Scare Tactic

Fright Bytes - Women in Horror Month

2012-02-22T19:18:00.000-05:00

Hi all! Yes, this is a shameless plug. But I'm plugging something that's free and you might even enjoy. The Fright Bytes Women in Horror Month episode just went live and I was thrilled to be on it. I was even more thrilled to be on a panel with Lady Hellbat aka Andrea Subissati and Lianne Spiderbaby.For those of you that aren't familiar with these lovely, intelligent, funny women here's a crash course.

Lianne Spiderbaby is the host of Fright Bytes and contributor at Fangoria Magazine. Beautiful yes, but will terrify you with her film knowledge. She's currently working on her first book entitled 'Grindhouse Girls: Cinema's Hardest Working Women', about exploitation and horror actresses which I'm already lining up for.

Andrea Subissati aka Lady Hellbat already has her first book under her belt, "When There's No More Room in Hell: The Sociology of the Living Dead" and some standout appearances on the Rue Morgue Podcast. She's an academic with a killer personality. Her passion and energy is as contagious as a zombie bite.

It was a blast to film. Special thanks to Phil aka "Josh" and Steve for the technical, creative and moral support. Enjoy and let me know what you think.

Near Dark (1987): Near Perfect

2012-02-21T19:25:00.000-05:00

I don't think horror movies get much cooler than Kathryn Bigelow's Near Dark (1987) a hybrid of traditional vampire films and westerns. This combination proved relatively revolutionary and broke the mold of what genre horror films could be. The vampires in Near Dark are never referred to as vampires. They can be returned to human form. They start a lot of fires. You could say the post-modern horror revolution began with Scream (1996) but I think it began 10 years earlier with a bunch of redneck vampires.

But before I get ahead of myself let's talk plot, oh true believers. Hunky Caleb (Adrian Pasdar) is "turned" by the mysterious Mae (Jenny Wright), we never quite find out what he's turned into, even Mae doesn't know. They hook-up with her pseudo-family comprised of Jesse (Lance Henrikson), Diamondback (Jeanette Goldman), Severen (Bill Paxton) and Homer (Joshua Miller). All sadistic psychos in their own way, they decide to give Caleb a chance to prove himself and live among them. But Caleb's father and younger sister are close behind them, causing problems for his vampire street cred.

I'm not a vampire kinda gal. I like things that, y'know, actually scare me. The Anne Rice stuff is too over the top for me, don't get me started on Twilight and I find Buffy to be indulgent. Fright Night I find goofy and The Lost Boys dull. Near Dark gives us lean, mean vampires with little to no romanticization to soften the blow of feeding. I think it is a bolder transition leave more questions than answers. I like the subplot of the father and sister looking for Caleb because it's not overly manipulative. If I went missing, my parents sure as hell would come looking for me. And that subplot holds its own and keeps moving forward without much indulgence.

These plot points neatly pulls Caleb and Mae between order and chaos. There is an incredible amount of pathos generated with very little. Bigelow knows that her audience is a genre one so there is no need to explain away plot points. The audience understands. We have been primed for these films in our culture. It is, however, a bold move that should not be ignored. It is a move that will repeat through the rest of Bigelow's career making her, in my mind, a singular director.

I say this film is near perfect because it is Bigelow's first "big-budget" feature. She is still playing with styles and the visual style in Near Dark does go in a couple different directions. The plot of the film suffers mostly from its leading man. Adrian Pasdar aka a poor man's River Phoenix. Hell, I think Keanu Reeves would have been more interesting. But I count my lucky stars that Near Dark provides my favourite performances by Henrikson and Paxton. While I love Goldstein, there will never be another Vasquez.

Resident Beauty: Alice Through the Looking Glass

2012-02-17T10:02:00.000-05:00

In Naomi Wolf's groundbreaking book The Beauty Myth she wrote:

The more legal and material hindrances women have broken through, the more strictly and heavily and cruelly images of female beauty have come to weigh upon us... [D]uring the past decade, women breached the power structure; meanwhile, eating disorders rose exponentially and cosmetic surgery became the fastest-growing specialty... [P]ornography became the main media category, ahead of legitimate films and records combined, and thirty-three thousand American women told researchers that they would rather lose ten to fifteen pounds than achieve any other goal...More women have more money and power and scope and legal recognition than we have ever had before; but in terms of how we feel about ourselves physically, we may actually be worse off than our unliberated grandmothers.

This old thing? It's my zombie outbreak number.

I don't know if we're "worse off than our unliberated grandmothers". From what I hear from my mother my grandmother was pretty liberated. But I do know that it is hard to deal with not being pretty. Whether you are deemed beautiful or not or whether you are in fact "beautiful" or not can have a significant impact on one's self-esteem. If only we lost 10 pounds, our nose was different, our profile was better... we'd survive the zombie outbreak, right? RIGHT?! Ok, maybe not a zombie outbreak but we'd get that job, we'd be asked out or we'd just be happier. For this week I thought the Alice character , specifically from the first Resident Evil film, would be worthy of an closer look. Alice does not have the academic following that a Ripley or even a Laurie Strode has. There is very little written about her in terms of analysis because she is simply an under-developed character in an underdeveloped series. However her "coding" (images and visual phrases that help us as an audience understand her) is ripe for analysis and Resident Evil is nothing if not overly ripe.

I wish IKEA made these beds easier to assemble.

I have actually written about this character before but as I even admit in that post, it has more to do with my love of Milla Jovovich (Leeloo FOREVER!) than perhaps the actual movie. The first film is a sinful guilty pleasure and I think both Jovovich and Michelle Rodriguez give strong performances with an okay script. (I think everyone would still like to have seen what Romero would have made out of all of this). But as the films lurch on, the barely-there humanity in the first one all but flickers and dies out as the plot of the films outruns the story.

But let's talk economics. This film was made for very little in the action movie world and it made (relative) buckets of money upon it's theatrical and DVD release. As the sequels fell into place so did a rash of pseudo sci-fi-comic-booky-with-a-familiar-female-lead movies (Aeon Flux, Elektra, Bloodrayne) but all of them crashed and burned pretty spectacularly. (and the Underworld series is much less successful than RE) So why has Resident Evil jumped from one successful film to another? Because beauty sells. And not just this beauty:

but the overall aestheticization of violence. Violence, like women in these movies, becomes a fetishized commodity. The audience is allowed to participate in an indulgent fantasy wrapped in the end of the world where the character we identify with is the most sought after, beautiful figure imaginable. Alice is tough, strong and completely unique and we are with her pretty much all the time. In the sequels if we are not with Alice we are with an equally beautiful-tough woman.

In order for Alice and Rain (Michelle Rodriguez) to be accepted as members of the team with value they must take on masculine qualities. Rain is a butch female soldier (one would imagine her as the long lost daughter of Vasquez) and Alice assumes a leader role after 'One' (seriously, that's the character's name) the leader who leads them for the first 20 minutes is turned into meat cubes by the Red Queen. They assume power by taking command like a man, by behaving like one. "Even though the films feature female leads, they do so by endorsing patriarchal attitudes about masculine prowess and violent privilege." (Benshoff)

Because women are looked at as passive and men as active these action heroine women are looked upon as obtaining agency by imitating men. Indeed, Alice becomes more masculinized as the series progresses. Alice , and characters like her, are never just strong and skilled, they are super-humanly strong and gifted. Her costuming also suggests a view for the male eye with an unseen force only leaving her a skimpy red dress to wear through the film. Her attitude, manner and means code her to an audience as a dominatrix, an agressive force allowed to transgress social "norms". We immediately understand Alice to have agency because of her manner. She has become a masculine assailant while still maintaining her sexual appeal.

Alice is positioned throughout the film as a force providing order to a now unstable society caused by zombies. (you could easily sub-in werewolves, vampires etc... the uncontrollable) While Alice and characters like her (most notably Selene in the Underworld series) share traits with the Final Girl archetype they are not the innocent girl next door. They are an unknown force that battles infringing entities while maintaining a more important social order.

I do not know what or how these films should be changed but I know that in order to give the fans of this series the films they deserve the creators need to take some risks and break out of the stereotypical horror-action film BS. Even if an ambitious, challenging film fails I guarantee that it would be more entertaining than the half-asses, lackluster, boring films that are now, like clockwork, rolled out every few years.

Ripley's Believe It or Not!

2012-02-10T09:53:00.001-05:00

Alien and Aliens have been part of my psyche for as long as I can remember. When I first got into scary/weird/non-little-girl movies my Dad warned me that Alien was the scariest of all scary movies and that my older brother actually ran out of the cinema when he and his friend went to see it. For the purposes of this post (and because it's my favourite and so there) I'll be mainly referencing the first film.

I can't remember when I first saw the film but it traumatized me. It was not only scary but unsettling and its unsettled nature came from human nature. The aliens were not necessarily the scariest part of the film (although they didn't help). Alien open up an entirely new world of Aliens, Alien 3,Alien Resurrection and (this summer) Prometheus. This film series became a pop culture movement unto itself. My favourite Alien "addition" being:

Initially the film received mixed reviews when it was released in 1979. Some critics got it, some did not. (my favourite negative quote being from Time Out who said the film was an "empty bag of tricks whose production values and expensive trickery cannot disguise imaginative poverty". So maybe not everyone got it. This was a completely revolutionary film, let alone science fiction film. From the pacing to the violence to the effects to the reality that was created on the Nostromo it was a whole new bag for audiences around the world. Despite some critics, the film became a commercial success influencing the next generation of films and spawning it's history that continues to fascinate audiences and scholars alike.

And what happens when something becomes popular? Analysis. Lots of it. Surely these people must have done something special to create a film so beloved and wildly popular. Mm. MM!?!?!??!?! And of course, there are people who love the film and want to talk about it because they love it. And there are the academics, who see lots of essay opportunities and theories to be applied. As an academic myself (I have a very useful MA thankyouverymuch) I have to say I think the best academic writing can illuminate aspects of the object being examined and place in a context of understanding ourselves as human. That's not to say all academic writing is good academic writing. However, even the most seemingly arbitrary decisions we make reflect on our species, right? The seemingly innocuous decision to make Ripley a female rather than a male character still reflects something. Perhaps that we assume characters will be male until the creators make a decision to differ that.

If you're at all interested in the Alien Universe I highly, highly, highly recommend you check out the blog Strange Shapes and for the purposes of this blog post check the post on Strange Shapes entitled Dispelling the Alien Critique which comprehensively cites all the famous quotes by the creators of Alien saying there is no underlying meaning to any of this. It's simply entertainment and should be taken as such.

My personal take is that it can be either or. Great art, to truly be considered "great art", should work on a pure visceral level of enjoyment and be ripe for dissection. It's desperately intriguing to me that a woman survives again and again in the world of the films. The imagery in these films is ripe with birth imagery, castration and oppression. To ignore implication of these images would be doing ourselves, and the films, a disservice.

Ellen Ripley often falls into the Final Girl category, a term coined by academic Carol Clover in her book Men, Women and Chainsaws, and states that in order to survive Final Girls must become masculinized. Ripley, though possessing many Final Girl traits never accepts female traits and therefore is never in the position to accept masculine traits. In the version that we all know and (I hope) love there are scenes edited out that imply romantic (at the very least) sexual relationships between Dallas and Ripley and Ash and Lambert. (I know, right) While I am aware of these scenes they are not in the film as we know it so we'll pretend they don't exist. In the film Ripley is not sexualized (we only learn in Aliens that she has a daughter on Earth). When she strips at the end of the film to a tank top and underwear it is more about the vulnerability of Ripley rather than a moment of titillation for the audience. Ripley is at her most vulnerable when she is met by the most terrifying monster to have under one's proverbial bed.

The most shocking and violent scene to me as an adult watching this film is when Ash becomes the outright aggressor and tries to choke Ripley by shoving a porn magazine down her throat. A P0RN MAGAZINE PEOPLE!!!! In academic terms it's the female voice trying to be supressed and controlled by a male voice.
In Stephen Mulhall's essay In Space No One Can Hear You Scream: Acknowledging the Human Voice in the Alien Universe he remarksof that scene that it is “the film’s most explicit equation of male violence with the desire to annihilate the female voice.”

