cube" (1997) and "Splice" (2009)? Well, he's back with a supernatural mystery which is available via VOD just in time for Hallowe'en. Don't get too excited, though, because "Haunter" tries to be more cerebral than scary and fails at being either.
The biggest problem is that "Haunter" is another typically Canadian remix of over half a dozen already extremely well known movies and at least two recent TV shows.
The first things I thought of when I started watching it were "Groundhog Day" (1993), "The Lovely Bones" (2009), "Voices" (1973), and "Lady in White" (1988), but there are also some quite blatant borrowings from "The Others" (2001), "Marchlands", and "American Horror Story". Throw in a few tiny homages to "The Collector" (1965), "The Matrix" (1999), and even "Dark Skies" (2013), and you have your movie.
If the wind changes, you'll stay like that. Oh wait...
As "Haunter" is essentially a ghost story, there are bound to be some formulaic similarities to previous ghost stories, but that's still no excuse for all the cloning. It's laziness for the most part, although it's dangerously close to plagiarism in others. I've only read parts of "The Lovely Bones" novel and have never seen Peter Jackson's movie adaptation, but if I can see the resemblances, I'm sure Alice Sebold will!
I'm not saying that "Haunter" isn't fairly enjoyable or well made. The cinematography borders on beautiful, and atmospherically, it's not a million miles away from Spanish thrillers such as "The Orphanage" (2007) or several of the more "girlie" Asian horrors. The acting is competent too, apart from Abigail Breslin who only has one big-eyed expression and is prone to sighing, gasping, and breathing heavily to compensate. Consequently, there are more close-ups than are strictly necessary, but that's a minor niggle.
The three time periods of 1985, the present day, and the late 1950s look the part as far as I can tell. As somebody who has no idea what Ontario looked like in the main 1985 time zone, I assume that kids were into much the same things as I was, but I'm a bit dubious about the Atari games console or Siousxie and the Banshees still being popular in the mid-80s rather than 3 or 4 years before. I've always imagined Canada as being a few years behind everyone else, so maybe it's spot on. My Canadian readers will have to let me know.
Overall, "Haunter" is a decent but very predictable PG-13 ghost story with no scares, no swearing or nudity, and very little violence. It's an upgrade for teenage fans of "Goosebumps" or "Are You Afraid of the Dark", but it's far too kiddified if you're an adult. I'll give it an extra point because it held my interest to the end.
"Farmhouse is a psychological thriller set in the modern day mid-west. We follow a young couple as they leave their everyday lives behind and head out to a new beginning; starting over from scratch. After becoming stranded in an isolated vineyard in the middle of nowhere, the young couple is forced to face the secrets they're running from, all the while trying to escape the malicious intent of the vineyard's mysterious inhabitants."
Here's a blast from the past. Other than the gory torture scenes, I'd completely forgotten about this little gem until I was reading through one of my subreddits and realised that I ought to watch it again. How I forgot to review it is another story, but the end of 2008 and early 2009 wasn't the greatest time for me, and I had far more important things on my mind.
Anyway, having decided to rewatch "Farm House" to refresh my memory, at first I thought, "How many more times is 'Voices' (1973) going to be remade?" Of course, the plot isn't exactly the same, but there are many parallels in the first 30 minutes which should lead you to suspect an equivalent twist ending.
"Farm House" isn't a predictable ghost story though. The majority of the movie is a psychological thriller with extreme torture elements. I know that part of the horror genre has fallen out of favour and died away to nothing, but at the time it was great, especially when coupled with such mean-spiritedness and Kelly Hu being sexy as Hell (pun intended)! It's not that Jamie Anne Allman isn't beautiful in this too, but Kelly Hu is something else! The scene between the two of them involving a cheese grater will haunt you long after this movie ends, and you'll probably never look at a meat thermometer in the same way ever again either!
The acting is superb all round, although Steven Weber's psycho Samael eclipses William Lee Scott's not-quite-heroic Chad and Nick Heyman's valiant attempt at portraing the deaf Alal. The characters are stereotypes to some extent, and clichés abound, but there's actually depth to their characterisation which doesn't happen so much nowadays. How things have gone downhill in only 5 years!
As for the story, it's hard to tell you anything about it without spoiling it for you. Obviously, I don't mind giving spoilers for bad movies, but I prefer to keep them to a minimum for good ones. Suffice it to say that "Farm House" is pretty harrowing stuff and makes director George Bessudo's previous movie "Lake Dead" (2007) seem tame in comparison. If you look up the plot outlines, there are some superficial similarities between the two, of course, but it's like comparing apples to oranges. Everything (including the location, cinematography, and talent) is superior in "Farm House" to anything that was part of the After Dark Horrorfests.
