Posted by admin | 0 Comments

The Unborn – Review

reviewed by Danny
directed by David S. Goyer, 2009
_______________________

Some films wear their influences on their sleeves;  The Unborn is fairly well clothed in them.  David S. Goyer’s supernatural yarn has scenes lifted from (or, to put it nicely, inspired by) dozens of earlier, better horror films.  Still, the film has some cool horror imagery that would likely be thought highly of if it was it service of a better, more original plot.

Right from the beginning I liked the way the plot got off and running without the background drivel often seen in modern horror.  The film may well be about the sins of the father being revisited  on the son (or, in this case, it is Grandmother/Granddaughter), but The Unborn skips the exposition and gets right to the creepy bits.   Casey (played by the lovely and game Odette Yustman) is jogging along a park road when she notices a single glove in her path.  She turns to see a creepy young boy (imagine Santi from The Devil’s Backbone minus the GGI).  The boy quickly turns into a dog wearing a plain white mask.  Casey follows the dog into the woods, where she finds the mask.  When she tries to pick up the mask, she reveals a jar with a fetus in formaldehyde.  While she is staring at it, the fetus opens its eyes.  Cut.

“So what do you think the dream means?”

It is a good opening.  Stylish.  Creepy.  It establishes a tone that the film manages to hold on to… for about thirty minutes.  The stuff happening around Casey is truly creepy when we have no clue what is going on.  The scene with the young boy, the baby, and the hand mirror is particularly effective even in its brevity.  The problem with the cool imagery is that, eventually, the plot comes along and renders it cliché and overdone.

Soon, we learn that Casey had been a twin and her twin brother had died in the womb after having her umbilical cord wrapped around his neck.  That would probably have been enough, but we are also treated to Nazi experimentation, Jewish mysticism, genetic mosaicism, and a ton of references to myths and folklore.  It all becomes a mess of tropes and cliches familiar to any horror film fan.

Unfortunately, even the visual tone of the film falls apart about the same time the plot unravels.  For the last half of the film nearly every supernatural image is one we have seen before.  I’m not talking obscure movies.  The references here are to films like The Exorcist and Ringu.

By the time the film wrapped up, I had little emotional connection to the characters.  Things had simply become too absurd and unbelievable.  The set up for the exorcism itself is as unbelievable as any element I’ve seen in a horror film in years.  It seems to exist only to provide more bodies for the demon to kill in gruesome ways.  It is also nice to note that you only actually have to read the first and last paragraphs of the exorcism ritual in the presence of the demon.  All of that middle stuff is apparently filler that can be done off screen.  That is going to allow me to cut a lot of useless pages out of my “How to Survive in Horror Film Situations” compendium.

After a strong opening, The Unborn falls apart.  It wastes a good core performance from Yustman and gives the brilliant Gary Oldman nothing interesting to do or say.  Worst, it wastes an excellent opening that led me to expect a much better film than I actually ended up seeing.

Read More

Posted by admin | 0 Comments

The Fourth Kind – Review

reviewed by Skot
directed by Olatunde Osunsanmi, 2009
___________________________

The Fourth Kind is a sci-fi horror picture starring action movie princess, Milla Jovovich.  I don’t know how many reviewers would classify it as science fiction, but I do so, though with hesitation, because U.F.O. movies tend to be a sci-fi sub-genre.  The director of Fourth Kind attempts to follow the examples of The Blair Witch Project, Cloverfield, Quarantine, and Paranormal Activity by presenting supposed documentary on-the-scene footage.  Then Fourth takes the technique to the next level by adding in dramatized re-enactments portrayed by Hollywood stars, cutting back and forth between the documentary footage and dramatizations, even occasionally running the two side by side for certain scenes.

Milla Jovovich plays psychologist, Abigail Tyler, who is investigating a series of unexplained phenomena she hears about from a number of her patients.  Early in the film, Dr. Tyler notices that several of her patients report trouble sleeping and peculiar images in their dreams, including that of a white owl watching over them.  We’ve all had weird dreams that we couldn’t quite shake off the next day.  So it is mildly creepy to hear different people describe seeing the same detail, and an unusual one at that, in their night terrors.  (Allow me to say that I was watching this movie with my 14-year-old son who was opening an eighth grade graduation card he received at this point in the film.  The card had an owl on it.  Woooooo-oooo).  The patients are all plagued with the feeling of not being able to remember something significant that happens during their dreams.

