Texas Chainsaw Massacre: The Beginning(2006)
Director: Johnathan Liebesman
Starring: Jordana Brewster, Diora Baird
Review of The Texas Chainsaw Massacre: The Beginning. (Directed by Jonathan Liebesman. Staring Jordana Brewster, Diora Baird.
by Roy Seeger
I don’t want to be the type of reviewer to lament that the remake is never as good as the original. That is too easy. Besides, to compare The Texas Chainsaw Massacre: The Beginning to the original 74’ version is unfair. But even when we compare it to the remake of a couple years ago, it is lacking in originality and character development. Instead, what The Beginning focuses on is atmosphere, gore, and beautiful victims. Granted, the atmosphere is lush and gritty: big budget gritty, a bunch of beautiful mutilated ladies and men in carefully applied dirt and blood. There are some truly nice scenes where special effects create a genuinely creepy moment, however, these moments are mostly undercut by the fact that they are barrowed from previous versions of the franchise. Occasionally, however, director Liebesmen tries too hard to impress us with his special effects which then come off as comical instead of disturbing. This movie would most appeal to the Fear Factor crowd who hasn’t seen the first remake, or for people who want to see trivial connections with the original remake. (I didn’t care.)
The plot formula is not surprising anymore, and in places is embarrassingly predictable (he’s in the back seat?). Any changes are superficial: two brothers with their special ladies go to register for the Vietnam War (except one brother is secretly going to run to Mexico). The attempt at political commentary is embarrassing and, like most of this movie, superficial.
What so bugs me about this prequel to a remake is that it could have been so good. The idea of developing the circumstances around this family, to in a sense make these characters more sympathetic, greatly intrigued me. Leatherface is one of the great slasher villains because he is a misguided, mistreated child. The premise of showing Leatherface growing up working in the slaughter house and being ridiculed was exhausted in the first five minutes, which are by far the most interesting part of the movie which should have ended where it began, with the death of the slaughter house owner.
***
The Texas Chainsaw Massacre: The Beginning is fairly typical of a new type of American Horror movie that I have begun noticing. I mentioned the phrase Fear Factor crowd. In the last five or so years, there have been a slew of movies where the major focus is gore, and very beautiful people. Take Cabin Fever. The Original Remake to the Texas Chainsaw Massacre. Wrong Turn (a similar plot to Chainsaw but this family is in the trees). And so on. These elements are not of themselves bad things, but they seem to all too often replace character development and an interesting storyline. I won’t even get into the fact that almost every American horror movie today seems to be a remake of an old or foreign movie (save that for another rant), but just in comparing the two Chainsaw franchises, we can see a lot of the problems with this current sub-genre: they tend to completely miss the point of the original and they assume that gore is scary. Aside from the general lack of political commentary in the remake (which, in the original, gave the family a social context and made them a tinge more sympathetic) the characters are flat. I never really noticed the extent of this flatness until I recently, after watching The Beginning, caught the opening of the original. It is the part where a group of travelers pick up a hitchhiker (just like in the remake.) Except in the original it is a scrawny guy who is obviously a local. He seems happy and eager to please his new friends. So much so that he barrows a knife from one and uses it to make a deep cut in the palm of his hand. His smile betrays his obvious glee. That one scene is more terrifying and disturbing than all the crazy camera angles and clean dirt of both remakes.
Friday, February 16, 2007
Tuesday, February 13, 2007
On Love and Sex and Death (oh my)
"Flesh is the fundamental problem into which we are born . It's the first paradox we are aware of, long before we know what the word paradox means. The very same nerve endings that present us with pleasure if stroked the right way are the same that give us pain…We're paradox real early…We also learn at a young age that certain pleasures we can induce for ourselves are forbidden, secret, taboo. One of the reasons horror fiction falls shy of being considered serious writing is that there's a general belief these kinds of stories have sexuality as their subtext, and by bringing that subtext into the more prominent position of text, you somehow call the bluff of the machine that made the thing work in the first place. You've pulled the hood off, so to speak, and people feared that in showing the workings, the magic wouldn't work any longer. I don't think that's true at all - it doesn't stop me, certainly. Any genre that requires the willful disregard of certain facts that we all know to make it work is moribund by definition." Barker's Searching For A Higher Plane By Bob Strauss, The Fresno Bee, 25 October 1987
Monday, February 12, 2007
Valentine's Day Horror Picks
Darlings, it's almost Valentine's day and what better way to spend it then the way I spend it every year: huddled beneath covers, avoiding the February chill, and watching horror films with my sugar booger. What follows are my picks for best Valentine's day horror films and, tommorrow, a few words regarding the horror film as aphrodisiac. Happy V-day!
