Smile (2022)

 Smile...2022...rated R...1 hrs 55 min...starring Sosie Bacon, Jesse T. Usher, and Kyle Gallner. Written and directed by Parker Finn

(Quick note, I certainly wasn't expecting it to be a month before I posted a review. In my defense, however, that month was full of bad health, new revelations, and currently a stint in therapy to regain both strength and independence. So...maybe cut a beleaguered old man some slack?)

Rose Cotter is a young therapist who we soon learn is a very driven person that can't seem to turn away a case. This manic drive proves to be a trait that she didn't need so much of (but has reasons for). On the way out of the office, she decides to help one more person. Said person claims that she's being stalked by something...something that has many faces...known to her and unknown as well but all with the most twisted smile. Rose tries to help but of course thinks that this is just something the young woman -believes- is true but isn't. Then the victim goes into a fit, with Rose getting help. But when Rose returns, the woman is no longer agitated. In fact she has a rather nasty smile on her face as she ends up killing herself. Soon Rose becomes the next person stalked by whatever is smiling so wrongly and of course, hijinks ensue.

This movie can be looked at on a few levels...it may not be the deepest piece of cinema ever but I think it's clear that the idea of trauma being passed on and affecting the next person or people in the chain is present. We find out that Rose has some deep flaws and issues, and has surrounded herself with the worst support group ever. The cinematography is gorgeous and the soundtrack matches it so that we, the viewers, understand that we are no longer in the normal, "sane" world once the entity enters. Rose is driven deeper and deeper down the rabbit hole of madness as she deals with something that can't be real and yet is.

There are a few jump scares along the way but at least one of them surprised me by how it was executed. The only telegraphed piece is, in my opinion, supposed to be that way. That makes it no less gruesome. The ending has some re iews loving it and others not so enthused...but I'm not sure how else it could have ended and not felt cheapened. 

Overall: solid horror movie; disturbing, triggery, scary, and often just downright creepy.  I give it 3.5 understaffed mental hospitals out of 5. I might have gone higher but it didn't hit the excellent mark for me, sadly. But in horror movies, I will take "damn good" gladly and happily.

Seven Years But Not Completely Dead (NAMR)

 Since it has been so long, and since I need to get back into the mindset of writing these entries, NAMR stands for "Not A Movie Review". This post is about why I have come back to this little side project of mine. Knowing the writer as I do, I'm sure we will meander here and there along the way. Straight lines and I have never really gotten along.

Honestly, I didn't really expect to be back to this virtual "neck of the woods". But I also did not expect another major complication that has affected my life. My health has taken a downward bump. I had to go see my doctor about an incident I had almost a month ago and since then moving about my house has been possible but limited. We're not sure what is going on just yet but it has very seriously impacted my life as well as my wife's. Even my dog knows something serious is up, though it doesn't stop my lovable goon from giving me sass. (That's just part of the service.)

So I have a lot more time on my hands right now and I need to find ways to keep busy or else I will worry myself into an even worse position. Worry is not a useful skill as far as I can tell but I have mastered the art of it in my multiple years roaming up and down on this planet. I remembered this blog and figured I certainly had a bit more time to devote to it right now.

So I'm back in the saddle again. I don't expect high readership or much of anything to come of it, but if it keeps me from vibrating through the bed Flash-style then my time invested will have been well spent.

Besides, I still have opinions. Lots of them.

The Blair Witch (2016)

The Blair Witch...2016...rated R...89 minutes....starring James Allen McCune, Callie Hernandez, Corbin Reid, and Brandon Scott...written by Simon Barrett...directed by Adam Wingard

Hello again after a while, my fellow horror fans. So let's talk about the new take on the Blair Witch legacy, shall we? As people who watch this genre with frequency know, protagonists get some dumb ideas. This movie starts with one of those bad decisions that viewers know will end in some terrible events happening. Heather's brother James (Heather being the filmmaker and head of the original Blair Witch Project) finds a Youtube video of footage found in the Black Hills Forest near the town of Burkittsville that shows a brief glimpse of a female wandering around an old structure. He assumes that this may in fact be Heather and decides to gather some friends and go look for her. As alluded to earlier, bad things ensue.

First of all, let me express one of my own biases. Mockumentary style films are old for me in the horror genre. The concept, kicked off with a bang by the original BWP, is now done to death and beyond. I can understand the interest in going back to this story, especially with the new technology that's available to people now. Drones, tiny cameras, Youtube...our toys have changed quite a bit since 1999. Since we're now on the other end of the spectrum with lots of found-footage horror movies out and about, I was hoping that this film would offer more than just another link in the chain.

