Posted by admin | 2 Comments

Wolfman – Review

reviewed by Skot
directed by Joe Johnston, 2010
___________________________

“It is said there is no sin in killing a beast, only in killing a man.  But where does one begin and the other end?”

This is the question presented by the 2010 remake of The Wolfman, starring Anthony Hopkins, Benicio Del Torro and Emily Blunt.  It is asked near the beginning as well as at the end of the film.  It is a question that permeates many horror films, the werewolf sub-genre most especially.  It permeates them implicitly, if not explicitly as in this case.

Horror is one of the most relevant and important genres of film and literature for our times.  Horror and fantasy and science fiction, all forms of speculative writing, permit artists and scholars to consider subject matter that fits readily into no other format.  Each age wrestles with its own philosophical questions and ethical dilemmas.  Rational discourse is not the only, perhaps not even the best, way to address some perplexing issues.  Here is where the arts and the faculty of the human imagination can be of use.  One age-old question that has never been more relevant than today has to do with human nature.  How shall we define what it means to be a human being and what is our relationship to other people, to the natural world, and to God?

Understanding the nature of man is a prevalent undertaking in the horror genre.  What is the essence of humanity and how do we differ from the animals?  Likewise, what is the definition of a monster?  What do human beings look like beneath the surface?  We present ourselves as civilized beings, rational, and self-controlled.  But is that an accurate depiction of what we are like or just a clever facade?

Christian theology considers human nature to be corrupt.  It is not evil in essence, but it has fallen and been thoroughly tainted.  This fallen nature manifests itself in the evil acts we commit.  Ideas of tabula rasa and progressive improvement do not apply to the wolfman.  Jesus warned us against being whitewashed sepulchers, structures that are clean and bright externally but which only house decay.

The plot of this version of Wolfman is unoriginal.  It is set in Victorian England.  The 1941 original was in Wales.  Dangers are always found in the marginal places, on the frontiers.  England or Wales, a terrible creature is marauding the countryside devouring whomever it finds.  Gypsies are somehow involved.  There is a family curse.  A man changes into a wolf and back again.  The monster can only be stopped with silver bullets.

Lawrence Talbot is a man at war with his inner-being.  He finds himself cursed.  Like St. Paul, he continually does things he does not want to do (Cf. Romans 7).  The Freudian interpretation would see the chief character’s inner-wolf as the man’s repressed sexual frustration, his desire for his deceased brother’s fiancee and his adversarial relationship with his father.  Other interpreters will see the classic struggle between the two natures of the the Christian, the Old Adam and the New Man.

Unquestionably, the Wolfman is evil.  The beast inside must be killed.  It cannot be reformed or rehabilitated.  If it is not destroyed, it will destroy.

Robert Louise Stevenson also mined this ore with his novel, “The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde.”  The same man exhibited two personalities.  One of them civilized and self-controlled.  The other barbaric and dangerous.  Freud would perhaps call these the super-ego and the id.  Which personality was the truest representation of the one man?  In the end, they could not be separated.  Hyde had to be destroyed.
The Wolfman (2010) demonstrates once again the philosophical and theological importance of this much maligned genre of fiction as a metaphorical narrative.  Some things are best said in metaphors.

Read More

Posted by Hallo | 2 Comments

Splice – Review

reviewed by hallo
directed by Vincenzo Natali, 2010
________________________

Vincenzo Natali’s 2010 sci-fi/horror release Splice provides a fascinating two-tier exploration for discerning movie-goers.  One the one hand, the movie must be evaluated on the rudimentary premise of overall theatrical quality.  In other words, is the movie well directed, does it make sense, does it keep your attention, does the viewer leave satisfied?  On the other hand, Splice provides a critical commentary on the underlying question of eugenics and the ongoing dilemma between innate moralism and the contemporary reality of a biological revolution.  There are issues raised in Splice that must be addressed, and in fact will be addressed within our lifetime.  For that reason, this film makes me shudder.

Splice is about a romantically involved couple, Clive and Elsa, who are also brilliant scientists leading a team of fellow biologists in the creation of two “self created” species.  Taking the DNA from a host of various animals, Clive and Elsa managed to splice together two creatures who have the capability to provide helpful biogenetic samplings that will increase agricultural productivity.  With their success comes their desire to take what they have “created” to the next level:  human DNA.  Clive and Elsa are convinced that if they are allowed to include human DNA in their process, then many health issues and diseases would be able to be instantly remedied.  Unfortunately for them, they are given the stop sign by the folks who have the money.  That, of course, will never do.  So, Clive and Elsa set out in secret to make their new human spliced creation.