LOVE,
Amanda
LOVE,
Amanda
- My Bloody Valentine(1981)-- This is an obligatory #1 pick for Valentine's Day. The plot: miners, massacres, bloody hearts in boxes, pick axes, gas masks, dire warnings, 20 year anniversaries, and VALENTINES DAY PARTIES!! Aww. A heart in a box? You shouldn'a have. (No one ever gives me a heart in a box.)
- Valentine (2001)--Starring one, David Boreanaz ("Angel"), this is your standard revenge slaughterfest. Not bad, not surprising, but full of lovely people dying in dramatic fashion. Not a whole sale slaughterfest, but a nice who-done-it reminiscent of older films. Aww. A box of gross maggoty chocolates? You're too much. (And Fellas, David Boreanaz's hotness may get you forgiveness points if you opt for this movie for Valentine's Day.)
- My Boyfriend's Back(1993)--a horror-comedy hybrid, think "Can't Buy Me Love" meets a reanimated road block. A light hearted (hearted...punny) movie, very few scares, but sweet. Not for fans of more explicit, or serious, horror. Why this didn't star a Corey is beyond me.
- Zombie Honeymoon(2004)--Perhaps I am a creepy girl (people have called me this), but I actually think this is a romantic film. I would much rather watch this than any number of cutesy love stories (although this film does have it's cutesy moments). What limits does love have? Is death one of them? What about undeath? This film stirred some very tender discussions in my household. (It's as sweety cute as I get.)
- Candyman(1992)--Not only is it, in my opinion, one of the scariest and most underrated horror films in the past 20 years, it is also a love story (of sorts). This movie is sweetly (no pun intended this time) seductive and damn scary. It is the first film I ever saw that resulted in a popcorn toss moment (a popcorn toss moment is a quick scare that's so sudden and intense that your popcorn goes flying...it is akin to the cat in a closet scare, only it doesn't have to be a cat in the closet). This is the type of film that will make one cling to their loved one. And although the lead actor, Tony Todd, isn't exactly sexy...his voice is. Turn off the lights, turn up the volume and sit close together, couples. Aww. Candy full of razor blades and kisses made of bees? You're so sweet.
Kisses are just bites without the teeth (sometimes).
Thursday, February 1, 2007
Scariest Horror Movie Moments (1-10)
This is a link to the documentary entitled "100 Scariest Movie Moments," if you've been near a TV that subscribes to Bravo around halloween you'll have seen at least part of this doc (while flipping through the channels?). Here is a rundown of the filmmakers picks. Many of the filmmaker's picks (no news regarding how these were selected...a poll? via their own personal preference?) are from standard horror movies, but there are some selections taken from "related" genres (horror's incestuous cousins: Science Fiction and Thrillers). Here are the titles (in order 1-20) of movies containing their selections for scariest movie moments--with my added comments.
Jaws --A damn scary movie, but the scariest? I don't know. Honestly, if you have not seen it for a while, or have ONLY seen it on television (with edits and commercial breaks) do yourself a favor and try watching it anew. It is truely a fear inspiring film. It kept people out of the ocean for years after its release, and it is the ONLY film to ever make me physically ill (I was like 10 years old, and had eaten a lot of junk food...so it's vomit inducing powers are probebly limited). Scary moments...yes, many. Scariest? Well, it does have some arguable moments and some long-lingering effects on the people who have seen it. Plus, it IS a great film, I'm always amazed by just how good it is (after all it is a movie starring a rubber shark).
Alien --This is a movie that straddles the line between sci-fi and real horror. I will agree that the first time I saw this film I was terrified (and 11). My mother and I rented this from the local library and curled up on her bed to watch it one night while the younger kids slept. This is when I discovered that my mother screams and slaps when she gets scared. This is a truely scary film, but not just that--it is also a good film. The acting is wonderful, the tone, the music the mood: all spot on. And the scares...gasp! I'm going to agree that this is one of the scariest films ever, but again, because it is one of those scifi/horror fence films I might bump it down on my list.
