Movie Appraisal: Detention (2011)

Detention, directed by Joseph Kahn, whose only other directing credit is Torque, is an absolutely enjoyable movie. While quick-paced, it's also memorable and really fun. I probably didn't catch half of what happened in this movie just because of the breakneck speed of the film, the dialogue, and the characters. It almost seems to be made for the ADD generation while having references to the nineties literally throughout the movie. It's odd, and my awkwardness at describing it is probably already showing.

I have no idea how to talk about it, and I'm pretty sure I don't want to spoil it. It's a horror comedy, although it's also fairly light on most of the horror and pretty heavy on most of the comedy. Strangely, although I do not tend to like comedies, I really found this one guffaw kinds of funny. The witty banter along with references, and the characters giving a joke every thirty seconds made this movie really enjoyable to just watch. I had heard about the synopsis and a bit about the movie in general, and I knew I needed to watch it. It's definitely an oddball movie, but it so happens to fall right under what I love in movies. I guess I could call it the horror-comedy version of Donnie Darko mixed with The Breakfast Club (to a point). And it certainly feels as good as either of those movies.

I don't really want to spoil the plot. Let's just say it's odd, almost nonsensical, and really fun. The actors look like they're having a blast. They certainly make the characters into something memorable at the very least. The weirdness of the film mixed with everything else about it makes this a much watch movie if you've ever agreed with me on some of my more outlandish movie likes. I can't really even think of another movie like this one.

I recommend this almost more than any other movie. It's really odd, and I think it will be a love it or hate it kind of film for almost everybody. I loved it, but I can totally understand someone disliking it. I do have a hard time really calling it a "horror" movie, but it does have gore and horror elements in it, and all of them work really well although most of them are also disregarded. The movie- it almost feels like one of those teenage parody movies being put out a few years ago, something like Not Another Teen Movie or whatever. Not that I've really seen movies like that, but just watching the previews, that's what this movie almost acts like. And that might seem like a turn-off, but it does that in a way that actually works.

I'm so scattered about this film. I have no idea what to talk about. If I were having a conversation with you, I'd be trying to say three different things about this movie at once. It has so much density and so many elements in it that I find it very difficult to adequately talk about everything. I love the background moments, things that happen completely in the background that have plot relevance, but are not focused on. On love the adherence to foreshadowing, which seems to be a near-constant thing in this film. The continuity seems like it was a major consideration throughout the movie.

When I watch this film again, I may write a bit more about it. I think this might be a movie that needs multiple viewings to really get everything going on. I may not be giving you much, but this is a really fun movie and really worth watching. Yeah. I think that's all I have to say about it now.

Movie Appraisal: Lo (2009)

Sometimes when you have a bad week like I just had, you need to settle down with a weird, insane, and incredibly entertaining film. Lo, directed by Travis Betz, as you might guess, is that very film this time around. I don't know how to say all that much about this film except it is a very odd ride, unexpected with a sad and poignant payoff. Movies like this intrigue me all the way through. It is because they are unique and tell a story that is incredibly unmarketable, but also simply amazing.

Lo is one of those rare films that comes along every once in a while, with a small budget, no names in the cast- an independent film that says something on a deeper level than you expect. While it doesn't start off swinging, the movie hits hard by the end, with each set-piece of the story telling the story in a very unique way. One thing that I found really cool was the way that the whole thing was set up like a stage play, a musical, a dance number, and a very poignant and ultimately ill-fated love story.

The story is pretty decent, but it takes a while to really get going. And although there is a real feeling to the story, its pacing and characters do leave something to be desired at times. It's probably mostly the acting, which is all over the place. It's one of the failings of the movie, and there's no other way to put that out there. When I started watching the movie, I was very put off, even wondering at the time if I should continue watching it. While it does get much better, the first twenty minutes or so are rough, and I would completely understand if people decided to not take a chance with it after that.

But in taking the chance you find a wonderful personal little story, with acting that is pretty decent towards the end and a plot that holds up under scrutiny, perhaps because of its simplicity. I like the demons and the main character (sort of, although his silly faces are completely idiotic at times). The whole story about a man using a crazy evil book thing to summon a demon to find his girlfriend who was dragged down to hell is something mixed between Evil Dead II and Joss Whedon's supernatural television shows.  The humor is all pervasive, although completely inappropriate for the tone at times. It works every once in a while, but most of the time it's very awkward, barely forcing a smile at all, much less a guffaw.

The make-up is one of the highlights of Lo, really showing off what inexpensive made-up demons can actually look like. I had a very Joss Whedon vibe from the costumes and demons, specifically from Jeez. He could have literally just stepped out of Angel and I wouldn't have even batted an eye. The film looks good all around, but the lack of a budget does show, with the sets being minimal at best and the filming being more closely akin to a stage play than an actual film.

The characters here, mostly a collection of demons and damned souls, are interesting but ultimately paper-thin. You see the plot, the whole plot, by the ending, which gives the demons and what Lo the demon is doing some context, making the whole thing make more sense in general. Lo really is the highlight of the film, his character and his acting are both the most believable and the most entertaining. Like the title implies, the titular character is essential for any sort of enjoyment of this movie. Jeremiah Berkitt, who plays Lo, gives off a fantastic performance in general as the crippled demon. The other actors do competent jobs, but none of them really stand out like he does. The other characters, a waiter, two damned souls, Jeez the Nazi demon thing, and the main character Justin are all a bunch of cliches and Whedon-esque pieces of this movie. And the girlfriend character is something else. Most of the "humor" of the movie stems from her, even if she has the hardest time with comedic timing.