In Katy Gilpatric's essay Violent Female Action Characters in Contemporary American Cinema Gilpatric asserts that even the most celebrated female action heroes succumb to a feminine need/desire for men/family/empathy etc (Which Weaver spoofs wonderfully in Galaxy Quest). Ripley does not. She is compassionate but does not suddenly spring to life when a man enters the room, or rush to find her daughter (a scene deleted from the second film), she is the motor for these movies. She is the catalyst for survival and redemption. She is woman, watch her use a flame thrower.

Final Girl Film Club: Hell Night (1981)

2012-02-09T18:39:00.000-05:00

I've already talked about my deep, unfailing love of Stacie Ponder's blog Final Girl and with the return of The Final Girl Film Club which means I can stop running around fretting endlessly about what horror movies I am and am not watching which brings us to....

Hell Night is a happy throw back to slashers of old. One where the characters are not shouting out post-modern, ironic one liners. No! They were wooden characters based on what some old film producers thought kids were like. There is the promise of The 3 Bs: booze, boobs and bludgeonings! It's all that a classic slasher should be.

Four college frat and sorority pledges must spend the night in the Garth Manor where family patriarch Raymond Garth murdered his family that was comprised of deaf, mute and retarded children. Legend has it that one child survived the ordeal and is still living in Garth Manor. Two guesses as to who makes an appearance within the first 40 minutes. I say 40 minutes because Hell Night is one hell of a slow burn. It's oddly pre-post-modern. The sex yields no boobs or butt, the kills produce minimal blood and there is more tension than shock.

Costume Party = Atmosphere

The four pledges naturally assume the legend is meaningless and look forward to a night of indulgence and illegal substances. Then the deaths happen. You've got the sex fuelled twosome, the Final Girl and the Sensitive Guy and the Frat members trying to scare the bejesus out of them. As the bodies start piling up it's a race to see who will make it to day break and WHAT WILL BE LEFT OF THEM!! ...

I have to say, I really really liked Linda Blair in this. As Marti she's charming, sweet and has some ridic heaving bossums and adorable puppy fat. But more importantly, she embraces the Final Girl tropes of being level-headed and sound while mayhem goes on around her. I was shocked to learn that Blair was nominated for a Razzie award for Worst Actress that year. The other actors are 80s bad, which equals this decade's ironic hilarity. The pacing does suffer from repetitive kill syndrome. Pretty Young Thing hears noise, PYT goes to investigate noise, winds up deader than a door nail.

"Gorked Out"

Hell Night is pretty by the books, once the "gorked-out" (a term I'm pretty sure is only used in this film) missing son turns up the murders are minimal and more tension inducing than your normal slasher. It's not exactly The Haunting but it's not Friday the 13th either. If you've noticed it's pretty hard to talk about this film without bringing up all the horror slasher cliches ever. And while Hell Night does contain pretty much all of them it's well worth a look and a pleasant gem of the horror canon to discover.

Carrie White and the Monstrous Feminine

2012-02-03T10:26:00.001-05:00

Carrie is one of the most polarizing films I can think of, especially in terms of gender victimization. For my February WiHM series I wanted to tackle Carrie first not only because it is such a rich subject matter but because it is one of my favourite films. For me it is heartbreaking, terrifying, beautiful, funny, ironic and hugely enjoyable.

I think we live in an age where characters like Carrie have become so iconic they represent something beyond their original intentions. Most young people, unless they had actually seen the film, would recognize her as the crazy girl who gets blood on herself. However, Carrie functions as a realistic modern day fairy tale which takes a terrific dark turn. Thinking of the film in fairy tale terms, Carrie is the princess locked away by an evil witch (her mother) and eventually frees herself with the help of a handsome prince (Tommy Ross). Carrie breaks the pattern by having multiple villains in the evil Chris and her boyfriend/ minion Billy. That's the way I read the film. It can also easily be read as a religious morality tale, a product of subversive counter-culture and a predecessor to torture porn.

In her review of the film for New Yorker, critic Pauline Kael noted that prior to De Palma's film, "no one else has ever caught the thrill that teenagers get from a dirty joke and sustained it for a whole picture," deeming Carrie a "terrifyingly lyrical thriller." Roger Ebert wrote "Brian De Palma's Carrie is an absolutely spellbinding horror movie, with a shock at the end that's the best thing along those lines since the shark leaped aboard in Jaws. It's also (and this is what makes it so good) an observant human portrait. This girl Carrie isn't another stereotyped product of the horror production line; she's a shy, pretty, and complicated high school senior who's a lot like kids we once knew" Carrie was well received by critics and audiences and earned stars Sissy Spacek and Piper Laurie Best Actress and Supporting Actress Oscar nominations. It was both a thriller and a coming of age drama, moving and horrific. Carrie is an example of what horror movies can be at their best.

Made in 1976 the US was going through massive social changes and working out how to deal with them. This is the era that brought about the New Hollywood where filmmakers took charge and set about doing work that was not simply fantastical but dealt with real issues in ways audiences outside of Europe had not seen. (check out Peter Biskind's amazing Easy Riders Raging Bulls if you're interested in this topic) Brian DePalma was a young filmmaker still looking to make his mark. Due to long periods of uncertain financing he sat and story boarded nearly the entire film. It is interesting to note that horror films generally follow the pattern of subduing an uncontrollable force. In Carrie, her telekinetic powers do not seem to be of any threat to anyone unless provoked. Her powers are used sparingly and as Tommy and Carrie begin to enjoy each others company and the dance itself the audience (or certainly me) gets caught up in the romantic aspect and feels just as wronged as Carrie does when Chris pulls the string releasing the barrage of pig's blood.

In Serafina Kent Bathrick's article Carrie: Ragtime: The Horror of Growing Up Female she claims DePalma
"has developed his own brand of sexism”. She writes, “there is an urgency in his desire to prove the impossibility of community amongst women”, and that ultimately, “like all the women in the film…[Carrie] is punished for being a woman”. Another academic Barbara Creed developed the notion of the Monstrous Feminine in her aptly titles essay Horror and the Monstrous Feminine. Creed writes that Carrie is “a particularly interesting representation of woman as witch and menstrual monster” If we look at Carrie's powers as a force for evil then yes, perhaps. But Carrie is a young woman wronged. All the women are in Carrie. They are the product of repression. Heck, even Chris has to give John Travolta a blow job to get him to do anything without getting slapped. They are limited by their lack of agency, by their perceived inability to affect anything other than each other.

I think Bathrick and Creed overlook Sue Snell (Amy Irving) in these contexts. Sue has agency and feels guilt for not knowing better and rightfully tries to make it up to Carrie by asking her boyfriend Tommy to take Carrie to the prom. Sue even attempts to thwart Chris's sabatoge of Carrie only to be pulled away Miss Collins (Betty Buckley) before she can stop Chris. There is an inherent self-loathing that the female characters seem to feel and only Miss Collins and Sue are able to act on it. They feel uncomfortable with the way Carrie makes them feel and they've been given few other options on how to deal with these feelings. Mocking, hate and disgust and easy feelings to pile on to someone who can't stand up for themselves.

In re-reading these articles it feels as though the scholars and critics are attempting to deal with Carrie in horror movie conventions. There are either heroes or villains. Any power is something indicating evil that cannot be controlled. Before reading these articles I never thought Carrie was a sexist film. It felt honest and brutally unflinching at the horror people inflict on other people. I think DePalma is trying to show his audiences that there is good and evil in all of us. DePalma's seemingly ultimate message (in my reading of the film) is that everyone has the power to be a monstrous and beyond that, we all have our own brand of horror within ourselves. That and don't piss off the chick who can move things with her mind.

Women In Horror Month

2012-01-31T18:57:00.001-05:00

For those of you that don't know, February is Women in Horror Recognition Month as you can tell by the seal to your right.

This is the third February recognizing women in horror so all of Scare Tactic's posts will be WiHM related. Fear not, true believers. You'll still get the same content but with a decidedly (more so) laydee-like bent. I'm going to be talking about 4 of my favourite female horror characters and their evolution from celluloid, to audience reception to scholarly discourse. The first lady up, is the one and only Carrie White. There will also be some special events which I'll post here. So keep it in your pants, don't go upstairs and listen to what the crazy old man sez, 'cause it be Women in Horror Month!

For more information check out:

http://www.womeninhorrormonth.com/

28 Weeks after that thing that was bad happened.

2012-01-26T20:06:00.001-05:00

I thought 28 Weeks Later was going to have as much bite as Will Smith's lyrics.(sample lyrics: Ciga-cigar right from Cuba-Cuba, I just bite it, It's for the look - I don't light it) But lo, I BE WRONG!

I remember liking it when I saw it in theatres and eventually my standard line on it was "the first 15 minutes are worth it." I said that line for so long I began to believe it. But lo AGAIN! I was also wrong. I recently picked up the DVD on the cheap and settled in one hungover evening to watch it by myself. My roommate made an appearance towards the end of the film, entering on our apartment as she often does - phone to ear. It was the first time she put her phone and asked, "what are you watching?"

The answer, dear readers, is I was watching one of the most emotionally traumatizing horror movies I can imagine. The movie does a great job of creating really likable and intelligent characters so when they brutally start dropping like flies (often in an instantaneously made decision for the greater good) but it helps the film feel brutally real. This version of London feels eerily reminiscent to that of Children of Men where decisions that affect the characters we like are made with little to no emotion.

In the 28 weeks since the first 28 days, the American military has moved in and have asserted control over the Rage virus outbreak. They are beginning to integrate civilians back into London slowly and with a lot of control. Needless to say, the Rage virus gets out again. Let's just say it's a man's fault. ANYHOOZLE, a group of the most attractive and charismatic people (army and civilian types) try to get on the last transport out of London before the military bomb the bejesus out of the UK.

It's typical stuff, right? But you've got a really amazing cast that bring this story to life and makes you care. You've got Rose Bryne (intelligent), Jeremy Renner (charming), Robert Carlyle (despicable) and Imogen Poots (naive) making up the bulk of the leads and it works. The script is clear and sharp, making the set up relatively painless and even reminds one of the American occupation of Iraq. If victory was declared, why were they still there???? The control mixed with the smugness of the American forces is horrific enough without all the zombies making a reappearance. (between you and I, I think we were a few scenes away from a zombie Guantanamo)

It's a truly worthy sequel that in some ways, I like better than the original. There, I said it. I believe it's the most under-appreciated film of the '00s. If you haven't seen it, do! Now!

And yes, those first 15 minutes are still not to be missed.

Stacie Ponder's Slashers 101

2012-01-25T18:41:00.001-05:00

Before I get into the nitty-gritty of this review I just want to state that I really, really dig Stacie Ponder and her blog Final Girl . It's a terrific blog and Ms Ponder is smart, funny and scarily knowledgeable about all things horror. So when she announced her mini-comic Slashers 101 I was all over that. I will say that I recommend checking out her Final Girl blog before purchasing 25 copies of this, because while I love that sense of humour, others might not. No more disclaimers, on the the show ... er... post!

Slashers 101 is like the best pamphlet/guide book I never got. The health clinic at my university would have been waaaaaay more entertaining with Slashers 101 on its shelves rather than Radon: The Silent Killer. But I digress. Ponder is a seasoned horror blogger so my expectations were high and relentless. This mini-comic had to be all things to me. Mother! Father! Sister! Brother! Friend! Lover (ew)! And as someone who spends an inordinate amount of time thinking, reading and watching horror, Slashers 101 is one of the most refreshing reads you might ever get.

Among many things, Ponder is also a comic book inker and artist. The breadth of her experience is evident in Slashers 101 with clever, simple and clean page layouts. Ponder becomes your guide and narrator through the world of Slashers (with an emphasis on North American slashers from the 70s and 80s) she includes cameos from Columbo, Dr. Loomis and the glass unicorn from Black Christmas among others. While she covers the basic sections such as history of, killers, victims, weapons and the Final Girl you've also got super sweet additions like "SlashFros" and "Dull Killers in Jeans" which keeps it from turning into an illustrated version of Carol Clover's Men, Women and Chainsaws.

The best thing about this comic is it will appeal to relative newbies and horror fans. It's got all the information any book about horror movies will give but it references things and provides insight only hardcore fans would recognize. Show me another informative horror guide that mentions Curtains (1983) and I'll give you everything in my savings account.

