The Paranormal Activity movies are quite an achievement. I can think of only a handful of movie serials where every installment works as a whole movie but also adds to the mythology of the previous ones, not a single movie is a failure and each has it’s own voice. Harry Potter’s 8 installments would be the first one that springs to mind in regular movie genres but what of the horror genre? Can the same be said?

Lets take a look – Nightmare on Elm Street? No, part two was a dud and did not make sense within the framework of the original..

Halloween? Did you SEE part 3??

Friday the 13th? Increasingly one note and less believable as installments went on, not to mention the drop in quality.

Alien? Again, part 3 sucked.

No I think Paranormal Activity  pretty much stands alone with this accomplishment, and for that I admire and respect it immensely.

The latest movie in the series is part 4, and follows on from part 2, after part 3 thoughtfully filled in some background information and managed to be the scariest installment of the lot.

In this one we are introduced to teenaged Alex, her boyfriend Ben, her mum and dad and young brother Wyatt.

A new family of a single mother and her creepy little boy have moved in across the street and then things start to get disturbing…

It’s not giving too much away to say that the mother is Katie from the previous films, that would be clear to anyone who has been following the ongoing storyline of these movies, but part 4 (though very slow-burning) does manage to pack in a small twist that I was surprised by.

The scares here are more subdued than the previous installments, though I’m unsure if this is bcause we know what to expect now to a certain extent. The audience I saw this with jumped and squealed at all the right places, following this with nervous laughter, which for me means that the horror element is effective, even though it is in shorter supply here.

The webcam and the use of the Kinect ‘dots’ worked well and gave a new dimension to the ‘found footage’ sub-genre, fuel to reinvent and expand, always a good thing for horror (which I believe is the only genre with it’s finger firmly on the pulse of our society).

The acing is as good as it needs to be, with a nice amiable turn from Matt Shively as boyfriend Ben the standout.

I have always appreciated that Paranormal Activity does not linger on it’s short bursts of violence, filming them almost matter-of-factly, and the restraint is both highly effective and respectable. The horror here (as with previous PA’s) builds until you are tense and ready to jump then unleashes one scare after another to arrive finally at a truly terrifying ending.

The lesser of the four (though with the others so good, that does not reflect too badly on this one), PA 4 is still a consistent, frightening movie that will leave you jumpy and satisfied.

7.5/10

Please note – As in part 3, almost nothing from the trailer is in the final movie, so don’t be waiting for the scenes you remember from it, they won’t happen.

Also, The cat is fine – no need to worry there.

1999:

1. The Blair Witch Project – builds to a shattering climax that is pure terror
2. The Sixth Sense – strong horror elements, a classic of clever film-making
3. Stir of Echoes – creepy and haunting
4. Deep Blue Sea – big dumb fun!

2000:

1. Final Destination – not in the least bit scary but watching people die has never been more enjoyable
2. What lies beneath – mainstream cinema does horror and does it well
3. American Psycho – Huey Lewis has never been cooler then when accompanying an axe murder
4. The Exorcist: The version you’ve never seen – the spider walk!!!!

2001:

1. Joyride – classic horror scenario that seems entirely plausible
2. The Others – ponderous, stuffy but oh so creepy
3. Session 9 – truly unsettling and hard to shake
4. The Gift – Sam Raimi knows his stuff
5. The Devils Backbone – such powerful imagery

2002:

1. The Ring (US) – left me jumpy for days
2. Ju-on – had the worse night’s sleep ever after this one, creepy kid!
3. Red Dragon – Ralph Fiennes is truly truly scary
4. The Mothman Prophecies – understands the power of what you hear

2003:

1. 28 Days Later – Oh my god! They run!
2. Identity – tricksy, creepy and clever.
3. Wrong Turn – like an 80’s horror with better gore.
4. A Tale of Two Sisters – atmospheric and affecting, haunting.
5. Final Destination 2 – Fun and games.

2004:

1. Dawn of the Dead – The remake is better, gutsier and more cynical than the original.
2. Open Water – desolate and bleak, a nightmare on the screen.
3. Saw – bad acting, bad effects but what an ending! N.b. Forget the sequels – they suck.
4. Shawn of the Dead – very funny and still a little scary too – quite an achievement.

2005:

1. Wolf Creek – pure dread – compelling, honest and unforgettable. A film I can’t shake for days after viewing.
2. The Amityville Horror – Permeated with dread, very scary.
3. Dark Water – not great but effective imagery make it worthwhile.
4. Reeker – funny, inventive and easy to watch.
5. Masters of Horror, John Carpenter Cigarette Burns – made for TV but very, very disturbing.

2006:

1. The Descent (UK version) – brilliant, strong characters/sense of place/ creatures and a psychological layer that makes it so much more.
2. Hostel – hard and disturbing, so plausible it’s scary.
3. Shrooms – should’ve seen the end coming but didn’t; still good, fun horror.
4. The Night Listener – Not strictly horror but very creepy premise and Toni Collette is effective.

2007:

1. The Mist – A disturbing allegory for our ever-present Lord of the Flies possibilities with the cruellest ending ever.
2. Grindhouse – slow burning cleverness to the ultimate pay-off (and arguably the best car chase ever committed to celluloid)
3. Black Water – heart in the mouth all-too-possible alligator thriller, a great Aussie horror.
4. The Orphanage – Equal parts scary and sad, creepy kids rule.
5. 30 Days of Night – a vampire film with a real sense of place (Alaska) and a dark and dirty feel, gory and cool.
6. Halloween Remake – a clever remake that integrated what you expected to see with what you wanted to see, perfectly cast too (just skip the trashy sequel)
7. Wind Chill – little known two-hander ghost story that certainly creeps up on you
8. Rec – a balls out thrill ride from start to finish – oh zombies… how I love thee.
9. Pan’s Labyrinth – by turns nasty and enchanting, not sure if this is a horror but it certainly has enough horror elements to get your heart racing – Pale Man anyone??
10. Vacancy – It’s the central idea that is the best thing about this film – wanna be the star of a snuff movie? Me neither!
11. Disturbia – a spin on Rear Window that worked for me though was a little soft in the end.
12. Primeval – a fictional account of the hunt for Gustave, the legendary real 20 foot crocodile that lives in Africa. This film also makes a strong political statement about the genocide in Burundi.