This leads me to talk about the setting in general. Not the black room where Justin has locked himself to do the ritual, but the flashback scenes. These are done so uniquely, put on as stage plays with supporting characters just off in the wings waiting for their cues to come on. This is the bread-and-butter of the movie, and easily the most entertaining part of it as well. The tragedy and comedy faces, the breaking of the fourth wall, and the focus on stage techniques to pull of some great moments actually works in the film's advantage. So, for a threadbare production, it actually comes off quite well. I do admit that I wish it had been a theatrical production to see rather than a movie. It feels more of that ilk and would probably work much better as that. But the movie stands well on its own merits. All-in-all I can't complain all that much.

I don't know what else to say. While I enjoyed the movie quite a bit while watching it, the flaws have shown themselves since then. I see them pretty significantly, but that doesn't take my enjoyment of watching the film away. I liked it all right, but I have no idea if I could ever recommend this to anybody who didn't like small budget indie productions that are not in any way a big form movie. I guess it could be considered horror-comedy maybe? Although that doesn't quite work either. I don't know if I could rightly call this horror. It feels more like a supernatural and tragic romantic comedy. I guess? Man, that's a ton of qualifiers...

Anyway, for most this is not the movie for you. While I liked it, it gives off a bad impression from the get-go. The acting is rough at times. The comedy sometimes feels forced. And it's about a love story, which is always a reason to avoid a movie. (I jest... but seriously, I dislike most romance movies.) There's a ton working against this movie, but I actually really liked it. While it's not perfect, it succeeds at both entertaining and doing something different. I liked the story for what it was and the presentation for what it did. There are probably a ton of better movies out there, but this one I liked well enough. If you're looking for something incredibly odd and out of the ordinary, maybe you can try this one, just don't say I didn't warn you about Justin's ridiculous faces or the first twenty minutes of this film being very hard to get through.

Movie Appraisal: John Dies at the End (2012)

John Dies at the End was one of my most anticipated films of 2012. I was looking forward to this thing almost as much as I was looking forward to The Hobbit. So, just remember that when it comes to me being critical or reviewing this sucker in any and all ways. Also realize that I wasn't expecting much from this film either... so I was not nearly as disappointed as some might be.

I also have to say that I love the book of the same name by David Wong (of Cracked.com fame). It has fast become one of my favorite novels after I read it, full of both horror and comedy, with both mixing together to create a wonderful reading experience. Because I thought so highly of the book I was really looking forward to the movie... but then I started hearing things. I generally avoid the hype or hate machines because my tastes tend to be fairly different from most other critics and reviewers. i tend to like fairly different things from either mainstream reviewers or the indie crowd. So, most of the time I reserve judgment for myself. The things I was hearing though... they were on the fairly negative side of things, with some calling it a disjointed mess and others saying it was fun but confusing. It was mostly plot-related and pacing-related criticisms. I hate to agree with most critics but... well... I'll give my opinions shortly. First I want to talk about the book and what I liked from it.

I like to think of myself as a pretty big reader. I tend to like horror, but I'll try anything that has urban fantasy or that might be kind of different. I bought the book in a Borders before they went out of business because I had heard some interesting things about it. Then I waited a year to read it because that's what I usually do. Anyway, when I finally picked it up, I fell in love with it. It told a story I loved, with great characters, great ideas, and a great execution despite not having the best writing ever and being mostly very casually written. Even so it left me wanting more and more. I just wanted to read more about these characters and their adventures. That happens pretty rarely, let me tell you, but I was absolutely sold on it. The comedy was great, if a little random at times. The horror was actually really well done in a story this goofy. And mostly, there was a perfect balance between the serious and the comedic, which appeals to me quite a bit. The book was something of a dramedy horror book, something I see very rarely, and like quite a bit.

And you know what? It worked. It found that perfect place of happiness in my head and settled there. It had great scenes- memorable scenes- a great cast of characters, and a lot to say about almost everything- weird and normal alike. The first person narration really added to the character of David (the main character), and made him seem like a big ball of randomly knowledgeable everyman... and it worked. The other characters, Dave, Molly, Amy and the rest... well, they worked too. Dave being this goofy screwed-up and drugged-up guy who was the main comic relief and David's best friend. Amy was this sick and disabled girl who really became the heart of the book... and the reason for Dave to do anything crazy or heroic at all (mostly). And then there's Molly the dog, who remains the smartest character around. Other characters were really well done as well, these ones being completely absent in the film, like "Big" Jim Sullivan and Jennifer Lopez. Both of these characters were incredibly well-written and created despite being fairly minor characters in the finished work.

"Big" Jim is kind of the crux of the entire novel, seeming to be the real reason for the soy sauce to have come into the world. (The soy sauce is the drug that makes the characters see the weird things that normal people can't see.) His characterization in the novel is one of slight antagonist or antihero even though he thinks of himself as the put upon heroic Knight Templar. He knows much more than he ever lets on, and yet we as the readers and David Wong as the narrator know almost nothing about what he did except for the conjecture on his part. Jennifer Lopez also was well done, being the initial object of desire that David wins over, this perfect woman he falls for, gets as a girlfriend, then loses through their inability to stick together. In some ways its one of the most depressingly real parts of the book. David gets the girl; he wins her over by being the best he can be, by being the hero, and by standing by her... but their relationship, which is both heavily physical as well as being emotionally draining on the two of them ultimately doesn't work out. They go their separate ways... and even though it's kind of amiable... relationships ending like that are never pretty. It makes the Dave in the second half of the novel one that is a bit more serious and a bit more depressingly real as well.