Interestingly, Clive begins to have doubts.  He raises the appropriate moral questions about bringing the sanctify of human live into a test tube situation.  Elsa, on the other hand, is more concerned about the moral question of the millions dying from life-threatening diseases.  As we will discover, her desires are far more reaching, and soul stirring, than just science.

It was at this point in the film that I realized I was watching a different variety of the 1999 horror masterpiece Deep Blue Sea.  In that wonderful film, sharks brains are being altered in order to provide a cure for Alzheimer disease.  It is the lead lady that is fixated on seeing the study through to the end, even when that means going against the guidelines set forth by the pharmaceutical company.  As we all know, the end result is a bunch of people getting eaten by really smart sharks.

When the new human spliced creation is birthed, Elsa immediately begins treating it like a daughter, or as Clive cautiously puts it, a pet.  He, on the other hand, wants to remain in science mode and treat the creation like any other specimen.  Sensing the need to give the creation a name, Elsa comes up with Dren.  As Dren continues to get older, we begin to see a fascinating switch in roles.  Clive becomes more lovingly involved with Dren while Elsa begins to take step backwards into science mode.  This comes to a cringing climax when Elsa, in Clive’s absence, straps Dren to a table and cuts off part of her tail.  We learn that Elsa comes from a mentally troubled family and although the unknown factor of having a child has kept her from pursuing motherhood, she was able to find peace in the control forum of the laboratory.  When that control begins to disappear, Elsa becomes more and more fixated on science and experiment rather than life and nurture.  From that point, the concepts of normalcy, decency, and human dignity become blurred beyond the point of recognition, so that Clive ends up sleeping with Dren and correctly explains to an appalled Elsa that “we have changed all the rules.”  The movie reaches its conclusion with Dren experiencing a sex change and becoming violent.  Ultimately, after raping Elsa, he is killed.

Judging Splice based on its effectiveness as a good, entertaining movie is difficult to do because, in my case, the cultural, theological, and human issues carry great weight.  That, of course, is part of the director’s intent.  Yet, I found the movie to be poorly directed in certain points, especially when Clive and Elsa are working to create the new human DNA creature.  Those scenes came across as a couple of high school students studying for a science test the next day; it just wasn’t believable.  If folks are not able or interested in wrestling with the deeper undertones of the film, then it will fail to capture their imaginations.

On the other hand, Splice is a textbook example of why horror movies are extraordinarily important for not only increased cultural awareness on crucial issues, but more importantly for the continued need of a Christian worldview.  At one point during a presentation of Clive and Elsa’s first two created beings, the president of the company funding their work proudly announces that these creatures “were not born because of luck or fate, but by design.”  Embedded within her introductory remarks is the nerve-wracking, victorious implication that we are now able to “play God.”  From a Christian point of view, the Bible gives humanity the blessed dual-obligation of both dominion and stewardship over creation.  This certainly provides an interpretation that our use of animals can and should be for the betterment of humanity when possible.  At the most basic level, we acknowledge this when eat a hamburger.  Yet, we are not without limits on the dominion side of our rule and it must be coupled with proper stewardship before God.  Clive experiences a profound revelation of this fact when he acknowledges to Elsa that they have changed all the rules, nothing is sacred any longer, nothing is “right.”  Despite the scientific and technological advancements that make our world a better place to live, Splice solemnly reminds us that we are the created, not the creator.  Whenever our ambitions take us to a level beyond our created purpose and entice us to play the God role, the consequences will be disastrous.

Finally, both Splice and Deep Blue Sea (and others) force the viewer to wrestle with the “Robin Hood” ethical question.  Robin Hood, of course, breaks the law in order to serve a good purpose.  In both films, the motivating factor in playing God was to ease the suffering of humanity.  Yet, both films are built on the conclusion that such noble pursuits are not always the end-all be-all.  There are other, and at times more critical, issues to consider.  Besides, Splice demonstrates that the humanitarian reasons are actually a red-herring for Elsa who is instead motivated by her desire to conquer her family demons.  In a sin-cursed world, just how pure are the assertions of altruism?

Thus, Splice is mediocre when it comes to well-crafted story telling and directing.  It is powerful when it comes to critically thinking through human issues.  For that reason, I commend it to you.