Yes, I know I was going to stick to more "Hallowe'eny" movies this month, but my cunning plan has already been scuppered by a ton of new DVD and VOD releases. I don't suppose it matters much. Any horror movie is good this month, right? But if you want to see something truly horrific, I recommend that you grab yourself a copy of "Farm House" as soon as possible. The "Twilight Zone"-esque reveal goes on for a few minutes too long, but I don't think you'll be disappointed.
Based on the bestselling novel by Marion Pauw, "Daglicht" is a Dutch movie which is bound to get the same Hollywood remake treatment as "The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo" once the "powers-that-be" get wind of it. Unlike "The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo" though, this movie is very formulaic and will appeal to the lowest common denominator rather than the more cerebral.
"Daglicht" (meaning "Daylight") is a polished but predictable European thriller which seems cleverer than it needs to be until you start picking away at the details. Much debated theories about genetics which pave the way for far-fetched discovery contrivances are more likely to be met with a shrug by today's "look it up" generation and laughter from those who know better, and once you realise that the mystery aspect is so easy to solve, it's only worth watching to see your hunches played out.
Maybe that's the point of the thriller genre anyway, but as entertaining as such predictability may be, we're so many years on from "Columbo" and "Murder She Wrote" that I'm surprised how something this simple could still work. Apart from one problem solving spectacle, I'm certain that everything in "Daglicht" has been done to death in soap operas too.
Don't worry, I'm not going to spoil "Daglicht" by deconstructing the entire plot because it's definitely worth watching with no prior knowledge of what it's about, but a visit to TVTropes.com afterwards will make you feel quite foolish for liking any of it. Mind you, I could say the same thing about 99% of the movies made in the last 40 years because that's just the way things are. Change the character names and locations, and we're always being resold the same half-dozen stories.
If you don't want even minor spoilers, stop reading now!
Great production values and a fine cast of Dutch actors including Derek de Lint, Fedja van Huêt, and Monique van de Ven barely cover the superficial dialogue, unrealistic relationships, and rushed situations. Everything may look good, especially Angela Schijf as Iris (and Matteo van der Grijn as Bo for the ladies), but "Daglicht" often feels like a glorified TV movie with abrupt scene changes which would normally be hidden by commercial breaks.
It's not that things jump haphazardly from one scene to the next as there is a logical progression, albeit with a few flashbacks, but many clues are revealed without reason or compulsion. Hardly any work is put into investigating other than a few interviews, and infuriatingly, the dead ends or red herrings which crop up are simply abandoned. For example, how Iris goes from one internet search to another with such precision is never explained, and the crucial cover-ups are probably the worst kept secrets in the entire history of cover-ups. When every major character is so willing to talk, it makes the minor characters who refuse to reveal information look ridiculous. Worse than that, some characters don't seem to serve any purpose at all, especially Thijs Römer's initially interesting but entirely superfluous role.
To give credit where it's due, the make-up on Fedja van Huêt (who plays both the younger and older Ray) is as outstanding as his acting, but he's not a million miles away from being a less sympathetic clone of "Rain Man". Thus, for every point in its favour, "Daglicht" has several more against it. The deal breaker for me is that the kid who plays Iris's son is annoying to the point of making you want to see something very bad and extremely painful happen to him, but sadly, nothing does.
Angela Schijf and Derek De Lint. Cool.
"Daglicht" was released theatrically in the Netherlands on April 11th this year, but has been leaked to the internet before getting even an official UK DVD release. I may be cynical, but the very high quality of the streams which I've seen suggest that rather than being uploaded by pirates, it was done by the producers themselves to avoid an international distribution deal for a movie which they realise isn't that good and use that loss to make it easier to pitch the idea of a remake directly to Hollywood. Stranger things have happened.
In its still pre-Hollywood remake favour though, "Daglicht" does attempt to show the negative repercussions of mental retardation. Despite going out of its way to reinforce the bullshit myth of idiot savants, the fact that Ray's own mother can't cope with him after his emotionless animal cruelty is only one example of the darker side.
Bearing in mind that nothing in "Daglicht" is as controversial as any of the statements I made above, there are a couple of gratuitously shocking moments, but the ickiness factor is very underplayed. Its superficial portrayal of mental health problems mean that "Daglicht" is hardly another "Loving Walter" (1982), nor could it ever be. Gritty realism would have made "Daglicht" something that everybody would want to talk about rather than another example of pulp.
"In 1885, a female doctor helping a group of people with their phobias becomes embroiled in a murder mystery surrounding a patient that may or may not be a vampire."