The time, humour, creativity and thought that goes into something like Slashers 101 is a rarity. It's all too easy to become jaded about the supposed lack of creativity in the genre, Slashers 101 actually began to revive my faith in the slasher genre and has given me some new-old films to check out.

If you're reading this, chances are you're in the market for a copy for yourself or a loved one. And I didn't even mention the best part - it's $5!!! Or spend $10 and Ponder will sketch a request from any slasher you like. Oh, and remember how I was humming and hawing over purchasing 25 copies of this, screw that! Purchase as many as you can, support independent artists and wave your freak flag high.

Order your copy here.

Trailer Review: Resident Evil 5: Retribution

2012-01-20T10:17:00.000-05:00

I've talked about Resident Evil before and I have a real soft spot for these movies, mainly because of Milla Jovovich. I think she's the shit and no one will be able to convince me otherwise. I cut these movies a lot of slack because of her but RE: Afterlife was a huge messy disappointment. If you haven't seen it, it's essentially a big teaser trailer for this film. What was most disconcerting about that one, was it was directed by Paul W.S. Anderson who directed the first one (he wrote all of them) and couldn't get that darn movie focused enough to tell a coherent story. Yes, Milla looked great, but Afterlife felt like a big middle finger to the audience.

But here we are. It's 2012 and RE 5 is coming out in nine months. The RE series has done a nice job of playing with the Umbrella Corporation as an actual entity. A few years ago, a dear friend got me Umbrella Corporation mints in a an awesome Umbrella tin. The mints were pretty good and I still have the tin. I think they've done a good job of incoporating Umbrella as an online entity without getting bogged down in explaining and rewriting mythologies (cough, Underworld, cough).

ANYHOOZLE, Let's see... we've got a whole bunch of characters coming back. Sienna Guillory, Michelle Rodriguez. Oded Fehr.... All your favourites, AMIRITE? Well, I don't know what's going on but it's big, shiny and has a lot of pretty people kicking ass in slow motion. I think if you took out all slow-motion of of these films they would all be 45 minutes combined. But I digress. This trailer does what it should. Intrigues, pumps up and leaves you confused as to what you just saw.

Horror Movie Coolie: Jason in Friday the 13th Part 2

2012-01-13T10:03:00.000-05:00

Happy Friday the 13th, y'all! If there was anytime to talk about the Friday the 13th series it's now. It's an interesting movie because even if you haven't seen the original, you're probably not far off in guessing what goes on in in. Earlier on in my horror movie watching career I watched the entire series when I was 11 or 12. And holy hell are they boring. They just get more and more nonsensical. And frankly, I like a little bat shit crazy with my nonsensical. (see: Nightmare on Elm Street series) But there was one moment of the whole Friday series that scared the bejesus out of me.

Hey girl.

After Alice Hardy fought off both Mrs. Voorhees and a miniature swamp-man version of Jason, Alice thinks she's safe and sound, right? Wrong. Dead wrong. Men have strange relationships with their mothers, but when they manage to come back from the dead to avenge her death you should know there's really no point in running.

Friday the 13th Part 2 opens with Alice pottering around her apartment telling her mom that she's fine. She's totally fine. She's even taking meds to combat the anxeity of being the only survivor out of all her friends. See? Fine. Totally fine.

Then....

WTF indeed.

ZOMFG !!!!!!1!!!!

I'm not endorsing Jason as a Horror Movie Coolie because he kills a Final Girl, but because this scene scared the snot out of me when I was 11. Well played, Jason, well played.

The Girl With The Inappropriate Scenes

2012-01-05T16:47:00.000-05:00

I didn't think I'd wind up writing anything about David Fincher's The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo (2011) but here I am, spurred on by several other reviews if nothing else. In a few reviews I kept coming across writers talking about the film as a mystery (which indeed it is) with horror supplied by a handful of graphic rape scenes. And I thought that was very interesting. Physical aggression becoming horror becoming titillating.

Before I get all too ahead of myself here's the basic plot. Daniel Craig is trying to solve the mystery of the disappearance of Christopher Plummer's niece 40 years ago. He eventually seeks help from Lisbeth Salander (that chick from the Nightmare on Elm Street remake, Rooney Mara) and they solve the mystery 2 hours and 40 minutes later. The rape scenes come about before Lisbeth joins the mystery plot. She's a ward of the state and falls into financial dependency of a loathsome man.

I knew next to nothing about the plot. I haven't read the books or seen the original Swedish film. What I did know going in was there are going to be some rape scenes. And there were going to be graphic. But daring. And there was going to be sex. And boobs. Also, there were going to be rape scenes.

My feelings about the scenes are that Mara is an impressive and brave actress, just as Fincher is an impressive and brave director. But really, the scenes and that whole subplot is a big red herring in the middle of story that doesn't fully support it. Lisbeth being a feminist hero, exacts her revenge on the perpetrator, follows up with it briefly later on in the movie but other than that, no one talks about it. It is never mentioned. Lisbeth chooses not to tell anyone and that's fine. No other characters need to know and that trait adds a lonely hearbreaking quality to the character.

But why, oh why, was I only informed about the rape scenes in the publicity. I feel like I didn't know anything about the story other than that. It doesn't help that the character and actress were fetishized to the hilt in practically every image that came out before the movie.

Hey friend, do you have an extra cardigan I could borrow? Oh, you need both of them? Oh. Okay.

What's interesting is that her (Lisabeth and Mara's) portrayal is as a sexual other. She's "different" from our other forms of beauty and sexuality. She is aggressive. For some people, unattractive. How do you combat this? By putting the actress on a real purdy cover of a magazine.


PRETTY!!!!!!!!! I'M SO ATTRACTIVE!!!!! BUT NOT SO MUCH THAT I'M THREATENING TO YOU!!!!!!

Unfortunately I couldn't find a bigger image of the cover but it says "Rooney Mara: The Girl With the Pierced Nipple".

They couldn't have come up with anything else? A woman's magazine that one would think is vaguely progressive thought/knew that people would be curious enough about a nipple ring to buy something about a relatively unknown actress. That's just lazy and insulting in my books.

Is this harsh? No. I don't think so. A feminist hero can have all the nipple rings and tattoos that she wants. My problem is that I think these images go against everything we learn about the character. I saw her as fully sexual woman but deeply protective of that sexuality. Why did the movie studio have to sell her out?

Best of 2011

2011-12-31T16:04:00.000-05:00

This is my first official Best-Of list and I was all pumped for it... but then I tried listing off the horror films I saw in theatres this year and they barely took up one hand of fingers. So instead of a typical run of the mill Best Of, I'm going to do some highlights of my year in horror for y'all

1. Movies that Made it into Theatres.

Um... like I said before there wasn't a hell of a lot to choose from so let's do the Corresponding Song Titles version

Scream 4: Mo' Money, Mo' Problems
Insidious: You Can't Always Get What You Want
The Rite: Highway to Hell
Paranormal Activity 3: Thriller
The Kill List: I Shot A Man In Reno
Melancholia: It's the End of the World as We Know It

I should also mention, I really want to see Take Shelter, The Innkeepers and The Woman as soon as possible. I really do hope they make the rep theatre circuit before too long. One of my favourite lists of this end-of-the-year orgy is Lianne Spiderbaby's which can be found ici.

2. Movies I finally got around to watching on DVD.

Never Sleep Again (2010) I think this is the best horror documentary ever made. See it. Love it. And revel in the honesty and joy of the Nightmare On Elm Street series.
The Children (2010) I had been wanting to see this movie for the longest time and it finally happened when it came onto Netflix Canada. While it's not perfect, it's definitely a visceral, fun experience.
Some of the Saw Series (2004-2010) A pleasant surprise. I haven't seen all of them yet but for what they are these films are incredibly effective. If you're the tiniest bit curious and you haven't seen them, I'd say it's definitely worth your time.
Ravenous (1999) Weird but I can't believe I hadn't seen it. So glad I finally got to.
The Elephant Man (1980) So weird. So good. So sad.

3. Career Highlights

2011 was a big year for me horror-wise. I started writing for Planet Fury (nee Pretty Scary, nee nee FanGirlTastic) and electronically got to know the wonderful and inspiring Heidi Martinuzzi. I've gotten to interview Nancy herself, Heather Langenkamp, review a bunch of movies and go to FanExpo where I was able to meet and befriend the lovely Lianne Spiderbaby. These women are so flipping cool I can't really put it into words but they have inspired me to keep writing and keep doing this if only because I love it and I believe in what the genre can be.

I was also fortunate to have an article published in the Living section of the Toronto Star about Horror and Fashion. I still have multiple copies of it, if anyone wants one.

And finally a big, huge, gigantic thank you to everyone who reads this blog. I love doing this and have loved getting to know more of the horror community through it.

All the best and have a very happy 2012.

No-No-Notorious

2011-12-22T11:25:00.000-05:00

In actual fact, I should have saved that title for a review of Hitchcock's brilliant film, Notorious. But nay, this is a review of a film that has been doing well on end-of-the-year-best-of-horror-lists, Insidious. Every time I thought, I must watch that Insidious movie, Duran Duran's immortal Notorious would get lodged somewhere in my frontal lobe. Come, join me in my own personal hell:

Now that we've all finished watching British men try to dance, on to James Wan and Leigh Whannell's Insidious. This is the same director/writer team behind Saw with the magical pixie dust of one Oren Peli (director/producer of Paranormal Activity) sprinkled on top. Insidious is also known for being 2011's most successful film in terms of cost-to-gross ratio. Neat, huh?

As for plot it's pretty standard. It's like a less wholesome Poltergeist (i.e. Poltergeist if Tobe Hooper had, in fact, directed that movie) with a dash of Paranormal Activity thrown in for good measure. Weird things start happening to a family, one of their sons falls into a non-coma and the weird stuff escalates. Believing their home to be haunted, they move only to discover that it's not the house that is haunted, but THEM!!!

Pretty standard stuff, right?

Let's talk cast. Rose Byrne is awesomesauce. I think she's fantastic in everything she's in and I genuinely enjoy watching her. As Renai (It's fucking Renee, I loathed to my core seeing it spelled "Renai" throughout the film) she makes the most out of Whannell's sub-par dialogue ("I just want things to be different in this house. I had such a bad day. I'm scared nothing's gonna change." is equal parts exposition, lazy and poorly phrased) and creates a normal but interesting character. The problems begin when the movie shifts away from her story to everything else in the movie about half way through.

Halfway through the movie it becomes about the father and "The Further" (every time they said "The Further" all I could think of was "The Rural Juror"). The Father, Josh (Patrick Wilson) is, to paraphrase an old Friends joke, pretty but dumb. No wait, that's pretty dumb. He's such a bland, lackluster character that I really began drifting during the second half of the film. I like that the film took us to The Further and spent some time there. The problem is, I didn't find it all that interesting. It looked like a Cirque Du Soleil number that got scrapped.

Now, there are some great scares. I can only imagine they were way more effective on the big screen but they still made me jump on my relatively small screen. The score is one of the best I've heard in a long time. It's both a throwback nod to other scores and completely unexpected.

I think my disappointment lies with what it could have been. All the ingredients were there but nothing really stuck a landing. By the time the ending happened, I just didn't care. There is an interesting pattern to this movie. Scary things happen, then characters sit around and discuss what happened. Do I care what astral projection is? No. Stop telling me.

That's not to say Insidious is a bad movie, it's quite a bit better than a lot of horror films that have come out recently but, as you can see by the amount of ellipses in this review, my attention kept waning. There were enough ideas in this film to churn out four individual movies. I give them credit for trying to make a film that could land somewhere between The Haunting and Poltergeist while still appeasing the current trends but I would rather see what scares these filmmakers rather than a collage of what they think will scare the masses. (FYI - What scares the masses ain't astral projection)

Trailer Review: Dario Argento's "Dracula 3D"

2011-12-17T11:30:00.000-05:00

Oh my gentle Jesus. What motherfuckery have we here? The basic answer is horror impressario Dario Argento's first 3D foray with Dracula.

The actual answer is something that vaguely resembles the plot of Bram Stoker's Dracula but Argento has finally figured out what we all missing from the story, a praying mantis.

