Empire of the Ants #178 (C-)

A-hahaha!!  The ants seemed like they were projected into the shot via overhead projector or something similar.  I don't know what they did, but it was funny.  Almost like the ants were a macro shot from a tank and the screen was split, half ant tank/half people in the woods.  Hell, the ants often were climbing up nothing (seemingly the air) when really it was the tank walls.

In all actuality, it was done pretty well considering the release date was in the late 1970's.  Then when the ants would get close, it seemed like a shot straight out of Troll 2.  Super close up and you could only see their fuzzy heads.  Also, some of the action shots consisted of the cameramen just shaking the camera back and forth to add to the "excitement".  Man, this was funny.

And, we have yet another movie which had some form of insect attack where they dub-in cicada and loud screeching as the killer's sound (although this one was old, so this could have been the original movie to do this...haha).  Point being, that is not the noise of a giant killer ant, it's a cicada and other ear piercing shrills.  I guess I can't talk however, because I've never seen a giant ant, so maybe they do sound like that?

The movie actually reminded me a lot of Shock Waves, although instead of being trapped on an island full of surrounding water and getting attacked by nazi water zombies, they were getting attacked by humongous leaf cutter ants.

Best part for me was watching my first Joan Collins movie (that I can recall) and watching her get eaten by the queen ant.  YES!

Warrior #177 (B+)

Pretty sure the plot is known here by the entire world, but for those who are reading this in 17 years I'll do a quick recap.  A teacher who can barely pay his bills needs some extra dough or his family will go bankrupt.  He used to do some MMA (c) fighting in his younger days, and decides to get back involved.  There is a giant tournament coming with a huge purse and he decides to enter the contest.  With great fortune for the teacher, the main fighter from his gym gets hurt and cannot compete....thus a spot opens up and he can join the tourney.  Also, he has a brother.  Okay, you are caught up on the plot now....

Once the tournament starts, I feel like they film the entire rest of the movie as one long day.  Is that true?  Maybe it was just me who was confused, and/or they didn't film this well?  How many days are involved?  They can't fight twice within the same day can they?  I'm guessing the tournament occurs over many days, but they don't make this very apparent.  As in, there aren't any cut scenes with either brother and their family, trainers, or whatever.  I would think that they would have a fight and then show the husband with his wife and kid during the week, or prepping with the training for the next scheduled fight.  Instead, they do one fight, then it's seemingly immediately followed up by another.  Oh well.

I really liked this movie.  I am happy I watched it.  Once again, Tom Hardy transforms himself into a crazy awesome role.  He's ripped again like in Bronson.  I don't quite understand how a fairly plain looking guy can look completely different in nearly every movie he's starred in??  He's obviously a favorite of mine...man, I just got excited to see Dark Knight Rises...  Last statement, Tom Hardy IS today's Gary Oldman.  (Ohhhhh, they are BOTH in the Dark Knight Rises!!)

Crawlspace #176 (B-)

This is not to be confused with the Klaus Kinski version (click here for my review on the Klaus Kinski version), but is also a pretty swell movie.  They are completely separate movie plots just with the same name.  I believe the Crawlspace I'm reviewing here was initially a made for TV film, but you can get it on DVD.  I would say it isn't a main streamer and is probably more for someone who is willing to sit and watch an older, slower paced movie without too many gimmicks.  The plot is a nice, traditional family (husband and wife only) who could not have children, find a strange squatter in their basement crawlspace.  Because they always wanted kids, they decide to befriend this random oddball.  They feed him and give him clothes, and invite him for Christmas dinner.  For the most part, "Richard" (aka the crawl space hippy troll) declines their invites and chooses to stay where he's most comfortable, wedged between the basement ceiling and a drafty floor/straw.  The family finally convinces Richard to go to the store to get them groceries, but the store folk make fun of Richard and he ends up leaving empty handed and even without his $20.  Later that night, Richard heads back and trashes the store.  The town folk then want Richard's head on a platter, and the nice older couple does their best to defend Richard...despite knowing that he's wrong.  One thing leads to another and bad stuff happens, you'll have to watch to find out.  I did enjoy this flick though, a pretty fun and strange older movie.  I like seeing twisted movies from the 70's.

If this happened in this day, it would be certainly different results.  The family was just like, "oh, there's a young man living in the basement, in a hole full of cobwebs and straw....let's give him a suit and some cookies!  And pretend like he's our long lost son."  Heck....what the hell!?

When I rent a movie, versus watch it on streaming - my picture/screenshot ability is greatly limited.  Thus I apologize for the two awful pictures below.  Yes, that is my lamp in the reflection and yes, the 2nd shot is blurry:

Long Weekend (1978 version) #175 (B-)

This flick is not to be confused with the awesome (I'm sarcastically guessing that it is awesome) movie from 2005 staring Chris Klein...this version of "Long Weekend" was from 1978 and is placed in Australia.  There is no connection here other than the names.  Now that we are clear on this....on to the review.

So far I'm 11 minutes in and I had to press pause to state something about what's occurred so far.  A couple (at least I think they are an item) met up in the morning to head out on some sort of vacation.  Prior to knocking on the woman's door, the man pulled out a rifle and put the scope on her face as she walked around her kitchen on the 2nd floor.  Odd.  Then on their drive out to holiday, they spent the time screaming at each other...followed by the dude almost crashing into a van, a few minutes/hours later trying to go around a car and almost hitting another car head on, then the guy threw a match or cigarette out the window and caught the side of the road on fire, and finally he nailed a wallaby square on killing it dead.  All while not paying attention.  This movie is crazy so far.  Not sure if that is in a good way however.

I'm finished watching now.  It was pretty entertaining.  Basically this couple is going on a retreat to the outback/beach, as the have been having troubles with their relationship (and as it turns out the wife had an abortion due to getting knocked up by another guy, which is divulged mid way).  Along the way to the beach and also while at the beach, they commit unnecessary acts against nature.  For instance they shoot animals, the man chops down a tree just because, they smash an eagle egg and they shoot a sea cow.  The remaining plot is nature turns on them until everyone dies.  The last 30 minutes are pretty gripping.  I rewound the last scene 3 times including some screen by screen slow motion.  It was an "ooooooh!" scene for sure.

Here is a small conversation between the couple:

Peter: "You preoccupied Marcia?"
Marcia: "Let's go home"
Peter: "We just got here"
Marcia: "I'll make it worth your wild gorgeous"
Peter: "Home is where I leave my dirty socks"
Marcia: "Should have married your mother"
Peter: "You've got better tits"
Marcia: "I'm serious Pete"
Peter: "About marrying my mother?"
Marcia: "About going home.."
Peter: "Why?"
Marcia: "To beat the traffic"

After watching this I was listening to another podcast by the Mondo Movie guys, and they mentioned Long Weekend.  Then they mentioned that Jim Caviezal was involved in a remake of this movie.  I looked it up and found out that it is true and the remake is called Nature's Grave (also listed as Long Weekend depending on where you look).  I noted that the Jim's character was named Peter and the dog was still Cricket, but they renamed the wife to Carla (versus Marcia).  I wonder why changes like that occur?