2008:

1. Eden Lake – hard, brutal, terrifying and really really good
2. The Ruins – a big surprise for me in how effective this was, I cared about the characters and found their killer plant plight totally engrossing.
3. Quarantine – Rec remade with Americans – just as scary.
4. Let the right one in – more a feeling then a film for me, more atmospheric then frightening, but memorable and a real achievement in film-making.
5. Shutter – for a pg American remake this worked for me and even gave me a few good jumps. Yes pg film-makers – it can be done.
6. The Strangers – although ultimately disappointing for me, I loved the lengths it was willing to go and the hard line it wanted to walk.
7. Splinter – trashy silly and cheap but lotsa fun.

2009:

1. Paranormal Activity – sheer terror for me, slept with the lights on for three nights – can’t say any movie has done that to me since I was a child.
2. Orphan – a unique twist on the creepy kid genre elevates this from really good to great for me. A must-see.
3. Lake Mungo – VERY creepy, sad and realistically set in suburban Australia. A totally original idea (rare!) brilliantly fed out throughout the films running time so that when things get going you are totally invested and intrigued. Features one of the scariest moments i’ve seen on film.

4. The Last House on the Left remake – as disturbing as the original with the parent’s revenge explored so much better in this version. Just turn it off before the final coda – that little bit at the end almost ruined all that had come before it.

5. Zombieland – the most fun I have had at a horror movie in years. Hilarious and full of zombies – brilliant!
6. Drag me to Hell – silly, zany and gory. Welcome back Sam Raimi.
7. Donkey Punch – starts off as porn, then takes an abrupt turn into kill or be killed territory, all too plausible UK horror.
8. The Descent 2 – seen apart from the original this is good and creepy, in comparison it is woefully under-cooked. It does however feature some truly edge-of-your-seat set pieces.

There is a popular sub-culture in the horror genre – one that is self-aware and self-depreciating, knowing, and a little arch.

If this genre were a character it would twirl it’s mustache and swirl it’s martini because it knows all the tricks of the trade and it also knows how to ply them to its own means.

Arguably the most famous example of this sub-genre would be Scream (and its subsequent sequels), Sean Of The Dead may be considered another although it is not as subversive, and Funny Games may also be included in this group though it takes itself way too seriously and is not as much fun as it’s contemporaries (nor does it intend to be).
These films are as much about exploiting horror conventions as they are about their own (by necessity) convoluted plots.
They enjoy toying with our expectations and making us laugh as much as scream.
The Cabin in the Woods is the latest addition to this group..
Partly written by Joss Whedon (of Buffy and the Star Trek reboot fame) and directed by new-comer Drew Goddard, it is essentially a story of five teenagers who go to, you guessed it, a cabin in the woods; but while the cabin is the foreground of the story, there is an elaborate and strangely appealing background taking place that puts quite a unique spin on what we see happening to these teenagers. To say more would take away the pleasure of seeing this films secrets come to light, and so the summary ends here.
The acting is uniformly above bar with Richard Jenkins and Bradley Whitford adding some well-seasoned spice to their ‘office’ roles, Chris Hemsworth brings his sizable screen presence to the ‘jock’ role (though with the wattage turned down a smite), and Fran Kranz draws every eye to him with all the best laughs as the ‘stoner’.
There are some obvious and not so-obvious horror references here, everything from The Strangers to Hellraiser and I could not help but connect a lot of this movie (entire scenes in fact) to The Evil Dead; but while the kids in Scream were aware of the horror conventions and cliches they continually found themselves in, these teenagers seem to be less in on the joke and therein lies the rub. These are non-horror-savvy kids in a horror-savvy movie so it didn’t entirely gel, at least not all the time. It was never quite funny enough or quite scary enough and so fell just short of the goal post for me.
Having said that, there is lots of fun to be had here – the ‘suit guys’ are surprisingly hilarious and I enjoyed their realistic dialogue (child-proof handles anyone??) the super-bong, the scooby-doo obviousness of the teenagers’ roles, the last magnificently bloody half hour, the special guest star and of course that ending – how great and wonderful is that ending?! I must admit that when we got there and there were two possible finales, I truly didn’t think they’d be brave enough to pick the one they did, it was (for a misanthropist like me) just glorious.

8/10

The Strangers, 2008

It was a freezing cold evening in the chilly Melbourne winter when I

attended a 5:30 screening of ‘The Strangers’ with my good friend Jo.

We got loaded up with respectable cinema goodies and took our seats
prepared to be scared; after all, even the trailer to this film
afforded me a few chills and I wanted to get back to the way horrors
used to be when scares relied on actually scaring people, not just
grossing them out.

‘The Strangers’ tells the story of Kirsten and James, a remote farm
house, and the strangers that make a sport of their isolation and
fear.

It is a spare little story which makes good use of its minimal cast
and setting, particularly in the opening 30 minutes or so where the
tension is built up quietly and efficiently. There is a back story
between this couple and it is mostly explained through a short series
of flashbacks to the earlier part of their evening, the painful reason
for their awkwardness now. It is well-handled and the melancholy
between them is palpable.