What really disappointed me was that the story really didn't give us much that was new. I wanted to see more on the families of the original three and more of how the town was dealing with all the attention the first event caused. (A subject dealt with more in that thing referred to as Book Of Shadows...yeeeesh) I guess I was wanting a real sequel that actually furthered the first one's mythology and world.

Instead, I get supernatural hijinks that bend the laws of time and space with no real attempt at explanation on how this spirit got so strong. A very interesting plot point on this subject doesn't even get addressed. I get characters that I don't have a whole lot of sympathy for. Sure, I get a glimpse of the Witch herself...though I'm not sure that was a great decision. Basically, I felt like I got a modern redux of the story, not a real follow-up. And at least in this selection, I was not happy with what I got.

So, this one gets 2.5 piles of rocks out of 5. It's not really worth the stick figures.

Creature Lake

Creature Lake....2015...not rated...80 minutes...starring Jonathan Matthews, Mike Kekich, and Brandon Dhue...written by Damien Slevin...directed by Drazen Baric

5 friends decide to take a weekend excursion to a piece of property one of them claims to own close to a lake. The place seems like an ideal getaway spot, but the group gets warned off by some of the local Native Americans. Heedless, they go for their vacation and soon learn why they shouldn't have.

Again, I have a short plot synopsis because again I have found more found-footage horror with a fairly simple premise. That's not necessarily a bad thing, but as these stories are becoming more and more prevalent, I do think that something needs to make each one stand out on its own. This selection did not really deliver anything new...or anything all that terrifying. I was mostly confused and bemused.

At risk of throwing out spoilers, I was left with several questions. Why was this local tribe so intent on appeasing the ...whatever it was... in the lake? Was the naked woman merely an illusion the thing projected...and why was it chasing our protagonists? Why was the thing so goofy looking? Why did I sit through more dialogue laced with insults and racial epithets? (I get that in reality, people say some really messed up things at times...but maybe I don't need that much reality)

I can understand the limitations of a budget, but where this movie...and a lot of others...breaks down is that there is no internal consistency apparent in this supernatural world. I understand the characters would not have all of the information about what's going on and why,  but the viewer needs to have a sense of the whole situation if the story is going to work. If the movie doesn't somehow convey all that info, it suffers...much like it does from bad acting, which didn't help this one either.

Overall...bleh, meh, and urgh for the time lost. 1 tentacle creature out of 5.

NAMR: 7 Years Old

I'm just making a quick note that this off-and-on blog (mostly off) is now 7 years old. I do believe this place needs more life pumped into it. Yeah, I know, we'll see how that goes.

The Houses Octber Built

The Houses October Built...2014...not rated...91 minutes...starring Brandy Schaefer, Zack Andrews, and Bobby Roe...written by Zack Andrews...directed by Bobby Roe

Are you looking for the ultimate Halloween experience? Do you want to push the envelope of fear in your haunted house hunting? Well, in this found-footage film a group of friends decides to do just that the week of Halloween, and find the dangerous underside to the home-made haunts that spring up every season.

If the plot synopsis seems short, well, that's because that's basically it. I understand that the mockumentary format is one of the easiest ways to make a movie if you're getting started. With any luck, I will be involved in a project like some of the ones I'm reviewing...and I don't expect it to be cinematic gold. If I'm lucky, this hypothetical creation will be cinematic zinc. But enough of the sidebar, I'm just saying that I get why I'm seeing a lot more of this style of film. This one worked a little better for me despite the fact that I'm just not a huge fan of the format.

Maybe I've watched too many horror movies, but at this time in my life I find myself with very little sympathy for characters who go do the obviously risky thing or decide to invade the "bad place" or read the grimoire or what have you. Said protagonists knew better, and often times they were being obnoxious in the process. Our main characters here do fall into that category, and so I was surprised to find myself still interested. Personally, it was more of the general idea being explored here.

I'm a sucker for urban legends, and the idea of a moving "experience" that is really a killing ground...darkly wonderful. There is something unsettling about people dressing up in costume to scare you, and the film includes footage of the stories that people trade about attractions, accidents that happen there, and so forth. For me at least, that's a great idea to explore.

The costumes of some of the stalking psychopaths are pretty well done...one in particular of a doll-girl really stood out to me as disturbing and effective. But the story itself doesn't really offer many surprises, and people who live in the southern part of the country may not like some of the "redneck" comments that the group use as they get further off the beaten path. There are some moments that stand out...but in general, the movie really doesn't break the pattern I've come to see a lot of on Hulu and Netflix.