#174 The Last House on the Left (1972) (B-)

Can I ask a brain question of you on this fine day?  When there is both an original and a remake of a movie - does the viewer generally end up liking the first one they see the best?  As in, if I see the remake first, I like it better than the original.  And vice versa, if I see the original first I like it better than the remake.  For me it seems that this might be the case.  I was going to write more about this thought at the end of the post, as well as give examples - but I've decided to write an entire post on this topic instead.  So, go here ________ for that write up.  I will basically list a bunch of examples and state whether I liked the original or remake better - and then also mention which I saw first.  Then we can begin to see if the phenomenon is real.

Now on to the movie.  As you can probably tell from the first paragraph, I've seen the remake of The Last House on the Left already, somewhere within my past movie viewing experience.  I ended up liking it 4 stars worth in Netflix (c), the same as this movie.  And I probably would give both an overall rating of somewhere between a C+ or B- (it's close).  And yes, for the record I would rather give them 3.5 stars to be more fitting.  Regarding which I liked better, I think I liked the remake a tiny amount better.  I feel like it was more modern with better finishing moves.  I recall a nice scene involving a sink.

The original was good however and the acting was clutch - but I guess it just lacked based on what it was able to show, which could have hurt the movie.  Since it was from the early 70's, they really couldn't show too much of the action.  Still they did a pretty good job considering the rules back then.  In the last sequence within the house, when the parents caught on and started to booby trap the house (a la Home Alone), it got a bit cheesy.  That final fight with the main bad guy and the Dad was pretty ridiculous.  I bet in the 70's they could still fight like a normal person, versus having it portrayed almost as if they were snapping their fingers as they spun in a circle, getting ready to battle 50's style.  The bad guy would punch the Dad in the gut and they would stand there and talk about it for a 20 seconds, all while his fist is still in his stomach.  And then the Dad would offer the same back....just slow and not the best scene for me.  Comical almost?  I should not be so harsh, because then the Dad gets a chainsaw and chases the rest of the baddies around and it is pretty good overall.  And that one guy just forces the other one to blow his brains out, just because he has so much power over him in his posse - that's pretty crazy, because he did what he said all the time, including ending it all.

But, in the end I am thankful for having watched this movie. Wes did a good job in his first directing attempt.  I think he will have a successful career.  LOL.  (Craven for those that think I meant Anderson)  I also loved that essentially the entire film took place outside and during the day.  That is always the best for me, versus hiding a good portion of the flick in the shadows.  Turn on a light and still make it scary...challenge on directors out there.

I also need to ask, why do they make a mockery of the two police officers throughout the movie?  They even go as far as playing circus music as they are fumbling around.  Just not sure why they added this aspect, but oh well.  The music was actually well done throughout.  Maybe in the end I liked the original better :)

Shadow #173 (A-)

Tagline: The horrors of combat pale in comparison to what awaits a war veteran when he goes on a biking trip and crosses paths with a sadistic butcher.

Ok, I'm a few dozen minutes in and I am wondering to myself, am I missing something here?  A totally random guy (who happens to be the lead role in this movie), is back from the war...and now off on a BMX journey of sorts, somewhere out in the rolling hills...and he stops at a bar for a beer.  Alright, I'm with all of that so far.  Then, two guys come in and start messing with a local girl.  The young war vet then sticks up for the local girl...and of course boom, romance instantly.  Here's where I get confused.  Low and behold they both have nearly identical BMX bikes (same kind basically just different colors), the same helmet styles, same goggles...looks like they shopped for their jackets at the same trendy out-doorsy store.  How in the hell?  These are all way to random items for me...c'mon!

Now I'm about 36 minutes in.  HOLY HOSTEL-LIKE SHIT!!!  Woah!  This is beginning to remind me of Frontier(s).  For the record, I just had to push pause and turn on a light in the room I'm in, as well as peek my head into the other side of the hallway.  That's just an FYI.  Someone please tell me, where is that girl's voice coming from?  She called to him when he was outside - clear as day and very loudly - then she called to him in roughly 3 different corridors from deep within the house, and yet again from the basement.  But in each room he enters she is not there??

Ok, so this movie was surprisingly only 1 hour and 17 minutes long.  Short and sweet.  Everything I said above in which I was confused about, I now understand.  But hell....what a thrill ride.  Man, my heart was pumping throughout this flick.  It was definitely not what I expected and I recommend this for all horror movie fans.  In fact, from looking at the cover of the DVD, coupled with how the movie started with the plot of a kid on a biking trip in the flowing hills of a random town (no clue)...I ended up completely blind-sided and rewarded by this movie.  I suppose however my mind created it's own vision of what was going to occur, and I didn't expect something similar to Hostel meets Frontier(s) which then meets the Horde.  In all honesty, except for perhaps Hostel....and that's a small maybe because I did really like Hostel....the Horde and Frontier(s) top this movie by a few solid notches, but Shadow was still good enough to earn a low A rating from me.

I need to find out if that butcher guy has acted in other movies??   I just did an image search.  Creepy.  Now that's a classic horror movie actor/presence.  He needs to be in more cinema, pronto.  Per my image search, I'd say that in real life he actually looks like the brother of Coach from Survivor.  I purposely am not giving a snapshot of the butcher because I believe that needs to be a surprise for when you watch for yourself.

Here are two pictures.  This guy below isn't even the main bad guy...

Straw Dogs #172 (C+)

I saw the original Straw Dogs (1971) and liked it a lot.  You know, the one with Dustin Hoffman and Susan George.  I'd probably give that one a B-.  Apparently it was taboo back when it was released and didn't do too well with the public reaction and dollar-wise.  I guess because of the rape scene and due to Hoffman's revenge/anger etc, as both topics were not normally depicted on cinema screens prior to this time.  I think the original Straw Dogs was even released prior to Deliverance.  Per IMDB (c), yes this is true...I checked.  Also, a random review called the original 'an interesting example of a vigilante film before the subgenre became fashionable.  Films before had dealt with the theme of revenge but rarely as brutal or as primal...'  Just a note, did you notice how that review used words like vigilante, subgenre, fashionable, and primal?  I don't ever use words like that.  LOL.  I use words like good and I liked it.  

For the remake (2011), I believe they changed the story some.  While I don't recall the Jeremy Niles/Janice relationship from the first one, apparently this was indeed part of the original.  It must not have been as prominent in the story.  If it were me however, who directed the remake, I would have been fine with this not being included at all.  It was bad plot - unneeded and actually brought the movie down some in my mind, specifically when Jeremy was in the house with them at the end cowering and rocking in the corner.  Another big change in the plot was Kate Bosworth's character having any tie with the town folk.  I cannot recall this at all from the original Straw Dogs.  Anyway, it doesn't matter...still both were worth watching with the original 70's cut holding a flame over the 2011 version in my mind.

For those that don't know the plot, a husband and wife move to a new house in the country.  They hire some locals to fix their house up...but then the locals get a bit too comfy with their invite and start to make the new family uncomfortable.  Soon the locals are downright harassing the couple and then it becomes an all out war.

Does Kate Bosworth have two different eye colors?  In the one scene where Charlie came to "visit" while James Marsden was out in the forest with the boys hunting, I swear I saw two different color eyes when she stood at the door.  That's the 2nd time in the recently viewed movies where I believe I saw this, but I'm drawing a blank on the other occasion.  I just looked it up and it's called Heterochromia.  Here are some others with this syndrome: Jane Seymour, Dan Aykroyd, the guy with a buzz cut from Prison Break (Wentworth Miller), Mila Kunis, David Bowie, Virginia Madsen, Kiefer Sutherland,  Elizabeth Berkley and Kate Bosworth.  Ah!  I remember now, the person I saw with Heterochromia was Mad Max Scherzer from the World Series. 