Both of those characters exist in Book I, and they are either gone or dead by the second half. Their disappearance from the narrative makes other characters (mostly Amy) have room to come into the story and be used effectively. This works really well in the novel, better than I would have ever thought. Having two distinct and very different feelings to a distinct and singular novel makes the novel feel more like a vignette of stories rather than a coherent narrative despite the fact it remains a fairly cohesive narrative throughout. It works well at establishing many moments of fun and terror between all the characters of the novel, as well as showing that a history exists between many of the same characters in the novel. Amy was not always the heart of the novel, but became it through perseverance. Hell, in the novel she is initially established as some kind of deranged and disturbed young woman, one who David went to a special school with. He even made fun of her, giving her the slightly awkward nickname of Cucumber because she threw up so much and he likened it to sea cucumbers exposing their guts when attacked. She was never meant to be his girlfriend. Again, she was set up with this confusing and somewhat disturbing past. Her brother "Big" Jim died in the first half of the novel, and David really didn't like him. There was nothing that foreshadowed their romance. He never called her hot or gorgeous or the most beautiful thing he had ever seen. Instead they fell in love because of mutual respect, some conversation, and both of them taking care of the other. It exists in the novel and is one of the most well put together romances I have ever seen in fiction. But it sadly does not exist in the movie.

I'm not here to review the book, but it disappointed the hell out of me that certain scenes didn't make it into the movie. For instance, most of the second half of the novel isn't there in the movie. Amy basically takes on a very different character than she was in the book. She becomes some strange mixture of both Jennifer and Amy without ever being either of them, and being a much blander character because of it. She also has the least amount of characterization for the main cast. Because so much of the second half of the novel is cut out (and because I prefer the second half of the novel), I found myself not enjoying the second half of the movie as much as I could have otherwise. Now, don't get me wrong I loved the first half of the movie, but the second half... Look, there were no snow scenes (some of the most atmospheric moments of the novel), no real reason for going into the mall or any explanation of what the mall was at all, no shadows, which are some of the main antagonists of the novel, no going to Amy's house and finding her missing and all the things that came with that (some of the tensest and most serious moments in the novel), no dog eating a bomb, no characterizations for many of the minor characters, and no Las Vegas bloodbath. Most importantly, there is no major plot twist like the novel has. If you've read the book, you already know the twist, if not I won't say it. It makes the entire monologue at the beginning of the movie about the ax completely worthless with that twist not being in the movie. It has nothing to do with anything... unless Justin's status as Shitload is being discussed, or Arnie status as... yeah... Without that plot twist, there is no real emotion coming from the movie, no real reason to bother with or fear Korrok, and no real reason for Amy and David to be together. It instead becomes a random collection of scenes and emotions (mostly funny ha ha) that have little to no emotional ground in them, something the book hit incredibly well.

Ultimately, with some of my favorite moments of the book excised from the movie, this is a movie I could never LOVE. I was glad I went into the movie already knowing some of the changes. And I think others who love the book should be prepared as well. I would have been very annoyed at the movie if I hadn't known what the changes were, specifically to Amy, Bark Lee, and the whole second half of the plot. The scenes between David and Amy were the biggest disappointments. I understand that with the plot of the film those scenes couldn't have been fit in without reworking the script, but those were Amy's character establishment scenes, and taking them out essentially removes a main character in the plot from being characterized. Also, the time crunch of the story bothered me in the film. The novel takes places over the course of years (I think two years, but I could be slightly off. It could be three.), and it needs that time to establish the characters and their feelings towards everything that's going on. The movie makes everything seem predestined and very quick, almost making us and the characters get used to everything long before they even have a moment to think and become established as characters. These guys have to get used to all of this in maybe two days or so rather than two years, and their characters never really reflect that. There is no real change or arc to the characters in the movie, unlike the book, and some of the most poignant and meaningful moments and character establishments are just nonexistent. David's line about John never calling Amy the girl with one arm, Amy's reaction to the twist and to Dave beating the crud out of the guy who called her a "burden," Dave helping Amy after she threw up, Amy and Dave's time in the car with the shadows chasing them and the snow slowing them down, John holding Molly to the antagonists and commanding her to defecate the bomb she had eaten... well, too many great moments are just missing, and I just don't see much good that comes from that.

I think the emotions in the novel added a lot to it and made those scenes with comedy all the more comedic. It let the steam off of a fairly serious and pretty horrific plot. The second half of the novel real upped the stakes, and made everything a lot more meaningful... but that doesn't come out in the movie at all. The movie is basically and essentially the first half of the novel with a few parts of the second half put into it, mostly Amy (if you can call her Amy), Korrok's homeworld, the other dimension basketball game, and the mall. Other than that the movie was almost a straight adaptation of the first half of the novel... which, honestly, it should have been all along. Just take away Korrok, add Jennifer and Jim (and the characters who get forgotten after they are lost to the shadows), add Las Vegas instead of Korrok's lair... and there you go. You have the first half of an incredible book made into a stellar movie, and you can hope that a second half of the book can be made into a movie later on. Maybe that's crazy... you know, with money and the chances of success... but it's so close to only being the first half of the novel... why not just make it that and add the second half later or not at all?