A stranger comes to their door asking for someone who is not there and
they send her away but there is something unsettling about the
encounter, and it is 4 in the morning and they are all alone out
there.

James leaves on an errand (as you do) and Kirsten is alone now, so of
course things escalate and her unease turns to out-right fear, you in
the audience feel it too. This is tense and frightening stuff, you
cannot help put yourself in their shoes.

Things remain taut and absorbing right up until a third ‘victim’ shows
up, then all inventiveness and credibility flies out the window and
predicability and stupid responses come flying in.

It is mostly redeemed by a shockingly passionless scene of final
violence that I found chilling and sad, but it is once again hampered
by the directors need to include another tacked on horror convention
ending that actually drew some laughs from the audience and the man
seated behind me to declare “well that was a load of bullshit! I want
my money back”.

I don’t agree with his less-than-eloquent assessment of the film but I
can understand his disappointment, after all, the only thing worse
than a bad film is an average film that could’ve been great.

Liv Tyler is believable but somewhat insipid as Kirsten, you can’t
help but wish she’d gotten a little fight in her somewhere along the
line. Scott Speedman did an adequate job as James but was far more
effective in the earlier non-horror scenes than once things really get
going.

The Strangers themselves were very effective throughout and I must
admit that that sack mask has stayed with me even after the movie.

This could’ve been a real nasty, hard, thrilling little horror but
instead turned pedestrian in all the wrong places and ate itself.

Sometimes, less is more.

7/10

Prom Night, 2008

They don’t seem to remake old horrors anymore, they just use the title and maybe the setting and off we go.
This was the case for Halloween, Texas Chainsaw, Black Christmas, When a Stranger Calls etc. and it is also the case for Prom Night.
In the original, a child’s game ended in tragedy, 6 years later, a witness to the game wants revenge. It starred Jamie Lee Curtis and was basically a good old fashioned cheesy slasher movie set at the high school prom.
In the new version, Brittany Snow plays Donna who returns home from a night out to find her family killed by a stalker teacher who, three years later, escapes and pursues her at the prom.
The movie’s ‘star’, Brittany Snow , has very little of the star power she displayed in Hairspray and is bland here, the burden of expressing both fear AND sadness over her family is obviously beyond her limited capabilities as an actress.
Her posse of friends don’t fare much better with the only real stand outs being Collins Pennie and Dana Davis as Prom King and Queen Ronnie and Lisa, their chemistry as believable as their fright.
Jonathon Schaech is a menacing presence as the killer but is not given as much screen time as he deserves, his skill with what little he is given puts the other actors to shame.
The main issue I have with this film is that it is not scary.
I know that the PG rating means no gore but where does it say that there can be no horror?
And no story coherence?
Why would the police say that they have ‘no reason’ to think the killer would go after Donna when he was arrested for stalking her??
Why would the killer go to the prom and be hidden by a cap from the other students and teachers who know him??
Why would he kill her friends instead of just her??
Why would Lisa get off the elevator on an abandoned floor instead of where her friends were when it was only the next floor down??
How does he brutally stab all those people and still not have a drop of blood on him??
There is so much of this silly questioning that it just gets ridiculous and completely takes you out of the film, it is hard to suspend your disbelief when they make it so impossible to do so.
PG horrors may have their place and that is a debate for another time (watch out for my rant on this very subject in ‘Sue Says’ soon) however I do think that in this case the film was severely hampered by this rating. Not to mention the stupidity factor…
All I want from a horror is a few good scares and maybe a sleepless night – is that too much to ask??

3/10

The Orphanage, 2007

Suitably, this movie starts with an orphanage, angelic children running about, playing a modified game of ‘what’s the time Mr Wolf’ while the sun shines and all seems right with their small world.

We flash forward and Laura, an orphan we saw re-homed in the opening scene, has returned to the orphanage with her son and husband in tow, determined to re-open it.

They barely have time for a big welcome party before her son goes missing and the creepiness begins.

That’s a short summary of a film I am encouraging people to see but to say much more would give away too much and it is a good deal more fun to go into this one a little less the wiser.

The revelations are more haunting when you don’t expect them, the final denouement more effecting.

Del Toro produced this and heavily influenced the look and feel of it as it is a bit like Del Toro lite, but I cannot fault the good work director Juan Antonio Bayona displays here, particularly when you consider this is his first feature.

The cinematography warrants a special mention also, as it is sublime; the acting impressive across the board and some of the subtitles were entertainment on their own, so funny were the translations.

Mainly however,  this is a movie of subtly escalating disquiet, things are just so terribly ‘wrong’ here in some fundamental way that you can’t help but feel uncomfortable from the beginning, and certain set pieces (That game! That mask!) recur to you in the watches of the night and bring with them a small shiver and a rethink of that night-time toilet break.

The Orphanage has all your classic horror trappings – scary little kids, a haunted house, a tragic twist, creepy masks, a deformed child neglected and a mother tormented by this neglect, and a protagonist that everyone thinks is delusional.

This is a good old fashioned horror movie imbued with some scares that are well above average and a poignant ending that puts the whole film in a different light. Sinister and sad in equal measures, this is an orphanage well worth visiting.

8/10

Turistas, 2006

Turistas is one of those movies I never got around to seeing when it first came out but found it on a list of horror nasties the other day and decided to give it ago.

Alex (Josh Duhamel), his sister Bea (Olivia Wilde) and her best friend are on a bus in Brazil which crashes in the opening sequence, introducing us to fellow survivors and future victims – Brits Finn and Liam, and Australian Pru (Melissa George).