Below is a picture of a local from the bar - opening a beer bottle on one of 'Charlie's boys' belt buckles:

 (c)

Wreck-It Ralph (B+) #171

Good family fun here.  I took all my guys to see this one...and after a few bathroom trips, I think I saw 94% of the flick by the end!  :)  Man, if I was a kid today watching this movie...I would be totally excited at the thought of this make believe world.  It was like Toy Story, but for kids that like video games.  At night, when the arcade closes, the games "come alive" and the characters from each game can go through their power chords and into the power strip aka the central station.  There they can party together all night as long as they get back before the arcade opens in the morning, and as a rule they MUST NOT die outside of their game or they will be gone forever.

Is there some sort of psychology behind making the characters look just like John C. Reilly, Jane Lynch, and Sarah Silverman?  I just wonder why they do this?  I guess it helps them to do the voice?  But, do they do the voice first or drawing first?  I'm going to ask SA to explain it to me.  Good thing there wasn't a Mario or Luigi main character because they'd have to John Leguizamo to read the lines.  But really, I ask again why do they make the characters look like the actors doing the voice?  Ralph even had John C's gap in his tooth.  Craziness.

Last note to remark on before I do some interviews - does anyone think that they had to pay royalties to use the video game characters in the movie?  For those that have seen this, you know that most of the games were made up and most of the characters were nobodies.  That is except for the few real characters that they used - namely Sonic, Pac-man and Blinky, Q-Bert and Bowser.  I just wish they were able to have free reign and put guys like Karnov, or the Contra twins, or Dig Dug, and maybe the dude from Frostbite in the movie.

I decided to interview 4 random kids who saw the movie, and their interview reaction/answers are below:

Kid #1: It was a good movie, I liked it a lot.  I really enjoyed the part when Ralph licked the little green sour guy.  I also liked when um Ralph, don't write um....hahahahaha.  Dad, erase that!  I knew who Q-Bert was because we watched him on YouTube (c).  I laughed during the Hero's Duty jokes.  Is that enough?

Kid#2: I barely liked it, but most of it was funny.  Like, um, I think it was like, it was like um, a....like, um...may I please have a drink?  My favorite game in there was like, um, when he was in Sugar Rush when he went through and then he punched the thing of the doom pit, and all of the bugs went to the light, even King Candy.  Can you get rid of the may I please have a drink part?

Kid #3: I like it.  Wreck it Ralph destroyed the little girl's car.  Um, he wrecks stuff.  My favorite part was when the little girl showed Wreck it Ralph her home and when Wreck it Ralph helped her make her car.  I like the whole thing.  We saw the Wreck it Ralph whole movie.  I want to watch the movie again.  Dad, why are you writing that?

Kid #4: I like Wreck it Ralph breaking the little girl's car.  And I like all of it.  (What else?  What was your favorite parts?)  All of them!

Ok this is me again...that worked pretty well.  My interview skills are lacking I suppose.  I also noted a glitch in the movie, it happened a few times actually.  When you watch you will likely see what I'm talking about.  It's pretty obvious.

(c)

The Langoliers 170 (C-)

Pretty good idea by Stephen King, in theory that is (read as: they should remake this with Ice T, Jeremy Piven, Nick Lachey, and Linda Blair).  And the book was probably a pretty good read.  But this was just too long...and laboring.  I am assuming, similar to some other King "epics", that this likely aired on TV in multiple parts - thus the length??  Because no movie needs to be 3 hours long.  It literally took me 3 different nights to watch it myself.

The basic plot was as follows: people were flying on a large jetliner heading to Boston.  Apparently they traveled through a portal of sorts but this wasn't shown.  Everyone that was sleeping on the plane remained existing within the world when they went through the portal, and those who were awake disappeared altogether but their watches and jewelry remained.  Among those remaining few - approximately 8 people - were Bronson Pinchot, Dean Stockwell (from Quantum Leap) and David Morse.  David Morse happened to be a pilot on his way to see his recently deceased ex-wife (you see, he was in mourning and taken off his scheduled flight to fly back to her home).  So this group of misfit passengers end up landing the plane at another nearby airport.  I can't remember where and it doesn't actually matter.  Once they were on the ground they realize that no one is there.  No life, no people, no wind....and when they clap or stomp their feet no sound comes out.  Anyway, it is deserted and even the sandwiches taste awful (they sampled them from the airport snack shop).

For the next hour or so they walk around the empty airport asking each other what they should do next, and questioning what's going on.  A blind girl is able to see again but this time through Bronson's eyes only.  I think a few people got killed by Balki Bartokomous who essentially was going insane.  The group hears a sound off in the distance, near the power towers.  Then a few other things happen, the viewers yawn, some more stuff...the viewers fall asleep.  The next week they try again and then BOOOOOOOOM, 2 hours and 13 minutes into the movie the Langoliers show up!!!  This is some of the worst graphics ever, but it's totally hilarious!  And definitely worth watching.  So do I recommend this?  No.  But if you have Netflix (c) instant stream, just push play starting at 2 hours and 13 minutes and watch the horrible 1995 graphics, and watch Bronson Pinchot get eaten by the Langoliers.  That 15 minutes is all you need to see and you will laugh your butt off.

The Grey #169 (B-)

My movie reviews have contained a lot of "I don't know who recommended this to me" and "someone once told me that this movie stunk so....".  The Grey is no exception.  Someone once told me that this wasn't the best....so for a long time I avoided it altogether and thought I didn't want to waste my time watching.  Well, I pushed play the other day and made it through 42 minutes and enjoyed what I saw.  Last night I finished the rest of the flick, and overall had a very fun ride.

I went in thinking this was going to be all about bad cgi wolves...specifically I thought to myself, how in the world could a 2 hour movie be all about wolf attacks?  Well a few scenes were like that, but none too badly done...much to my surprise considering the previews showing 17 sets of glowing eyes staring at Liam and crew.  I don't pretend to understand wolves and their territory, but as Liam tried to tell the crew - apparently they attack if you are in their "zone".  I guess they were in their "zone" for the entire journey, because they had non-stop howling and glowing eyes engaged on them in the nearby forest.  But again it wasn't the worst as I did think it would be more overbearing.

I absolutely loved how they painted the start of the movie, beginning with the plane crash which set the scene - great cinema, just fantastic.  I was really on the edge of my seat.  Well done, good suspense, good viewpoint...then they were stranded in the middle of ice and snow nowhere...again, great shots and perfect set-up/feel.  The director built a suspense that had me totally hooked.

It would have been slightly cool if they developed the characters of the 8 or so guys that were left after the crash.  I guess they had them so bundled up, that you really could barely see them to get to know each of them.  Even the guy who was bitching and moaning about Liam being wrong, and wanting to take their personal belongings wasn't recognizable enough to me for me to know if he was the guy who just got eaten.  Never mind, I realized later that he was still there.  And over time, the character building was better...but done more once there were only a few left (spoiler, people die).

The ending actually was perfect for me.  Someone once mentioned I would hate the ending.  I was totally okay with it.  Not many movies end like this.  It was sad, but also makes a bit of sense given the position and situation.