Exorcist--To begin with a quote from Beetlejuice, "I've seen the EXORCIST ABOUT A HUNDRED AND SIXTY-SEVEN TIMES, AND IT KEEPS GETTING FUNNIER EVERY SINGLE TIME I SEE IT." I've got to agree, somehow it does...I don't want it to, but I still can't recapture the initial horror of the first viewing at 12 years old (is this a chronological journey through my childhood?). First, no twelve year old has any business watching this film...thanks, mom. (I know, I begged...I know.) This film IS scary, but I just can't figure out which "moment" they might be referring to. The film is scary as a whole, it must accumulate (or marinate?). There are no leaping killers, no lurking creatures, just a dread, a forboding and a big big evil v. innocence theme. I love biblical horror...love it. I can't get enough, and this movie may have begun my love relationship with the genre, a scary film for sure. And it would be in my top 10.
Psycho--YIKES! Again, I add to the chronological journey through my childhood: One grey summer day when I was 15 years old, I was suffering from cramps. I begged my mother for some horror films, and she brought back Psycho. My little brother, who was once a sweet boy, watched Psycho with me, in the basement on a little 13 inch black and white T.V. (it didn't matter did it? I mean it's in black and white.) where we huddled together eating Doritos and drinking gallons of Diet Dr. Pepper. What's my point? Well, midday in the summer and this movie is still scary as hell. It's so misleading...everything is fine, calm, we've got a plot already then...WHAM! Moments the phrase WTF was invented for. Needless to say, this movie is horrifying, fabulous, riviting and NOT (decidedly not) remakable. A brief comment on the Psycho remake: dearest hollywood, don't ever do that again. There are some things that CANNOT be remade and remaking Psycho is like remaking the Wizard of Oz, unless you do something lovely and clever and completely different (thank you, The Wiz), you are just making a mess of things. Classics work because something magical has occurred, a great colliding of forces, and as much as I adore Vince Vaughn, he's just too Vince Vaughn-ish to fill Anthony Perkin's shoes. No matter how those shoes are choreographed. The original Psycho makes my top 10, the sequels and remakes do not. Now, dear Hollywood, stop it!
Texas Chainsaw Massacre Ha, right after my plea to Hollywood regarding Psycho, I get to discuss THE Texas Chainsaw Massacre. Oh, Momma! YES! I will limit my discussion here, for Polyphobia will be inviting a guest to review/analyze ALL of the Texas Chainsaw Massacre Series (remakes and offshoots included). Be ready.
Shining--of course they mean the original Kubrick version (the King directed remake is horrifying in a different way). Another childhood story: at age 14 my family decided to make a griswald-esque trip across the country to Oregon, down the coast to L.A. and back to Ohio. We took a few side trips, one to Mt. Hood. Although most of the film was shot in Estes Park, Colorado, several scenes were filmed at the Lodge on Mt. Hood...the long long long hallways in the big wheel scene are located there. My mother and I, both fans of horror ran at top speed up the hallways, mimicing little Tommy's path...scary! Okay, that story wasn't very interesting, but The Shining IS! This movie is creepy, kooky and spooky. And there are quite a few scary scenes (my favorite scenes are of the creepy new year's eve party...surreal and Kubrick-y). It would be a contender for a top 10 position...but could be easily bumped by something less cerebral and more "holy crap!"
Silence of the Lambs --this is another film that is technically not horror, it is a thriller (more on the distinction/correction/confusion of these two genres in a later post), but it does not make this film any less horrifying. There are moments that definately blurr the boundary between crime drama and straight forward horror. I personally find the scene with the night vision goggles absolutely terror-filled. Scary movie, yes...scariest moments, maybe...horror movie, no. This movie, and others like it (serial killer films) can be catagorized as a type, a type made popular post-cold war and pre-digital era: human-threat based horror films. It is easy to track the fears of a society through it's horror films; post-cold war and pre-digital America no longer feared the threat of nuclear attacks or radiation (bye bye giant monsters and mutants), it no longer feared the supernatural (it was a time virtually devoid of techno-fears) because science and technology explained everything...what it feared was itself in the form of other humans. Most of these human threat films are not psychological, but psychotic...the good ones recognize the fear of others (xenophobia) inherient in American culture, the bad ones are just wholesale slaughterfests by killers bent on personal vendettas. The motivations always varied, but the thematic trend was solid.
Carrie--for god's sake, I mean the original. The remake of this film was interesting in it's attempt to do something different (it was not choreographed like Psycho) with the story, and it adhered more readily to Stephen King's novel (not that that's a boon...see "The Shining"), but it lost all the focus and, well I don't want to say it but, charm of the original. The character of Carrie is fascinating: we not only understand and pity the killer, but root for her in the end. It has powerful moments for analysis as well: look at the themes of sexuality and religion that underscore every moment of this movie. I might place this film in the top 20 horror movies of all time, it is brilliant...however as far as moments go: the scares in this film are collective not individual, so, there are no real "moments." It does, in the mother role (played by Piper Laurie), have one of the scariest characters in a horror film...so scary!