Dr. Tyler tries using hypnosis to bring these repressed memories into the light of day.  Not good.  Bad things happen.  People die.  Could it be that some things are so terrible that the memory of them causes madness?  An incomplete memory is bliss after all.

I applaud the filmmakers for taking a risk and doing something out of the ordinary.  It’s not exactly a nail-biter but there are a few genuinely disturbing moments.

The Fourth Kind is a different kind of U.F.O. movie that has more in common with supernatural chillers like The Exorcist than it does with sci-fi adventures like Star Trek or War of the Worlds or television’s V. This movie suggests that inhabitants of Nome, Alaska, and possibly millions of other earthlings, are being visited and even abducted by other-worldly entities which may or may not have arrived in your run-of-the-mill spacecraft.  Some scenes resemble episodes of demonic possession or spiritists channeling otherwordly intelligences more than merely patients in psychoanalysis coping with painful recovered memories.  This opens the possibility that these extraterrestrials could be from another dimension or universe instead of merely a distant galaxy.  The influence of Erich von Däniken’s Chariots of the Gods and The Mothman Prophecies by John Keel can be seen.  Like a good postmodern sci-fi horror movie, The Fourth Kind delves more into metaphysics than astrophysics.

Like many examples of the horror genre, The Fourth Kind challenges the ability of reason to explain every aspect of human experience.  This movie explicitly argues the point that some phenomena, real and true, lie outside the scope of the scientific method.  Those who cling irrationally to the sufficiency of rationalism are the bad guys here.

Unfortunately, the interspersing of documentary style footage in and around the dramatized parts of the movie failed.  It didn’t make the movie scarier.  It was just distracting at first, but became annoying later on.  The filmmakers should have been forced to make a decision.  Either go the Blair Witch route entirely or scrap that technique altogether and just give the audience a solid dramatization.  It’s possible to have too much of a good thing.  And what works in one scenario, one project, in the hands of certain artists, might not work elsewhere.

I don’t usually use a star system to rank movies, but for this I’d give it a 2.5 out of 5.  Now, if Milla Jovovich had gone all Jack Bauer on the aliens, that might’ve been worth the full five stars.

Read More

Posted by admin | 2 Comments

The Changeling – Review

reviewed by Danny
directed by Peter Medak, 1980
____________________

One of my earliest horror-related memories was being scared witless by my first viewing of Friedkin’s The Exorcist.  I had been forbidden to watch it by my parents and had to turn the channel on the television anytime I heard footsteps approaching my room (no remote control for me, so I was sitting within arm’s length of the television at all times).  The fear of getting caught mixed with the frightening images on screen left me exhausted but intoxicated by the time the film ended.  This experience made me a fan of the genre for life.  Unfortunately, after years of exposure to and analysis of the genre, it is rare that I find a new horror film frightening.  For that reason, I value those films that scared me back in the day and, more so, the films that creep me out even after repeated viewing.  Peter Medak’s The Changeling is certainly one of those.

The Changeling stars George C. Scott as John Russell, a composer and music professor who has the awful experience of watching his wife and daughter die in a traffic accident.  After a period of mourning, he moves to a new town and begins teaching again.  He soon moves into a large mansion with, we find out later, a mysterious history.   As is pretty traditional in the sub-genre, Russell hears strange noises, sees things in his peripheral vision, and is generally made uncomfortable in his new surroundings.  Eventually, Russell begins to piece together the history of the house.  As you might expect, it is dark and violent.

The Changeling contains many elements that are now standard in the haunted house movie.  Most of them were well-used in the early years of the genre.  We get a séance, see spirit writing, hear mysterious voices that have been recorded on tape but weren’t heard live.  A walled off room is discovered that reveals a dark secret.  Thematically, the sins of a father are re-visited on a son.  None of this is particularly original.  In fact, it is all to be expected in such a film.  The Changeling stands out because of its craftsmanship, its sincerity, and the weight imparted on the events by Scott’s central performance.