Get the Gringo #168 (C)

Okay, it got better....glad I finished it.

First, is gringo something bad?  I feel like they shouldn't have named this movie gringo.  Like that's a bit taboo maybe?  Perhaps I'm wrong.

20 seconds in and it's loud as all hell....then they push pause on the scene and I'm pretty sure Statham is talking.  Not only did I have to rewind but I had to turn the movie up 16 more notches to hear.  Then, of course I heard, and the volume/music goes right back up and I'm blasting out my house.  Shit....what the hell?  Don't people edit movies?  What is wrong with Mel, Statham, and Liam Neeson?

I'm sorry, I really want to like this flick...but why is he narrating this?

"El Hefner"...haha!  That was a good line.  Okay, let's give this a chance.

21 minutes in and I can't hear again.  Goddamn.  I'm a complainer for sure.  But why do they make movies like this?  Why are they seemingly whispering, yet just having a regular conversation.  I'm going to have to watch this one another night.  I need some senseless horror.  Till another time gringo....till another time.

I picked it back up again and gave it another chance.  I can agree, the flick was pretty good.  But there was so much that was just impossible.  Very quietly, Mel is basically better than Tom in MI and better than Bond for the most part.  By that I mean, stuff was happening with the plot that was too perfect.  Just insane.  No matter how much of an awesome criminal he was, just plain impossible.  At the end he just walks back into the prison....kills the 10 guys in his way...and walks out with the girl, the kid, and the money??  C'mon.  Despite this, I liked the movie semi-well.   I guess I'm saying, put this aside and ignore the crazy impossible factor, and it's a good action flick.

This means, I'll give Payback a chance.

The Abominable Dr. Phibes #167 (B)

Poetic plot recap, spoken in 70's verse:

'The incredible legends of the abominable Dr. Phibes began a few short years ago.  All of them unfortunately true.  It was here, in London's fashionable Malden Square, whence Phibes ventured out to work his diabolical revenge against those responsible for the death of his beloved wife Victoria, and the destruction of his own face - making it necessary to talk though an ingenius mechanism in his neck. Phibes says, "my wife existed only 6 minutes on the operating table...you murdered her...when the acid reaches him, he will have a face....like....mine!"

The most brilliant minds of Scotland Yard were baffled, as the amazing murders continued each more feandish than the last.  And in his soundproof basement of his mansion....none could hear his flamboiant songs of triumph and revenge, played on his organ and by his ingenius clockwork musicians.

"We have got to find Phibes!"  Only by a stroke of amazing luck did the police seek out Malden Square.  But the feendish Dr. Phibes was prepared for such an emergency, and building his face anew, he entered the cript where he had enshrined his beloved wife, incredibly maintained, neither alive nor completely dead.  And there Phibes placed himself in suspended life, like her....until it would be time for Phibes to rise again!'

Cue sequel music!!  I can smell it!  (and because its currently 2012 - I know for a fact that there is indeed a sequel)

I applaud two of the killings by Dr. Phibes, as they happen right under the nose of the inspectors.  Phibes is specifically creative with all 8-9 of his killings, however the brass head of a unicorn catapulted across the street and through the chest of an unsuspecting victim is one of the best.  He also loves death by creature.  Lets see - there was death by bat, locust, rat...and in a way there was death by frog.  Totally rad.  I have a feeling that this movie inspired the creator of the "Saw" series, especially that last death scene.  Each death was elaborate and disgusting...all while the killer was nowhere to be found.   Excellent.

Like the Gore Gore Girls, this movie fit the mold of those taboo horror movies from its time.  I learned of this movie from a tip from someone stating this was a brilliant horror classic from the 70's - containing crazy, purposefully calculated offings.  Whoever suggested this was right.  This is my first Vincent Price movie.  However hopefully not my last.

Also one quick statement about Phibes band, which was named Dr. Phibes' Clockwork Wizards.  They were found within an elaborate organ room in Phibes' mansion, and were composed of moving dummies who played various instruments while Phibes played along on the organ.  

Shock Waves (D) #166

Mystery Science Theatre could have definitely reviewed this one.  Also, you could have played Shock Waves on mute and added in a hint of fast forward until you see the first zombie in the water, which occurs approximately 40 minutes in.  What I'm saying is, this wasn't the best.  The background character building and conversations are basically pointless.  There wasn't even one drop of blood (sorry man, had to steal that).  Seriously?  It's a zombie movie!  But alas, it was from 1977 so there were some "rules" of cinema to follow back then.  The worst the movie did was show someone after they were dead for a while - all boiled or water-logged...or to show someone getting dunked under the water by one of these brackish water zombies.

I guess the zombies were cool though, despite a few scenes where it looked like they were missing their poorly done zombie make-up.  And they sure had some odd tendencies...for instance they liked to lay down in the shallow water, or on the ocean floor.  Basically it was their m.o. and was for no apparent reason.  If I had cash for every time the flick showed zombies laying on the water floor I'd have about enough cash to go to Wawa for a week straight, getting Red Bull and a b-fast sandwich each time.  Overall it was just an odd movie.  I really need to remember who recommended this to me??  I think it was the same guy on the internet that recommended the Langoliers and Satan's Little Helper.

Definitely the best parts were the zombies walking underwater and coming out of the water.  Even the death scenes were weak.  It also seemed that everyone in the movie, stuck on this one-hotel-having-island, were forced to wade through water in order to go anywhere else but inside the hotel.  Like, to go see what was going on over there, they either needed a boat or needed to wade through hip high water. We also saw a few mistakes, like some of the dead guys breathing or starting to get up because the scene was over.

As far as a good underrated zombie flick goes, this one does not fit.

MOVIE 165 End of Watch (B)

Hi there....I watched End of Watch a few days ago.  And did so actually in the theatre as you might expect.  With popcorn and a soda the size of my ass head.  It's been a while since I've gone to the theatre, since perhaps Snow White's Huntsman or maybe Ted (it took me a while to post this, I've since seen Looper).  It felt good to get out there again, knock off the rust a bit.  Speaking of the theatre - I still haven't seen the new Batman, Total Recall, Premium Rush (LOL), Dredd (again, LOL), Bourne Legacy, Expendables 2, or the Possession (note to self, don't see the Possession aka the Dibbuk Box movie - too dangerous).

Now moving on to discussing End of Watch.  It was a good movie for sure.  Per a commercial I saw just a day or so ago, it's the #1 movie right now....a bit hard to believe, but okay.  I will say that I recommend going out and seeing it.  It wasn't the best ever and I have at least one pretty major gripe (see below), but it's still real good and totally worth a view.  In the theatre?  Maybe not.  You could wait and watch this on your home system.  They did a superb job building the characters...in fact, it is basically all they did throughout the movie.  Jake and Michael Pena are best buds, and they joke with each other, share excitement in the field of duty together, and would even die together.  Does it feel a bit like Harsh Times?  By that I mean have a feel of two homeboys riding around in a car for most of the movie all while within the "harsh" inner city streets?  Yes.