Read More

Posted by admin | 0 Comments

Grace – Review

reviewed by Danny
directed by Paul Solet, 2009
_________________________

Grace is the story of a mother who after the baby she is carrying dies late in the pregnancy decides to carry the infant to term and go through with the birth. After the child is born, the midwife leaves the room to give the mother some time with her child. She returns and finds the mother nursing the now-living baby. The rest of the film follows the mother and child as the already unnatural situation devolves into the grotesque. It is a slow film about a painful subject, and it can be a chore to watch. However, unlike so many low-budget horror films that aim no higher than shock and awe, Grace seems to have something to say. Unfortunately, it message is muddled and obscured by unnecessary plot elements and poor execution.

The first thing we notice about Madeline is that after two reported miscarriages, she has embraced alternative health. She is a vegan, a fact that might exist solely as a juxtaposition for her later decidedly carnivorous acts. More importantly, she has decided to forgo the hospital and have a midwife (who happens to be her ex-professor and happens to be in love with her) deliver the child. Though we see this kind of reflexive denial of science in many people who feel the medical establishment has failed them, the cynic in me can’t help but think that the midwife subplot exists solely to have the birth happen out of the way of all those pesky eyeballs and vital-sign monitors of a hospital birthing room. Even if it is sincere, the film does midwifery no public relations favors, certainly. I kind of got the idea that this exchange happened at some point before the events of the film:

Madeline: “Guess what? I’m pregnant!”

Patricia: “Hey, I’ve got a hot tub and some forceps. You should have the baby at my house!”

Soon after getting the child home, Madeline discovers that it isn’t mother’s milk that Grace craves. Only blood will satisfy the baby’s hunger. At first, Madeline gathers the blood by milking it out of raw meat she gets at the grocery. I’ve read of some vegans who interpret the film as an attack on their lifestyle. I can’t be sure of the director’s attitude toward vegans but the images of the freshly drained meat and filthy Styrofoam packaging on the kitchen counter didn’t have me craving a hamburger.

Of course, as tends to happen in horror films, things quickly get worse. Turns out, Grace doesn’t really thrive unless the blood is fresh, very fresh. This leads to scenes where Madeline sacrifices first the evil doctor hired by her mother-in-law (I say evil because he seems to have an antique breast-pump fetish, and that has to come from a dark place)and then the mother-in-law herself.

The film ends with a fairly shocking image of a mauled breast, the result of Grace moving from fresh blood to raw meat. Kids advance quickly these days. Until that shot, the film is not particularly gory. The director seems to be going for a disquieting tone and any over-the-top gore early on would certainly have spoiled that. He makes good use of long, lingering shots of inanimate objects in the David Lynch style. Leave the camera on anything long enough (say a glass of unstrained wheatgrass juice) and it can become gross and scary. With that in mind, I’m not sure if the film-ending money-shot is necessary, but as final images go, it is pretty effective.

Those lingering shots and the film’s lyrical pacing lead me to believe that the surface plot isn’t all the film has going for it. Everything about the film screams that it needs to be read symbolically rather than literally. Unfortunately, I’m not sure that the message comes across clearly. My instincts say that it isn’t about the loss of a child but is, instead, about how having children changes a person. Madeline will do anything for Grace, including violating not only society’s laws but her own moral code. She goes from normal, loving mom to multiple murderer in the course of a few weeks. It reminds me of the conversations that are so prevalent after some heinous crime against a child has made the national news. I hear parent after parent say something like “If that were my child, I’d kill the guy.” Though that is usually just bravado, Grace presents us with the possibility that our moral code is malleable when it comes to protecting our children.

Truly, I can’t speak with any certainty to the message of the film. I can say, though, that, despite its weaknesses and absurdities, Grace rises above the camp and exploitation of a film like It’s Alive, which takes on a similar story in a much more garish way. If the summary elements above interest you at all, the film is worth watching. If you find the whole concept off-putting, I’m afraid there isn’t enough of quality within the film to make it worthwhile.

Read More

Posted by Hallo | 0 Comments

Robot Monster – Review

reviewed by hallo
directed by Phil Tucker, 1953
_________________________

This review is the first in my series of reviews of the movies showcased in Disney’s Sci-Fi Dine-In Theater.