What the Hell did I just watch? It's not often that a movie is so soulless and ineptly made that it leaves me speechless, but this is one of those times. After "Phobia" ended, I sat staring at the blank page on my computer screen for three hours afterwards waiting for the neurons in my brain to reconnect, and then I had to go to bed for a long depression nap before I could bear thinking about it again.
Even though it's only 90 minutes long, "Phobia" feels several times longer because of how dialogue heavy and boring it is. When I say boring, I mean really boring in the way that watching an amateur dramatics production or a high school play is boring. Actually, no, this is worse than either of those; "Phobia" is seven-year-olds-performing-a-nativity-play-boring but in a foreign language which you don't understand. I was familiar with the subject matter, I knew what was intended, but I couldn't process it because it was so shit.
How any movie could be both overwritten and overacted but contain characters so underdeveloped at the same time is a mystery to me, although I'd hazard a guess that it must take some severely misplaced genius to create such a thing and a lot of luck to get it distributed. Maybe not so much luck since "Phobia" is only another one of many Gravitas Ventures VOD movies which I've written off this year, but still... I can't even... I don't know... my head is full of FFFFFFFUUUUUUUUUUUU! Sorry for writing like a fifteen-year-old, but honestly, this movie was probably written by a teenager too. With no nudity, swearing, or anything more gory than you'd see in an episode of "Buffy the Vampire Slayer", it's definitely PG-13 all the way, and it's impossible to call it horror with a straight face.
She's dressed as a man, but he's wearing a fake beard. WTF?
If you can concentrate on anything in the first half-hour without being distracted by Erica Leerhsen's thumbsucker-mouth which stands out more because she's supposed to be disguised as a man (à la "Yentl") then you're a slightly better person than me. But if you don't wonder why she still wears a girl's wig, or notice that Sigmund Freud (played by Matt Moore) has a ridiculous fake beard, there's no hope for you as a movie critic. I know this is a low-budget B movie of sorts, but what the bloody Hell were they thinking?
Also how can anyone hire Eric Leerhsen—the only girl in "Book of Shadows: Blair Witch 2" (2000) who gets naked—and not ask her to get naked again? Wouldn't a clichéd and gratuitous nude shower/bath scene being overlooked by another character make a better reveal of her gender than removing a stupid black wig which doesn't match her ginger eyebrows? It's not as if you can't see that she's a woman anyway, but... oh my God!
Bearing in mind that director Jon Keeyes is only a couple of weeks younger than me and hasn't directed anything worthwhile other than "American Nightmare" (2002), a few shorts, and a couple of horror TV shows for kids, he should still know better. Exactly what age group is "Phobia" intended for? It's too talky for kids and too tame for adults. And what's with all the badly spoken French with subtitles? It's distancing, alienating, and irritating. It certainly doesn't make the period setting more realistic.
You just have to have a bald Nosferatu guy called Guy!
Once there are no more scenes of Americans butchering the French language, things improve slightly, but just to redress the balance towards crap again, half of them now need to have fake Romanian accents which are more like Russian. Has no one ever heard a Romanian speak before? They usually sound Latin (for obvious reasons including Romanian being a Romance language) not Russian! Jesus wept! And was it really necessary to have a bald-headed Nosferatu lookalike just so that everyone knows that this is a vampire movie? Seriously?
Beautiful Tiffany Lonsdale spices the eyecandy up a bit as bald Guy's sister with claustrophobia, but the lack of any family resemblance is uncanny. She doesn't even look like anyone in the family portraits or her cousin Val Drakul! Maybe she was adopted or a lusty milkman paid her mother a visit? Casting decisions were clearly not a strong point, so it's probably better to not overthink these things.
At least everything improves considerably after the location change from Paris to California (although it's really Texas). Once Erica Leerhsen starts wearing big Victorian dresses, lets her hair out, puts on some lipstick, and looks like a woman again, she's actually quite pretty. She's still not believable as a doctor, and her relationship with Nicholas Brendon lookalike Chase Ryan Jeffery lacks chemistry, but to give credit where it's due, her performance gets much better as the story progresses. The fact that Dr. Lesley doesn't get the chance to cure her patients' phobias is relatively unimportant.
Stephanie Rhodes (the Camp Counselor in the "Friday the 13th" remake) steals the show completely in her scenes as sexy Elizabeth, the ward of agoraphobic Annabel Lee (Carolyn Wickwire), but not enough is made of her to be memorable overall. Without any eroticism or some desperately needed sex scenes, why even add a lesbian facet to Elizabeth's character? What's the point? Again, who are the target audience?