Here's my gripe.  They all had cameras.  Jake had more than one.  Apparently he was filming everything for a "project" he was doing for some sort of schooling he is in.  So in every scene, he's walking around filming, most times while also holding his gun and peaking around corners.  Typically cop move right?  In a bad situation, yet it's important to ensure that you have your handheld camera.  Then, even the bad guys had a camera.  They would carry it around and film their "bad" stuff, and then one of the bad leaders would say, "turn that stuff off and get serious" and push it with his hand.  Speaking of that, there were 4 major bad guys, and 2 of the 4 were girls.  Nothing against girls, but seriously?  The main bad guys are going to roll in a posse like this?  Just doesn't seem hardcore enough.  Again, sorry....as I know there are a lot of real tough girls out there that are offended right now.  I just would think that Jake and Michael Pena would have had a harder time going against 4 really tough dudes, not 2 and 2.

Note to self....See Higanjima!  Currently Netflizzz (c) doesn't have it available, so I have to put it on the save portion of the list, along with exactly 51 others.  Seriously?  Hey Netflix (c)....I love ya, but you gotta go and get these DVDs.  I've had some in my save section since I joined a few years ago.  Why can you not see that I (and others) would like to rent certain movies?  Ok, bye bye.

Altered #164 (B)

So tell me, how long can you go with your intestines yanked out of you and stretched onto the other side of the room?  This one dude lasted for over an hour with his out - bet that's longer than you could last.  For most of the hour he held his intestines in his hands, compiled in a messy, knotty pile.

Basic plot summary of Altered: a few dozen years ago (although they show none of it, but it would make a great prequel) 5 guys have some sort of abduction experience.  Four of them make it back.  Three of them are still friends while one has been sort of shunned by the community because of what allegedly happened to the 5th guy that didn't come back.  Also the 4th guy stayed up on the ship longer than the others.....so, another reason the town blames him.

Hellbent on gaining revenge, the now adult friends trek out into the woods with home-made harpoon guns and shottys with taped on spot-lights...only to come home with a captured creature - same species that abducted them years prior.  They have no where to go but to the 4th friends house/warehouse.  From there they get into a world of trouble, as of course the creature escapes.  There is also a girlfriend involved, not sure why but they tie her up and put her in the bedroom with her mouth taped shut.  I guess so that the thing doesn't overtake her mind?  But then couldn't the alien also do that to the 4 friends?  A bit confused about that part.

When the cop shows up, there are some pretty good scenes and dialog.  I like when he's dying, all he wants is to get a final Yeungling (c).  LOL.  I also liked watching the guy who got infected turn into a ball of mess.  That was good special effects.  He was falling apart at the end.  Literally.  That guy was a good actor.  He remained mean and mad despite having his insides coming outside and his other body parts, like his face, falling off.  I also dug the friend with the crazy mullet hair - he was also a good actor.  I'd see more with him in it.  Hell, they all do a good job considering.

When the "altered" friend was in the field, why do the other creature/aliens not see him?  That was odd.  Maybe with a second viewing I'll understand better.  Unfortunately at this point I don't have time to make for a second viewing of this low-budget "masterpiece".  But, I recommend it for sure and give it a solid B.

Looper (C+) #163

I'm stuck on how to rate this movie.  I guess I had big expectations due to the publicity and the high end actors involved.  The movie was okay...and you should definitely see it (don't go by me)...but I would have liked a bit more plot development - especially on the time travel front, and perhaps some additional information regarding how he became a Looper.  And maybe no TK??  Okay, so the TK wasn't the worst.  Just a twist I didn't expect.  Although, the new commercials show it off a bit.

It's yet another movie with a kid for a main actor.  But you don't see that in the preview, do you?  The kid, Pierce something I think his name is, is only 5 or 8 in real life (hard to tell though, IMDB (c) and other web-sites don't list it) - yet he played a 10 year old in the flick?  I'd say he was closer to 5.  I don't get it.  Then why do they say he's 10 then in the movie?  Or, why didn't they get another actor who was  actually 10?  Anyway, he did a pretty good, creepy job.  It's tough with me and movies, specifically when they add kids into the mix as one of the main players.  For instance, I just watched "Satan's Little Helper" and while the kid was super annoying at times - he was also cast perfectly.  His dumb look/expression fit the character perfectly.  Anyway, this kid did a good job too, so it worked.  And at the end he had a bit of a Children of the Corn in him.  And maybe some Take Shelter.... http://scutigeromorph.blogspot.com/2012/03/122-take-shelter-b.html

Ok, now onto the plot issues I have with the flick.  The movie was about 2 hours long.  The cool part (to me), is when movies take time to build up the plot or characters.  Perhaps show some more of how he's a Looper, and as mentioned more about the time travel.  Instead, all of the scenes you see in the preview (him putting the gun in the Looper bin, him blowing away guys that land on the tarp in the field near the corn, and him and Bruce sitting in a diner) happen basically within the first 15 minutes of the movie.  When I first realized this I thought that meant it was going to be really good, because for christ's sake - Rotten Tomatoes is giving it a 93%!  Thinking back, that feeling of "oh I just saw all of the preview scenes so that means it's only going to get better" transformed into, "man, what the hell was that?  And geez I sure wish they didn't fly through the Looper stuff"  That was when I became confused.  With 20 more minutes under my belt, I was finally able to put 2 and 2 together and realize that Joseph G-L was only in the now and Bruce was only in the future.  I thought going in, that Joseph G-L was from the future and he got sent back to waste people.  Not correct.  Anyway, if this paragraph makes any sense at all to you, then good.  Last thought about this is I bet they didn't show much of the time travel etc. because they likely made this on a super low budget.  Another huge payday for not much money.  Well, they did have flying motorcycles....

A few more points.  At one point they showed J G-L kill like 10 guys in a row in that corn field.  Like guy shows up, J G-L pops him.  Flash to next guy getting popped....and another.  Back to back to back to back.  That was their way of plot building I suppose?  Then they did a strange scene, starting with J G-L getting ran-sacked at his apartment - followed by flashing words on screen that said "1 year later" or something, then it said "5 years later" and then it said 10 years later, 15...up to 30.  By then he was all grown up and was now Bruce.  Anyway, this was done really badly.  You will understand what I mean when you see it.  A scene that lasted 1 minute to explain 30 years.

But did I like it?  I guess so.  It was okay.  I can tell you that I think I'd rather see that other Emily Blunt movie with Matt Damon and those doors that took you places.  That one was cooler to me, even though others on the Earth didn't seem to love it as much.  Oh, and the guys who made J G-L look like Bruce did a really good job.  I couldn't stop staring at that.  Seriously, how did they do that?  I would like to morph into a mix between Val Kilmer and that guy from the Saint.

162: The Hole (A)

Guy #1.  Getting tackled.  He's Desmond Harrington.  You know, the guy from Wrong Turn who drives his mustang into a van full of hippies during the first scene, only to learn he must then survive a forest totally loaded with demented half-breed-wielding-excellent-bow-skills-having weirdlings.  Yeah, that's him in 2001 in that picture getting tackled.  Wrong Turn didn't debut until 2 years (2003) later.  He plays the famous kid of a rock star, with emaciated cheeks and a boyish charm.  Charm that can barely be seen due to it's depth - deep within a soul of a well rounded middle-aged man - learned by experience but stunted by age - still living in his area high school.  Well rounded because he's the son of a rock star mind you, not because he's actually too old for the part.

Guy #2.  The one doing the tackling.  He's the friend of Guy #1.  He gets pissed when he's supposed to get pissed, gets drunk when he's supposed to get drunk, is horny all the time, and gets crazy with venom when he's stuck in a hole for days on end.