Anyway, I have other, granted mostly minor, gripes, but I think that last point I mentioned is the most important. I would have loved this movie if it were only a straight adaptation of the first half of the novel. And as it is now, it's pretty freaking close. The first half of this movie is nearly perfect, making sure that each important note of the novel is hit in turn. It's only when the things from the second half of the novel are added and shoehorned into the plot that the plot stops working as well, and the adaptation kind of craps out. Robert North is the first indication of this. Although I love Doug Jones, and he's playing the right part here, the character is completely unnecessary to this film for all of the two scenes he's in. Marconi is another problem, being dumb rather than well done. I hated how this character was portrayed in the movie, especially when he was a very different kind of character in both the novel and its sequel This Book is Full of Spiders. Also, why the hell is Amy's last name changed from Sullivan to Larkin? It seems like such a dumb and arbitrary change to make. I know the dog was named Bark Lee instead of Molly because they had a male dog, not a female one... and I can't complain about that change because of that... but Amy's last name change just seems insane and nonsensical.

The funny thing about this movie is that although the plot is sometimes not incredibly coherent and at other times actively confusing as both halves of the novel are crammed into the movie, the little vignettes with the meatman, the police station, and Robert Marley's trailer are incredibly well done. Hell, even the ax scene that starts the movie off is all kinds of awesome. The bratwurst phone is funny; the soy sauce looks fantastic. All of the characters (except Amy and John) look dead on to me. "Camel Holocaust" is brilliant and hilarious. The acting is really top-notch throughout as well, with Chase Williamson making the perfect David Wong. I loved his voiceovers, his dry humor, his jumping between melodrama and absolute deadness in his voice. I thought he was absolutely brilliant. Rob Mayes is also great as John Cheese... but he looks nothing like the character is described in the book, and tends to act very little like a man who has an addictive personality to booze, smoking, women, and any kind of drug available. Rob Mayes is way too ripply and well-muscled to scream out John Cheese to me. That being said, I loved his acting performance as well. He had some absolutely fantastic expressions and comedic timing.

The direction was good as well, especially in the soy tripping scenes. Don Coscarelli did an amazing job with the directing even if his screenwriting was not as amazing. I was pleasantly surprised by how good almost  everything looked (except Korrok and the wig monsters) even with a ton of CGI at times. I was less happy about how the plot and characters ended up, but an adaptation containing both halves of the novel would have been difficult for anybody to adapt. It was a really good try... even if the second half of the film mostly didn't work.

Uh... I guess I can quickly talk about the plot if you know nothing about it. David Wong, the main character, is getting interviewed by Arnie Blondestone (Paul Giamatti) about being some kind of spiritual exorcist or something like that. He tells Arnie about some kind of drug that can make him and his friend John see things that most people cannot see. As the story starts, David is at a party. Amy is there too (not in the book though; in the book it's Jennifer) looking for her dog Bark Lee. David is listening to John's terrible band Three Arm Sally playing and eventually runs into Robert Marley (not his real name), a (possibly) Jamaican man who is the "source" of the soy sauce. He tells David what he dreamed and freaks the guy out a bit.

Eventually David gets a call from John after he gets home and goes to sleep. John is telling David to come over and help him. David jumps out of sleep and rushes over to find John going crazy and seeing things that aren't there. David sighs as John runs outside. He looks around and finds a syringe full of some dark liquid that John calls soy sauce. Eventually, after they go to a restaurant to cool down, David gets a call from John while he's sitting across from him. This is the first indication that something is wrong. David takes John away, calls a priest, gets poked by the needle in his pocket, starts tripping (in one of the best scenes of the movie), and is eventually accosted by Detective Appleton. The detective takes him and John into custody to ask them some questions about the party. It is here Appleton reveals to David that a bunch of the party-goers have shown up dead or are missing, and that only he and John are known to have survived. David freaks out as the soy sauce enters his system completely, but before he can do anything John "dies," and he is left alone in the interview room with a police officer who doesn't show up in mirror. A fight ensues, he gets away, talks to a bratwurst, and ends up at Robert Marley's trailer.

In the trailer, David sees the soy sauce, ingests it accidentally, saves himself inadvertently from dying from a gunshot, and almost gets run over by Bark Lee driving his truck. He goes back home, meets Shitload, formerly one of the people at the party, and is taken captive along with a comatose John, Bark Lee who is channeling John, Fred, and Amy. (Fred dies by the way. That's what happens to minor characters...) Shitload takes them to an abandoned mall, John tries to run off, makes Shitload go outside where he gets shot by Appleton. They all are "saved" until Appleton explodes into little white worms. They then decide to go into the mall and take care of business.

Amy has only one hand. Her other is gone. She opens a ghost door with her phantom hand. And then she disappears for the rest of the movie... She kind of starts a romance with David, but it is so quick and stupid that it is actually embarrassing to watch, and it shouldn't be there at all if it's going to be that kind of low quality. Bark Lee, David, and John... the humans among them armed... enter the mall and meet Robert North, who kind of held David at slugpoint (ha ha) earlier in the film, and Dr. Marconi, who seems out of place here and is idiotically used with his twin blonde assistants for... reasons... They send the three "heroes" of our story into another world where they find a Largeman and a bunch of naked other people, all of them with their upper faces masked. Largeman talks about the history of their world, Korrok, and why John and David need to help them. There's also a really gory and well done cartoon shown. I liked that part quite a lot. Eventually they meet a badly CGIed Korrok, explode a bomb, inexplicably meet Marconi again, and survive. David is with Amy at the end. Arnie is a half-ghost, and John and Dave play basketball and go into another world, but make fun of the guys there rather than help save it.