The saddest thing is that everyone in "Phobia" can act! They've all been in other things before, whether TV shows or movies, and they don't disgrace themselves once you take into account what they had to work with. The fault rests almost entirely with the script despite annoying background music which outstays its welcome, lethargic pacing, cheap-looking camerawork, and a lot of staginess which doesn't help. Whatever clever period mystery Anne Gibson may have thought she was creating, it would have been better as a pulp YA novel than a movie. To say that "Phobia" is reminiscent of Kim Newman would be an insult more than a compliment, however, since I can't stand that grinnygog or his books.
Okay, she does look a bit better in a dress.
On the plus side, the way the use of hypnotism and vampires are combined into a mystery seems to be fairly original. If my mind wasn't still numb, I'm sure that I could find better examples than "The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari" or "The Vampire Lovers" to prove myself wrong, but as all roads lead back to Hammer and Bram Stoker's "Dracula", I'm positive that there's nothing new here other than the way it's presented. A couple of homages to Edgar Allan Poe are harmless additions.
Before I wrap this up, I have to mention the effects. Apart from the wig and beard fiasco, the make-up is generally good and a couple of torn throats look the part. Inevitably, there are some very cheap "Buffy-esque" CGI effects near the end which place this movie in the "Syfy Original wannabe" category and will doom it to appearing in Echo Bridge or Mill Creek multipacks one day, but they do provide some horror action. I doubt that "Phobia" will ever been shown on TV unless Chiller (or Zone Horror/The Horror Channel in the UK) get it for next to nothing though.
According to the IMDb, the ensemble cast from "Phobia" is due to reappear in "The Harrowing" (2014) but with the addition of Debbie Rochon instead of Erica Leerhsen. As I'm done with being a masochist after suffering through this borefest, I think it'll be another good one to miss.
"A detective searches for the body of a femme fatale which has gone missing from a morgue."
If you're a regular follower of my Twitter feed or Facebook page, you'll know that I've been raving about this thriller intermittently ever since I first heard about it. Not only am I an enthusiastic ogler of Belén Rueda, but I naively expected "The Body" to get a theatrical release.
Unfortunately, after only playing at a few festivals, "The Body" has gone straight-to-DVD (and Blu-ray) in the UK, and there's still no news of any US release. This is a bit of a disappointment, but it's only to be expected in a country where envious eyes are probably drawing up their plans for a remake and holding off distribution for as long as possible. Such shenanigans surrounded "[REC]", "Let the Right One In" and "The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo", so I have every reason to be cynical. Also, since this movie is already so American in style, you just have to laugh at the irony of anyone wanting to remake it in the first place, but I'm sure it'll happen eventually.
"The Body", you see, is a genuine homage to classic film noir without falling into the neo-noir trap. It's a contemporary version of Agatha Christie-style thrillers for the most part with twist on top of twist. It also owes a great deal to Chan-wook Park's "Vengeance Trilogy" stylistically, but only insofar as Park's movies also homage better pulp mysteries of the past. "The Body" is as beautifully filmed but less taxing on the senses as, essentially, it's an easy to follow "popcorn flick" dressed up to look like more than it really is. That is until, of course, everything is revealed at the end.
Without giving away the plot too much, all I can tell you is that "The Body" is mainly a police investigation which takes place over one rainy night with flashbacks and some hypothetical scenes of events which may not have happened. Structurally, it's reminiscent of "Endless Night" (1972) and "Basic Instinct" (1992) but not without a couple of healthy dollops of "Sunset Blvd." (1950) mixed in. Thus, noir genre fans should feel right at home among the formulas. One very gory make-up effect will please horror fans too.
Belén Rueda and Hugo Silva.
While some people might say that "The Body" is clichéd, generic, and a little bit too slick for its own good, the perfect pacing, atmosphere, and performances turn it into a very classy piece of storytelling. There's maybe not quite enough depth to the characterisation to cause empathy, but you could say that about "Double Indemnity" (1944) or any of the Bogart vehicles. Two-dimensional characterisation is crucial for the various reveals in such thrillers anyway. Outside of Mankiewicz or Hitchcock, there's never been much time devoted to character driven mysteries which actually work, and writer/director Oriol Paulo hasn't taken that route with "The Body" either.
The focus is on Hugo Silva, who as Álex Ulloa is trapped like a fly skewered on a pin, and José Coronado as the tenacious detective Jaime Peña who questions him. Both are well cast in their roles although there are moments when it's hard to believe that bearded and bespectacled Hugo Silva would have enticed not one but two beautiful women into his bed. With much sport made of Belén Rueda's age along the way, Álex Ulloa is immediately defined as a gold digger who has bitten off more than he can chew this time, and he's not a likeable character.