Girl In Background #1: That's Thora Birch.  Good actress who's in a bunch of stuff, most notably American Beauty.  She plays the main character.  A girl who is on the cusp of a win.  A girl who sees a challenge, yet is stymied by life.

Not pictured Girl #2: Keira Knightley.  Otherwise known as famous girl from Bend it like Beckham and Domino.  She plays the Heathers-like girl, full with sweater and quirky smile.  She is the "it" girl, the one that all guys want.  All guys that is but the ones without organs between their running sticks.  She gets what she wants obviously - and does so with a cute accent and the synonym for charm.

Far Guy In A Distance #3: this is Martyn Taylor, played by Daniel Brocklebank.  Martyn is in love with Girl In Background #1 and he would do anything for her.  Anything......

Put them all in a hole/bunker in the middle of nowhere, minus Far In A Distance Guy #3, and throw away the key...

The Gore Gore Girls (Special Edition) / #161 (C-)

Oh dear God.....straight wowzer!  Some of this was totally unnecessary and WAY over the top.  For instance, the salt and pepper added onto the buttox.  Honestly!?!?!  Salt and Pepper!?!?  They even pushed the limits when they alluded that the one dancer was about to use that cucumber for something....uh, well....okay I'll move on.  But just know that I'm not kidding.  1972 folks!

This movie has some huge balls...more than I've seen in a long time.  That does not mean I'm recommending viewers to partake.  It was a bit like Pink Flamingoes, but in the horror movie genre.  The "acting" outside of the murder scenes was really bad.  And the film quality, production and editing was even worse than the acting, but I suppose that was to be expected.  But then they get to the killings....which were just totally brutal.  Unnecessarily long, with squishing sounds....taking things way too far.  Its sort of funny because at first they do the typical 70's horror movie "move" by not showing most of the actual murder scene - but then they go farther and show all kinds of gruesome craziness after the actor has already died (here is where the squishing noises come into play).  Completely out of control.  I can see why this movie caused controversy and is listed as NR.

For the record, I shut my eyes twice during my viewing.  I also decided to have a snack midway through...some creamy cucumbers cut up and spread on bread....then I almost threw up the cucumber spread when the champagne glass scene occurred.  Especially as the 2nd glass was filling up.  Holy crap....why?  Followed directly by the french fry scene?!?  Ugh.

You know, I got what I deserved by watching this mess.  I got sick to my stomach and I got bad acting.  But damn, some of the scenes were just so freaking crazy.  I can't stop saying that.  I guess for those of my friends out there that like horror - you have to check this out....but perhaps just temper your expectations and maybe you should fast-forward a lot and make the entire movie last 20 minutes.

My favorite part of this film was that the main detective guy looked at the camera twice and talked to the viewer.  That is pretty funny if you ask me.

key words: eye popping (multiple), ironing of face, french frying face....salt and pepper

Crossworlds / #160 (C-)

"I guess we're still on Earth...." they say as they see two totally gnarly surfer dudes come over the hill.

I watched this movie in two stages.  I started with about 40 minutes or so one night before I eventually fell asleep...and the rest was watched the next day.  I'd say the beginning of the movie was way better than the ending, at which point it is almost like the acting completely falls apart.  And honestly - can't someone tell Rutger Hauer that his hair is awful? Also he must be like 60 pounds overweight for his character's role.  I'm not even looking at the script and I can tell you that is that case.  I bet the guy who put this movie together was just pooping with joy that he landed a "star", when it would have been better if they got someone with a better haircut and someone who weighed less.

Sorry, this is not how I expected this review to go.  Let me start over.  The idea for this movie was really good.  It's actually one of my favorite kinds of movies.  Where the main character doesn't really understand what is going on but others around him do...and also where the main character remains "who they are" despite the situation.  Both of these feels were portrayed throughout this movie.  And honestly, if they would have done it better overall, this could have easily been a high B-rated movie.  But instead the acting just didn't cut it and the plot sort of fell apart and was uninteresting by the end.  Once they started that staff and crystal stuff with the guy in the suit, it went down hill.  But the building of the plot was quite glorious (first half).

This was a mix between Gor, Time Bandits, Jumper, and that movie with Matt Damon and the different doors.  The main character, an unsuspecting kid from modern day (who could have been cast WAY better if you ask me), gets twarted into an ever-changing world.  Moving from present to past, from desert to cave, etc.  Basically his Dad did it before him and he is the chosen one, but doesn't know it.  It takes him most of the beginning of the movie to figure out what is going on, and that what he has been witnessing and doing is actually happening.  They do a good job of jumping from landscape to landscape, that is until the guy with the suit fights the unsuspecting kid and they totally overuse the scene back-and-forthness.

Also Jack Black was in this.

Random side note: I would redo the Wickerman and have the cop fake-turn-into one of the town folk, that is until he has the greenlight to get out of their village at night in the water, which takes hours and is suspenseful.  But the scenes where he is acting all crazy as if he was one of them, just to fit in long enough for his escape....damn, those scenes will be beautiful.

Ka-Boom (D) #159

Wow, what a mess.  I thought this was going to be semi-amazing, or at least watchable.  Man was I wrong.  Witches?  Glowing red eyes?  Forehead glowlight magic?  Voodoo magic?  An underground illuminati type club filled with young good looking kids?  Way too much sex?  Geez!  I would have rather watched "Gargoyles", the made for TV masterpiece (loosely said).  If you cannot tell and thus stamped for the record - I do not recommend this at all.  Gregg Araki failed in my opinion.  Seriously, how many obnoxiously cut flashes between scenes can one movie have?  Like when you flip from one screen to another on your smart phone and it goes different ways - one time a horizontal flip, another time it is like a vortex spin, etc.  The editing with these cuts were unorthodox and at times occurred mid-song - whereas it made the timing almost seem like a mistake.  The song would just stop when the scene would change, in a crazy "Hey-look-what-I-learned-to-do-with-my-fancy-editing-equipment" annoying type of way.  Yeah....this movie sucked.

I forget how I got Ka-Boom on my radar, but whatever it was, or whomever it was....I wish I hadn't listened.  The plot, as well as the acting, was just awful.  Hell, even the casting was awful (read as: the roomate, the gay beach guy, the Dad, Lorilai, etc.).  Some of the people were okay I suppose, like the main actor and the two main girls, but then you put them in this craphole for a movie and their performance goes way down.  I have to ask, was this made for a direct release onto Cinemax (c)?

The basic gist of this film was a kid in college, who has sex with anything that moves, keeps blacking out at parties only to find out that some crazy shit has been going down during his down time.  He thinks a girl was murdered, "maybe" and right in front of him nonetheless - by people wearing animal masks.  A bunch of other dumb shit happens.  More sex.  More animal masks.  More dumb shit.  And then he finds out he's the chosen one and expected to lead an army of underground whatevers as the world is heading towards the end, or something like that.  Totally dumb.  And everyone is in on it.  And then the world blows up....Hence Ka-Boom.  Plot spoiler alert I guess...sorry.