Despite the familiar nature of the plot, many of the elements feel fresh and new because of how well they are shot.  The séance that is arranged after Russell begins to believe something supernatural is going on is one of the best ever filmed.  It is supernatural through and through yet somehow very believable.  This quality is seen in nearly every supernatural moment.  There are some great special effects later in the film, but mostly everything is pulled off with simple camera trickery which never comes off as cheesy.

At no point watching The Changeling do we feel the events are anything but real.  The sadness at the heart of the Russell character colors how we see the events.  Clearly still troubled by his loss, he easily could have been one of Poe’s unreliable narrators.  Instead, he is just the opposite.  We believe the events of the story because Russell believes them.

And that belief is so important in a horror film.  By their nature, they can’t be “realistic” in the literary sense, but they must feel real.  The Changeling does and I think that is the core reason I have always found it so scary.

In the end, what we find scary is such a personal concept that I can’t guarantee The Changeling will have the same effect on other viewers as it did on me.  I can guarantee that they will see an amazing central performance and an extremely well-made film.

(Note:  I couldn’t find many details about the films U.S. Theatrical run, so I’m not sure how much of an impact it had here.  However, the film is one of the most successful Canadian films of all time, in terms of both box office and critical acclaim.  The film was nominated for ten Genie awards (basically the Canadian Oscars) and one eight, including Best Motion Picture and Best Foreign Actor– for George C. Scott).

Read More

Posted by admin | 2 Comments

Paranormal Activity – Review

reviewed by:  Skot
directed by Oren Peli, 2007
_______________________

There is a new film called Paranormal Activity that some people are calling one of the scariest movies ever made.  Produced in 2007 by unknowns with just $11,000 and shot in seven days, it’s being compared to The Blair Witch Project from ten years ago.  It too was made by amateur filmmakers for a pittance and it too became a phenomenon.

My comments will come from two perspectives that, in my case, overlap.  First, as a discerning moviegoer.  Second, as a pastor.

If you think you might see this movie, I recommend not reading many reviews (except this one) or watching the trailer.  I don’t want to tell you much about it because it’ll be more fun when you don’t know what to expect.  Just know that it is relentlessly suspenseful and may make you want to sleep with the lights on for ten or fifteen years.

Paranormal Activity is being promoted as the scariest movie in the history of always.  Calling anything the “scariest” or “funniest” or “best” is almost setting it up to fail.  If your expectations are impossibly high, then you are sure to be disappointed by what is otherwise a terrific film.  Some of the ads for the film say “nightmares are guaranteed.”  Seems like that should be deterrent, but not so.  I’m telling you, for all the adrenaline junkies, this will not disappoint.

Horror movies go up and down in popularity and they’ve been pretty popular recently.  Because we build up tolerance, the tendency is to try to out-shock, out-jolt and out-disgust everything that went before it.  But let’s face it; the envelope can only be stretched so far.  Once you’ve seen one subterranean, nazi, zombie, seven-headed, man-eating Hydra you’ve seen them all.  The problem with many horror pictures is that they show you too much, they over-explain the inexplicable.  What is most refreshing about this movie is that it has the guts to let its story convey the horror instead of the spectacle.  Paranormal Activity stands out because of its restraint, for what it doesn’t show.  It scares you more by suggestion that explication.

Parenthetically, how intriguing that the other surprise hit of the year was District 9, another non-Hollywood movie, made on a shoestring with unknown actors.  It had a lot more going for it in terms of the special effects but like Paranormal, the emphasis was on the tale itself.

God is a storyteller.  There is a grand narrative from which all others, to some extent, derive.  As God is imaginative and talkative, it is thus also constitutive of human nature to tell stories and to hear (see) them told.  This characteristic, almost above all else, distinguishes us from the animals.  Creative storytelling is what is most godlike about us.  Sometimes we spin yarns, fiction and non, for entertainment, to pass the time.  Usually to convey values, beliefs, tradition and other culturally valuable information.  Storytelling has been used to inspire great virtues such as courage, compassion, and integrity.  It has also been used to manipulate and undermine.