José Coronado, on the other hand, doesn't develop any further than being a typical cop haunted by his own "Lost Lenore" tragedy. He certainly looks the part, and even the most casual glance at his previous TV and film credits indicate that he's been typecast here. In case you're wondering, a lead role in "R.I.S. Científica" (a one-season Spanish version of C.S.I.) is his most recent claim to fame. There's a little bit more to detective Jaime Peña than meets the eye, but you'll have to find out what that is by watching this movie yourself. Unlike some over-privileged, douchebag movie reviewers, I'm not going to give away the details.
Sadly, Belén Rueda doesn't get nearly as much screen time as she did in "The Orphanage" (2007) or "Julia's Eyes" (2010)—both of which are credited to the producers of this movie—but she still has a very important part to play even as a corpse. That bit I can give away because it's in the synopsis. However, as a compensation for the lack of Belén Rueda's MILFy goodness, Aura Garrido provides a decent amount of eyecandy as Álex's girlfriend Carla. Once again, there's more to her than just a pretty face.
Aura Garrido as Carla.
The supporting players are all top notch Spanish TV actors from various dramas which haven't travelled. Some stand out more than others including fierce-looking Patrícia Bargalló as Agent Norma who deserved to have a bigger part. Trust me, you'll notice her because she looks like Noomi Rapace from "The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo". I'm sure it's meant to be an intentional in-joke as there are several other visual homages to that movie. For even more fun, write down a list of as many famous thrillers as you can remember before watching "The Body" and tick off all the lines of dialogue that you've heard before.
Ultimately, "The Body" is a noir-geek's paradise for identifying all the "borrowings", but that's exactly what it's meant to be to some extent. Despite its overall serious tone, and one "gross-out" moment, the ending is so contrived that you know little more was intended than a display of Oriol Paulo's erudition and some very dark humour. Make no mistake, "The Body" is not a comedy—no jokes are cracked, and nobody except Belén Rueda laughs—but that doesn't stop it being witty for other reasons. Whereas some thrillers allow the journey to become more important than the destination (or vice versa), "The Body" is pleasing throughout.
Even if you're not a big fan of mysteries and thrillers, "The Body" is easily the best movie you will see this year.
Click the pic to visit the official Facebook page.
"Set in Catalonia, Painless weaves two stories: in one, starting during the Spanish Civil War and running through to the '60s, an asylum attempts to rehabilitate children who feel no pain, by teaching them physical suffering. In the second, in the present time, a brilliant neurosurgeon who needs a bone marrow transplant, discovers this dark past when he searches for his biological parents."
Since American horror is as dead as a zombie that's just been shot in the head, incinerated, and ground-up into ink to be used to print more articles from Lianne Spiderbaby in Fangoria, I've decided to return my attention to the European offerings as I continue my quest to find something horrific again. Sadly, for all of its beautiful camerawork and moments of brilliance, "Painless" was not what I was looking for.
Ostensibly a drama about congenital analgesia, "Painless" has much the same look and atmosphere as "American Horror Story: Asylum" but without the silly bits. It's pretty dour stuff all the way through since that's exactly what anyone should expect from a story set mostly during the various civil wars in Spain. If you've ever seen "The Devil's Backbone" (2001) or "Pan's Labyrinth" (2006), they have a similar socio-political commentary in the background. You can tell that director Juan Carlos Medina (actually an American by birth) fancies himself as the new Guillermo del Toro, but employing Luis Berdejo Arribas, the weaker writer from the "[REC]" series, hasn't helped his cause.
While the acting is to the same high standard as any of the big name Spanish movies from the last 10 years, the script leaves the characters begging to be more than two-dimensional. The highlight is seeing a now totally unrecognisable Derek de Lint from "Poltergeist: The Legacy" playing a German doctor who speaks Spanish. Minor as it is, he's the only one allowed to have any development.
"Domi-nique -nique -nique s'en allait tout simplement, routier, pauvre et chantant."
Other than the modern half of the story being a lot less interesting than the first hour of period set scenes, "Painless" becomes very rushed and contrived in its last third. Even if I had a thorough knowledge of Spanish political history, I doubt that it would make a great deal of sense, plus there are enormous plotholes.
Yes, there are real, physical plotholes rather than continuity errors or small lapses in logic that can be reasoned away. For one thing, I would love to know what the inmates of the hospital, especially Berkano (Tómas Lemarquis), get to eat during their incarceration. I know the kids are supposed to have supernatural abilities along with their inability to feel pain, but a couple of spoonfuls of soup, in one important case, couldn't keep a mouse alive! Cannibalism is suggested later on, but for five years with only one rotting corpse to feed on? Not likely, is it?