And hell, I normally totally love movies with people wearing animal masks.  D!

director's cut 'Mimic' (B+) / #158

"Piece of shit, on the ceiling....figure that one out" - Josh Brolin, Mimic

This movie and I have a bit of history.  History that existed even before me seeing it.  I listened to a podcast (again....the Mondo Movie guys, who I love and now sometimes tweet with) where they discussed how epic the movie was, but most specifically the director's cut - if you were to watch any version of Mimic this was the version per them.  So I saw that Netflix (c) had Mimic available and I started to watch it.  Without knowing if it was the director's cut, I ended up pushing stop and didn't view the entire movie.  I did however watch the beginning and enjoyed it.  I then fast-forwarded to the end to see if I could tell if it was the director's cut.  I blogged that mini-viewing, albeit only about 20 minutes worth of viewing pleasure to go on....perhaps someday I'll post that mess (unedited, it's a real mess, but it's funny to read back).  So that takes us to present day....heard a podcast, peaked my interest, watched about 20 minutes including the ending....and then I set out on my quest to find the director's cut.  This was no small feat.  I tried a few used DVD-type stores and struck out.  Then I opted to just order it once I realized that it was eating away at me and I needed to see it.  So finally it came in the mail.  And below, is what ensued (I also forgot to add the part about me talking up the director's cut to a handful of friends before seeing it....so there's that too).

Ahhh Mimic, finally.....the director's cut is in my hand!  I like that for the majority of the movie there were three things going on at once.  Basically the plot was affecting more than one person and they showed all of the people involved, doing their thing in different scenes concurrently, as the plot unfolded beneath the town.  A very endearing quality, and done subtly in the background if you will.  Meaning, people probably don't notice how good the flow of the movie was, which created a constant dark mini-action feel created nicely by del Toro.  This is a hats-off statement to a good director in my mind, when a movie can make you feel this way without even trying (to the viewer, I'm sure del Toro tried).  Hands together again for del Toro who does a really good job at creating this atmosphere.

I have nothing against children, much less handicapped children - but damn I wish that Chuy kid would have died.  Sorry if I'm ruining any plot here by saying he lives.  But you likely will wish him to die too.  I guess I really shouldn't say this, and thinking back on the movie I suppose parts of his character weren't the worst and added to the plot, but honestly the "Mr. Funny Shoes" thing was annoying to me.  But for now I'll take it back sarcastically and change my tune to the following - I actually loved this Chuy (pronounced Chewy) character and was happy that he didn't get hit by a train at the end, and I was also happy that the Mimic creatures didn't devour him once he walked into their lair about mid-way through the flick, and lastly I was super happy that he lived when the male Mimic creature didn't pierce his skull with his sharp arm talon thinger.  Which by the way, am I the only one that noted that these talons made sword noises?  I'll say that again.  Did you notice that the Mimic creatures had sharp piercing appendages??.....And those appendages made freaking sword noises?!?  What the hell was up with that?

Lastly a note about Mira Sorvino: I think this was the first movie I've seen with her in it??  I could be wrong.  But she was sexy and she liked bugs, a lot.  What else do you need?  Not much.  She should have done more action films in her prime.  Since this was made in 1997, she is probably not making many more films, much less action films.

Sorry if I could bitch just one more time....when I went to Netflix (c) to watch the non-director's cut ending....I found that I needed to download Silverlight (c) AGAIN!  I think this is the 30th time officially within the last year.  I guess it's good they get it right and fix the bugs, but holy bloody hell.

After watching the non-director's cut ending, I was confused because I saw the exact same thing in each version.  So I did some reading on-line.  Apparently del Toro only added about 7 total minutes of "fixes" and these are barely noticeable in the director's cut, but they must add what is needed to make the movie hold it's own to this day.  He says roughly in the below clip from MTV.com (c), that when you watch a movie when you are 9 (and love it) and then again when you are 25 (and wonder what the hell was I thinking for loving it?), that the added 7 minutes to the film make the movie remain a "love" for fans that still watch it today.  I guess the director's cut didn't come out for many years after the release of the original.

www.mtv.com del Toro explains "change" in you and Mimic

Sorry this is getting long, but I also read prior to watching this that del Toro initially wanted the movie struck from his resume.  This is half because he didn't get his vision in the ending.  Apparently his way would have been much darker and I suppose that means that the good guys wouldn't have walked away.  That would have been awesome except I would miss Mira.  But also apparently he had a hell of a time with this movie and fought with the producers and had issues with the studio, or something like that.  So for me where do I stand when it comes to Guillermo del Toro?  I didn't love Don't Be Afraid of the Dark at all, and I didn't love Devil's Backbone (although I'm thinking I need to see it again???)....but I did really like Cronos, Pan's Labyrinth, and Mimic in that order.  I tried to start watching Hellboy and got immediately annoyed.....that leaves Blade II and the Hellboy series and I've seen them all so far.

Chopper (B) #157

My buddy liked this piece.  And for about a year and a half, perhaps longer, he asked me to check it out.  I stumbled upon the flick this week and texted him a picture of Mark Chopper Read to give him a heads up I was finally watching it....and once I told him, he under-whelmingly said it was just okay and could have been better.  I repeat, he recommended it to me for about a year and a half!!  What the hell?  I assumed that meant it was going to be straight awesome, at least per him.  If I could guess, I would say he wanted more action and craziness in the movie and that is why this was dubbed "it could have been better".   Come to think of it, I think it's been like 3 years.

Well guess what?  I thought it was superb.  It's not some crazy CGI adventure and was lacking super quality as a whole (read, it was grittily filmed and for a seemingly low budget).  Rather I feel they actually did a great job portraying Mark Read and his "way", slowly developing his character throughout the entire film.  I especially liked the ending and the way they wrapped it up clean and nice.  They showed him sitting with the prison guards and watching his 5 minutes of fame (although they allude to the fact that he might actually be famous, I need to look that up for confirmation.  Is he even a real guy?), and then the guards start to leave and say, "eh yo Chop, we're going to have to lock this door...okay?"  To which Chop acknowledges....and then they close and lock the cell door.  At that time the camera shot fades back....while Mark just sits by himself, in his glory, yet all alone and in an empty cell with little to no allies left.

Throughout the entire film, both in and out of prison and when he was free in the real world, everyone "seemed" to love him.  Well sort of.  It was like he was loved to his face, but hated behind his back.  Perhaps because people were scared of him.  Who could blame them, he was a total bad ass and could probably kill a predator in a 1:1 battle.  It was a strange mix though, because he was also constantly a really nice guy.  For instance, after each time he killed someone or drastically injured someone, he would start apologizing and offering comfort in the form of a cigarette or a trip to the hospital.  Definitely some sort of bipolar craziness going down with Chop.  But to me, it was portrayed perfectly which made this gritty movie well worth watching.  The scenes with his ex-prison buddy Jimmy were hilarious as well.

What else is Eric Bana famous for?  I need to see these other items of his resume.  He was superb.  150% awesome.  Great casting by the guy who casted the movie and great character representing by Bana.  Honestly, if the budget was bigger and the filming was a better quality, this could have been a huge hit.  The initial scenes in the prison yard when his buddies were turning on him to get the handsome ransom were totally epic.  This scene specifically is why I kept watching.  Mark Chopper Read is just so gentle and nice, offering hugs to his backstabbing buddy while nearly bleeding to death.  What a great scene.  Haha, I'm laughing just thinking about it.  Hell, even the way Bana just made this character act in normal everyday scenes - like when talking to the cops in the bar or talking to his Dad - was straight awesome. With those metal teeth and the way he explained what his brain was thinking - or rather what his brain was flip-flopping - was just hella good time.  The scene with the interviewer was really fun to watch as well.  I'm curious what the rest of the world thought of this, so I'm going to go check out some reviews by others.  Good day homey.