And that's about it. Some parts of it come out of nowhere and are confusing, while others work quite well. Very little is added to the plot, with the movie mostly being an adaptation of the first half and the very last part of the novel. A lot of lines are taken directly from the novel... and subsequently they work very well... although there are some lines not in the novel that are also quite good.

I guess the ultimate conclusion I have come up with to this movie is that while it is sadly a very broken movie... it worked pretty well for me. I think very few people who haven't read the novel will like it. And I think that people who have read it will be annoyed by some of the plot choices. I have to also disagree with most people who said it needed a bigger budget. It may well have when it came to the amount of film or getting a great screenwriter to adapt... but for the most part, besides Korrok, the CGI was solid, the acting was solid, and most everything else worked. What it needed was about twenty more minutes or so to establish characters, specifically Amy and John, and to have a slightly less confusing plot. Hell, even David needed some fleshing out. And the plot is all over the place. The romance, a wonderfully written romance in the novel, is awful here, if it exists at all. The main point of the novel is completely untouched in the movie. The main antagonists of the novel are not even mentioned here. Amy is for all intent purposes a completely different character. And mostly, the movie forgot that there were both serious moments and comedy in the novel. Those are the main problems, and I doubt throwing money at the film could have fixed them.

That being said, I liked the movie, but didn't love it. I enjoyed it, but felt confused by some of the plot points and how some things were executed. I would not recommend this film for people who haven't read the book (although some very well might enjoy it, so take that as you will. I think most will find it more confusing than not, although I could be wrong.), and for those who have read the book and want to see the movie, beware of the changes the movie makes and know them before watching it. I suggest reading a few reviews (or just mine here), looking at the changes, and thinking to yourself if you really want to see a novel you like with light characterizations, inexplicably dumb changes to the plot, and some of the best scenes of the novel not even in the movie.

I will say that the scenes that are lifted straight out of the novel are really good though. So, take that as you will. I really think the movie is worth seeing for those scenes alone... but just take your head out of the plot or the coherency of the story... they really don't work. So, here's to tentative recommendations with warning labels attached to them in red ink! Check it out, but don't blame me if you're disappointed with it in the end.

Movie Appraisal: Trick 'r Treat (2007)

I don't have much to say about this movie except that if you haven't seen in and are reading this review: Stop.

STOP RIGHT NOW.





STOP, and go and watch this film. Do it for Halloween. I don't care if it's not Halloween anymore. Do it for the potential of Halloween. This just happens to be the greatest Halloween movie ever made and needs to be watched by everyone. Oh, you think I kid. You think I jest. I neither kid nor jest. It is perfect. Perfect in every discernible way for a Halloween movie.

Trick 'r Treat is an anthology film written and directed by Michael Dougherty. It was based on his animated short film from 1996 entitled Season's Greetings, which also features the character of Sam (that little dude up there on the poster). The movie is also a wonderful comedy-horror movie with blood, gore, breasts, and everything a horror movie like this should be. The comedy aspect of it is incredibly well done. It's funny at all the right spots. I found myself laughing more than once at the ridiculousness of it all or some of the wonderful lines throughout the movie. I loved the ironic deaths of many of the characters, so much so that I would generally find myself gleefully humming to myself as they died. Not sure if I've ever done that to a movie before...

The characters (and acting) in it are brilliant as well, ranging from the hilarious murderous principal Steven Wilkins (played by Dylan Baker) to the virginal Laurie (Anna Paquin) to Sam (Quinn Lord) himself. Hell, even the savant Rhonda (Samm Todd) and the witchy young girl Sara (Isabelle Deluce) are nearly brilliant. Brian Cox is also awesome as Creeg, the angry old man of the film. I can't say enough great things about all of these actors. Seriously, every last one of them creates a fantastic and memorable character. And they all seem to really love being in this movie, and making a movie that finally feels precisely like Halloween.

Anyway, the movie basically involves a bunch of Halloween parables. And they all work quite well with each  of them focusing on a different aspect of Halloween culture. You have the kids who are trying to dig up an urban legend and appeal to the ghosts of that legend. You have the woman who doesn't have any respect for Halloween and wants those decorations down ASAP. You have your girls in sexy costumes going to a party in the woods. You have a serial killer type who poisons a kid. And you have a crotchety old man who has no respect for anybody but himself. All of these plots intertwine to tell the narrative, but I'm not saying how they intertwine. Watch the flick to find that out.

It is one of the first films I've ever watched that really hits what Halloween is all about. It feels appropriate in every way. It feels like Halloween. I don't know how much more I can say about it. I've been a kid at Halloween. I've been a crazy teenager at Halloween, and now I'm basically an adult at Halloween. I've loved Halloween every year. I've gone trick-or-treating with both friends and family (and been around the blocks a few times by myself). I've been to parties, stayed up and watched horror movies with people, and generally enjoyed the holiday every year immensely. If you've taken any time to enjoy it too, you will love this film. Don't be scared off by the comedy aspect of the movie, since it does hold the appropriate level of scares as well. But don't think that the movie is too scary either. While there is a good amount of gore, it is really over-the-top, never being actually realistic in the slightest. It fits in a snug little corner between comedy and horror and works well as both of those things.

The plot with the school bus massacre, the old man, and the school principal are my favorites, but all of them work more-or-less incredibly well. It's just that those three work spectacularly well as what they are. The school bus massacre especially feels like it could be a movie all on its own. And it happens to be the absolute pinnacle of terrifying in this movie. I'm pretty sure I've done stupid things like these kids did, and though it didn't end up as... uh... messy as it did in this movie, I'm pretty sure the mood was still there. Somehow Halloween was encapsulated on film, and I love that feeling so very much.