"We wants it, we needs it. Must have the precious!"
For a reasonably well-funded movie, the production values are excellent. The cinematography is competent with only a few moments where things are too dark, the sound is good, and the location covers a multitude of sins. Unfortunately, "Painless" lacks spectacle after promising so much with its admittedly CGI-enhanced opening scene.
Plodding rather than thrilling, "Painless" is worth a rental, but it's visually better than the story it delivers.
"A rare book dealer, while seeking out the last two copies of a demon text, gets drawn into a conspiracy with supernatural overtones."
Nine days left until Hallowe'en so it's time for "The Ninth Gate". See what I did there? Don't worry, it probably won't happen again. I doubt that I'll ever rewatch "The Ninth Gate" anytime soon either.
I'm not a Johnny Depp fan and find it kind of disgusting to watch somebody with $200,000,000 and their own island playing a part which absolutely anyone could have done just as well. I know his fizzog sells plenty of movies, but I find him overrated. Johnny Depp sort of reminds me of somebody I used to work with who had the same stupid little beard and reeked of body odour so, unfairly, I imagine him to be much the same.
I'm not going to get all moral on you but seeing Johhny Depp romp around naked with Roman Polanski's younger wife also makes me feel nauseous. Given Roman Polanski's criminal history, it's no surprise that his wife is half his age, but it's still weird to see her used in this way. I suppose she wanted to do it, but it's not right.
As you probably know, Johnny Depp plays the part of a "book detective" who gets hired to track down the last copies of a Satanic tome. With a neo-noir feel to the story, he's reminiscent of Mickey Rourke in "Angel Heart" to some extent. His employer, Boris Balkan (Frank Langella), is hardly Lucifer in disguise, but there are superficial similarities.
I'm not sure if the intention was to rework the "Angel Heart" storyline because I only listened to a few parts of the director's commentary on the DVD. I do know that "The Ninth Gate" was based on a novel about something less Satanic with an ending which faded out in a way that made it almost impossible to conclude satisfactorily here either. Kudos for at least trying to wrap things up, but after nearly two hours of watching a mystery unfold, it was still weak.
The standout for me is Lena Olin who plays Liana Telfer as one of the more truly vicious femmes fatales that I've seen for ages. Not only is she extremely hot but sinister with it. Corso (Johnny Depp) describes her as "dishy", but scary and mad as a bag of cats would also apply. She's certainly got claws and she bites!
It's amusing that so many rich characters in "The Ninth Gate" are all into collecting old books about witchcraft. It's yet another thing for the conspiracy theorists who drag up even though though it's just a trope. Considering the elaborate measures many of the bibliophiles take to safely store their treasures, the rough treatment which the Satanic book that they are all chasing receives is also unintentionally comical. I can't think of any book dealers who would handle such a valuable item without gloves, and I highly doubt that they would smoke all over it or press it onto a photocopier.
Roman Polanski's wife, Emmanuelle Seigner, who plays "The Girl" or "Green Eyes" does a fine job as a demonic sidekick even though her role is never truly explained. Whether she is saving Corso from destruction or leading him to his destiny is flawed thoughout the story. Ultimately, she's there to encourage his bad side, but it's complicated and open to too much interpretation. She's nice to look at when nude even though she has a Maryam d'Abo thing going on with her eyebrows which is distracting.
As for the plot, well, it's a mystery in the same vein as "The DaVnci Code" or "Angels and Demons" but years before Dan Brown even thought about writing them and without any twists. It's a straightforward, "connect the dots" affair with a little bit of horror action along the way. It's actually rather difficult to classify "The Ninth Gate" as a horror movie except for the supernatural elements and the Satanism because it isn't all that scary.
"The Ninth Gate" is a beautiful looking film with a rather sleazy and grubby atmosphere which makes me homesick, but the ending is such a disappointment that it it spoils what could have been another Roman Polanski classic.
"In 1922, a young novelist goes to the countryside to write her latest book and falls victim to terrifying hallucinations and nightmares."
With everyone else frantically writing about "Paranormal Activity 4" today, I thought I'd provide an alternative in the form of "Behind the Walls 3D". It's not that I recommend it over "Paranormal Activity 4" in any way, but I've waited a long time to say something about it, and it seems appropriate for my "Hallowe'en Countdown".
Let me just forewarn you that I generally love French horror movies. I usually don't care how bad they are or how much of their stories make absolutely no sense. Having said that, I really don't have anything good to tell you about "Behind the Walls" because I barely had the patience to sit through it. "Behind the Walls" is, without doubt, one of the most boring movie experiences ever unleashed upon the unsuspecting public.