So, I will give this piece 2 weird doll-girls out of 5.

Bride Of Frankenstein

Bride Of Frankenstein...1935...unrated...75 minutes...starring Colin Clive, Elsa Lanchester, Ernest Thesiger, and Boris Karloff...adapted from Mary Shelley's work by William Hurlbut...directed by James Whale

Sequels are often a tricky business; I know of only a few that manage to stand up to their predecessor movies let alone surpass them. After seeing "Bride", however, I have another selection to add to this short list. What we have here is one of those works that surpasses just being a film. This classic is a movie that has woven itself into the history of the cinema, not just for horror films but for the medium in general.

First, we are shown an opening sequence that shows a conversation between Byron and the Shelleys that leads us into the movie. Elsa Lanchester plays Mary Shelley in this short part, as well as the Bride herself later, and gives viewers the transition into the story proper. The story picks up after the end of "Frankenstein", and as I hinted at before the monster has proven to be hardier than the local villagers had hoped. Dr. Frankenstein has survived his calamitous fall as well, and only returns to his crazed pursuit of reanimation after being both tempted and later coerced by a warped colleague, Dr. Pretorius. Pretorius has created his own miniature life forms, but wants to collaborate with Dr. Frankenstein to build a woman. Meanwhile, the Monster has been captured but escapes, generally gets treated poorly, but finally receives a small measure of kindness when he stumbles across a cottage that houses a blind hermit. Not surprisingly, this doesn't last...and the Monster ends up working with the scheming Pretorius to get Frankenstein to build him a companion. The conclusion...well, if you don't know, see it for yourself.

Now, I could go on and on about this piece...and many critics have. To be fair, there's lots to look at and admire...the performances are wonderful, the artistry of the sets and lighting is distinctive, the makeup is still iconic (though this time the get-up is much kinder to Karloff). The Monster does speak in this film, and while the actor himself was worried that this decision was the wrong one, I think it adds to the pathos of the created being. There's also an interweaving of humor in the film that gives it lightness in places and a strange twist in others...overall adding to the movie's movement.

Again, I'm not sure how much this film translates to the modern audience, but in the horror genre this movie is a foundation of many films that later come down the road. ("Gothic" and "The Bride" are two quick examples.) For some people, I'm sure that watching this would be "eating your veggies" all over again, but it's worth it. If you only see one of the Frankenstein films, see this one.

My rating: 4 and a half tiny people in bottles.

Frankenstein

Frankenstein...1931...unrated...70 minutes...starring Colin Clive, Mae Clarke, John Boles, and of course Boris Karloff...written by John L. Balderson (adapted from the Mary Shelley book)...directed by James Whale

I can think of no better way to restart this blog than with the phrase:"...It's alive, it's moving, it's alive, it's alive, it's alive, it's alive, IT'S ALIVE!!!!!"

This selection is a movie to watch for so many reasons. I'm not going to sit here and tell you that it's without flaws and is completely accessible to a modern audience. It's not. But the word "iconic" is also so highly appropriate in this case. If you want to see where the film history of Frankenstein starts, then taking the slightly-more-than-an-hour to see this Universal picture is mandatory. Do it, it's good for you! Yes, I'm saying that seeing the movie is the equivalent of eating your peas if you're a horror fan. But I'm right.

The film is a compressed, gentler version of the book designed to appeal to the audience of the day. The Monster isn't possessed of the intelligence that Adam has in the book, but Karloff's genius is being able to help convey the emotional truth behind the creature's existence. Without dialogue, his facial expression conveys pity, loneliness, anger, and frustration at a world that is mostly hostile to him. Honestly, having someone like Fritz (not Igor) in my face in the first days of my existence wouldn't make me trust in my environment all that well.

The makeup is remarkable to look at, the sets are a marvel, and the overall visual sense of this selection is something that's been copied so very often that seeing the origin is worthwhile. Despite what I expected, there were only two fatalities in the movie and I expected more. That's part of why I call it a gentler version of the story. I'd say three, but I know there are sequels so the fate of the Monster, while grim looking, isn't the end.

In terms of what I've been exposed to throughout my life, I find it hard to give it a high rating just on the historical value alone...though personally that makes "Frankenstein" a must-watch for me. But it's short, and there's some wonderful things to see...so if you have some time and want to see some history, then the seventy minutes here are well-spent.