Night of the Living Dead --One of the, if not THE, best horror movies ever. Originally done for 3,000 bucks...3,000 bucks!! More money was spent on the filming of Coven (That's pronounced: CO-ven). This is a fascinating film, one which can be analyzed virtually ad infinitum. It is sheer brilliance, and scarier than nearly all of the films on this list. As far as moments go, my favorite (if one could say that...it is not a pleasant response) "scary" moment of the film occurs during the closing credits. I shall spoil nothing, but say...the heartbreak and terror and disgust one feels during the closing credits of this movie is very powerful both emotionally and as a commentary on American society. I have seen this movie more times than I care to admit, and I still almost tear up when the credits roll. Nothing, however, will equal that first viewing: I spent most of the film, from "They're coming to get you, Barbara" until the last scrolling name, with my hand clasped firmly over my mouth in awe and fear and finally sorrow. Nothing holds up to the sheer force of this film. Terrible. You must see it. The one horror movie to make it's viewers weep...that, in itself, is terribly impressive.
Wait Until Dark--Whoa. If you have not seen this film, you are missing out on something phenomenal. Although, again, this is technically not horror, but a thriller or even a drama at points...this movie is truely frightening. The acting is supurb and it does contain one of the scariest movie moments I can think of, when we the audience are struck blind...the scariest minute of black screen in the history of cinema.
I know, I know...that's 10. The top 10. I have listed the next 10 on the list without commentary...knowing that most of these films will (hopefully) be discussed in time. I already have plans for a review/analysis of Audition--a film I believe is one of the scariest ever made. And how could I not comment on such genre staples as Halloween, A Nightmare on Elm Street, and Hellraiser. I count 21 movies in these franchises alone...wait until I add all the TCSMs and Friday the 13ths? It makes me wonder if this project is too ambitious. Be patient friends, I will try to speed up my posts. If you are interested in a particular review, or want to suggest a post, please contact me. I'm all yours.
Numbers 11-20 on Scariest Movie Moments:
Audition
Misery
Scream
Halloween
Freaks
The Omen
A Nightmare on Elm Street
The Haunting (obviously the original, with Vincent Price)
Hellraiser
The Ring
Jaws --A damn scary movie, but the scariest? I don't know. Honestly, if you have not seen it for a while, or have ONLY seen it on television (with edits and commercial breaks) do yourself a favor and try watching it anew. It is truely a fear inspiring film. It kept people out of the ocean for years after its release, and it is the ONLY film to ever make me physically ill (I was like 10 years old, and had eaten a lot of junk food...so it's vomit inducing powers are probebly limited). Scary moments...yes, many. Scariest? Well, it does have some arguable moments and some long-lingering effects on the people who have seen it. Plus, it IS a great film, I'm always amazed by just how good it is (after all it is a movie starring a rubber shark).
Alien --This is a movie that straddles the line between sci-fi and real horror. I will agree that the first time I saw this film I was terrified (and 11). My mother and I rented this from the local library and curled up on her bed to watch it one night while the younger kids slept. This is when I discovered that my mother screams and slaps when she gets scared. This is a truely scary film, but not just that--it is also a good film. The acting is wonderful, the tone, the music the mood: all spot on. And the scares...gasp! I'm going to agree that this is one of the scariest films ever, but again, because it is one of those scifi/horror fence films I might bump it down on my list.
Exorcist--To begin with a quote from Beetlejuice, "I've seen the EXORCIST ABOUT A HUNDRED AND SIXTY-SEVEN TIMES, AND IT KEEPS GETTING FUNNIER EVERY SINGLE TIME I SEE IT." I've got to agree, somehow it does...I don't want it to, but I still can't recapture the initial horror of the first viewing at 12 years old (is this a chronological journey through my childhood?). First, no twelve year old has any business watching this film...thanks, mom. (I know, I begged...I know.) This film IS scary, but I just can't figure out which "moment" they might be referring to. The film is scary as a whole, it must accumulate (or marinate?). There are no leaping killers, no lurking creatures, just a dread, a forboding and a big big evil v. innocence theme. I love biblical horror...love it. I can't get enough, and this movie may have begun my love relationship with the genre, a scary film for sure. And it would be in my top 10.