I really can't say enough good things about this movie. I'm glad I had a chance to review it on Halloween. I'm also glad that I've gotten the chance to have a great time on Halloween watching a fantastic film. Check it out right now if you haven't this year. You will not be disappointed, I almost guarantee it.

Movie Appraisal: The Cabin in the Woods (2012)

So, this is basically SCP Foundation: The Movie. Yup. Uh-huh. Okay.

Okay, this review is done. You can go now.




Seriously, stop reading, I have nothing else to say.





Nothing else to say here. Doo doo-doo doo-doo. You can stop bothering me now. I said my peace. Said it all in fact. My full thoughts are up there. You should be thankful I wrote any words at all you ungrateful weirdos. So get out of here. Go make a sandwich or something. Some potato salad maybe. Or just go read the entire SCP Foundation website. I'm sure they'd enjoy that. But you can leave this review alone now. Yeah...








Oh, fine... FIIIIIINE... You want me to write words that you will read then I'll do that, but you'll live to regret those words more than likely.

I liked this movie a lot. It was a fun movie all the way through. Sure, there are hiccups from time-to-time and the plot is all kinds of complicated... but it works pretty well in general... even if it works better as a comedy than a horror movie, which is somewhat disappointing. Don't go into this movie expecting the scares and the jumps. It's a movie that relies much more on dialogue and set-pieces then it ever will on the actual horror of the situation despite the fact that this movie is obviously a play on common horror movies and horror tropes.

Now, do all those things make the movie good or bad? Well, that's really up to the watcher of the film, but I found it fairly compelling for the most part... although the "horror movie" portion of the plot is much less compelling than the office job portion. Basically I was more interested in the SCP: The Movie than I was at the actual victims of the whole convoluted premise. I wanted to hear so much more about the lives and working atmosphere of the guys who are in the office environment than I wanted to see the horror movie stuff play out. I honestly thought that having the movie continue on from its almost fake ending of all of the sacrifices working out would have been much more interesting. Maybe not for most audiences, but I think I would have found that much better in literally every way.

I seem to be talking a ton about what this movie isn't rather than what it is, and the problem is, although I liked this flick, I really keep thinking about how easily it could have been better. The last minute of this film left me with a bad taste in my mouth as well, probably because of the inexplicable actions of the two characters left alive as well the very last image, which completely severed any emotional investment I would have had in the plot. I know this is an old Joss Whedon trick, and I simply thought it wasn't as fun or as good as other ideas that I could just come up with now. That being said, it is Joss Whedon, and I was expecting something like this as soon as I understood what the "twist" was. It still doesn't mean I love it... but it was okay.

The movie is basically easily separated into thirds. The first third being the lead up to the horror with the college kids of Dana (played by Kristen Connolly), Curt (played by Chris Hemsworth), Jules (played by Anna Hutchison), Marty (played by Fran Kranz), and Holden (played by Jesse Williams) all going to Curt's cousin's cabin in the woods. (There's a title drop there by the way. Just so you know.) Now each of these five characters represent an archetype in these kinds of films despite the fact that not all of them represent their archetype in question at the beginning of the film. Jules seems to be a rather intelligent and self-conscious girl despite being labelled as "the Whore" by the movie. The controllers drug her to make her more likely to engage in lewd behavior. She does and is promptly killed for showing her breasts and getting physical with her boyfriend. Curt is an intelligent student who becomes "the Athlete," essentially becoming a makeshift leader to the group. Holden, a much more jockish character towards the beginning, becomes "the Scholar" as it is learned that he knows Latin and is fairly intelligent. Marty is always "the Fool," but mostly in the Tarot definition of the Fool as a wild card. And finally there is Dana who is "the Virgin" despite not being a virgin at all. But they have to "work with what they've got."

While the kids are all introduced the operators are as well. The most prominent of these are Richard Jenkins as Gary Sitterson, Bradley Whitford as Steve Hadley (the mer-man guy), Brian White as the military guy Daniel Truman, and Amy Acker as Wendy Lin, a chemistry lady. These characters are the most compelling to me, being both the most easily related to, and the most easily liked. Look, nobody likes college kids, not even the college kids. I'm a college kid and I can say without a doubt that I have no liking of college kids. So, the "lead" characters are far and beyond the least likable in the movie. I won't say they deserve what they get, but I wasn't really sorry for any of their deaths or potential deaths. Whereas I felt pretty down as all the operators were killed off in the final act. They were morally ambiguous certainly, but they were trying to do the greater good under the worst circumstances... and what's wrong with that? Whereas the last two "hero" characters alive in Dana and Marty go ahead and let the world end. I mean, seriously? Why would you guys do that? Die then a save billions or die a few minutes later and save no-one? That is seriously messed up. And it was the one part of the movie I really didn't like. It felt out of character, and honestly damned both of those characters in my eyes. You do what you have to do to prevent an apocalypse if you want to go traipsing around calling yourself a good guy. I don't know... I guess it left a bitter taste in my mouth. I like dark endings, but seriously, if you have to make characters act out of character and have a bunch of convenient plot things happen at the same time to get your dark ending, it's just not worth it. There's no payoff and no punch. And the hand coming up from the earth at the end just seemed dumb. If you're going to keep the dark ending leave it a little ambiguous at least. The hand looked worst than what I could have imagined in my mind... but there's the problem... this movie is inherently not a horror movie.