My rating: Three and a half lightning-spewing machines out of five.

Not A Movie Review: Resurrection

That is not dead which can in storage lie,
And with strange aeons, old blogs won't die....

I've come back to see if I can restore life to the lifeless, as I have so many more movies to watch and talk about. We'll see if my Victor Von Frankenstein impression can do anything of permanence. Maybe this is a symbolic gesture of saying I'm not giving up on my writing or myself. Maybe I just want an excuse to see more of my favorite genre. I don't think it matters much; I am here now, so let's see where we go from here.

Before we do, though, a quick list of where we've been and the dates we were there:

Movie Title, Date Reviewed, Rating

13 Ghosts 04/19/2011 2
Alien 04/14/2011 4
All Souls Day: Dia.... 10/26/2010 1.5
An American Haunting 02/28/2011 1.5
An American Werewolf 1 11/01/2010 3.5
Apollo 18 02/16/2013 2
Are You Scared? 02/10/2011 1
Are You Scared 2 02/19/2011 0.5
Atom Age Vampire 09/16/2011 1.5
Bram Stoker's Dracula 04/21/2011 3.5
Candyman 10/19/2010 3.5
Cast A Deadly Spell 04/10/2011 3
Creepshow 03/29/2011 2.5
Curse Of The Demon 04/08/2011 4
Dead And Breakfast 10/20/2010 3
Drag Me To Hell 04/15/2011 3
Event Horizon 04/11/2011 3.5
Exorcist III 01/05/2011 3
Frailty 04/11/2011 2.5
Fright Night 03/03/2011 3.5
Ghosts Of Mars 04/29/2011 2
Grace 04/08/2011 3
House On Haunted Hill 10/15/2010 3
House On Haunted Hill '99 11/09/2010 2.5
In The Mouth Of Madness 10/29/2010 3.5
Insidious 09/25/2012 4.5
Jason X 04/13/2011 2
Jennifer's Body 03/05/2011 2.5
Ju-On (The Grudge) 10/18/2010 4
Killer Pad 10/16/2010 2
Legion 10/21/2010 2
Mary S..'s Frankenstein 04/15/2011 3.5
My Bloody Valentine (1981) 02/18/2011 2.5
Night Of ..Living Dead ('68) 10/22/2010 4.5
Session 9 11/03/2010 3
Silent Hill 10/15/2010 3.5
Silent Hill: Revelation 11/13/2012 2.5
Sinister 09/26/2012 3.5
Species 04/14/2011 2.5
Suck 02/26/2013 3
The Amityville Curse 11/17/2010 1.5
The Amityville Haunting 08/07/2013 ---
The Blair Witch Project 10/24/2010 3
The Blob (1958) 11/08/2010 3
The Blob (1988) 11/12/2010 2.5
The Conjuring 08/07/2013 4.5
The Devil's Rejects 09/04/2011 1
The Devil's Tomb 04/25/2011 2
The Exorcist 01/04/2011 5
The Fly (1986) 04/25/2011 3.5
The Fly II 04/29/2011 2.5
The Fog (1980) 02/08/2013 3
The Fog (2005) 02/08/2013 2
The Haunting Of Molly… 04/07/2011 2.5
The Lost Boys 03/03/2011 4
The Thing (1982) 02/26/2011 3
The Tingler 04/19/2011 2
The Tomb (Ligeia) 06/17/2011 2.5
The Wolfman (2010) 02/15/2011 2.5
Torture Garden 04/19/2011 2.5

So if you're willing, let's see what dark gems we might find on the road. I'm sure there will be plenty of slush as well, but gold is only found when it's looked for.

Edit: Apologies that the formatting didn't turn out like I wanted. I'll keep at it and see if I can coax it to get better.

The Conjuring

The Conjuring...2013...rated R...112 minutes...starring Vera Farmiga, Patrick Wilson, Lili Taylor and Ron Livingston...written by Chad and Carey Hayes...directed by James Wan

Renown paranormal investigators Ed and Lorraine Warren are asked to come to the farmhouse recently bought by the Perron family. The family has been afflicted with supernatural events that have escalated into moments of sheer terror. The mother, Carolyn, is desperate to find some way to protect her girls. So the Warrens agree to help, despite Ed's reservations that another case will be dangerous for Lorraine. Let's just say that Ed was right to worry.