This story, Paranormal Activity, is told to instill fear.  Fear is a deeply entrenched emotion.  All children are afraid of the dark, a condition we never truly outgrow.  We are wary of things that go bump in the night, or in the hallway outside your bedroom door.  Sometimes rightly so.  Fear can serve us or defeat us.  Can I get an “amen?”  Sometimes fear is helpful.  A man who is never afraid is not brave, he is a fool.  That is one thing that Paranormal Activity says.  If it conveys any existential meaning at all – and I believe that it does – it is that sometimes you SHOULD be afraid.  It is one of the standard conventions of such movies to have a character who is a skeptic, one who thinks he understands the nature of things and is in control of his life, but who is rudely awakened, usually one moment too late.

My assertion is that this is what most people are like, most of the time.  We are know-it-alls when, in fact, we only see a fraction of the cosmos and all it contains.  We’ve only scratched the surface.  Christians acknowledge the reality of the spiritual world.  The Bible certainly teaches that angels and demons exist and that God Himself is daily active in our world.  Read the four Gospels.  It is evident that exorcising demons was a significant part of the earthly ministry of Jesus.  These things are real and yet many of us live daily as materialists.  Not necessarily materialist in the sense of loving money and possessions (though that may be true too), but materialist in the sense of behaving as if only the material world matters.

When I was a pastor in Pittsburgh, I was genuinely surprised at how often people in the church-at-large and community came to me with tales of ghosts and haunted dwellings.  Paranormal Activity.  You can devote yourself to science to try to understand the world.  Or you can consult psychics and mediums.  But the philosophies of this world will always fall short.  And that brings me to my criticism of this film.  For all of Katie and Mika’s attempts to understand and overcome that which tormented them, they never phoned their pastor.

Read More

Posted by Hallo | 0 Comments

Drag Me To Hell – Review

reviewed by Hallo

directed by Sam Raimi, 2009
______________________

Sam Raimi is a great director.  Perhaps such a simplistic and painfully obvious statement is not the most effective way to draw in my readers, but sometimes the obvious needs to be made clear from the outset.  His work crosses a number of genres, including the rabidly popular Spiderman movies.  From what I can tell, he is in the development of remaking his own movie – again!  Apparently there is an Evil Dead movie in production as I type.  Evil Dead II was in essence a remake of Evil Dead with a slightly larger budget.  Now it appears he is doing it again.

Anyway, Drag Me To Hell has nothing new to offer in terms of plot development, story-telling, and thrills.  There is no question that this is a Sam Raimi movie, you can see his handiwork all over the place, especially in the scenes that involve gore; there are multiple kick-backs to the Evil Dead series, including projectile zombie parts that end up in someone’s mouth!  The ending is predicted a good half hour before the film ends with no real surprises in store for the viewer.

Having said all that, what makes this film interesting is the premise upon which the gore, supernatural seances, curses, gypsies, and all the rest is based.   It is a story about an economic crisis vs. the financial and professional success of the working class.  What do good people do when faced with the opportunity to help someone when it might cost them a rise to the top of their profession?  That is exactly what Christine Brown must decide when an old gypsy comes into her bank asking for an extension on her mortgage.  In this way, Raimi sets up a fantastic parallel between the good and evil that accompany demons and humans, and the good and evil that accompany working in the business world.  One of the elements of horror that makes it work is that we know who to root for.  In this story, the “evil” of the business world is Christine, although she is the “good” of the actual horror tale.  Interesting.  After deciding to deny the poor lady the extension, which impressed her boss, the gypsy places a curse on Allison that sends a demon to torment her for three days, followed by “dragging her to hell.”  What follows is the chaos of  Christine’s newly acquired curse and her attempts to both destroy it and yet still appear to have everything all together to her boss and boyfriend.  Much of the story just doesn’t come together.  After an extended scene involving a dramatic and complex seance (which included goats), we discover that it had no real effect and Christine still has to get rid of a button from her coat she was wearing when the gypsy afflicted her before she can get rid of the curse.  So why the seance?  Things like that might drive some viewers crazy.  For me, it is just all part of the good fun of Sam Raimi and his beautiful ability to create memorable scenes.

This movie is worth a look, just don’t expect to find anything too refreshing in the horror elements themselves.  Perhaps the real horror is the greed of the financial world.

Read More