The warning signs were there before I even started watching the DVD. Just about any movie which is directed and written by the same people tends to be a low-budget abomination, and adding 3D on top of that almost always guarantees a turd. I hoped it wouldn't be so, but I was proven right on both counts. In spite of "Behind the Walls" being the first French live-action feature shot in 3D, the sparse 3D moments add very little to a story which is handled so ineptly that it almost makes no sense at all.
From the promotional blurb and French websites, I mistakenly believed that "Behind the Walls" was going to be a period version of "Half Light" but with an even more attractive actress in. Superficially, "Behind the Walls" and "Half Light" both deal with the loss of an author's child and that same author retreating into an isolated place to write her next novel. That's where the similarities end.
"Behind the Walls" isn't really a ghost story or a thriller except that it has elements of both which are used as confusing red herrings. The unfurling drama is mainly about our author, Suzanne (Laetitia Casta), mixing drugs into her drinks and getting crazier while the local villagers blame her for all their troubles. When a couple of their daughters disappear, it reminds them of the last outsider who came to live in the area and a series of unsolved child murders. It sounds a lot like "The Reflecting Skin" too, doesn't it? Trust me, it isn't.
The only reason to watch "Behind the Walls" is to ogle Laetitia Casta. She was a Victoria's Secret model before becoming an actress, but you can't really hold that against her. She can actually act a bit although she's a bit dour-looking and far from perfect. Depending on the angle she's filmed from, she's also reminiscent of several Hollywood actresses whose names I can't quite remember. In other words, she's a "type" rather than a star.
The French are such great copyists, and they know what sells. Even Laetitia's love interest in "Behind the Walls" is an "Antonio Banderas type" by the name of Thierry Neuvic. Again, he's not a bad actor, but you won't see him outside of French cinema or TV either.
You might as well give up on the plot since all the good stuff involving an underground lair which Suzanne's cat, Zola, accidentally discovers is quite unimportant except in how it highlights the state of our heroine's mind. When Suzanne moves her typewriter to that spooky place to write her Lovecraftian novel, of course, it's very creepy and full of supernatural shenanigans, but it's all in her head.
Everything is about coincidences, people jumping to conclusions with the minimum of circumstantial evidence, and ignoring what is right in front of them. That is except for the local pervert/mid-life crisis guy who becomes dangerously obsessed with Suzanne, and, of course, her Antonio Banderas lookalike boyfriend who gives her a gratuitous diddling before setting off to play detective in another village.
One scene which reeks of plagiarism (however unlikely it may be) is when Suzanne is in a bathtub surrounded by rats. Although the old porcelain bathtub reminded me of the posters for "Slither", Teeth" and "What Lies Beneath", the scene obviously owed most to the first of these and simply swapped alien bugs for a horde of rodents.
Without spoiling the ending for you (as if you'll ever be silly enough to watch this anyway), let me just say that my overwhelming thought when the credits came up was, "What the bloody Hell did I just watch?" I've tried to put it together for the purpose of this review, but I may be completely wrong about what the directors, Julien Lacombe and Pascal Sid, were trying to achieve.
"Behind the Walls" has some beautiful locations, is nicely filmed, the sparseness of the setting works in its favour, and the costumes are spot-on, but it lacks a cohesive and involving story. It's not a traditional ghost story, and it may have a deeper meaning about French national guilt or some such tripe which is way above my head, but it's just as likely to be only a badly made movie.
"Rachel Carlson, a successful novelist moves to a small Scottish village to move on with her life after the death of her son. Strange things start to happen when she is haunted by ghosts and real life terror."
For the 12th movie in my "Hallowe'en Countdown", I've chosen a favourite of mine which has been polarising reviewers ever since it was released. One of the more snarky BBC critics doesn't just stop at bashing the movie but calls anyone who likes this movie "half-wits". If being a half-wit means that you enjoy a good supernatural thriller then I'm proud to be one.
Although it contains themes which are reminiscent of a lot of Asian ghost films from the same time, "Half Light" doesn't have any scary long-haired girls or little boys meowing like cats in it. Unless you find Demi Moore absolutely terrifying (bearing in mind that the jury is still out about some of her close-ups) or extremely attractive then there may not be a lot here for you. It's not a "terror movie" by any stretch of the imagination.
If you are trying to please the ladies with a movie on Hallowe'en, I'm sure they'll be glad that you haven't put on something which will make them soil themselves and give them nightmares. They'll also appreciate that "Half Light" has Henry Ian Cusick (who we all know as Desmond from "Lost") in it plus Hans Matheson as the love interest. Girls goes crazy for these guys. Apart from being very good actors, I don't really see the appeal of either of them though.