Psycho--YIKES! Again, I add to the chronological journey through my childhood: One grey summer day when I was 15 years old, I was suffering from cramps. I begged my mother for some horror films, and she brought back Psycho. My little brother, who was once a sweet boy, watched Psycho with me, in the basement on a little 13 inch black and white T.V. (it didn't matter did it? I mean it's in black and white.) where we huddled together eating Doritos and drinking gallons of Diet Dr. Pepper. What's my point? Well, midday in the summer and this movie is still scary as hell. It's so misleading...everything is fine, calm, we've got a plot already then...WHAM! Moments the phrase WTF was invented for. Needless to say, this movie is horrifying, fabulous, riviting and NOT (decidedly not) remakable. A brief comment on the Psycho remake: dearest hollywood, don't ever do that again. There are some things that CANNOT be remade and remaking Psycho is like remaking the Wizard of Oz, unless you do something lovely and clever and completely different (thank you, The Wiz), you are just making a mess of things. Classics work because something magical has occurred, a great colliding of forces, and as much as I adore Vince Vaughn, he's just too Vince Vaughn-ish to fill Anthony Perkin's shoes. No matter how those shoes are choreographed. The original Psycho makes my top 10, the sequels and remakes do not. Now, dear Hollywood, stop it!
Texas Chainsaw Massacre Ha, right after my plea to Hollywood regarding Psycho, I get to discuss THE Texas Chainsaw Massacre. Oh, Momma! YES! I will limit my discussion here, for Polyphobia will be inviting a guest to review/analyze ALL of the Texas Chainsaw Massacre Series (remakes and offshoots included). Be ready.
Shining--of course they mean the original Kubrick version (the King directed remake is horrifying in a different way). Another childhood story: at age 14 my family decided to make a griswald-esque trip across the country to Oregon, down the coast to L.A. and back to Ohio. We took a few side trips, one to Mt. Hood. Although most of the film was shot in Estes Park, Colorado, several scenes were filmed at the Lodge on Mt. Hood...the long long long hallways in the big wheel scene are located there. My mother and I, both fans of horror ran at top speed up the hallways, mimicing little Tommy's path...scary! Okay, that story wasn't very interesting, but The Shining IS! This movie is creepy, kooky and spooky. And there are quite a few scary scenes (my favorite scenes are of the creepy new year's eve party...surreal and Kubrick-y). It would be a contender for a top 10 position...but could be easily bumped by something less cerebral and more "holy crap!"
Silence of the Lambs --this is another film that is technically not horror, it is a thriller (more on the distinction/correction/confusion of these two genres in a later post), but it does not make this film any less horrifying. There are moments that definately blurr the boundary between crime drama and straight forward horror. I personally find the scene with the night vision goggles absolutely terror-filled. Scary movie, yes...scariest moments, maybe...horror movie, no. This movie, and others like it (serial killer films) can be catagorized as a type, a type made popular post-cold war and pre-digital era: human-threat based horror films. It is easy to track the fears of a society through it's horror films; post-cold war and pre-digital America no longer feared the threat of nuclear attacks or radiation (bye bye giant monsters and mutants), it no longer feared the supernatural (it was a time virtually devoid of techno-fears) because science and technology explained everything...what it feared was itself in the form of other humans. Most of these human threat films are not psychological, but psychotic...the good ones recognize the fear of others (xenophobia) inherient in American culture, the bad ones are just wholesale slaughterfests by killers bent on personal vendettas. The motivations always varied, but the thematic trend was solid.
Carrie--for god's sake, I mean the original. The remake of this film was interesting in it's attempt to do something different (it was not choreographed like Psycho) with the story, and it adhered more readily to Stephen King's novel (not that that's a boon...see "The Shining"), but it lost all the focus and, well I don't want to say it but, charm of the original. The character of Carrie is fascinating: we not only understand and pity the killer, but root for her in the end. It has powerful moments for analysis as well: look at the themes of sexuality and religion that underscore every moment of this movie. I might place this film in the top 20 horror movies of all time, it is brilliant...however as far as moments go: the scares in this film are collective not individual, so, there are no real "moments." It does, in the mother role (played by Piper Laurie), have one of the scariest characters in a horror film...so scary!