Now, I love me some Suspiria and a lot of his other movies of that era. I love the Mothers trilogy that began with Suspiria but on the recommendation of several respected people, I've avoided Mother of Tears (2007) like the plague. Some have suggested that Argento may have lost it in the last little while. And based on this trailer, I can't say they're wrong.

There are a couple things I want to touch on in the trailer. Firstly, Rutger Hauer (everyone's second favourite Replicant after Darryl Hannah) as Van Helsing who appears to be doing an accent on par with Kate Beckinsale's from (go figure) Van Helsing. What. The. Fuck. What is he doing? In one scene he seems to have a very Eastern European accent and the next an incredibly bland North American accent.I don't know if this is symbolism about colonization but it's crazy distracting. Like, Tyra Banks distracting.

Secondly, I feel like this trailer is made up of people walking into shot, then walking across a room. It makes the whole thing look like a stage play. A really, really boring stage play. For a man that gave us this:

walking around on a set doesn't really hack it, you dig?

All in all, this looks like a spectacular failure. One for the books. Based on this trailer it can only get more crazy or, at worst, boring. And honestly, neither of those things makes me want to see this.

Micromanaging - Skip Shea's Microcinema (2011)

2011-12-14T18:17:00.001-05:00

Skip Shea's Microcinema is a small glimpse into something much uglier and deeper than this 7 minute short film fully realizes.

This short film is a meditation on what we've all come to know as torture porn. Love it or hate it, it's become a sub-genre unto itself. Shea nicely realizes all the tropes of Torture Porn effectively and clearly then flips them nicely on their head. In a turn that resembles Saw meets Blair Witch Project meet The Wicker Man, Shea combines the genres in a one-two punch that that even the most seasoned horror fan won't see coming. The problem becomes that there is more story than time.

Tantalizing the audience with wide reaching themes of psychological terror, Microcinema leaves you wanting more. The film is brave and unrelenting. It is a breath of fresh air to a lot of the common horror tricks that are being trotted out time and again. As the saying goes, it's always better to be left wanting more than less.

Scare Tactic's First Year

2011-12-08T20:26:00.001-05:00

That's right! Today is Scare Tactic's first birthday. I have to admit that this all started as a lark but I'm now deeply proud of this little blog. It's even on my resume.

Without too much dithering, I've been thinking about what posts I've missed. And I've missed the mother of all horror-blog-posts! Without further ado...

My Top 5 Favourite Horror Movies

5. Martyrs (2008)

Pascal Lauguier's existential nightmare is one of the most divisive movies I've ever come across. It's been the subject of debates at parties. (Okay, one party) Two girls are seeking revenge on the people who captured and tortured them as children. That journey of vengeance takes them on a twisted and surreal adventure, creating one of the most high-concept horror films around. I totally understand that it's not for everyone. But it's lovely to hear vital and impassioned debate about a new film in the horror community.

4. Black Christmas (1974)

This movie is so flipping awesome I can't stand it. It's my favourite slasher film. Granted it makes little to no sense; but it's weird, funny and hella creepy. It also has an incredibly strong female cast that includes Olivia Hussey and Margot Kidder. It's a one of a kind that is forever being ripped-off. Where do you think Halloween got all those ideas?

3. Carrie (1976)

Brian DePalma's ode to womanhood. The pop cultural birth of the monstrous feminine. Throw whatever labels you want at Carrie, this is one badass horror movie. It's horror divrives from not only supernatural violence but personal violence. What viewer didn't perk up when the mean girls where sentenced to extra gym classes? DePalma helped the viewer feel like an outcast who just wanted to be left alone. It helps that it includes some of the best performances in film, let alone the genre. (Piper Laurie? Fuck yeah!) The final scare still gets me and is one of the most effective scares in any movie.

2. Rosemary's Baby (1968)

There isn't much to say that hasn't already been said about Roman Polanski's iconic Rosemary's Baby. Great performances, effective direction and some truly disturbing and troubling scenes. The film presents the audience with Rosemary's very real choice at the end. Who knows what happens after the final scene, but those closing moments caused me anxiety than any trap in Saw.

1. The Shining (1980)

If you've only ever glanced at Scare Tactic you'll know that I fucking love The Shining. It's brilliant. It's one of the best movies ever made. It's moody, evocative and impeccably shot. Like the other films on this list, The Shining deals in interpersonal horror, the horror we can inflict on each when we're in close quarters for even a brief period of time.

Trailer Review: Cabin In The Woods

2011-12-06T18:45:00.000-05:00

Well, the film I had completely forgotten about is getting not only a poster but also a trailer! Yup, we will finally be able to see Drew Goddard and Josh Whedon's horror film to end all horror films The Cabin in the Woods. The film has been sitting on the shelf since 2009, first it had a release date then they wanted to convert it to 3D and then MGM/Spyglass went bankrupt. But now there's a tailer, a poster and a release date for April 2012.

Before I start listing off concerns, let's just talk trailer. Yes, they're skirting around being an homage. With the initial shot of the cabin... well, it's the same shot from Evil Dead. Which isn't bad. At least they're acknowledging the ultimate cabin-in-the-woods movie. There was some nice punchy Whedon-esque dialogue. Then it goes cray-cray. And I have two feelings about that... One being, way to be ambitious! That's really exciting in a horror movie these days. It's not a remake, an homage potentially, but not a remake. And thank God for that. The overall look of the movie is clean and slick, perhaps a little CGI-heavy but not offensive in my mind.

What worries me? Well, I refer to "Cloverfield" as "Suckfield" and the writer of that monstrosity is not only the co-writer but the flipping director for this. "Cloverfield" could have been an awesome monster movie but the whiny characters overtook it and made it about their inability not to be jerks. And, y'know, I'm just not that big a fan of Whedon. I like his ideas but I feel like they fall apart under the weight of their own ambition. Based on this trailer I saw parts of Evil Dead, Friday the 13th, Dawn of the Dead, The Strangers and Resident Evil. I'm sure there are more in there.

Look, I'll probably shell out my hard earned coinage to see this bad boy in theatres because, like Fox Mulder, I want to believe. I want to believe there are horror movies coming out that aren't based on stupidity, regurgitation or the lowest common denominator. I'll leave this review on a note of hope and caution; to paraphrase, with great ambition comes great responsibility.

What I Saw

2011-12-02T09:48:00.001-05:00

I realize I'm not only showing up late for the party, I'm showing up after the club has been shut down, torn down and condos built over top of the place where a party once happened.

But better late than never, right?

Um, maybe not...

In any event, I've talked about the Saw series several times before on this website. And it's an interesting beast. To be totally upfront, I've seen the first one, the second one and now the sixth one. Does this make me a Saw expert? Heavens no. But as it's one of the most successful horror franchises ever I wanted to bring up a few points about it because of my recent viewing of the sixth installment.

Firstly, why haven't I seen all of them? Well, it was a combination of broke and lazy which I like to call "brazy". The last one I saw in theatres was number 2. And what a number 2 it was. Boring, slow, and only ONE member of NKOTB. Then the rest of them rolled out over the next several Halloweens. And I couldn't really be bothered. But they kept coming and the people who loved it seemed to really love it and after doing some quick wiki searches, it seems like the makers actually tried to make an attempt to infuse the films with purpose, mystery and mythology. Maybe it wasn't always successful but hey, I haven't done any better.

One thing that jumped out to me while watching Saw VI was how good Tobin Bell is. The dialogue isn't great but it's fine. It become blatantly obvious how silly the dialogue can be when it's in the hands of less skilled actors but Bell makes it work. In VI you see his character as a man coming to terms with cancer and those scenes are down right impressive from his end.

As I seriously doubt that this franchise was supposed to run for as long as it did the filmmakers were placed in an interesting trap of their own, they were forced to create a mythology as they went. The characters whom the traps were inflicted on were never the real story, they were a means to an end to tell Jigsaw's story. Now, when you're character dies mid-way through the series, all the filmmakers can do is tell his story, through FLASHBACK! Now I tend to think of flashbacks (like voice overs) as a pretty lazy way to tell stories unless they are integral to the story (i.e. The Usual Suspects). Saw could have moved on to other story arcs but I guess the promise of the Jigsaw returning in new ways was too enticing. We're also now running into the problem of making the villain the hero of the franchise. Which again, is not the worst thing to ever happen to filmmaking, the producers etc just painted themselves into a corner.

What surprised me most, however, is that I didn't hate it. At all. Some of the traps had me hiding my eyes and were really visceral. There are some good actors in the series, and it's nice to see so many Canadian actors employed. Saw VI actually made me curious about the rest of the series more than I was before. Which is more than I can say for the likes of Jason Takes Manhattan. At least Saw takes itself seriously, even if we don't.

The Horror of Gifts

2011-11-24T19:05:00.001-05:00

What to buy the girl that has everything? And by "everything" I mean her own free horror blog.

With everyone and their undead son putting together a gift guide full of truffle oil, gourmet salts and clothing items that rival a bi-weekly paycheck, I thought I'd put together some items that would be good the genre-loving among us.

Full disclosure, I haven't read The Horror! The Horror! but I sure as hell want to. Perfect for nerds and horror coolies alike.

The ultimate fan-fiction, Freddy vs Jason vs Ash is a must read for those who haven't already and we can only dream of what the movie could have been.

Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay better than a cheese of the month club. Fangoria is still the great magazine it always was and as an added bonus one of my favourite writers and Fright Bytes host Lianne Spiderbaby is a regular contributor.

We've got some cold months ahead of us. I use winter as the perfect excuse to save my money and stay in a lot. My favourite excuse is "Sorry friend, I have to finish the Friday the 13th series this weekend." Eventually, they just stop asking.... Here's a great list of some of the best horror DVD box sets out there.

Looking to do some redecorating but your favourite ax is in the shop? No fear! There are some amazing silkscreen prints of your favourite horror movies out there. My favourite is Room 237 by Tom Whalen.

I got this gift this year and it's still one of my favourite books and I insist everyone that comes over to my house looks at it for a full 5 minutes. Full of terrifying cautionary tales, Struwwelpeter is a messed up, sick and amazing look at what happens to rotten children.

Where Are They Now In Horror.... Felicity

2011-11-12T11:09:00.000-05:00

I love me some Felicity. To be fair, I was only recently reminded of this fact through this New York Magazine article which makes me want to go back and watch the whooooooole series.

For those of you that didn't watch Felicity the basic premise is this: hottie Ben (Scott Speedman) writes in Felicity's high school yearbook something to the effect of "I wish I'd gotten to know you better." Felicity then takes this as an invite to drop her current university med school plans and follow him to New York. Crazy? Yes. Disturbing? Yes. But look at Ben:

In any event, Felicity then meets this other guy, Noel, who is a good guy yet significantly less attractive. There are also some other friends, some of whom invent rape stories to get attention and others who are witches. Oh, it was created by J.J. Abrams too, so there are some time traveling episodes. It's actually a fun, sweet show about a young woman trying to find herself. Also this guy's in it:

ANYWAY.... My team and I have been working around the clock to determine who in the Felicity cast has horror supremacy. The more we got into their IMDB pages the more we realized there are some serious contenders in this bunch.

Starting the lowest of the low....

Yup, Felicity herself. She gets this dishonorable distinction because she hasn't done any horror! Every actor has done at least one goofy horror-esque part (as we shall see) and this is entirely unacceptable. Sure, you're not too good to cut off all your hair but nooooooooooooooooo you'd better do Mission Impossible 3 rather than play the female lead in some J-Horror remake. For shame, Felicity, for shame.

I'm now going to lump Sean (Greg Grunberg) and Meghan (Amanda Rotundi) together because they didn't do a heck of a lot before Felicity then managed to get dumped into the JJ Abrams universe of goofiness and played reoccuring characters on Alias/Lost/Heroes and then pop up as "News Reporter" in Super 8 which for many reasons I refuse to see. So there, Sean and Meghan. You're not important enough to be the worst so you get lumped in the crappy, crappy middle. BAM!

No joke, I could not find one image of this girl smiling...

Doing a bit better is Elena (Tangi Miller). She hasn't had a big career BUT she was in Leprechaun Back 2 Tha Hood. I'm glad they had the opportunity to wrap up the loose ends from the first one...