If ever the popular cult cliche “so bad it’s good” applied to a B-rated horror film, it would find a welcomed home with the 1953 Sci-Fi horror production Robot Monster.  After deciding to review the movies in Disney’s Sci-Fi Dine-In Theater, my first obstacle was going to be actually finding them.  Obviously, my local Blockbuster store did not have a copy of Robot Monster on hand.  I have discovered that even finding a few of these films to purchase is quite the task.  To my amazement, Amazon.com had Robot Monster available through their “Amazon On-Demand” video service.  So, I “rented” the movie through Amazon for $2.99 and watched it right on my desktop.  The fact that Amazon has this title available through their on demand service highlights the cult following Robot Monster now enjoys among sci-fi and horror fans.

It would be hard to overstate how bad this movie is.  For starters, the majority of the movie is just a dream by a little boy, Johnny.  The only “real” parts of the film are the very beginning when the characters are introduced and then the very end when Johnny awakes.  The “creature” (in his dream) is a fat guy wearing a fat gorilla suit with a make-shift diving helmet on his head topped with some bunny-ear antennas.  His name is “Ro-Man” and he has been given one simple assignment from his superior (lovingly named The Great Guidance).  Destroy all the inhabitants on planet earth.  This takes all of about 9 seconds thanks to Ro-Man’s calcinator death ray.  However, as is typical of the human race, there remains a small group of humans, eight of them in fact, that just refuse to die.  We meet them for “real” at the beginning of the movie and they are a professor (scientist), his assistant, two other unlucky chaps who exists just to be killed, a widow, her two daughters and one son.  Interestingly, during the dream portion of the movie (which is the majority of the film), these characters take on different roles.  So, the professor is now married to the widow and takes on the role of scientist/father/husband.  Even during the short “real” portion of the film at the beginning, little Johnny was hoping this would happen.  So, the movie does attempt to demonstrate how the dreams of little boys can be in part determined by the desires of their heart.  Roy, the handsome and well-built young man, becomes the love interest for Alice, the eldest daughter.  Thanks to a recent invention by the father/scientist – a new serum that prevents anyone from getting sick (even stops the common cold!) – the family and the other remaining characters are impervious to Ro-Man’s dreaded calcinator death ray!  Thank God.

The Great Guidance is becoming more and more irritated that Ro-Man cannot complete such a ridiculously easy assignment as wiping out humans.  He reveals his frustrations to Ro-Man through the use of the highly advanced bedsheet/intergalactic video transmitter.  Thankfully, the Ro-Men speak perfect English.  To our surprise, the family also has an intergalactic video transmitter and is able to communicate with Ro-Man, although he is unaware of their location.  Due to Ro-Man’s own frustrations and the threats offered by The Great Guidance, Ro-Man leaves the confines of his bubble-invested cave and sets out on foot to locate the pesky humans.  At this point in the movie, I had to pause the film because I was laughing so hard.  For what seems like an eternity, we see Ro-Man just walking around.  Down hills, up hills, around bushes, down a long deserted road, he is just wandering around.  I could have sworn at one point Ro-Man was clearly gasping for breath as he ascended a hill.  The family seems to be in no real danger.  Even if Ro-Man found them, which apparently is never going to happen, although he is only about 2 minutes from their hideout, all the family would need to do is walk at a brisk pace and they would easily escape the clutches of Ro-Man.  This is similar to Tom Savini’s emphasis on the “ease” of escape from zombies in his ill-fated 1990 remake of Night of the Living Dead.

Anyway, eventually the family decides to just wander around as well for no apparent reason.  Ro-Man by this time has a huge crush on Alice.  Unfortunately, in one of the most bizarre scenes in the movie, Alice and Roy were married at a very make-shift ceremony by the father/scientist.  This doesn’t stop Ro-Man.  After crashing their “honeymoon”, which consisted of some super weird dialoge followed by some “necking” in the woods, Ro-Man strangles Roy and takes Alice back to his cave (yes, the bubble invested one).  The Great Guidance comes on the intergalactic bedsheet just as Ro-Man is tying up Alice.  He isn’t quite able to tie her up and leaves the ropes dangling as he goes to answer The Great Guidance.  To our amazement, when Ro-Man returns to Alice, she is completely tied up!  Hmmmm, perhaps Alice has a little bit of a wild side about her?  At this point, The Great Guidance is seriously ticked off that Ro-Man is not killing Alice, which is what he has been commanded to do.  He accuses Ro-Man of being more like a Hu-Man (another line that had me laughing out loud).  Ro-man has no problem knocking of the children though because when Johnny interrupts his time with Alice, who is still tied up in the cave, Ro-Man abruptly goes out and strangles him to death.  Poor Johnny.  It is the last thing Ro-Man will ever do, however, because The Great Guidance kills Ro-Man through the use of his own kind of calcinator death ray.  Thankfully, the boy wakes up and we see that everyone is just fine.  Or are they?