Night of the Living Dead --One of the, if not THE, best horror movies ever. Originally done for 3,000 bucks...3,000 bucks!! More money was spent on the filming of Coven (That's pronounced: CO-ven). This is a fascinating film, one which can be analyzed virtually ad infinitum. It is sheer brilliance, and scarier than nearly all of the films on this list. As far as moments go, my favorite (if one could say that...it is not a pleasant response) "scary" moment of the film occurs during the closing credits. I shall spoil nothing, but say...the heartbreak and terror and disgust one feels during the closing credits of this movie is very powerful both emotionally and as a commentary on American society. I have seen this movie more times than I care to admit, and I still almost tear up when the credits roll. Nothing, however, will equal that first viewing: I spent most of the film, from "They're coming to get you, Barbara" until the last scrolling name, with my hand clasped firmly over my mouth in awe and fear and finally sorrow. Nothing holds up to the sheer force of this film. Terrible. You must see it. The one horror movie to make it's viewers weep...that, in itself, is terribly impressive.
Wait Until Dark--Whoa. If you have not seen this film, you are missing out on something phenomenal. Although, again, this is technically not horror, but a thriller or even a drama at points...this movie is truely frightening. The acting is supurb and it does contain one of the scariest movie moments I can think of, when we the audience are struck blind...the scariest minute of black screen in the history of cinema.
I know, I know...that's 10. The top 10. I have listed the next 10 on the list without commentary...knowing that most of these films will (hopefully) be discussed in time. I already have plans for a review/analysis of Audition--a film I believe is one of the scariest ever made. And how could I not comment on such genre staples as Halloween, A Nightmare on Elm Street, and Hellraiser. I count 21 movies in these franchises alone...wait until I add all the TCSMs and Friday the 13ths? It makes me wonder if this project is too ambitious. Be patient friends, I will try to speed up my posts. If you are interested in a particular review, or want to suggest a post, please contact me. I'm all yours.
Numbers 11-20 on Scariest Movie Moments:
Audition
Misery
Scream
Halloween
Freaks
The Omen
A Nightmare on Elm Street
The Haunting (obviously the original, with Vincent Price)
Hellraiser
The Ring
Tuesday, January 30, 2007
Rest Stop (2006)
Rest Stop (2006)
Director: John Shiban
Starring: Jamie Alexander
Screenplay by: John Shiban
This movie sucks. Sucks. I give it a holy crap this movie sucks. Because I am rendered partially speechless by the utter suckitude of this film I shall repost my netflix review of said film in its entirety below. :
"I am a huge fan of random slaughterfests of this sort, and the concept of this movie is extremely interesting (and has the potential for real scares). A lonely rest stop miles from nowhere, an inhumanly cruel, faceless threat: it sounds like the basis for an interesting film. OH, HOWEVER...this has to be one of the most "confused" horror movies I've seen. I'm not sure exactly where it all went wrong: the writer? the director? the actors? the HUGE AND GAPING PLOT HOLES? The answer is probebly a little bit of everything. Despite having "borrowed" ideas from three or four better horror films, this film is filled with the kind of ridiculous actions / reactions / premises that are usually only reserved for low budget horror movies made in someone's back yard. I suspect that the writer and/or directer felt they were being somehow mysterious or clever at key points, but really there is nothing mysterious or clever in this film; there are only ridiculously unlikeable characters, enormous plot holes, pointless scenes, unconnected characters and events and zero explanation. A side note, if there was any truth in advertisitng the alternate endings described as "each one scarier than the next" would need to be changed to "each one more puzzlingly stupid than the next." "
I first have to say, that the review above is a rarity, I seldom, if ever, bother with reviews on netflix (or at all if you notice the frequency, or lack thereof, with which I'm placing reviews on this page). I just couldn't stop myself this time though. I thought, if I could just get one person to delete this movie from their queue then I will have done a very good deed. I hate movies that seem SLICK and turn out worse than most low-budget, backwoods, dentist-directed ex-genius crapfests (I'll give three dollars to anyone who can figure out what movie I just referenced). Now, some movies have low budget sillyness I can get behind; movies like, "There's nothing out there" (a self-aware goof fest)and even "Manos, Hands of Fate" (whose only charm is its successful MST3K-ification). But I hate movies that are oblivious to their own failure. I am positive that the filmmaker, director, whatever: John Shiban thought this was a tour-de-force, I mean after all JOEY LAWRENCE IS IN IT! (And in the only accidentally funny scene in the movie...I laughed for like 10 minutes, I'm stifling a giggle now as I shake my head over the shame of it). And there is where it all went wrong. Why set out to make a "type of movie?" Make a good movie, tell a good story, make me scared. This film was sadly all candy coating with no center. (I would swear they spent the majority of the filming budget on corn syrup and the editing for the trailer.)