When I wrote the review for "Insidious", which is another James Wan film, I said that it wasn't perfect but that it was damn good and I was very happy to find something damn good in this genre. In some ways, I think Mr. Wan topped himself with "The Conjuring". The opening sequence, where the Warrens are relating the details of another case, sets up the feel of the movie in short order. I was also quite pleased with something a friend of mine, Dan Marcel, pointed out: the effects on this movie were physically done for the most part. I've found...and of course, fearless reader, you may agree or disagree...that physical effects work better in horror movies than a plethora of CGI. The realism of the effects build a more believable atmosphere; a necessity when dealing with the supernatural.

The plot isn't exactly surprising, and runs in a fairly traditional manner. I didn't find this choice to be a minus; I was on the edge of my seat enough that a strange plot twist was not required. I did like the fact that the film actually had a bit of restraint at the end...there were a couple of moments where I thought that overused devices might happen, and was refreshed that the movie didn't follow those choices. The best sign for me that I was "in good horror hands" is that a scare moment is shown in the previews, I saw the moment coming, and while I didn't jump, I was still creeped out.

I think I've made my point...this movie is a great haunted house movie, perhaps a bit old-school. James Wan aptly demonstrates that he paid attention in those old-school classes.

4.5 games of "hide and clap" out of 5

The Amityville Haunting

The Amityville Haunting...2011...86 minutes...starring Luke Barnett, Casey Campbell, Devin Clark, and Steven Dell...directed by Geoff Meed

Oh, look! Someone found film footage about another family who decided to brave living in the Amityville house. I'm sure they settled in nicely and everything was nice and quiet. No? Murder and supernatural mayhem? I'm shocked...SHOCKED, I say.

I'd love to give this film a full review, but I honestly can't. If you've read my sporadic blog, or even just skimmed the titles, you'll know that I have a fairly strong stomach when it comes to bad movies. I've made it through some real hounds. But for the first time in recent memory, I actually stopped a movie and said "No more!" I think I made it in about half an hour or so before deciding I was done. I'm not a huge fan of the mockumentaries and found footage films, but they can be done passably well, and I get that they can be made on the cheap. This selection should be used as the example of how NOT to make one of these movies.

That's it. I can't even give it a 1-5 rating in all honesty, but really: no. Just no.

Suck

Suck...2009...91 minutes...rated R...starring Rob Stefaniuk, Jessica Pare, Paul Anthony, and Malcolm McDowell...written by Rob Stefaniuk...directed by Rob Stefaniuk

Your manager is trying to get you to fire him, your ex-girlfriend has decided to spend the night partying with some goth freak, and your band is going nowhere. This state of affairs is where Joey, the main character of the film, starts in this offbeat Canadian film, playing with the whole vampires-meet-rock and roll concept that many horror fans know and...well, we know it, if we don't love it all the time. Soon the band...with a newly vampirized bass player...is hitting the road, coming to the states, and being pursued by a crazy one-eyed hunter named Eddie Van Helsing. (Yep, the hunter is indeed the role played by Malclom McDowell) Hijinks ensue.

So, the concept may sound tired and played, and certainly the production is not a big budget affair...but it holds up. Part of what makes the film feel sincere are the cameos done by Alice Cooper, Iggy Pop, Moby, and Henry Rollins. The dialogue has some shining moments in it as well...and a fun game the film plays with the audience is "Spot The Album Cover". Now, I'll admit that I didn't expect a huge classic when I clicked on this selection, but the film tickled me. There's almost no real fright in the movie, fyi, but a fair amount of gore.

Now, allow the Dark Angel Of Self Important Reviews to tell you what I think this film did correctly that some big budget films (Silent Hill: Revelation, I'm specifically looking at you) have not done. It's very simple, really: if you have Malcolm McDowell in your film, by Jove USE Malcolm McDowell! Sure, he wasn't at his most sinister, but he has a good amount of screen time and isn't just adding his name to make the movie have credibility. Okay, that's not *ALL* he's doing here...I'm not completely delusional.

Anyways, it's light fun in the supernatural genre... sure, there are better movies to watch, but it's sincere and not a terrible way to kill an hour and a half. I give it 3 tablets of "aspirin" out of 5.

Apollo 18

Apollo 18...2011...86 minutes...PG-13...starring Warren Christie, Lloyd Owen, and Ryan Robbins...written by Brian Miller...directed by Gonzalo Lopez-Gallego

So, many people know that the Apollo 17 mission was the last launched mission of the Apollo program, 18-20 being cut for budgetary reasons. However, what if there had been an Apollo 18 mission that we had never heard about? Why would there have been such an elaborate cover-up? Isn't the moon a stage set anyways? Anyways, we have discovered footage of this "lost" mission...yeah, yeah, yeah, you know the drill by now. Recovered film, things we weren't meant to know, etc etc etc ad nauseum.