The one “thinking” moment of the movie, if you can call it that, is when Ro-Man is given orders to kill Alice, despite his newly acquired feelings for her.  Ro-Man begins talking to himself and asks repeatedly, “how do you graph “must” and “cannot?”  He ends up losing his own life because the “cannot” aspect of the graph dominated.

Hey, this was a lot of fun to watch.  It is of course terrible.  Yet, writing this review was probably the most fun yet I have had on The Blackest Eyes.  At the end of the day, that is exactly what Robot Monster and all the other B sci-fi movies of that era were attempting to do; have fun.  I can only guess what the next installment will have in store for me.

Read More

Posted by Hallo | 0 Comments

The Burrowers – Review

reviewed by Hallo
directed by J.T. Petty, 2008
______________________

I had never heard of J.T. Petty or his 2008 movie The Burrowers.  After watching his film I will now be watching him closely because I think we have a talented director who will be given projects of greater weight and importance in the years ahead.  The Burrowers is a Lionsgate film that was destined to be a “straight-to-dvd” release before filming was ever completed.  First, the horror genre is not short of soil-inhabiting creatures who wreak havoc on unsuspecting humans.  Once Tremors was made, this genre could only go downhill.  Second, the film is shot in the 19th century Old West.  Horror blended with the Old West is an almost sure-fire way to destroy a potentially good horror movie.  With those two potential short-comings in mind, the movie succeeds on almost every level.

The movie begins by providing the setting of a love interest between Fergus Coffey (Karl Geary) and Maryanne Stewart (Jocelin Donahue).  The fairytale is quickly disrupted by a massive disturbance in the middle of the night that leaves several of the Stewart family dead and others missing.  Coffey and others, including long time Indian killers John Clay (Clancy Brown) and William Parcher (William Mapother), believe that a ruthless band of Indians have taken off with the family.  They form a posse and set out to find the guilty party.  They are joined for a while by a military campaign that demonstrates just how brutal they can be to the Native Americans when they want something from them.  It is difficult to know whether or not this is a political statement against our government for the history of violence against Indians, but it nevertheless makes the military look like the “bad guys” in this film.

Because the brutality gets out of control, the smaller posse decides to set out on their own.  They begin piecing together the truth that something other than Indians are behind the savage killings.  After a run in with some Indians, the posse discover that they are dealing with creatures who have existed for a very, very long time.  They used to live off buffalo, but since the white man pretty much destroyed all of them (another attack on the white man), the creatures turned to humans.  Their method of killing is harsh.  They poison their victims, paralyzing them, and then bury them just under the ground so their bodies will decompose, but still be living.  After the organs have softened, they creatures return for their meal.  Pretty sick.  And awesome.

Well, the story continues to build tension until Mapother, the lead man in the posse, is infected and used as bait by some Indians.  In what amounts to a pretty gruesome scene of the creatures eating Mapother alive (think of the end of Day of the Dead), Coffey discovers that sunlight is their nemesis.  Unfortunately, by the time they figure things out, the military has once again entered the picture, hung the two Indians who were in the area and still alive, and called it a victory.   The movie ends on a very depressing note with the creatures still at large.  This easily gives way to a potential sequel.

This is a beautifully shot film.  The scenes of the western landscape and 19th century atmosphere are as good as any western.  Petty takes what could be a recipe for disaster and turns it into a thought-provoking, easy on the eyes, gem of a horror movie.  The creatures, once you actually see them (which doesn’t happen until 3/4 into the film), are actually not that big of a let down, which I was certainly bracing myself for.  The action moves slowly, but still at a good pace and the method of killing is unique and fresh, especially for the typical creature under the ground movie.  The origin of the creatures is never given, which actually adds to the film, and we are given just enough information to know they have a history in the land and have been seen before.  This differs from many creature films, such as Tremors, where massive underground creatures appear and have never been seen.

Overall, I highly recommend The Burrowers.  Good acting, beautiful shooting, and unique elements make this a great watch.  If you have On Demand, take a look for it under the Free Movies section.  You will be happy you did!

Read More