After an argument with a local they wander off and stumble upon a hidden beach where everything is sandy shores, perfect sunshine, gorgeous half-naked people and a bar! This is some sort of paradise and they buy it hook line and sinker.

We come to realise that this place is a lure, and before you know it we are introduced to a Swedish couple (his name is Sven of course) who barely have time to lovingly caress their motorcycle (aka evidence to be used later in the film) before they are led away to die in the best and most shocking scene of the movie.

Our Western tourists meanwhile are partying the night away before waking up in the morning to realise that all their possessions have been stolen and the bar destroyed.

They decide to walk to the local town where The Motorbike is spotted thus telling them that this is a ‘bad town’.

The only person offering help is Kiko who says he’ll take them to his uncle’s house in the jungle; in absence of any other choice, they go with him. On the way there, he makes a detour to show them a lovely waterfall and underwater caves, because after being robbed, having rocks thrown at you and waking up cold and hung-over on a beach in the middle of nowhere, getting in some sight-seeing is really your main goal.

Of course, Kiko’s ‘uncle’ isn’t really his uncle but a mad doctor called Zamora who wants to sell their organs to the local hospital because America always steals from the little guy and blah blah blah. This film has now been running 55 mins and as yet all the deaths we have are 2 Swedes who we really didn’t know and a henchman.

Having watched this far you know who will be the first victim, the second victim, the third victim, you know who will survive and who will pay for their dishonesty. You even know how it’ll end.

The biggest issue I had with this film, apart from its total predictability, was its complete lack of tension. Not only did I not care what happened to these people, it was directed in such a lack-lustre way that there was not even any visceral thrill in the killing scenes, there was no believable connections between the characters and so no real loss felt when they died.

Also, there was no centre to this movie, generally films build to a scene or an ending or a moment but this film seemed to build VERY slowly and then just evaporate.

The actual death/dismemberment scene was well-filmed but was like watching ER or something, there was no screaming because the person was drugged and anesthetised during the organ removal procedure so it just felt like a medical drama scene, not a horror scene.

The cinematography was either gorgeous (the cave scenes are spectacular) or dreadful (the night time scenes so muddy you couldn’t tell who was who sometimes).

A strange film in that it didn’t seem to want to be the style of horror it had to be in order to work. If you want to make a video nasty for the noughties, it’d better be nasty or at least scary; otherwise, what’s the point?

4.5/10

Eden Lake, 2008

The other day I read a blog bemoaning the lack of intelligent, relatable characters populating horror films, how they seem to exist only to serve the plot, not to react and retaliate the way in which real people would.
This film goes some way in its effort to remedy that.

Nursery teacher Jenny and her boyfriend Steve escape London for a romantic weekend away in a remote quarry surrounded by woodland. Unfortunately for them, a group of young thugs also decide to take advantage of the area for some obnoxious fun. A confrontation ensues and then next thing you know it is one-upmanship for all as the violence escalates beyond what any of them could have envisioned, eventually becoming a cat-and-mouse pursuit that is as relentless and uncompromising as its villains.
Steve, played by Michael Fassbender before he hit it big with X-Men Origins and Prometheus, is all logic and confidence, sure that he can get the thugs to calm down with his ‘I’m one of the kids shtick’, reverting to aggression when that fails.
Jenny (Kelly Reilly), on the other hand, seems to sense the danger right away and wants to just keep the peace at any cost. It is in her that we see ourselves and in her actions and reactions we see our truth. She is not super-human, she does not become Rambo, she does not do foolish things, and the circumstances which put her most in harms way are the result of misfortune and bad timing, not any stupidity on her part.
The Chav thugs are accurately portrayed by a collection of young British actors, all scarily believable. You can see the threat and fear in their eyes and yet they manage to find a humanity in these characters that makes them all the more frightening.
Special mention should go to Thomas Turgoose of ‘This is England’ fame and Jack O’Connell as head thug Brett – he is truly menacing.
Directed with a great sense of pace and restraint by James Watkins, a man who seems to understand the efficacy of sound, that sometimes what you hear is far worse than what you see.
There are also some powerful sequences in this film; the initiation scene is utterly burned into my memory as is the ‘fire’ scene, the final denouement is bleak, confronting and cruel.
And yet I believed it all, I believed these characters and their struggle, I believed in those thugs and one glance at the news will confirm that this situation is certainly not far from the realms of possibility.
Eden Lake is the sort of film that you want to look away from, it is no joyride horror, no OTT torture porn, no silly creature feature. This is horror with a more human face than we are used to seeing and for this reason it scared the hell out of me. I thought about it for days and it still feels fresh to me writing about it now.
If horror really is a reflection of the society we live in (as I believe it is) than we should watch this film and take heed. For in some pockets of the Western world, this is the youth of today.
And if that is true, then God help us all.

9/10

Reviews From Bed

Whilst suffering from the dreaded super-flu like virus that has afflicted me for the last 5 weeks (and in truth, is still vehemently clinging to my immune system in the form of a very persistent cough) I managed to view a movie or two.
A pair of films that I watched over two consecutive Fridays, tucked up in bed and feeling sorry for myself were ‘A Tale of Two Sisters’ and it’s remake – ‘The Uninvited’; now with my health all but renewed, I can review them.

A Tale of Two Sisters, 2003

Two sisters arrive at a remote house where their father and step-mother await their return, the former with resignation, the latter with a nervous kind of spite.

The sister’s – Soo Mi and Soo Yeon – have a common enemy in the step-mother and they are bonded not only as sisters but also in the shared belief that the step-mother was responsible for their mother’s death.