I know, my tone up front doesn't sound positive...and I'll be equally up front when I say that I just couldn't suspend my disbelief enough with this concept. That said, I will say that I found myself liking the fact that there was a serious attempt to make the "found footage" appear authentic, and people interested in filming and different cameras might find this an interesting exercise. The actors do their jobs well; they really are trying to sell what I consider a flawed product and I had no problems with their performances. Little things like physics and biology got into my way as well...and normally I have no problem with setting aside my notions of hard science for the sake of story.

Let's face it, for many people the supernatural in general is a rough sell...I know there are people who just can't get into werewolves, vampires, ghosts...too much stuff to have to buy into. I personally am oriented the other way around...my brain has room for things of your more typical horror fare, and some crossovers between science fiction and horror I've found enjoyable. But tell me about a fake moon mission, and then posit the reasons why this mission was covered up...too much. I just couldn't go on this ride. (Maybe I'm just getting old.)

Not much in terms of suspense, and...okay, I can't believe I'm about to say this, but really, if you're going to do this sort of film, I'd say stick with Paranormal Activity. Really.

I give it 2 moon rocks out of 5.

The Fog (2005)

The Fog...2005...100 minutes...PG-13...starring Tom Welling, Maggie Grace, Selma Blair,and DeRay Davis...written by Cooper Layne based on the 1980 screenplay by John Carpenter and Debra Hill....directed by Rupert Wainwright

Antonio Bay, a fishing village off the coast of Oregon, is about to celebrate its 100th year anniversary, and Elizabeth Williams has come back from New York just in time to meet up with her old fling, Nick Castle, and be part of the festivities. Both of these people are descended from the founding fathers of Antonio Bay...and a bit of town history is about to catch up with them as well as several other people when a mysterious fog rolls in....

If this plot sounds at all familiar, that's because this movie is indeed a redo of the Carpenter film from 1980. John Carpenter does seem to be the man to "redo", what with new versions of "Halloween" and the prequel to "The Thing" released not too long ago. This film may have started the trend as it preceded both of them, and did have Debra Hill Productions involved as well. Still, one wonders how other Carpenter films were thought of as viable source material...don't get me wrong, I like his movies just fine...but this new version didn't exactly take the movie world by storm.

In the review I wrote up for the 1980 film, I mentioned that Carpenter's films often had a sense of the surreal to them, as if we were watching a celluloid capture of a nightmare. This time, we have a lot less of that sense of mystery and "What the hell?"... we learn more of the whole history of Antonio Bay, as well as understand why Elizabeth had to come back at that time. Of course, in the first film, Jamie Lee Curtis's Elizabeth is indeed a stranger with an interesting name that really does come to town at THE worst time. This version's Elizabeth is an integral part to the whole haunting. So, we gain more of a sense of story in this version.

That's about all we get. For some reason, I found the characters in the original much more interesting as people than the folks we get in this movie. We get a hint that Stevie Wayne and Nick Castle were involved at some point...is Stevie's boy Nick's? That might have been interesting to explore...but I'm not sure I would have cared. Part of what worked for me in the first movie is that these people basically got sucked into a nightmare that they really didn't deserve or even know about, but I somehow liked the characters enough that the haunting really felt sinister. This time, that connection wasn't there.

Even the enhanced effects didn't work for me...sure, the effects in the 80s version were cheesy, but one thing I will say that might have helped the older film: the spectres aren't vaporous themselves, but all too solid. They were the tangible fear IN the fog, and while their appearance can't be explained, a viewer doesn't doubt that these things can grab you and dice you up.

Honestly, this film just left me kinda "meh" with the added "Why does every haunting have to have a motive?". Maybe Carpenter was on to something...maybe the real fear in the supernatural is that there's no real explanation for why something like this might happen. Fear isn't completely rational; should our ghost stories be?

I give this movie 2 pocketwatches out of 5.

The Fog (1980)

The Fog...1980...89 minutes...rated R...starring Jamie Lee Curtis, Adrienne Barbeau, Janet Leigh, and Hal Holbrook...written by John Carpenter and Debra Hill...directed by John Carpenter

So, I'll admit that I'm partial to John Carpenter films, and I think that's mostly to do with the soundtracks he composes for his movies. For whatever reason, his films have generally managed to creep me out on some level, even when the stories seem more like fragments. The quote by Edgar Allen Poe at the beginning of this movie is relevant; Carpenter's movies always seem like nightmares and that surreal quality just makes the experience of his films unsettling.