Now, I know when I sat that people will be all like, "But it says it's a horror movie!" It's not a horror movie. It's a horror comedy more than anything else... just as much as Shaun of the Dead or Zombieland. Sure, there is gore and things that should be creepy, but it never really reaches the upper echelon of actually being scary. It's not The Evil Dead... that's for sure. Instead, everything works out for this movie to be a fairly compelling comedy... really not even a horror comedy. This is no Trick 'r Treat where there are actual horror elements to it (I'll get to that movie soon, don't you worry.), this is more generic horror with some good humor, good dialogue, and good characters tying it together.

Now, I liked the operators quite a bit, but Marty was also incredibly well written. His dialogue is witty and his comic-timing is really good. I found myself laughing at a good majority of his lines. The whole operators business was also amusing in its own right, especially the mundane conversations they have throughout the movie. This is actually one of those movies that I prefer the big twist out there in the beginning... because without that twist this would be a relatively generic horror movie... but with it it is definitely SCP: The Movie, and I can get behind that wholesale. I love how the monsters are kept in enclosed areas to be released at a desired time. I love how they have that cool of a collection from regular zombies all the way to a weird ballerina with her face a giant mouth-thing... and all the other horror references besides. I love how some old gods need to be appeased by the sacrifices of the respective horror tropes of different cultures. I really like this movie even despite the missteps. It works on a fundamental level to be an enjoyable experience.

And while there are some problems, if you keep an opened mind, this movie can really amaze you with both its plot and storytelling becoming something really amazing in the process. Now, as for scares... this movie offers very few. There is a lot of gore, but really only one scare... kind of a jump scare, but I found myself surprised... and that's the death of Holden. You see it coming from a mile away, but it happens so quickly that it left me surprised. The only "death" I didn't like was the fake Marty death. He should've died there. There was no way he fought back, not in the time required before the blood splatter goes up... but somehow I knew his offscreen death would be negated. I still didn't like it. It felt too fake... too manufactured. I just couldn't get behind the explanation or his character's continued life. But... I guess it is what it is. I've also heard some complain about the big red PURGE button for all the monsters... and while I found it incredibly dumb... I also thought it worked from a thematic standpoint. This is the SCP Foundation we're talking about. Of course they'd have a big red PURGE button. Why am I not even a little surprised? Plus, this leads to some of the best tension in the entire film, so how can I get up in arms over a little button?

I have to recommend this movie to people who love horror. It is a great little movie. Yes, it has some issues, but it mostly fulfills exactly what it's supposed to, and it does it ridiculously well. While reminiscent of The Evil Dead, don't expect too many scares. Instead hand on for some great dialogue, an interesting premise, and a fun ride.

Movie Appraisal: The Hole (2009)

I didn't know this was a Joe Dante film until after the movie was done. In retrospect I probably could have guessed. It's very much his style of film, with very similar themes to other movies that I've seen directed by him. But I'm starting off kind of strange, talking about the director of this film when I have a movie to review. So, let's jump down the bottomless hole and see what lies beyond the darkness.


I talk about Joe Dante because I tend to like his films (the very few I've actually seen), and this one is no exception. I loved (LOVED!) this film. It was great from beginning to end with excellent set-ups, a great plot, amazing characters, and a weird horror-comedy fantasy plot that actually made me both pull back from the screen at times and laugh at others. It was really a brilliant film. If you're reading this review right now and haven't seen this flick, just stop reading and go watch this film. Yeah, it has 3D in the title (because it was filmed in 3D) but don't let that throw you off watching the movie (or entice you to watch it either because 3D is generally horrible). The 3D didn't add or subtract from The Hole though. I didn't even notice it until after I started to look stuff up for this review and noticed that the movie was filmed in 3D and yeah...


The acting is amazing by the way. Yes, there are hiccups from time to time, but for the most part it works. The kids are kids. I mean, hell some of the things Dane (played by Chris Massoglia) did, I did myself when I was his age. And it all worked quite well. His performance, although a little wooden at times, really showed a character with depth and maybe some vulnerabilities and a whole lot of loneliness bottled up inside of him. He latched onto the female lead, Julie (played by Haley Bennett), and their chemistry together was fun to watch. Haley Bennett does a great job here as well, showing a range of emotion (maybe not the greatest range, but still a range) and a character that does feel well-rounded despite how little you know about her. Finally there is Lucas (played by Nathan Gamble who was the kid in The Mist.) who acts well beyond his years, having quite possibly the best comic timing and some of the best acting in the movie. The dynamics between Dane and Lucas is really the whole driving point of the movie, and kind of the take home message is that these two didn't really like one another at first, but eventually came together as brothers. It was sweet, well thought out, and well executed. Honestly, all three lead characters have great chemistry with one another, and the quality of their acting was certainly enhanced by acting against one another. I can't even say enough good things about the acting here. I felt that they were kids, and that's something I see so rarely in films like this. Usually the kids in a movie feel like anybody else, mostly like adults writing a kid, but here the kids feel like regular kids and act like regular kids, and it is absolutely a joy to behold.


The story is simple enough, a mother (played by Teri Polo) and her two sons move to a new town to get away from her abusive ex-husband, who is currently locked away in a prison in New Jersey. She gets a new job at a hospital and the boys have some free time to do anything they want to do. It's summer after all, so there are plenty of things to do, right? Well, no. Dane misses his friends and seems to really hate on his young brother, Lucas. He sees his pretty next door neighbor and starts watching her in the most socially awkward way possible, drawing her, and probably actively thinking about maybe possibly dating her. I-I... I don't know... I guess that's what I would be thinking if I had ever been in his shoes... which I haven't been... or... uh, probably haven't been... more than likely... Look, I understand what the dude's thinking, all right? Stop looking at the page like that. It's unbecoming of you.