Maybe a lot of shock elements might satiate the masses more than a romance with several twists, but "Half Light" works just fine without all the gimmicks. There's certainly enough creepiness in the early part of the film to draw you into the story and keep you engrossed until the very end. That's not to say that "Half Light" wouldn't benefit from a few more clichéd jump scares, but it doesn't really need them.
Set on a remote Scottish island which, in reality, is actually made up of locations in Cornwall and Wales, "Half Light" conjures up the kind of isolated and paranoid environment which is sure to please fans of "The Wicker Man". The influence is so apparent in several scenes that it's far too easy to point a finger at the lack of originality. No horror movie is ever very original anyway so you have to give "Half Light" credit when it manages to go in a different direction to what you might expect.
The greatest thing about "Half Light", other than Demi Moore proving that she can actually act, is that it feels "old school". Most of this is due to Demi Moore's character not being all that big on technology. Apart from mentioning the internet in a public library and using mobile phones near the end, this film could have been made 20 or 30 years ago. I doubt anyone would have had a bad thing to say about it if it had been.
Unfortunately, for those of who seen too many films, it's easy to spot that the "old school" twists are lifted from various made-for-TV ghost movies from the '70s. I could list half a dozen titles which "Half Light" made me think of. Obviously, the thriller elements in all those movies originally came from film noir, and this leads to "Half Light" feeling like a third or fourth generation duplicate of tried and tested formulas in some places.
Even with great production values, surprisingly good acting, and a plethora of British talent on show, I can see how the very harsh critics would hate it, but I still think "Half Light" works extremely well indeed.
"After being hypnotized by his sister in law, a man begins seeing haunting visions of a girl's ghost and a mystery begins to unfold around her."
Lest we forget what Hallowe'en is really about, it's back to ghosties again with "Stir of Echoes". Although it was overshadowed at the time it came out by "The Sixth Sense", "Stir of Echoes" now stands as the better of the two films.
Very superficially, "Stir of Echoes" and "The Sixth Sense" contain similar subject matter: a creepy little kid who can see ghosts, a murder mystery, and a twist ending. The big differences are that "Stir of Echoes" is set in a far more blue collar environment, the emphasis is more on a psychic adult, and it's not rated PG-13. Given the choice between a PG-13 or an R-rated ghost story, I think most of us would now go with the latter.
Based on a book by Richard Matheson but updated with a modernised screenplay written by the director (David Koepp), "Stir of Echoes" is a very nicely paced thriller which brings out the best from its main characters while not exactly skimping on the supporting cast either. Obviously, Kevin Bacon's character, Tom Witzky, is who the story is focused on, but this isn't just another Kevin Bacon vehicle. Underneath the ghost story is a movie about relationships, and everyone gets a chance to shine no matter how big or small their roles.
As you can tell from the picture above, "Stir of Echoes" has quite a few creepy moments yet it isn't really scary. There are even some genuinely light-hearted touches too. The tone is set when Tom's son, Jake, tells says, "Don't be afraid of it, Daddy." Thus, rather than being terrorised by ghosties as would be more usual, Tom and the audience are encouraged to embrace the existence of the supernatural on a more rational level. It doesn't hurt that the ghostly girl is kind of hot too.
Of course, Tom (Kevin Bacon) still seems to become deranged and obsessional to anyone around him who doesn't understand what he's going through. He's the "everyman" character who we can can all identify with but really wouldn't want to be even if it it meant having the gorgeous Kathryn Erbe as a wife. The characterisation in "Stir of Echoes" is multi-layered and almost perfect. For those of us who moan when there are no characters to empathize with in a movie, "Stir of Echoes" has an abundance of them.
Tom's relationship with Maggie (Kathryn Erbe) is stretched to breaking point, but to her credit, she stands by her man. Her character does get used in a scene which is very reminiscent of "The Shining" to clumsily bring more information about Tom's psychic abilities into the story, but there's a lot more to her than that.
The women in "Stir of Echoes" really deserve a whole article devoted to them on their own. They are all very strong characters who are more than just in the background to suffer the whims of their seemingly "man-child" partners. I'll write a bigger piece about them later, but suffice it to say that Illeana Douglas (who plays Tom's sister-in-law) is also an absolute joy to watch in this movie.
As usual with any kind of mystery, I'm going to cut this short in case I give away too many spoilers. If you've never seen it before or haven't watched it for some time, I recommend that you add "Stir of Echoes" to your Hallowe'en viewing.