Don't Be Afraid of the Dark #156 (C-)

Opening scene...very awesome!  And as it turns out, also very deceptive.  As they start building the plot.....I said to myself, "okay...I can handle Katie Holmes and Guy Pearce, especially if they are in a Guillermo del Toro film.  This should be good.  So let's see what he's got."  And thus I keep watching.  But then there are these things within the fire vent.  You don't get a real good look at them, typical horror movie style.  However, then they speak.  What?  Really?  They say, "Sssssssshe will come back, they always dooooooo"in a snake-slithery voice and then you get a glimpse of what looks like white glowing eyes within the grate.  Hmmmm.  Did the vent just whisper and did I just see glowing eyes?!  Is this a Jim Henson project?  Guillermo, please tell me you didn't produce a clunker??  I ended up dubbing this scene as the turning point of the movie.

As I continued watching, I got more and more disappointed.  Sure those little guys (see below) are pretty neat...done well etc., a la Subspecies or The Gate...but not neat enough for me to like the film.  I almost wish Guillermo didn't ever direct this.  I have a few gripes about the movie.  1) most of the movie is the little girl seeing and hearing the below pictured tiny beasts (they are probably about as big as my hand) and then when she tries to tell an adult, they don't believe her.  EVEN after she has photographic proof.  Pretty frustrating that this 'feeling' or mood happens throughout the movie.  I don't want to see that little girl be the only one involved.  I want to see those little things rip everyone apart and have all run for the hills in fear of them.  Or just be subtle little killers, not attack in a group and be all messy etc. (they don't attack very organized-like).  2) My second gripe is the little guys whisper the ENTIRE movie.  They call out her name softly, of course in perfect English because as you know most little beings from deep holes found within basement mansions speak perfect English.  "Sally......Ssssssaaaaaaaaally."  At one point they were talking to each other too, "We will go deeper.....and come out when they forget."  And then one will reply, "We will.  We will."  So dumb.  3) what does the movie title even mean?  Don't Be Afraid of the Dark???  That could be the name of any horror movie, but doesn't really make any sense for this one.  Some of the scenes even happen in the day light.  The title makes it seem that only in pitch black can these little monsters creep out and try to get you.  Also, the little girl has a spine of steel because she's barely scared.  So, there goes another piece of the title.  She spends her days going into a basement filled with cobwebs and sticking her face in an open hole in the wall.  I guess it should have been called, "Speaking Rats from a Hole" or possibly, "del Toro's Epic Whispering Bad-guy Fail Movie"....4) How in the hell is it possible that 3-4 times in the movie those little guys are trying to get the girl, yet somehow the door is always locked?  The adults are trying to break in from the outside as she screams from the inside....that is completely annoying.  Guillermo, seriously?  And you were embarrassed to have Mimic on your resume?  But then you put out this crap?  5) at one point one of those little guys gets squashed by a giant book case (but the door is locked and the girl is by herself), but then the adults break in...and she says something like, "I swear they were here...here look at this picture."  Instead of saying, "LOOK AT THIS DEAD ONE THAT I F-ING SQUASHED" she says look at this picture.  But the adults of course still don't believe her.  And finally point #6) For the last 30 minutes the little girl is photographing everything with a Polaroid.  If you watch, you will know why this is annoying.

The one cool scene aside from the beginning scene is when Katie Holmes' legs get snapped backwards.  But that is about it.  After this movie I decided it was time to own/watch the director's cut of Mimic, which is supposedly WAY better of an ending than the non-director's cut version, even if Guillermo still didn't really get his way with the entire editing.  So I bought it on Blu-Ray.  Should be here in a few days.

#155 / Ted (B-)

I saw this movie opening week.....which was many weeks ago.  I don't know why I haven't written the blog entry yet.  My bad.  It was probably movie #140 not #155, but I just procrastinated on my job.  I'm at the point where I almost don't know what to say anymore about it.  I'll give it a whirl....

For those that think - ah, it's probably just another "funny" movie that everyone will flock to and might be just average, especially because it's about a freaking talking bear and has hit-or-miss Marky Mark as the main actor - I am here to tell you that it WAS indeed good (not as good as 21 Jump Street, if I am comparing summer comedies) and I laughed throughout the entire thing.  There is a ton of cursing though, so don't let your tots watch.

I recall they busted on most of the current pop culture icons.  The very last thing you see on the screen (not a plot spoiler at all) is that werewolf guy from Twilight.  The constantly shirtless guy who also did that Abduction movie, also performed shirtless.  The bust on Katy Perry was pretty funny as well.  One of my favorite scenes was when Marky was trying to guess Ted's girlfriend's name as they chatted on the couch.  Funny stuff.  I also liked all the Flash Gordon scenes.  Makes me want to watch the original Flash movie, seems totally epic and right up my alley.  And finally I could have done without the Fenway park scene(s).

Joe McHale played a good jerk boss role.  I was happy with his acting.  Also, Giovanni Ribisi's character was fun.  And while he and his son, Taylor Lautner, were a bit annoying as an addition to the plot - however their actual roles and such were good.  God, I feel like I'm writing like a 13 year old.  And like, it was so cool, and like, so awesome.  And like, so neat and stuff.  So like, I would totally own this one day...I liked it I think.....

Ok, that's the best I can do weeks later.  I also watched Deathrace 2000 a while ago and never wrote that one up, because my plan was to watch it again considering it was super awesome.  But now it has left instant stream and I cannot watch it again.  So I'll just need to buck up and write something from my not so fresh memory.

Update: it's December and they are ramping up the DVD of Ted for the holidays.  It's annoying.  So, I moved this movie down from a B+ to a B-.  I still laughed, but I think the commercials are weighing on me.

The Hitcher - #154 (B+)

Wow, the police in this movie had some really bad aim.  I guess they weren't trying to kill C. Thomas Howell.  And if that was the case, then okay I'm down and can live with that - but they couldn't even hit the tires?  There was actually an entire scene probably lasting about 10 minutes, which was like a scene right out of good ol' Dukes of Hazzard (c), including crazy car chase scenes, cop cars crashing and exploding, shooting out of windows, and lots of dirt flying.

For the villain, I don't know who's a meaner?  Hesher, Meatloaf, that relentless guy from Duel who drove the truck, or Rutger Hauer?  I guess Hesher isn't a villain so that isn't fair.  And he also doesn't fit in the category with the other three mentioned either, as they all were "car" villains if you will.

Man oh man though, Rutger was an a-hole to the extreme.  That dude never gave up.  Even in the end he was smiling with blood smattered within his teeth, just asking for more.  I went into this movie thinking it was going to be about a guy getting picked up one rainy night, then the rest of the film would be about their struggles in the car once the driver realizes the hitch hiker was actually a bad dude.  Well, this was kinda like that for maybe a minute.  The rest was a hell of a ride and very much enjoyed as well as very much unexpected.  There was more than the car, as Rutger actually made it his mission to pester C. Thomas Howell throughout the movie, specifically letting him go and then showing up again and again.  He must have done that for 3 states worth of driving.  He was evil.  That one scene with Jennifer Jason Leigh was wicked.  Too bad 80's movies can't show the action.  Booooo.

I wonder, could Sean Bean do better?