Coming close to some form of legitimacy is .... Noel Crane (Scott Foley)! **Beware some spoilers in this one** He gets this for a few reasons (appearance in True Blood, a nice melange of low-budget horror) but in his role as Hollywood hack and (dun dun DUN) killer in Scream 3 he gets a lot of cred. By no means is this the "ultimate" Scream movie or even that scary but, boy, he really goes for it in this one. 1 part bat-shit crazy, 1 part convoluted Halloween plot, I have to admire his commitment because he's so very very close to the top...

But our numero uno, the best of the ok, life-time achievement in horror goes to.....

Ben-Scott!! True story, I breathed on him at an after party at TIFF this year. No biggie. But why is he #1, you ask? Because he wasone of the most important parts of the Underworld franchise and surprisingly good in The Strangers which is one of my favourite horror movies of the '00s. See, all my gratuitous picture usage of him in this post was totally justified.

Won't Someone Please Think Of The Children!

2011-11-10T19:02:00.000-05:00

There's nothing worse than disliking a kid. You feel like a jerk. But sometimes, kids are jerks. Bigger jerks than us even. Which is where the sadistic genius of Tom Shankland's The Children (2008) comes into play. The Children works on the most base promise of bad people get punished. Unfortunately, in this case, the bad people think very highly of themselves.

Two young families come together to celebrate the Holidays in the-middle-of-nowhere-England. Elaine's family (comprised of her husband Jonah, her "mistake" teenage daughter Cassey and two young children from her new marriage) make their way to her sister's secluded and opulent country home. Frankly, the place looks like an estate where Kate Moss could host a wedding but let's face it, some families are just richer than others. Chloe, Robbie and their two children are just that, overly rich, luxuriating in the posibility of home schooling their children and generally taking it easy. They are the poster parents that you secretly want to be but you still despise.

When one of Elaine and Robbie's children takes ill, begins acting strangely and generally frightens the other children, no one notices. Soon the other children become "infected" with the families noticing little except for British Avril Lavigne aka Cassey. She's our Final Girl and has interesting conundrum of balancing partying and saving her family from homicidal tots.

The Children, which borrows from The Village Of The Damned and The Omen, bravely forces the blame on the parents and their lack of foresight. The odd British passive aggressive violence that carries the first half of the film is done away with to fill it up with Grand Guignol-esque violence - unrepentant, grotesque and absurdly funny. The shocks come sharply and effectively. The film has a good sense of what it's saying without hitting you over the head with how awful these people are, they are simply products of a certain way of living. Only when one parent looses their partner do they actively search out their children as she has developed parenting techniques to keep them away from her. The Children exemplifies a selfish form of parenting where the parents see the children as reflections of themselves and because of that short sightedness, they fail to see when an object is going to penetrate their skull.

Top 5 Treehouse of Horror Episodes

2011-10-29T11:30:00.000-04:00

As a child, The Simpsons' annual Treehouse of Horror episode was as important to me as going Trick or Treating. In fact, I believe there were a couple times that I cut Trick or Treating short so I could catch the marathon.

The Treehouse of Horror series was a big introduction to the world of horror movies. In fact, this is where I saw a lot of horror movies before I ever saw the real thing. Going back and looking at the episodes as an adult makes me appreciate them more. The Simpsons, in their prime, are arguably the best contemporary satirical team. Their dedication to the horror genre only makes me love them more...

Here are my 5 favourite Treehouse of Horror segments

#5 Citizen Kang

I learned most of my politics from this episode alone. When Kang and Kodos kidnap Bob Dole and Bill Clinton and impersonate them to gain control of the country it's an all out political battle. It's also one of the most quotable Treehouse episodes with:
"Always twirling toward freedom!"
"Abortions for some, miniature American flags for everyone!"
"What about a third party candidate?" "Go ahead, throw your vote away!"

#4 Dial Z For Zombie

"Dad, you killed the Zombie Flanders!"
"He was a zombie?"
This is the ultimate zombie parody way before Shaun of the Dead made it cool. Every zombie parody you see today (and there are a lot) owes some kind of debt to this episode.

#3 Hungry Are The Damned

Never has there been a better use of space dust.
"How to Cook Humans" > "How to Cook For Humans" > "How to Cook Forty Humans" > "How to Cook For Forty Humans."

#2 Nightmare on Evergreen Terrace

"Lousy Smarch weather!"
A great satire of one of my favourite movies. There is nothing better when they parody the last minute scare with Willy getting off the bus.

#1 The Shinning

"Shh! Do you want to get sued?"
This episode exemplifies why The Treehouse of Horror series works so well. Yes, they're making fun of horror movies but the reason it works so well is because the writers know the genre so well. With great satire comes great responsibility.

HAPPY HALLOWEEN EVERYBODY!!!

Where Are They Now in HORROR... Breaker High

2011-10-28T10:43:00.002-04:00

Well, this is Scare Tactic's 100th post which also coincides with my horror film article in the Toronto Star and I have to say, the love I get for this little blog has a lot to do with the Where Are They Now... series. And what better show to examine than Canada's own Breaker High.

Did you know the show ran for only a year? And did you know that in that year they filmed 44 freakin' episodes?? (My favourite episode names being To Kill A Mocking-Nerd and Silence of the Lamborghini) Now for anyone who doesn't know what Breaker High is, please read the following description:

Breaker High is a television show which airs weekdays at 4:00PM on UPN. The show is about a high school cruise ship which not only teaches academics, but also gives first hand cultural experiences from around the world. The ship consistsof 500 students, but the show focuses on a group of 8. All the students come from different backgrounds and situations but they all work together as one group. The cast has great chemistry and together they just... CLICK! The situations and character development just... WORK! This show is full of drama and tons of comedy that anyone can appreciate. Overall, Breaker High is a great way to start your homework routine or take a break from life!

-From http://members.fortunecity.com/liquidice/

Never has a high school drama been described with so many exclamation points!!!!!!!! Seriously though... it was a weird time. High school was on a boat. Kids loved it. I remember watching it but possibly only because I didn't want to watch Oprah with my Mom.

But who comes out as HORROR CHAMP SUPREME??????? Let's do this!

Rachel Wilson as Tamira Goldstein who appeared as "Mother" in Saw 3D
Now, this is a tricky one... One of the leads was in one of the biggest horror franchises of the last decade but had the lowest score. (Yes, I score these. There's actually a panel involved. Do you think I'd make this stuff up off of my whims and fancies?)

But really how can I possibly give a decent placing to someone playing "Mother" in Saw 3D? I can't. I simply can't. For those of you that remember Breaker High Tamira had an oddly spelled name and was dirt poor. So dirt poor she had to pay her way attending high school on a cruise ship by doing some kind of vague work study program.

The sad thing is, she probably didn't even get killed in Saw, she just a principal actor who got a close up when she screamed. Horror fail, Rachel Wilson. You also have the most boring name.

Terri Conn as Ashley Dupree who appeared as Sandra Wilson in iMurders
Terri should be a heck of a lot higher on this list because... well... let all look at this poster for a moment:

It's a bloody mouse! And the events take place on a "Myspace-esque website". But Miss Conn was credited under another name when she did this so clearly it doesn't matter as much to her as it does to me. Therefore, she's second to last.

I also want to mention how the character she plays is one letter away from being this lady...

So close yet so very, very far.

Kyle Alisharan as Alex Pineda who appeared as Baggage Handler in Snakes on A Plane
Oh man, things are rough when you don't even have a picture up on IMDB... but luckily for you, and one .05 Google search, I found this:

He's the clean-cut handsome jock who is pretty non-date-rape-y. You know him all through high school and then he fades out of your memory until you think you see him as a baggage handler at the airport then, oh no! There are snakes on your muthaf**king plane. Noooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!

Wait, where was I?

Ryan Gosling as Sean Hanlon who appeared as some D-Bag in Stay and Murder By Numbers
I'm going to admit, the more people love this guy the more I think he's a tool bag. I mean, he's okay. I really liked Lars and the Real Girl but this guy:

as some kind of murderous mastermind. I think not.

And look at those bangs!! That's precisely what I try to get my hair NOT to do!

Which leaves us with....

Tyler Labine as Jimmy Farrell who appeared as Dale in Tucker and Dale vs Evil

I can't tell a lie. Tyler wins because a) this film is Canadian b) I haven't seen it and c) Cerie from 30 Rock is in it. Wins all around!

Fine Young Cannibals

2011-10-19T19:50:00.001-04:00

Every so often a movie comes along that is way more interesting then it has any right to be. It's more innovative, weird, ambitious and silly then you would expect going in. The other night I watched Ravenous (1999) which I had never seen and Evil Dead II which I've lost count of how many times I've seen.

I had no intention of linking these two films, but what do you know? They are totally connected! If you squint. And take off your glasses. And stand 20 feet away.

Ok, ok... they're both just weird. But one is awesome weird and one is "meh" weird. Ravenous is about cannibalism and the demons in Evil Dead will swallow your soul. So there is some element of digestion in both of them.... Right? Right.

Ravenous deals with a bunch of soldiers in and around the civil war. Guy Pearce is a coward and Robert Carlyle likes to eat people, there are also a gaggle of other soldiers whose main uses are to ask Guy about himself to reveal his character then be eaten by Robert. The most noticeable thing about Ravenous is the score by Michael Nyman and Damon Albarn (Blur, Gorillaz). It's brave, that's the best thing I can say about it. It's so truly odd and disconcerting that a film score could so overtake a movie. Also, Guy Pearce can't fall. He can't. Watching him fall is like watching someone who has never seen anyone fall try to fall. It was a really special moment in my life the first time I watched the part where he falls mid-way through Ravenous. And it was still special the 2 times I rewound and watched it again.

The big problem with Ravenous is it wants to be weirder than it is. Director Antonia Bird is all set to make a dark satire but the script is waaaaay too by the book. The script is a pretty typical thriller. People die under mysterious circumstances,hero solves it, throw in a twist, hero solves that, BAM, ending. Take away the historical setting, some great casting choices and you've got every movie Monica Potter and Ashley Judd was in, ever.

Evil Dead. Oh, what can I say about you that hasn't been said already. Actually, what can I say that B-Sol over at the Vault of Horror hasn't already said? It's one of the best write-ups of one of the best horror films series. What I like about Evil Dead is it takes a simple concept and expounds on it. It also has enough shocks to warrant the laughs. What horror film fan doesn't love the voice over of "workshed". Liking Evil Dead is akin to being in the cool kids club. Well, maybe not the cool kids club but definitely the funny kids club.

Ambiguously Made Duos

2011-10-14T10:47:00.000-04:00

Ever since I started wee ol' Scare Tactic people ask me all the time: Why horror? What is horror? What's my name? Where am I??????????????

And I have to say, these questions are valid. How exactly does one define horror? I don't think any one person can define it. As I've said before, horror is subjective. What scares me may not necessarily scare you. That's part of the beauty of horror.

As horror films continually fight to gain and maintain legitimacy there are a lot of films that horror film fans would like to add to the genre (i.e. Black Swan, Se7en). So I thought we could take a look at two similar films, one rendered firmly in the horror genre and the other more ambiguously straddling the line between horror and drama/thriller. I thinking Saw and Silence of the Lambs is a good place to start.

Now Silence of the Lambs (according to IMDB anyway) is classified as a "Thriller". Thrillers are described as using suspense, tension and excitement to engage an audience. They rely on the "edge of your seat" feeling and building towards some kind of big, huge, life-changing climax. Thinking back on Silence of the Lambs it does all of those things... so does Saw if you think about it.

My initial thought is that Saw has more graphic violence ... but then again, so does Silence of the Lambs. When Hannibal Lecter beats the security guard to death then wears his skin... yeah, that. I guess what it comes down to is that Saw trades on its violence. Let's compare posters shall we?

Eeeeeeeeeeeewwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

How delightfully intriguing and engaging.....

Wait a minute! With Saw we've got a random hand that doesn't look like it's in the best health. But this Silence of the Lambs poster... It's so... different... Let's take an even closer look...

That's Salvador Dali's The Skull. A skull made out of ladies!!!!

See? It's way classy. And Silence of the Lambs is way better than some random hand. Am I right?