I think this film is one of the best examples of that dreamlike imagery, and the start of the film with John Houseman telling ghost stories sets that tone immediately. In this film, the fishing community of Antonio Bay is just about to celebrate it's 100th anniversary; however the past isn't through with the town. The fog rolls in between midnight and one, the hour that belongs to the dead, and a bit of town history that was forgotten comes back seeking revenge. I'll grant that it's not much of a blurb, but if you haven't seen this selection, I'd hate to ruin it for you. I'll give you a hint; bloodthirsty seafaring ghosts are involved. (Aren't they the best kind of ghosts?)

There's a lot of classic star power involved in this movie, as seen by the credits above. Their performances, ranging from the single mother and voice of the local radio to the clergyman in his cups, help sell the idea that these are people dealing with the unknown. The story seems disjointed, but in some ways, the fact that no one person has all the answers or knows what's going on also establishes just enough of a feeling of reality...but a reality turning askew. For people like myself who like genre references and "in-jokes", the movie has those as well. (Dr. Phibes...really?) The soundtrack is genuine Carpenter, and the movie's length isn't stretched out too long. (The movie was actually almost too short, hence the whole John Houseman scene referred to earlier.)

Is "The Fog" the best movie ever? No, I won't go so far...but Carpenter is one of the names to look at if you're studying horror movies at all, and this film catches a lot of the essence that makes up his movies. If you have to see another Carpenter movie besides "Halloween"...which is indeed a mandatory movie... this film isn't a bad choice to get a sense of the director's works.

This movie gets 3 "Look, it's a coin...no, look, it's a board" artifacts out of 5.

Silent Hill: Revelation 3D

SIlent Hill: Revelation 3D...2012...94 minutes...rated R...starring Adelaide Clemens, Kit Harrington, Sean Bean, and Carrie Anne-Moss...written and directed by Michael J. Bassett

At the end of the first Silent Hill movie, we're left with a rather odd ending: Rose and Alessa/Sharon have returned back to their home after their fun romp through the strangeness that is the literal ghost town of Silent Hill...or at least their home in the alternate "fog" dimension while the father is stressed out and waiting in our world. Did you ever wonder what happened from there? This sequel follows Alessa, now called Heather Morris, and her return back to the town that gave birth to her.

Mind you, I say that it follows her further journey, as well as her father's. What I *don't* say is that it answers any real questions, but instead brings up bunches of new ones. Fans of the older movie will notice a lot of attempts to make this new offering follow the events of the original, but it only does so in a "sort-of kinda maybe if I squint at it" fashion. Fans of the game series will recognize that the majority of the plot is drawn from the 3rd game in the series.

The problem with this movie is that it doesn't go far enough in either direction...or in any direction. The start of the movie has a wonderfully creepy dream sequence that promises much, and up to a certain point Revelation looks like it's going to be a grisly gem. Sure, there's a big plot hole that has yet to be explained re: how Heather returns to the real world, but surely the movie will explain the method better...or at least the key object better, right? Wrong. In fact, the movie wanders after a certain point, and while there are some interesting scenes that crop up, most of the ghoulies of Silent Hill haven't changed...with one notable exception...and I personally wasn't scared so much as going "Wait...what?" by the end.

The ending itself seemed awfully light compared to the start of the film, and while this is a spoiler, I'll say that the ending of Silent Hill 3 went much darker and creepier than the end of this movie. I believe that to have been a terrible mistake in writing. I really could have used more explanation about many things as well, and I also have this personal complaint: if you get Malcolm McDowell and Carrie Anne-Moss in your movie, dear Gods, use these people! I could have used more of them and less of what I got.

The one complaint I didn't have was in the 3D aspect; it was decently used...and I kept waiting to see myself covered in ash flakes during certain scenes of the movie.

Overall, I'm a big fan of the Silent Hill games as well as of horror movies (obviously) and I was doubly disappointed with this movie. I seriously thought it could have been so much more...and the start of it promised more than the ending delivered. I can't say it was bad...instead it ended up as the worst thing a horror film can be: bland.