There are things here I’d like to tell you but I won’t because they are things you should discover on your own, not the least of which is the mystery of the mother’s death, but also the small clues throughout this film that add up to a terrible truth. When you watch this, take note of every passing glance, every small phrase, every inanimate object the camera falls on, they matter.
There is a richness to this film that imbues the sisters relationship with an almost palpable believability, you can see they love and care for each other, how close their bond is, how much they want to be each other’s saviour.

Appreciate also the beautiful dream-like quality of the cinematography, the sharp intrusion of the horror (in short bursts almost when least expected) has a lasting effect embodying as it does our deepest fears, the shape in the dark, the figure in the bedroom…
The final denouement when it comes is tragic and awful and damaging to all concerned, a harsh lesson in the nature of regret and how it erodes all that we treasure in ourselves.
This is a film that you watch feeling off-kilter but intrigued, repulsed but fascinated, a film that forces you to re-assess every character over and over again as new information comes to light, is that father unfeeling and cold? Or worn down by his love for someone who cannot feel it? And what of the step-mother? What is with her almost hysterical desperation?
ATOTS is a film that cannot help but impress with it’s expertly constructed story and artistic production values.
Director Ji-woon Kim has superbly built up the tension while giving nothing away – a mean feat in any film but particularly crucial in this one.
The actors are all flawlessly cast, believable, vulnerable and accessible.
A perfect psychological horror that you won’t forget.
9/10

The Uninvited, 2008

It was inevitable that Hollywood would remake the Korean original, as successful and well-made as it was, Hollywood always seems to think it can do better.

This time around the sisters are Anna and Alex (played by Emily Browning and Arielle Kebbel respectively). Anna’s story starts further back than Soo-mi’s and the film suffers from it, already you know more than you should and that sense of being dropped into the middle of someone’s life is lost somewhat when you colour it in with broad strokes of colourful dreams/flashbacks/back-story.
The storyline is similar to ATOTS but the title is not the only place the two films part ways, the sister is older in this film and therefore less sympathetic, the relationship between the sisters is not as well-realised, the boyfriend a distraction, the red herring a mistake.

Emily Browning, David Strathairn as the father and Elizabeth Banks (who plays the step-mother) are all solid in their roles, the direction by The Guard brothers is adequate and at times, nicely restrained.
There are some chills to be had but they are short lasting and I can only really recall one that truly revolted me (the back!!).
Perhaps if this film had not been a remake it would have stood more steadily on it’s own feet, it is not a bad film, just average and conventional, even the twist is dumbed down and sorely lacking the emotional impact that resonated so soundly in ATOTS.

The issue here is that it IS a remake; and a pale, insipid retooling of a film that did everything so right the first time cannot help but look even worse by comparison.
The cheesy, Hollywood ending had me cringing.
Stick to the original, this is just nowhere near as good.
6/10

Acolytes

The definition of the word ‘acolytes’ is as follows: devoted followers or attendants; it is a pity the film-makers didn’t research this before naming their movie, as there are no acolytes here.

The latest Aussie horror is out on DVD and while it has some promise it fails to deliver on any of them.

Young high school student Mark (Sebastian Gregory) stumbles upon a scene in his local woods involving a fresh grave and a man in a butterfly-decorated 4WD leaving the area. He shares his discovery with his friends James (Joshua Payne) and Chasely (Hanna Mangan-Lawrence) and they return to the scene to unearth what they imagine is buried cash or drugs.
Their fun turns nasty, however, when they uncover a body.
Through a convoluted series of events the boys come to the conclusion that their grim unearthing could help them exact revenge upon their nemesis – Gary Parker (Michael Dorman), so they begin a search for the identity of the killer.
This film heads down several interesting paths but never fulfils any of them. The reason behind the revenge is intriguing but not fully explored, the ‘Apt Pupil’ interest in the serial killer is touched on but left alone, the love triangle between the three teens is unique but unrealised.
Joel Edgerton as the serial killer in question is another incomplete thing about this film, he does a great job with what he is given but though the films most compelling character, his screen time is limited, his impact is stymied by shortened scenes and unexplored motivations. Plus, he looks like the prototype of the quiet-man serial killer, with his tinted 80’s specs and his thick paedophile moustache, he looks a bit too BTK to have ever been anything but a killer.
The other villain in this piece is Michael Dorman’s character, who’s all tightly wound anger and bristling testosterone – he is a wonderful contrast to Edgerton’s mild mannered sociopath.
The main issue I had with this film were the teen leads – Sebastian Gregory does an acceptable albeit mumbly job as Mark but Mangan-Lawrence’s performance as Chaseley is bloodless and boring and Payne’s work as James is just bizarre, his acting range somewhere between gormlessness and inane toneless yelling, he is never believable or sympathetic.
An intriguing idea for a film that is cluttered, uneven and full of plot-holes, it is still well filmed by John Hewitt with some great gore/horror at the end and a twist that while makes little sense, is interesting none-the-less.
5.5/10

Drag Me To Hell

My friend Michelle rang last week and asked what I was doing and would I like to go with her to see Drag me to Hell at ‘Knifepoint’ Shopping centre. As I was, at the time of her call, in bed wearing long johns, 2 cats on my lap, reading the paper and stuffing my face with pancakes, I said “sure” and she came over to sip cups of peppermint tea whilst I made myself presentable to the public.

After some vigorous vegetarian food shopping we headed to the selected session, popcorn in hand, prepared to be frightened (her) and grossed out (me).
One of us got our wish…..and it wasn’t Michelle.

Cued by the lurid title and director Sam Raimi’s previous efforts, I expected a humorous and disgusting thrill ride and that is almost what I got.
Story summary: Loan officer Christine (Alison Lohman) under pressure to improve her lot by her longed-to-be-forgotten redneck past, her bank manager boss (David Paymer), upper class boyfriend (Justin Long) and said boyfriend’s family, decides to take a stand with the wrong little old lady and denies a mortgage extension from a gypsy/witch who promptly curses her to be tormented by demons for three days before being claimed by Hell itself.