Beyond the poster what about the actual films? I think that Silence of the Lambs is a far superior film, but let's keep in mind it was based on a best-selling novel, had the backing of a major studio and had some of the most talented people in the industry involved in it. Saw, on the other hand was made for next to nothing by an independent studio that saw a short film and thought it could be extrapolated into a full length feature. I think Saw suffers from its newness. There's a lot of ideas an promise in it but ultimately it feels strung together. It relies too much on its shocks and not enough on the inherent puzzle solving which, for my money, is the most engaging part of the movie.

Silence of the Lambs was a hit right off the bat while Saw found its audience steadily through word of mouth. It didn't help its credibility that the Saw franchise churned out a new installment every Halloween until Paranormal Activity came along but even Silence of the Lambs produced some extremely sub-par offerings (Red Dragon anyone?).

So where does this leave us? I'm going to argue that Silence of the Lambs and Saw are both horror in that they are both horrific. Seriously. Silence of the Lambs, I think, is actually more messed up and shocking than Saw. Silence of the Lambs is not perceived as horror because the film company doesn't want it to be dismissed. Fair? No. True? Probably.

Horror Movie Coolie: Sara(Stefania Casini) from Suspiria (1977)

2011-10-04T17:37:00.001-04:00

I've talked before about the value of friends in horror films and how I love the undead out of Dario Argento's milestone film Suspiria. I got to watch Suspiria last night with someone who'd never seen it before and on all my previous viewings I never noticed how awesome Sara is. She really does most of Suzy's leg work and, unfortunately, draws the short stick in the long run.

Let us count the ways Sara is a Coolie:

1. She tries to stop Suzy from even setting foot in the school.
2. She doesn't take crap from Olga, Queen Of The Weird Hairstyles.
3. She doesn't fall for the witches tricks. She quietly works under the radar to gather the most information with arousing the least suspicion.
4. She correctly identifies the Directress' snore in the gym scene.
5. When she's in danger she does the best she can with the really shitty barbed-wire situation.
6. She's arguably the coolest undead person ever.

In most regards, Sara should have been the Final Girl. Everything points to it. So it's crappy that she can't be there to stab the hell out of the Directress with Suzy in the end, even though she doesn't, she fights like hell to escape. Seriously, if I ever go to a dance school in Germany, the first person I'm looking up is a chick called Sara.

She has pins in her eyes. I'd like to see Olga do better.

7 Habits of Highly Effective Killers

2011-09-29T20:41:00.000-04:00

What makes a good killer? What makes him/her effective? Killers always get caught or subdued, otherwise our population numbers would be in the negative... So what makes the good ones so great? How do they avoid detection while create fear and confusion?

Well if you listen to Dr. Phil you'll find the basic serial killer profile stuff, nothing they don't run you through at the beginning of Silence of the Lambs but I think killers are a lot more adept and sadistic these days... or at least they're more post-modern.

**Beware Los Spoilers**

1. Get Thee Some Followers

They could be friends, victims or family members but when you eventually get knocked out do you want your fancy kill-shed made from excess Ikea parts to go to waste? I thought not.

If they're your friends make sure they've got a strong constitution. Remember, you're the criminal mastermind. If they deviate then who's going to look stupid? You. If they're family members they will get emotionally involved, so make sure they know who they are after and then go for it like their life depended on it. Love isn't retroactive. And former victims, these are probably the most ideal. Especially if they're rocking the Stockholm Syndrome.

Tally:
Using Friends: 2-3 sequels
Using Family: 4-5 sequels (possibilty of rebooting the franchise in 10-15 years)
Using Victims: 7 (Bonus Points if 1 or more is in 3D)

2. Pick Up Some Stella Adler Books To Incorporate Any Additional Personalities You Don't Already Have

Multiple personalities is a great way to gain your victim's trust and to evade persecution if you get caught. You can go even further and get some needy person to fall for you and have a fake family. I mean, of all the bad things you do manipulating someone into loving you is probably the least of your (or their) problems.

3. Never Doubt Thyself.

Did Hannibal Lecter doubt himself? No. That's why he got a full series based on his character while Buffalo Bill who did most of the killing in Silence of Lambs got taken down. While wearing night-vision goggles. Not a good look.

4. Ambiguity and Doubt are Different Things

IS Patrick Bateman guilty? Does it matter? He certainly thought he killed those people. Just because someone doesn't have the firmest grasp on reality doesn't mean they aren't a valid killer. In fact, ambiguity will lead to increased debate and popularity if only in university seminar rooms.

5. Ignore Rhyme and Reason

Rhyme and reason leads to patterns which leads to being caught. Take emotions out of the killing. You can still involve a nifty theme to your killings but make sure your subjects are nice and random.

6. Time Travel

It works! Ish.

7. When all else fails ... Become a Supernatural Entity.

You can milk an entire franchise out of that then ride the convention circuit to a time-share in Florida.

The Ghosts Continue To Be In The Machine

2011-09-22T18:22:00.001-04:00

I love it when I'm right. It's truly one of my favourite things. So as I was breezing through the new additions to Netflix Canada I came across this bad boy:

Anyone? ANYONE? Well, if you remember, when Scare Tactic was in its infancy (it's at least a toddler now) I wrote a nifty little review of a movie called Pulse. A movie so weird and convoluted I maintain that what eventually killed the characters was a complete lack of logic. Granted it's a movie about ghosts attacking us through wi-fi, sucking out our souls which in turn makes us walk around until we kills ourselves, but you'd think there would be some kind of plot or thought behind it. But no, all we have is a bunch of sad-sacks that off themselves.That's right kids, it's ye olde suicide epidemic.

Now it's seven years later. The Amish are being heralded as geniuses and people are making do in pseudo-refugee camps. Everyone is happy... kind of... well, happy in the way people in The Road are happy. Everyone is at least content to ride this thing out and make the best of a slightly uncomfortable situation. Unless you're super bad-ass teenage Justine. She's all messed up and has managed to find the only mini-skirt and and black eyeliner in a post-apocalyptic world, so you know she's hardcore.

Our hesitant heroine uncovers a laptop in some kind of junk yard. (you'd think the new leaders would make with the burny-burny of those wacky technology items, but nooooooooooooooo.) Pulse 3 actually does something incredibly brave. It demands you NOT think. The second you start thinking about the plot and the hows and whys your brain will (ironically) short circuit. So new-wave Courtney Love starts up the laptop which apparently still has power and immediately starts chatting with some lovely fellow who refuses to answer any direct questions about himself. The only piece of information that he parts with is that his name is Adam which in turn brings about this exchange:

ADAM: Tell me about yourself.
JUSTINE: What do you want to know?
ADAM: Are you pretty?
JUSTINE: I don't know?
ADAM: That means you're pretty. How old are you?
JUSTINE: 22.
ADAM: Really?
JUSTINE: 17 actually.
ADAM: I thought so. I want to see you. I'm imagining you.
JUSTINE: With or without clothes?
ADAM: Does it matter?

At which most people would start yelling "STRANGER DANGER! STRANGER DANGER!"

But Justine is a rebel and therefore not most people so she agrees to meet him in Houston. What follows is an Odyssey-esque journey for Justine (and by "Odyssey-esque" I mean the picture book version) meeting people who are both helpful and creepy, strange and murderous. When she does finally meet Adam she discovers *SHOCKER* that he's not who he said he was.... like every To Catch A Predator episode ever.

Pulse 3: Invasion doesn't just beat a dead horse, it reanimates it and forces it to walk around for a while. It's a pretty amazing exercise in the lengths producers will go to in hopes of keeping a franchise alive. Irrational, illogical, eyeliner-laden lengths.

Horror Genres: Horror Comedy

2011-08-31T12:43:00.000-04:00

I think we can agree that horror films are about catharsis to a certain degree. Engaging yourself and bringing on stress followed by (hopefully) a release of some of that pent-up energy is one of the elements that brings me back to the genre time and again. When it works, it's amazing. When it doesn't, it's frustrating. These are similar problems you'll find in the horror-porn genre. But this is a family friendly blog (-ish), so let's stay on topic of the horror comedy, the next best thing to horror-porn.

Now, we can't talk about horror comedies without talking about Gallows Humour, which is essentially a situation that is funny in the face of a hopeless situation. The term and theory was created by Freud of all people in his 1927 essay Humour (Der Humor) in which he states: "The ego refuses to be distressed by the provocations of reality, to let itself be compelled to suffer. It insists that it cannot be affected by the traumas of the external world; it shows, in fact, that such traumas are no more than occasions for it to gain pleasure." Essentially Gallows Humour aims to deflate the power of the aggressor and give power back to the victim. It is commonly thought of as originating in Europe and took root in North America after World War II. It is a coping mechanism that is dealt out by those who must face uncertainty or probable death and what better place to employ that feeling than in a horror movie? If you can make an audience cower in fear and laugh out loud you're doing more than a little right.

We can trace Horror Comdies back to the 1920s but probably the most famous example from the black and white days is Abbott & Costello Meet Frankenstein. While it involves a ridiculously complex plot it is a great example of subverting the genre by attempting to make two normalized, pre-established characters and mashing them up. As you can see in the tag-line below "It's a grand new idea for FUN" the emphasis is clearly on mocking what the terror is and circumventing its traditional role.

In the 60s and 70s you had films like Rocky Horror Picture Show, Young Frankenstein, Attack of the Killer Tomatoes and Fearless Vampire Killers which followed the Abbott & Costello model of placing the emphasis on comedy. One of the first films to truly marry the concepts of horror and comedy was An American Werewolf in London (I know this is conjecture but it's my blog and I'm always right). Fucking John Landis scared the bejesus out of me when I was a kid with this movie and Rick Baker's make-up effect are groundbreaking AND traumatizing which is no easy feat. I saw this movie waaaaaaaaaay too young and am therefore hard pressed to really believe it's a comedy. But a Wikipedia page can't be wrong.


In An American Werewolf in Paris he wears a barrett

Now we're going to talk about the all time great film series, The Evil Dead. Words cannot express how much I love this movie and I can't count how many times I've seen it. It was made for nothing. It deeply distrubing but also goddamn funny. It hits the head on the horror-comedy nail. It is a mixture of low-budget shlock combined with in depth knowledge of the genre and a perfect leading man.

A group of friends go up to a secluded cabin and uncover the Necromonmicon. After playing a translation of the book trickster spirits come after them leaving only Ash (Bruce Campbell) standing. The film it's the heights of insanity but because of constraints of budget, location etc it never goes too crazy. The first two film essentially use the same plot (due to rights restrictions which prevented director Sam Rami from using footage from the first film for recap purposes) which leads right into Army of Darkness. Army of Darkness definitely fits into the comedy label but is a great addition to the series. I think the Evil Dead series is the gold standard of horror comedy because it combines the two genres fully and nothing can beat "The name's Ash. Housewares."

Well, we're almost at the end of the Horror Genre series. To check out the original and subsequent posts click here.

Dystopian Dream Girl

2011-08-25T14:13:00.001-04:00

My friends! I'm back from my first vacation in about 3 years. As you can guess I spent it under the table at a pub being fed white wine through a funnel.

That's right, I was in England. And seeing my lovely family and staying in London reminded me of a few things that we we take for granted - mainly the lack of riots, a stable economy and a population that is not forever engaged in a struggle with the government. To be fair, things aren't looking too good across Europe. Or in Libya.

In any event, the world around us is going to hell in a hand basket. Let's take a look at the pros and cons of some of the most popular visions of the future.

Children of Men (2006)

Pro: Clive Owen
Con: Population slowly dying.
Pro: Michael Caine
Con: Dies
Pro: There may be hope at the end!
Con: Clive Owen dies.

Blade Runner (1982)

Pro: Lots of Asian-esque food
Con: Evil Robots
Pro: Darryl Hannah's hair
Con: Sean Young's hair
Pro: It's Philip K. Dick's version of the future
Con: Ridley Scott's complete ignorance of the book it's based on.