So, now I'm at an impasse, I can't think of a way to talk about horror theory in relation to this movie. Maybe I'll just say this: sometimes what scares us doesn't need to be made so obvious. I'm thinking of movies like "Last Broadcast" (almost perfect...if it wasn't for those last four minutes), or even the love-it/hate-it "Blair Witch Project" where the thing that frightens us isn't shown, it is imagined. Isn't the fear in the imagining of the horror? The anticipation of it? This film had all the makings of something interesting...if it just hadn't tried to explain anything at all, for when it tried it failed quickly and left more holes than ideas. Nothing came together, but not in an interesting Gestalt kind of way...just in a "dammit, I want my two hours back" way. Stupid movie.
Side notes:
The main character is probebly the most dislikable character I have ever experienced in a horror movie. This was a very strange direction for the film to take: usually we like the main character, it is important to like them, for we want them to live. Taking the unconventional approach in this movie, making the main character a whiney, unlikable, useless dingbat really backfired (unless that was the point, but I just can't fathom what the point of doing this ON PURPOSE would be), I think? Oh, who can tell.
Director: John Shiban
Starring: Jamie Alexander
Screenplay by: John Shiban
This movie sucks. Sucks. I give it a holy crap this movie sucks. Because I am rendered partially speechless by the utter suckitude of this film I shall repost my netflix review of said film in its entirety below. :
"I am a huge fan of random slaughterfests of this sort, and the concept of this movie is extremely interesting (and has the potential for real scares). A lonely rest stop miles from nowhere, an inhumanly cruel, faceless threat: it sounds like the basis for an interesting film. OH, HOWEVER...this has to be one of the most "confused" horror movies I've seen. I'm not sure exactly where it all went wrong: the writer? the director? the actors? the HUGE AND GAPING PLOT HOLES? The answer is probebly a little bit of everything. Despite having "borrowed" ideas from three or four better horror films, this film is filled with the kind of ridiculous actions / reactions / premises that are usually only reserved for low budget horror movies made in someone's back yard. I suspect that the writer and/or directer felt they were being somehow mysterious or clever at key points, but really there is nothing mysterious or clever in this film; there are only ridiculously unlikeable characters, enormous plot holes, pointless scenes, unconnected characters and events and zero explanation. A side note, if there was any truth in advertisitng the alternate endings described as "each one scarier than the next" would need to be changed to "each one more puzzlingly stupid than the next." "
I first have to say, that the review above is a rarity, I seldom, if ever, bother with reviews on netflix (or at all if you notice the frequency, or lack thereof, with which I'm placing reviews on this page). I just couldn't stop myself this time though. I thought, if I could just get one person to delete this movie from their queue then I will have done a very good deed. I hate movies that seem SLICK and turn out worse than most low-budget, backwoods, dentist-directed ex-genius crapfests (I'll give three dollars to anyone who can figure out what movie I just referenced). Now, some movies have low budget sillyness I can get behind; movies like, "There's nothing out there" (a self-aware goof fest)and even "Manos, Hands of Fate" (whose only charm is its successful MST3K-ification). But I hate movies that are oblivious to their own failure. I am positive that the filmmaker, director, whatever: John Shiban thought this was a tour-de-force, I mean after all JOEY LAWRENCE IS IN IT! (And in the only accidentally funny scene in the movie...I laughed for like 10 minutes, I'm stifling a giggle now as I shake my head over the shame of it). And there is where it all went wrong. Why set out to make a "type of movie?" Make a good movie, tell a good story, make me scared. This film was sadly all candy coating with no center. (I would swear they spent the majority of the filming budget on corn syrup and the editing for the trailer.)
So, now I'm at an impasse, I can't think of a way to talk about horror theory in relation to this movie. Maybe I'll just say this: sometimes what scares us doesn't need to be made so obvious. I'm thinking of movies like "Last Broadcast" (almost perfect...if it wasn't for those last four minutes), or even the love-it/hate-it "Blair Witch Project" where the thing that frightens us isn't shown, it is imagined. Isn't the fear in the imagining of the horror? The anticipation of it? This film had all the makings of something interesting...if it just hadn't tried to explain anything at all, for when it tried it failed quickly and left more holes than ideas. Nothing came together, but not in an interesting Gestalt kind of way...just in a "dammit, I want my two hours back" way. Stupid movie.
Side notes:
The main character is probebly the most dislikable character I have ever experienced in a horror movie. This was a very strange direction for the film to take: usually we like the main character, it is important to like them, for we want them to live. Taking the unconventional approach in this movie, making the main character a whiney, unlikable, useless dingbat really backfired (unless that was the point, but I just can't fathom what the point of doing this ON PURPOSE would be), I think? Oh, who can tell.