A simple enough story but with a lot of room for things to go horribly wrong – should the old lady look cartoonish instead of evil, should the ‘torments’ prove to be silly rather then intimidating, should Christine’s actions appear to be foolish rather than strong, it could all fall in a heap.
Luckily, most of these things are pulled off with aplomb. There is much to enjoy here if you’re willing to play along.

The car park scene was effective and provided the only real ‘scares’ but was pretty vile and put poor Michelle off her popcorn for the rest of the movie. The torments were decidedly crazy-making for Christine to live through and her actions were nearly all acceptable with the notable exception of one frankly unbelievable plot twist involving a kitten, now as a cat lover I am biased but I just did not believe that her character would do what the director made her do, it was a plot device and maybe in a movie as silly as this one that isn’t as important but it still took me out of the story.

It is also important to note that the ending is VERY sudden and quite surprising, something that regular readers will know I enjoy – give me an ending I don’t expect and I’m a happy woman.

Alison Lohman was a good choice to play the lead, she is plucky, brave, and beautiful; Justin Long also works for me as her boyfriend, being in a thankless role is hard but he still managed to make an impact even as the ‘straight man’.

It’s nice to watch a film and be in the hands of a director who knows what he is doing, Sam Raimi’s films always have a certain look and feel and Drag me to Hell is no exception, here are the strange angles and zoom/pullbacks and crazy close-ups etc. we’ve come to expect, the puppety animals and kooky characters.
Lets face it, if you’ve seen the Evil Dead trilogy and dug it then you’ll also enjoy Drag me to Hell.

As for Michelle and I? We enjoyed it a lot but didn’t love it, it wasn’t quite as funny as I thought, not quite as clever, but it never lagged, was original not some dodgy remake of an old classic or a rip-off of an Asian horror, and I did have fun.

A most entertaining way to spend a Saturday afternoon and well worth getting out of your long johns for.

7.5/10

Mum and Dad

When you tell people you enjoy watching horror movies, and those people look at you with disgust and declare “Ugh, I don’t know how you can watch that stuff”, it is this movie that they are imagining.
I am not sure how matt and I watched this either.
Mum & Dad tells the story of a young Polish girl who is kidnapped by a twisted British family, tortured and… basically that’s it.
It is hard to review as there was no real plot, no real characterisation (motives? nup, character arcs? nup, humanity? nup), no sense of reality, no point really.
Essentially a Polish girl who we know nothing about and therefore cannot empathise with, who seems to have no-one to miss her as we see no police involvement, no family members searching, not even an employer wondering where she is, is taken by a sick family for no reason other than an excuse to disgust the audience.
This film was boring, made no sense and was peopled with characters you cared nothing for.
Worse still, it is badly directed, appallingly scripted with overblown, exaggerated acting and seems to exist purely to lurch from one atrocious scene to the next.
Nasty, grimy pointless torture porn nonsense.
Made me want to shower for a very very long time.

0/10

Jennifer’s Body

You know those friends that you have a history with, who knew you before you had evolved into who you are now, those friends with whom you no longer have anything in common bar in-jokes and embarrassing pasts, and now aren’t even sure if you like? That’s the relationship featured in Jennifer’s body.

Jennifer (Megan Fox – brains in her booty) and Needy (Amanda Seyfried of, gulp, ‘Mama Mia’ fame) are sandpit friends, i.e. friends since they were toddlers and this almost symbiotic friendship has devolved to the point where they are more or less frenemies.

Around this twosome screen writer Diablo Cody (Juno) has woven a twisted little tale of demon possession punctuated by her famous teenspeak banter and put-downs.

A night on the town turns into a night of death, destruction and human sacrifice brought about by ‘Low Shoulder’ band member Adam Brody (The OC), and Jennifer is just not the same afterwards, only no-one seems aware of the body count she’s been racking up except Needy.

Throw in a lesbian make out session, the interesting ‘mean girls’ style love you/hate you element that teen girls can sometimes create between them, Megan Fox skinny dipping in the lake and a prom final scenario and you got some pretty tantalising stuff for the average horror movie goer.

Some luscious cinematography and a pretty decent soundtrack do not a hit film make however and I was surprised when I went online to read what fellow film-goers thought only to be confronted by some pretty hateful diatribes.

The issues people had were sound ones – no, teenagers don’t really talk in witty soundbytes and yes, it appears that Megan Fox really does believe in the ‘just part your lips and pant’ variety of acting (although I gotta admire anyone who can get so much mileage and moolah out of just looking parched).

But if you are just looking for some solid b-movie thrills and spills with a few laughs and some truly committed acting from Amanda Seyfried, this just may be the movie for you.

Yes, its silly and Megan Fox is so out of her element its almost awkward, but I gotta admit I kinda liked it.

Don’t listen the haters, check your brain at the door and relax, this is one fun ride…

7.5/10

The Last Exorcism

There is a big problem with this movie – the posters are scarier than the film itself.

I have to admit that just seeing those posters around movie theatres a few months ago was certainly getting me very excited about this upcoming release, it looked like a mix between ‘The Exorcism of Emily Rose’ and ‘Paranormal Activity’ – two of the most frightening films for me in recent memory.

Maybe my expectations were unfair, maybe I wanted more than this film was ever able to deliver, but to say it failed to live up to either of those movies is being kinder than I feel.

When the movie ended last night I was more focused on what had gone right rather than what had gone wrong and therefore just felt mildly disappointed. Now I actually feel angry, because nothing in film pisses me off more than a missed opportunity.