Anyway, Lucas, being a little snot-nosed punk, goes on the warpath when Dane won't play with him and starts talking to the pretty neighbor girl, Julie, on his own, much to Dane's embarrassment and chagrin. He grabs Lucas to pull him away from talking to Julie, and starts beating the little booger up in the basement only to find...


THE HOLE


Well, they start messing around with this latched door on the floor of their basement, finding it padlocked with, I believe, six separate locks. They find the keys hidden away, and Dane undoes the locks only for them to find a bottomless hole. Julie comes in to see if they've killed one another or not, and stares in amazement at the odd hole herself. They mess around with it even more, sending items into the abyss and filming to see if they would find anything of interest, but they don't see anything of note besides a BOTTOMLESS HOLE UNDER THE HOUSE.


They treat it like a passing interest. Hell, I would probably do the same thing if I found a bottomless hole. I'd send stuff down there, try to tape it, write a blog about it, and ultimately get bored with it and forget about it. Such is my existence, making even the outright bizarre and creepy more mundane than a plain potato. Honestly, I like this part of the movie. The kids act like kids, not like adults writing for kids, which is something I really have to point out as a positive aspect of the film. The kids play around with the hole, and scare themselves... but ultimately... well, the hole wasn't empty... and whatever it was that was down there is coming for them...


I like the claw marks on the inside of the latched door. I like the locks disappearing, the ghostly noises Julie hears at night, the uncanny valley clown puppet that scares the crud out of Lucas, and I like the aesthetics. I like how the tension rises throughout the movie, and I like both the scarier moments and the funnier ones. I like how the scary moments were actually scary and the moments meant to be funny were actually amusing. It's a rare film that can pull off completely different tones from one scene to another and do so flawlessly, and this film does it amazingly. I couldn't stop watching this movie. I couldn't pause it, and I didn't want to pause it. I was totally engrossed in everything with this movie, especially the world of the movie. It simply impressed me to no end to see something that felt like it could have been real.


Anyway, the hole lets out your greatest fears, which you either overcome... or well... don't. And it works quite well showing off itself as both a effective horror movie and as an effective comedy-horror flick. There were certainly moments when I found myself slightly creeped out by what was going and other moments where I was rolling my eyes at the absurdity of the situation. But I think that was the point, to show us just how ridiculous some fears can be. Having a fear of creepy clowns eventually will point out just how ridiculous it is to think that a clown doll can overpower even a child. Fear of an abusive father becomes a ridiculous thing, showing that his own domination over those weaker than him makes him smaller and less intimidating. Showing a little ghost girl and pointing out that she's not some terrifying bogeyman, just a scared little girl who didn't want to die and misses her life... it really works for this movie. It shows the strength of the film through deconstructing fears and what makes a person afraid... also overcoming those obstacles. It's, in some ways, a coming of age story, with each of these characters putting something aside, growing as characters and as people. The development is fantastic, bordering on some of the best character development I've ever seen in a ninety minute movie.  I loved that aspect of the film. It was probably the most appealing thing to me about it, and something I definitely won't soon forget.


 The movie looked amazing as well, not necessarily because it was in 3D either. It looked like a lot of care was put into making the sets, the trapdoor, and the trippy dream sequence kind of thing at the end. I was really impressed by the visuals throughout the film though. I think they'll have a lasting impression on me. The pool scene looked like some of my memories of hanging in a pool or near a pool with high school friends. The basement scenes looked like they were taking place in a creepy basement, but the visuals changed just as soon as the scenes shifted to outside of that basement. The little ghost girl looked like she was made with some kind of stop-animation, and it worked so well, making her seem very creepy and very out of place, like she couldn't work in the real world. It gave the movie a definite fantastic edge that I thought worked incredibly well int he movie's favor.


Anyway, this was a brilliant film that I would recommend to everybody. It works as a family film oddly enough, despite the horror. There isn't much in the way of bad language or gore, and the sexual themes, if you could call them that, are no worse than anything you could see on the Disney channel, for example. (Not that I watch that channel, mind you, just that I've seen my younger cousin watching it and know the stuff on it.) I also find it funny that, although a relationship is hinted at, nothing ever happens between Dane and Julie. Their relationship has an innocence to it that you wouldn't expect, and I really enjoyed that. It happens so rarely that a simple innocent relationship can leave a lasting memory, but it was so much stronger than relationships usually are in these kinds of movies, you know the ones I'm thinking about. The ones that are all about sex and sexual interest and having the female lead lose as much clothes as possible. I don't mind those kinds of films, but I like the innocence here. It's done so rarely, in my opinion, that it really does matter when it's done superbly.


In general I would seriously say that anybody could enjoy this film even despite it's kind of cult film feel. I think it can appeal to a very wide audience, much like Gremlins. Joe Dante did a great job making another film that should be a classic. I'm only sorry to say that I hadn't even heard of the film before I saw it, which is a real travesty. So, I'm giving a glowing recommendation of this film. I really enjoyed everything about it, even the sometimes slightly off acting. There was a charm to this movie that very, very few movies have to them outside of Terry Gilliam movies, Joe Dante movies, and some random '80s and '90s flicks that I look back on nostalgically. I was impressed by this movie so much that I can't even stop smiling about it. Check it out. Find it. Watch it.