Reign of Fire (2002)

Pro: After the world is all but destroyed by dragons, all men become impossibly ripped
Con: Dragons
Pro: Matthew McConaughey's ability to fly through the air with an axe
Con: Christian Bale's stink-face ability
Pro: Publicized the very real threat of sleeping dragons under London.
Con: Christian Bale left in charge to rebuild. (see also: Terminator Salvation)

Destination Unknown: Quadrilogy

2011-08-10T09:35:00.000-04:00

I cannot tell a lie. I've been kind of agonizing over this post because... well.... I kind of dug Final Destination 4. Sorry The Final Destination. I know everyone out there seems to have pegged it as an enormous waste of time and indeed, I learned nothing about human strife, suffering or thought but I rolled my eyes the least amount of times than in any of the other Destinations. That's got to count for something, right? RIGHT?!?!?!

Now, it helps that it stars this guy:

who is cute as fuck. So there. I was able to spend a good portion of the film objectifying a man. And it was great.

Now, in all seriousness. The Final Destination deals a lot more in "plot" than advancing the mythology of the piece which in essence makes it a really great throw away though, I imagine, a bit of a pisser when you're actually invested in the damn series. Now I'm being smarmy and putting plot in quotation marks because this isn't exactly Citizen Kane. It's a pseudo teen slasher. Using a model we've seen 3 times before. A group of young'uns and some other people avoid death only to have it come after them. Then they get clever, think they've beat it but no, and it comes after them some more. I give FD4 credit for doing away with all the 9/11 junk. It didn't work and it's out of place in a popcorn CW-lite film.

My problem with the FD mythology is there really isn't one. It kind of rambles on about how death is after us. Well, death and taxes are two of our few certainties in life and if we're to believe in a plan larger than ourselves than maybe it's more important than us. The more these films focused on the mythology of Death's plan the more it became more about cheating God-like forces rather than simply trying to survive something.

The second you open the can of worms of Death's plan, you have to follow through with it. You can't just bring up 9/11 and not delve into the implications of that. Perhaps it was studio meddling or something that got cut out in editing but The Final Destination felt a lot more urgent when you do away with all the in-depth thinking that doesn't really go anywhere. For my money it was a short, sharp thriller about a group of attractive people trying to survive. Also there's a great sequence where a character gets his junk sucked into a pool drain.

Destination Unknown: La Tercera Parte

2011-08-07T19:46:00.004-04:00

And I'm back for Final Destination 3: Roller Coaster Of More Of The Same. I did actually start this one as a live blog but my witty remarks were repeating themselves so I thought I'd do a straight-up review so as not to tarnish the good name of the live blog.

With Death having wrapped up the remnants of the first film in the second we're on to some new premonition. And this time it's on a roller coaster. OF FEAR. Well, not really. Days before their graduation most of the class gets wiped out in a freak (wait for it) roller coaster accident.One girl freaks out enough that some of them leave while the others go along to their fiery fiery death. Those who manage to escape are pursued relentlessly by Death who likes to shoot nails through your face.

This is the first film to centre on a group of teens rather than expound to a larger demographic. The strange thing is that none of these characters really seem to notice that a bunch of their classmates just died. In fact, everyone seems pretty cavalier about the whole stitch. Only two characters are privy to the knowledge that their deaths are around the next corner, but being the goody-two-shoes they are they try to warn their classmates.

Cut to multiple scenes just like this.

MAIN CHARACTER 1: Seriously, Death is after us and you're going to die.
MAIN CHARACTER 2: We think we have a way to cheat it but we have to work together!
SUPPORTING CHARACTER: Fuck you guys!
SUPPORTING CHARACTER receives a brutal trauma, as predicted in a set of photos that MAIN CHARACTER 1 took the night of the accident, killing them.
MAIN CHARACTER 1: Nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!
MAIN CHARACTER 2: You know what would really piss Death off? If we had sex.
MAIN CHARACTER 1: What?
MAIN CHARACTER 2: Nothing.

Now, let's talk for a moment about these pictures. The Final Girl took some photos before that accident that in some way predict the death of her classmates. She and the Sensitive Jock spend the majority of the film pouring over them to figure out some clues to prevent their deaths. Apparently this theory goes all the way back to Abe Lincoln and (in poor taste) 9/11. I have a hard time believing that 9/11 had anything to do with Death needing to play catch up and it adds an uneven tone to the fun-death-loving set of film.

Leave the film with an unnecessary open ending and that's about the meat of Final Destination 3. I'm not quite sure what the purpose of the third one was other than a cash grab. I was talking with a friend today and we were comparing the Saw and Final Destination franchises. I feel that Saw (though deeply imperfect) has a legitimate claim to a continuing series of films because the game is controlled by human nature and therefore evolves. Final Destination, however, does not. We're all going to die. And with a slew of characters trying to cheat death it feels whiny. None of them do anything for the greater good. They're only really trying to save their own asses.

Well, we've got one more to go. Will it prove me wrong and silence me about my lack of faith in the series? Does any of this mean anything? Is Tony Todd after me???????

Help me Obi-Wan. You're my only hope.

Destination Unknown: Part the Second

2011-08-04T23:07:00.001-04:00

I'm back friend-os! And I have to say, today I did a lot of thinking. And not just about shopping. I feel like I was a little too hard on Final Destination. I'm obviously not going to go back and edit anything I wrote (otherwise it's not a live blog is it? And if I did do that the corpse of Baudrillard would come after me. Am I right?!) Anyhoozle. Final Destination is a fun WB-esque horror. And much better than some of the other ones of its time. *cough* Halloween Resurrection *cough*. In any event, on with the show and Final Destination 2. Is death still a thing? Do any of these actors have subsequent careers? Let's find out!

9:31pm A'ight so according to a news report it's a year after the plane crash that began the events in the first destination that was supposed to final. Interestingly, the news reports have picked up on the fact that the survivors of the flight were all killed and that Death's plan is infallible.

9:33pm The production designer is Michael Bolton. I hope it's this Michael Bolton.

9:37pm So some jerk kids are in a car driving to some weekend away and the filmmakers have already inserted at least 3 psych-outs. So far we've had people throwing cigarettes out of a car, someone talking on their phone, another person coked out while driving and one more person drinking while driving. Perhaps, Death's doing us all a favor. These people are jerks. And MAYBE Death put a lot of planning into this and MAYBE just fucking respect some hard work. Plus these deaths are kind of awesome.

9:44pm Bam! It was totes a premonition. If only this girl's friends weren't functional jag-wads then I'd actually care. But because Premonition Girl saw it coming she's blocking the road with her car.

9:47pm OH SNAP! Another car crashes into her car anyway killing all her friends. Ladies and gentlemen, we have out final girl. We've also got a cokehead, Career Lady, Black Guy, Angry White Guy, a Mother and Son .... dang. They're not even trying to cover up their stereotyping anymore...

9:49pm: Aaaaaaaaaaaaand I'm pretty sure they've copied and pasted Sawa's explanation scene from the first film. Since they're reiterating what happened in the first one...

9:52pm Wow, Final Girl's entire house is covered in the same shade wood paneling. I bet if you were drunk it'd just like an MC Escher painting.

9:53pm Death the first. Angry Young White Guy... who does not workout enough to justify a shirtless scene.... His name's Evan and he has a message from some girl named Tawny. Winning!

9:55pm Oh no! Evan's hand's stuck in a drain. And his appliances are exploding. At least these are realistic depictions of death.

9:58pm The Cute Police Guy is doing research about the Sawa incident on the 2002 version of the internet. Am I the only one that misses Geocities sites?

10:02pm He finds an article about Midriff Girl whose the only survivor and this is the best journalistic sentence ever: "was confined to Sunnybrook mental after claiming Death was trying to kill her."

10:04pm And we learn Midriff has voluntarily committed herself. Luckily she got her hair did before entering the asylum.

10:05pm Now Midriff is reexplaining the rules. A half-hour into the movie. And gives Final Girl the advice to avoid "anything creepy and ominous".

10:09pm Final Girl calls Midriff a coward which cues several moments of this:

10:12pm Uh oh. I think the mother and son are in for a very unpleasant dentist trip as the CGI water has returned... but this time there are pigeons.

10:14pm The son dies but he literally caused his own death when he startles some pigeons making a construction worker drop a glass plate on him crushing his entire body.

10:16pm Midriff checked herself out of rehab (or whatever) to help them! YAY! And how does she help them? By.... taking them... to Candyman.... for the love of God. I'm getting a beer.

10:19pm Candyman talks cryptically about following the signs and showing off that he knows their names.

10:21pm So Midriff and Final Girl decide that if the pregnant lady who survived the crash lives long enough to give birth then that will throw off Death whole plan. There is really no rhyme or reason to this logic but if they act hard enough then it will work.

10:23pm Police guy abuses his power to put out an APB for the pregnant woman. A totally legit, non-self serving APB.

10:24pm All the survivors are gathered in the Police Guy's loft. Which is a totally great plan where nothing ever has or ever will go wrong.

10:28 Some of them decide to stay at Police Guy's place. Where camping gear keeps falling on them.

10:36pm The remaining survivors are all sitting around in a car talking about how they've all cheated death before. Yes. That's an effective use of time.

10:37pm Now it's revealed that if Midriff and friends hadn't gotten off that plane everyone in the sequel would be dead too. So ... this is a necessary sequel.

10:41pm Death is playing an elaborate version of Mousetrap involving leaking gas. Now I'm sad because I remembered that the version of Mousetrap I had never worked the way it did in the commercial and I used to cry. WHY ARE YOU DOING THIS TO ME FINAL DESTINATION 2?!?!?!?

10:43pm Pregnant lady is about to give birth. Go remaining survivors! Go!

10:44pm Why are they letting Final Girl with her distracting premonitions drive. Surely there's someone else who can drive at high speeds when death is after you.

10:49pm The chick had the baby!!!!! Yay! No more death! SUCK IT DEATH!

10:50pm And they realize the pregnant lady was never supposed to die in the accident. Another survivor and Midriff die. There is one "Nooooooooooooooooooooooo!" then everyone moves on.

10:51pm Now Final Girl is manning up and sacrificing herself .... if only we had seen this in another movie that would have shown us how this all works out.....

10:54pm Oh wait! Police Guy saved her. This all seems so familiar somehow.....

10:55pm It just occurred to me that Police Guy is like 33 and Final Girl is around 17. Ew.

10:56pm Oh and now both their families are having a barbeque.... And someone blows up. Just like in a Godard film.

Fin.

Destination Unknown: Part 1

2011-08-03T22:15:00.002-04:00

I'm lucky enough to write for FanGirlTastic and recently scored myself an invite for an advanced screening of Final Destination 5 for review purposes. Since I've only seen the first one I have to catch up on the rest of the series to properly review it and I thought we could all share the warm warming glow of one of the most popular contemporary horror series.

8:37pm A minute into the movie and there have already been 3 skulls shown. A copy of the play is Death of a Salesman is visible. The word "evil" just flashes across the screen as the 3 writers were credited.

8:39pm Oh my crapping crap. Devon Sawa has a Goo Goo Dolls poster. And a Buckcherry poster. I suddenly wish it was 1996 again.

8:41pm And we're at the airport with a high school class getting ready to board the plane to France for a school trip. All the girls are wearing pale blue twin sets except for one who has bangs and is reading a book. But she's showing her midriff. Jack the gay guy from Dawson's Creek is in this.

8:44pm While at the airport the filmmakers use every chance to work in the word "terminal". And one of the characters has a walkman. This is clearly about the death of technology... No wait... it's not. A character just gave a monologue about taking a dump on the plane.

8:47pm Devon Sawa takes 5 minutes to board the plane while he looks at things with a distinct air of paranoia. It's like he has to keep reminding himself that he's not Devon Sawa in this scene.

8:49pm SEAN WILLIAM SCOTT IS IN THIS!!!!!!! God, I miss the early aughts.

8:50pm Oh shit, yo. Things are kind of shakey on the plane..... Whoooooa. It's like they're on one those rides at Universal Studios and they are to make the most of because the line was, like, super long. But wait! It was all a dream. Go Sawa go!!! Convince them you're not crazy!!!!

8:52pm Uh oh. The fancy attendant doesn't believe him. But the more attractive members of the class that are already on TV shows do!

8:55pm And the plane bites it. Those guys totally owe Sawa a Coke.

8:57pm A guy just asked if any of them need spiritual counseling.