Cotton Marcus, a preacher questioning his faith, agrees to go out to the remote bible-belt farm owned by the Sweetzer family, who claim their daughter Nell has been possessed by a demon. Cotton takes a film crew of two to document his last ‘exorcism’ – a ‘show’ he basically puts on for families as it seems that their belief in the charade of possession is so strong that the act of exorcism ‘cures’ their loved ones. It also, as he puts it, “helps pay the bills”.

However, things are not as they seem at the Sweetzer farm and it’s not long before things go very pear-shaped indeed.

So, what went right with this movie? The cast is good and strong, some nasty scenes (countdown to ten anyone?) were very effective, the decision to go minimal with the demonic ‘make up’ was a sound one and the character of the preacher was unique and interesting.

What went wrong? Pretty much everything else.

The hand held camera was supposed to add realism for the audience but you can’t have that and also have tension music, you cant have realism and have the characters act so idiotically, why didn’t they just call the police? They had cell phones right? Why didn’t they just leave? Why they couldn’t do those things was never addressed (a sin in horrors in my opinion) therefore the characters’ behaviour seemed totally irrational.

At the beginning of the film we are walked through how exorcisms are faked for families and then actually watch it being enacted with Nell’s family. Big mistake, because later we are expected to see Cotton do those things for real and be scared by them, a magician can’t reveal their secrets and then think you’ll be amazed by them later, the moment has gone.

Not to mention that a film like this, made mockumentary style, relies on a slow ratcheting of tension punctuated with moments of fear; to cripple it from the beginning with comedy is just stupid film-making, it’s like expecting a car to drive when you’ve already let the air out of the tyres, it doesn’t work.

Horrors can be humorous and still work effectively to scare us (see Scream, American Werewolf in London, Severance, Dead Snow) but its all down to where the humour is placed (as small tension releases throughout the film) and how they work (not to derail the scares that are soon to happen). They cannot be outright comedies and still expect to scare you.

Then we come to the ending, the film drags itself through half-realised scares (exasperating as some of them could have really popped instead of fizzled), ill-placed comedy and unconvincing scenes of ‘terror’ (the cat, Cotton couch sleeping and artwork moments all come to mind); only to reach a rushed and tacked-on ending that just stopped everything dead.

I had no issue with the concept of the ending per se but it was handled so badly and so conventionally but at the same time so unconvincingly (why are you all just standing there???) that I just couldn’t get onboard. The whole movie needed editing to make it tenser, sharper, quicker, better sound editing to really play up the ‘possession’, better camera work to make more use of the hand held, less comedy, more creepiness and a fully explored ending because it was an intriguing if not entirely new concept.

So in the end, the bad outweighs the good by a large measure and a film that could’ve been chilling, ended up being frustrating.

What a pity..

5/10

In 2007 Xavier Gens made a horror movie called ‘Frontiers’, it was one of the new wave of French nasties and once seen it was not easily forgotten with it’s graphic violence and depressing outlook on humanity.

‘The Divide’ is the film-makers second attempt at an english language film (after the failed ‘Hitman’ in late 2007) and he has again returned to the familiar ground of horror and darkness.

This is the story of a disparate group of survivors, escaping the nuclear war being waged outside their apartment block by hiding in said apartment block’s basement. How long they are there, what they do to survive, what is happening within them etc. is the main thrust of this compelling but utterly bleak film.

It is mostly cast with actors who have had their time in the sun and are now no longer the draw cards they once were or might have been; however there are some fine turns here, notably from Michael Biehn (Terminator, Aliens) as the curmudgeonly old janitor whose basement these interlopers invade, and Rosanna Arquette (Desperately Seeking Susan, Pulp Fiction) as a woman who finds herself spiralling towards a shocking degeneration after personal tragedy destroys her sense of self. The performances of both Milo Ventimiglia (Heroes) and Micheal Ekland are astoundly good and almost worth watching the whole film for, they are truly disturbing in their representation of men who fully embrace their changing circumstance, their opportunistic profiteering and alpha male behaviours are seriously scary stuff.

There are a lot of faults here, mainly the lack of early characterisation, the time frame is muddy, the confusion over the ‘white suit guys’, and it’s unrelentingly sombre and dread-filled tone can sometimes make it hard for the viewer to persevere.

But there is much to admire here, and it reminded me in some part of ‘The Mist’ with it’s dehumantization and return to savagery an almost inevitable conclusion to locking a group of people in a small place with dwindling supplies and no ‘society’ to keep us ‘polite’, (though of course, ‘The Mist’ was much much better).

I wouldn’t say i ‘enjoyed’ this, it’s hard to enjoy something so downright misanthropic and desolate, but i did admire what it was trying to say and a horror with something to say can only be a good thing in my book.

6.5/10

I went into this with an open mind. I’ll admit that I liked the first film, I thought it was compassionate to it’s characters, starred a man with a face just perfect for horror (Deiter Laser), was more studied than I had expected and had a nice scientific aesthetic that made the perverse subject matter far easier to ‘swallow’.

The Human Centipede Full Sequence is everything you’d hoped not to see in the first film and then some.

I don’t mind extreme horror, I enjoyed Hostel, loved Wolf Creek, thought Audition was masterful, what I don’t like is ugly, grotesque horror, and that’s the stock and trade of this grubby little movie.

The plot is wafer thin and fairly unimportant except to move the victims into play for the protagonist to commit his perversions on. It concerns a fat, inarticulate man called Martin who is obsessed with the movie ‘The Human Centipede’ and wants to make a centipede of his own, only his will be longer and he is not a surgeon so instead of neat suturing and gauze, here we get gaffer tape and a staple gun.