My rating: 2.5 carousel "horses" out of 5

Sinister

Sinister...2012...110 minutes...rated R...starring Ethan Hawke, Vincent D'onofrio, Juliet Ryalnce, and James Ransone...written by C. Robert Cargill and Scott Derrickson...directed by Scott Derrickson

Ellison is a "true crime" writer who has just moved his family into their new home. Ellison has lots of bills piling up, and is understandably concerned about the state of finances. Ellison really needs to write a best selling novel. And Ellison is about to find some research material that will give him more than he or his family ever expected.

Since this movie hasn't even been released yet, I'm going to do my best to be even more conscious about spoiling things. So I will be talking about things in general, and the best way I can sum up this movie is by using my homemade spaghetti as a metaphor. Follow along with me if you can. Really, it won't be that hard.

For our meals, I occasionally do spaghetti. It's a simple meal that my skills can handle, and even do well at making. Every time I do spaghetti, I generally follow one particular recipe that has served quite well. Some days, I hit it right...and we have a tasty meal. Some days, I do everything like I should...but it's just not as good. Maybe it's a tad overdone, or a tad undercooked, or maybe it's something in the air. I'm not exactly sure where things went wrong, but it just wasn't the right combination.

Now, all reviews are at some level subjective writings...so for me, Sinister was my spaghetti on an off night. There's lots of good stuff in this movie...decent writing with some snappy dialogue, great use in creating a suspenseful and creepy mood, and for me the right ratio of on-screen to off-screen violence. The actors are good, if perhaps not inspired, and the pacing keeps up. And yet.

Maybe it was a tad too predictable for me. Maybe there were a couple of cheap thrills too many for my liking. I've got no problem in saying that maybe it's because I'm a picky bastard, and it just didn't hit me right. I'm not saying the movie is bad...it certainly is not. I'm not saying you shouldn't see it...I'd put it at matinee level myself, but again that's me. I -am- saying that I didn't walk out of the movie going "Whoa, man, I'm not sleeping for a week!" Make of this rambling what you will.

My rating: 3.5 "extended endings" out of 5.

Insidious

Insidious...2010...103 minutes...PG-13...starring Patrick Wilson, Rose Byrne, and Ty Simpkins...written by Leigh Whanell...directed by James Wan

The Lambert family has just moved into their house, and are settling in when they start noticing things. Objects moving by themselves, doors opening, the occasional strange sound: these are the activities that plague the young family. That is, until little Dalton goes to explore the attic and takes a tumble...subsequently falling into a mysterious coma. The activities step up quite a bit, and like any sensible family finding themselves bedeviled by supernatural events, our protagonists get the frak out of Dodge. But like the tag line says, it's not the house that's haunted.

Okay, I found this movie to be a refreshing change of pace from a lot of the stuff that's out there these days. If you're looking for a gorefest, or something with lots of gooshiness (yes, that's a word...or at least it is now), you will not be satisfied with Insidious. On the other hand, if you're looking for something high on suspense and low on blood, this movie is just the ticket.  I made the mistake of watching this film at night, and the DVD extras that I watched to ramp down the adrenaline were the only things that let me get some sleep that night.

The ending...well, I won't lie...the ending gets a little weird and a touch predictable. I found the overall ride to be well worth my time and money, though. I love James Wan for the simple fact that all the "jumps" in the movie are genuine...no black cats jump out from hidden nooks to make you start. In fact, some of the moments actually caught me off guard, and I'm pretty good at gauging where they'll be and how they'll work. I also loved his take on the seance...it was strange but the look of it kept up the mood he'd been trying to build.

Seriously, see this movie. It may not be perfect but it's damn good, and in this genre I'll take damn good any day of the week.

My rating: 4.5 modified Viewmasters out of 5

Over a year...bad blogger.

Dear lord, where did the time go? My last post was over a year ago. Bad horror blogger, no zombie biscuit.

The Devil's Rejects

The Devil's Rejects...2005...107 minutes...unrated...starring Sid Haig, Bill Moseley, Sheri Moon Zombie, and William Forsythe...written and directed by Rob Zombie

Wonder what ever happened to the Firefly clan, that group of strange and sadistic psychopaths from "House of 1000 Corpses"? Well, if you do, this is the movie that will tell you. If you're expecting the over-the-top strangeness of the first movie, you're not going to find it here. Don't get me wrong, this movie has its own brand of viciousness and odd humor mixed in, but the film takes a strange turn in the middle of itself....

Yes, normally I would describe the movie and then give my thoughts on it. Not this one, though. All I really have to ask is: Really, Rob? Really?

I give it one giggly psycho blond out of 5...and a warning: not for the squeamish...or for anyone who needs time. Far as I can see, this movie is a waste of it.