Friday, January 19, 2007
Elements of Horror
Elements of Horror a short pdf borrowing heavily from Noel Carroll's famous "Philosophy of Horror" something I have used frequently when teaching horror theory.
A Synopsis of Carroll's Work.
I'm posting this now because I'll be referring back to it kiddies. Pay attention. This is important. Later on when I mention horrific metonymy or massification you'll want to be clear as to what I mean.
A Synopsis of Carroll's Work.
I'm posting this now because I'll be referring back to it kiddies. Pay attention. This is important. Later on when I mention horrific metonymy or massification you'll want to be clear as to what I mean.
Psychoanalysis and Horror Films
Psychoanalysis in/and/of the Horror Film by Stephen Jay Schneider, an excerpt from the introduction to Freud's Worst Nightmares.
This isn't a collection of psychoanalytic criticism of particular genres, trends or films, but is a collection of essays analyzing the psychoanalytic criticism that has been applied to horror. Stephen Jay Schneider insists on a meta-theoretical approach in this collection that looks at why and how psychoanalysis has been applied to horror films and what assumptions and conclusions have been made about horror as a result of those analyses.
Although I'm not a huge fan of psychoanalysis in most forms (and a vehement Freud-hater), I do think it's a worthwhile pursuit. And it can be fascinating when applied to horror films, but often the results of these analysis seem at odds with one another. Are horror movies dependant on oedipal desires? Are they the result of castration fear? penis envy? Since they are based on fears, according to standard psychoanalytical theory, they must also contain a desire. What are those desires? This can be a fun exercise, AND it can serve to point out pervasive societial fears/desires...or it can be a self-serving waste of time.
One of my favorite genres to "analyze:" werewolf films. They lend themselves beautifully to psychoanalytical theory, and the best films realize the connection and exploit or contort the tradition to expose something new and interesting about the furry insides of humanity. Some good werewolf (with great psychoanalytical possibilities) films to see: "Ginger Snaps," "Ginger Snaps II," "Ginger Snaps Back," "In the Company of Wolves," "The Howling II/III" and "Brotherhood of the Wolf." Or wait for the new release of "Blood and Chocolate". I hope they've at least thought about the tradition of werewolf films and metaphors...it seems they may have considering the title. (Oh, it's about women...they like chocolate...hurk hurk. Sometimes I hate how clever hollywood thinks it is. If it were half as clever as all that, there would never be a bad big budget horror flick.)
I do think it is an interesting project to analyze analyses. I've done this myself with several critical theories and rhetorical strategies. It can be quite telling about the nature of critical thought.
This isn't a collection of psychoanalytic criticism of particular genres, trends or films, but is a collection of essays analyzing the psychoanalytic criticism that has been applied to horror. Stephen Jay Schneider insists on a meta-theoretical approach in this collection that looks at why and how psychoanalysis has been applied to horror films and what assumptions and conclusions have been made about horror as a result of those analyses.
Although I'm not a huge fan of psychoanalysis in most forms (and a vehement Freud-hater), I do think it's a worthwhile pursuit. And it can be fascinating when applied to horror films, but often the results of these analysis seem at odds with one another. Are horror movies dependant on oedipal desires? Are they the result of castration fear? penis envy? Since they are based on fears, according to standard psychoanalytical theory, they must also contain a desire. What are those desires? This can be a fun exercise, AND it can serve to point out pervasive societial fears/desires...or it can be a self-serving waste of time.
One of my favorite genres to "analyze:" werewolf films. They lend themselves beautifully to psychoanalytical theory, and the best films realize the connection and exploit or contort the tradition to expose something new and interesting about the furry insides of humanity. Some good werewolf (with great psychoanalytical possibilities) films to see: "Ginger Snaps," "Ginger Snaps II," "Ginger Snaps Back," "In the Company of Wolves," "The Howling II/III" and "Brotherhood of the Wolf." Or wait for the new release of "Blood and Chocolate". I hope they've at least thought about the tradition of werewolf films and metaphors...it seems they may have considering the title. (Oh, it's about women...they like chocolate...hurk hurk. Sometimes I hate how clever hollywood thinks it is. If it were half as clever as all that, there would never be a bad big budget horror flick.)
I do think it is an interesting project to analyze analyses. I've done this myself with several critical theories and rhetorical strategies. It can be quite telling about the nature of critical thought.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