First the good – the main character is perfectly cast with Laurence R Harvey; I can’t rememeber the last time I saw such a repellant person on screen, if this is acting he’s good, if not then I’ll bet he always gets a seat alone on the bus. The black and white (with some brown….yes, you know what parts I’m talking about) is a very nice touch and works well with the coldness of the parking garage where Martin works and the storeroom where he keeps his victims.

The rest is all bad – the actors surrounding Harvey are pretty stock standard weak, the plot is full of holes, it’s offensive on a level I cannot even begin to explain (the baby sequence DISGUSTED me, children should NEVER be in horrors unless they are the killers) and on top of all that, it’s boring.

A waste of time and a nasty piece of work.

I will not be watching the threquel..

I have a very vivid memory of my sister Louise returning from her friends house one night, ashen faced and silent. I asked her what had happened and she told me she had watched a movie called ‘Demons’ and it had simply terrified her. I asked what happened in it and her reply haunted me for literally years..”you don’t want to know”.

Is there ever a more enticing sentence?? probably not for me. I must confess, when I read a movie review that says this movie will stay with you, hurt you, scar you, I wanna see it!

After that fateful night I saw the vhs at the video store many years over my youth and teen years (even when I was at film school, perusing the shelves with friends in a slightly drunken giggly stupor) but never quite had the nerve to watch it.

Until now.

Off to a friends house with my super-girlfriend miss kitty on Saturday I couldn’t help but see that particular movie option sticking out like a sore thumb amongst the many more admirable choices and declared this was the time to view it.

The essential story is all 80’s retro fashion and cheese which is a-ok for this little black duck. A mixed-bag of victims are trapped in a movie theatre while the ‘demon virus’ gradually spreads amongst them so they are either dinner or a demon.

Directed by Lamberto Bava (son of Mario) and screenplay written by Dario Argento, this ‘Evil Dead’-style gore-fest has quite an impressive pedigree, but apart from some nicely composed artistic shots it is essentially popcorn horror for the masses and was a huge hit when it came out spawning a moderately successful sequel.

The soundtrack is rocking and deserves the surround sound treatment and the effects are surprisingly effective but the acting leaves quite alot to be desired as does the dialogue; and the ‘locked room’ setting can get a little boring to look at but the thrills do keep you somewhat on your toes.

Overall not a film deserving of my sister’s trembling big-eyed fear, but what horror could live up to that chilling and yet alluring sentence??

I’ll keep looking for it……

In 1997 Austrian Michael Haneke made ‘Funny Games’, in 2007, 11 years later, it is remade into a shot-by-shot American version.

I watched this film a while ago and it took me a long time to write the review because I am still unsure how I feel about it.

It lies somewhere between brilliant and awful, horrifying and ridiculous, shocking and obvious, but out of all those adjectives the one constant for me is memorable.

I can honestly say that I have never seen a film quite like it and it has been in my head since I saw it.

Funny Games tells the story of a family who go to spend a relaxing vacation in their cabin when they are targeted by two sociopaths intent on making a ‘game’ of their torment.

It stars Naomi Watts (excellent), Tim Roth (believable and good to see back on screen) and Michael Pitt (utterly repellent in his role, as the villain should be).

It is superbly and simply directed, featuring those long shots and still shots that Haneke likes so much.

Its look and feel owes a nod to ‘A Clockwork Orange’, particularly the terrifying politeness that the sociopaths use when discussing the possible deaths of the family, and of course their white outfits also seem iconically influenced.

There is a coldness here that keeps you distant from the family to a certain degree, but they never act in a way that is foolish or nonsensical and that goes a long way with me as stupid victims always bring me out of a movie very quickly.

However, there is more to this film then I have written, it is a film that is aware of being a film and wants to constantly remind the audience of this, by breaking the fourth wall (characters speak directly to the screen, requesting audience involvement), by changing the ‘bad guys’ names throughout the film and by using film in a VERY manipulative way near the end when something most interesting is done by one of the villains – it features a remote.

The director has said that this film is put out as a challenge to those who enjoy screen violence, it’s aim is to make you complicit with what happens to this family, as if you are ‘in on it’ and it has occurred simply to entertain you the audience.

While I can understand what he is getting at and have felt disturbed by some of the films that have been released lately (torture porn sometimes REALLY earns its name) I’m not sure how successful this film will be in making its point. This film has an intelligence about it and a mannered way that means the girls who giggled through Wolf Creek and the guys who egged on The Devils Rejects to even greater heights of depravity will probably not see this type of film.

Those of us who do watch it will feel patronised and a little let down by a film-maker willing to take our money but make us feel bad about watching his film.

Who is he to judge what lesson we must be taught simply because we enjoy horror?

Michael Haneke says “Anyone who leaves the cinema doesn’t need the film, and anybody who stays does.”

What about those who don’t see it but slow down at car wrecks or love the news footage of carnage and sorrow? What judgement is passed on to them?

I enjoy horror films, I enjoy their ability to make us feel real emotions like fear and relief and catharsis and maybe even a laugh or two. I resent a director who feels he has to teach me a lesson for wanting my good vs. evil morality tale (for that’s all horrors really are when you get right down to it).

I believe the horror movie is the best evidence of the culture of a society, it’s our fear that makes us unique and is the most accurate reflection of how we live, our view of the world that surrounds us.

You can watch horrors from the sixties and see the influence of the Vietnam war, presidents being shot, fear of the person next door…

Horrors from the eighties with consumerism and Big Brother looming large.

Maybe the noughts and beyond are a more introspective time, when what we are most afraid of are suburban dramas, killers without humanity and what we ourselves are capable of.

Funny Games is a memorable movie, I’m just not sure it’s a good one.

7.5/10