8:59pm Ok, so we've got Sawa, MidriffGirl, SWS, Nerd Friend, Dawson's Creek, Dawson's Creek's Girlfriend, and Teacher. Let the paranoia and disbelief commence!!!!!

9:02pm Sawa is really torn up about this. He probably needs to have a non-consummated relationship with a girl that likes short tops....

9:03pm Cut to 39 days later... I guess Death has a backlog....

9:04pm Midriff Girl is wearing her blackest inappropriate top for the memorial. She and Sawa share the blankest emotional stare EVAR.

9:08pm *If* I die please don't let my nerdiest friend give a speech. It's just depressing.

9:11pm Oh no you guys! I think the scary water leak is going to get Nerd.

9:12pm AND IT DOES!!!! He dies by strangulation from the shower curtain. And then the CGI water recedes from whence it came so that Nerd's death looks like a suicide. Don't worry. It doesn't really make sense in the movie.

9:16pm Midriff Girl has made a sculpture about how Sawa makes her feel. "Connection" and "incomprehensible" are used, as is the phrase "I can still feel you." I've always been told emotions were complicated.

9:19pm Hey! It's Tony Todd!!! From Candyman!! Being weird and ominous... so y'know... it's a stretch for him.

9:21pm And we're in the midst of a menacing and sloppy exposition scene where Candyman tells us about Death's design.... A completely coherent and necessary scene.

9:24pm According to Sawa the new plan is to cheat death again.

9:25pm Dawson's Creek has a weird testosterone issue with Sawa. And for no reason all the survivors are at a coffee shop. Which leads to Dawson's Creek's Girlfriend breaking up with him then getting hit by a bus. Another one bites the dust.

9:27pm Sawa gets all Miss Marple on Death's ass and figures out the order in which the survivors are going to die. BAM. Suck it death!

9:31pm This Teacher is the poster child for sad single women everywhere.

9:33pm Why won't she die!!!!!!!?????????

9:35pm Holy shit you guys. She's drinking scotch on the rocks and so am I! There truly are no coincidences. I will booby trap my apartment now. Someone please inform my roommate.

9:36pm Oh! Teacher bites it via her TV. I'm going back to my death of technology theory.

9:43pm We're truly in the weeds with this movie. Midriff Girl is having some kind of heart to heart with with Sawa and I imagine it's a beautiful scene about how they'll get through this together but I can't tell BECAUSE SHE FUCKING MUMBLES EVERYTHING!

9:50pm SWS dies unceremoniously while everyone fusses over Dawson's Creek.

9:53pm Ok, I got bored. All the characters are just looking out of windows so Googled images of Devon Sawa and came up with this:


According to the website he's still single.


Here he is again, "acting".

9:58pm Sawa has figured out he got the order of their deaths wrong and it's Midriff Girl that's next and now he's running to her because she made that terrible sculpture about her feelings.

10:03pm Sawa tells Midriff girl that he'll always be with as he's about to sacrifice himself so she can get away. This after they've had approximately three conversation. Three mumbled, unintelligible conversations.

10:04pm But WAIT!!!! What's this? Friends! Sawa, Midriff and Dawson's Creek are alive! And going on their original trip to France. Awwwwwwwwwwwwww. I kind of want to make a sculpture about how I feel about all this....

10:07pm Uh oh, Sawa's Spidey sense is tingling....

10:08pm I'm going to level with you guys. Some stuff happens. It's suggested another character dies. Then some impossibly lame pop song plays over the credits. This is why horror movies should be rated R.

Horror Genres: Science Fiction

2011-08-02T14:21:00.002-04:00

Science fiction is a genre unto itself. I am not debating this. But I would argue that certain science fiction films have a decidedly horror-esque bent to them. Hence they are getting a write up in a blog that will surely be made mandatory reading for students in online or state colleges.

Arguably, the first fully formed work of horror-science-fiction was Mary Shelley's Frankenstein which was the first story to give a monster a grounding in the world of science. In horror-science-fiction there is a definite sense of man being the creator of his own downfall, thereby becoming his own monster.

I put forth that science fiction is definable by its need to ask questions and use questionable practices to reach the answers. There is often an element of Chaos Theory involved as events perceptibly change the course of human existence through small changes to the status quo. Essentially, what we try to control we eventually destroy. Alternative realities that are not far off from our own make up the majority of science fiction premises.

Now, where does the horror come in? I believe it comes when there is a specific, violent threat to the status quo. When the changes that I mentioned above take on physical forms (usually, not always) and become the aggressor in the situation. Taking that definition we can put the following films into the horror-sci-fi category:

28 Days Later

Alien

Event Horizon

The Fly

Frankenstein

Resident Evil

Splice

The Thing

Village of the Damned

What makes these films both sci-fi and horror in my mind is the threat becoming violent. One film I want to talk about in particular in this post is Danny Boyle's Sunshine (2007) which is most definitely a science fiction film and, I would argue, a horror film. A crew is sent to reignite the sun with a massive bomb on the Icarus II spaceship after Earth lost contact with Icarus I. And guess who stumbles upon Icarus I on their journey? And is there maaaaaaayyyyyyyyyyyybe something still alive on that ship?

**Beware Los Spoilers**

The super fun horror plot comes at the end. Pinbacker, a crew member on Icarus I has made his way on to the ship and has begun sabotaging the mission in hopes of being "one man alone with God." This move takes us from psychological thriller to a full out slasher film. I know a lot of critics had a problem with the last reel of the film but for me Sunshine is about human nature. Humanity has come together to pitch in the remaining resources to create a bomb that would restart the sun and of course humanity gets in the way.

In science fiction we can most clearly see the prejudices against horror of being a lowly form of entertainment. Just because there's a killer on board does not automatically make a film bad. It makes it a challenging film. You don't have to love it but the film shouldn't be written off because of the story. While Sunshine and most science fiction films are based on the conceit that the world should be made better through advancements, there is a reason we test on animals first.

The British Are Coming! The British Are Coming!

2011-07-29T16:14:00.001-04:00

The British are an interesting bunch. Dead on the inside, sparkling wit on the outside... they are monsters unto themselves. Room-temperature-tea-drinking monsters.

Paul Revere, local show-off and tattle-tale

The rest of the world's perception of Britain is also interesting. Wherever possible they are a villain and their accent is the definition of snootiness (unless you're in a Mike Leigh film) because, gosh-darn it, have you truly forgiven them for colonization? I thought not.

But those bad-teeth, sausage-roll-loving bastards have had some truly awesome horror films. Obviously it's hard to generalize an entire nation's contribution to a genre, but hey, why not try?

The British have a rich history of literature, and with the emergence of the Gothic-horror novel (Dracula, Frankenstein et al) the macabre is present in such classics as Jane Eyre, Wuthering Heights and A Christmas Carol. As film became more popular it was natural that one of the giants in the early days of the film industry was Hammer Horror in the 1950s. Its famed versions of Frankenstein, the Mummy and Dracula among others would become the norm for horror films and, eventually, be endlessly parodied.

As the times changed so did audiences' taste. They no longer wanted the schlock and awe of the Hammer Horror film but rather something more sophisticated. With the emergence of psychological horror the monsters we feared were often and inextricably tied to ourselves. The Haunting (1963) is arguably one of the best haunted house flicks there has ever been and ever will be. A team of paranormal investigators take up residence at the haunted Hill House in hopes of discovering some kind of evidence of a ghostly presence. What follows is some of the most intense and chilling scenes ever committed to celluloid. Without blood or gore, The Haunting is a landmark for classy and sinister horror films.

Ten years later Don't Look Now (1973) was released and while it was initially known for its stunningly graphic sex scene between Donald Sutherland and Julie Christie, it is a creepy-ass movie about the aftermath of the death of a young child. Sutherland and Christie go to Venice to try and put their lives back together after the accidental death of their daughter only to be told the spirit of their daughter is trying to warn them. Beware the red coat.

Taking us into the 1980s we have John Landis' An American Werewolf in London (1981) about two friends, one who winds up dead and the other winds up with an annoying monthly habit of maiming people. A horror comedy, yes, but this is the first and few movies to be both equally horrifying and funny. Rick Baker is in his prime bringing to life the most awesome werewolf transformation to screen. But seriously, stay on the trails in Yorkshire.

The 90s were a mixed bag for horror the world over. Scream was the only film to stick a landing and make an impression. But there are several awesome films that still have loyal followings that also happened to come out in the 90s.Event Horizon (1997) was one such film. What I thought would be silly turned out to be freakishly terrifying. Paul W.S. Anderson (who would go on to make Resident Evil) went all out in this film which, though incoherent, remains terrifying. One of the big themes in sci-fi/horror films is a crew must investigate a ship that has stopped sending communication or has started sending an SOS signal with only evil things awaiting the crew going to help. Methinks some people are still smarting over smallpox.

The 2000s were a pretty great time for British horror. You've got Shaun of the Dead, The Descent, 28 Days Later and The Children just to name a few. Why the resurgence, you ask? Well, with the resurgence of the British independent cinema in the 1990s the infrastructure was set in place to produce more homegrown films and a decade later, some of those new filmmakers (and 'Old Guard' Danny Boyle) were still making films that reflected the Britain they saw around them. But with 9/11, the London bombings, the War in Iraq and many other things, horror is a great way to reflect the chaos and confusion around us. By circumventing the politics they can deal with the human factor.

Trailer Review: Paranormal Activity 3

2011-07-24T13:07:00.002-04:00

As most of you probably already know the trailer for Paranormal Activity 3 was released this week. If you haven't seen it, find it here.

Now, I loved Paranormal Activity. The first one scared the bejesus out of me. And the second one, while less scary, still ultimately succeeded in interesting ways. I have a bit of a problem with the trailer for #3. The first and second films were leading up to what happens when (SPOILER) a posessed Katie gets out into the world. The second one gave some clues, but that's why I was getting excited for the third installment. The trailer for #3, however, shows the sisters as they were growing up when their family was initially possessed by unseen forces.

But can and should the producers be striving to make a prequel of a prequel? I don't know. It feels like they couldn't come up with anyway to maintain the established tropes of the films. When you expand the film beyond the controlled location of a house, how do you maintain a documentary-style feel? The only answer I can come up with is if the Kardashians got possessed and E! filmed it for a new reality spin-off.

The fear I have at this juncture is that Paranormal Activity is becoming the new Saw franchise. Every October whatever there will be a new one. Regardless of its merit. Which is a shame. For those that were scared by the first one, it was a nifty and inventive little film that caught them off guard. The second one didn't scare me because, well, me and everyone else in the theatre knew what was coming. But if you tamper with the formula, what happens? The studio doesn't make as much money? Bigger risks equals uncertain returns. As much as I would like to ignore the fact that films are designed to make money once they are in the studio system, I can't.

Let's take a look at the Rec series. The first two are AMAZING. Seriously. If you haven't seen them, see them now. The word on the new ones in development is they are breaking away from the POV shooting style (there will still be elements of it) and shooting it with a larger scope to show the outbreak as it spreads. It's incredibly risky, but ultimately will provide a potentially bigger pay-off to those involved and those who love the films.

Though I would like to see Kim Kardashian get possessed and eat Kourtney while Ryan Seacrest looks on.

Cottagin'

2011-07-15T09:54:00.001-04:00

Perhaps it's my unrelenting viewing of horror movies since I was small or the fact that there could literally be a serial killer anywhere but I expect death around every corner. Because of that, I'm still alive. Yes, I've accidentally punched my roommate more than I should but she could have been Pinhead. A 5'2 version of Pinhead.

In any event, I like to think of Scare-Tactic as a how-to guide of survival skills culled from movies. I'm like Oprah without the mess of panicky 50-somethings. In this post I'd like to talk a little bit about cottages. We all need a weekend away with a group of friends to goof-off but if you'd like to come home again here are some handy guidelines from films.

In Which We Learn From.... Friday the 13th (1980)
Don't have sex. It will be tempting, but don't do it. Firstly, do you want to be the jerk keeping your friends up with a squeaky mattress? Secondly, you'll die. You will die. There is literally no way around it. You'll live longer if you have sex with someone you don't care about. But God help you if you're in a committed relationship. This is how is generally plays out.

BLANDLY ATTRACTIVE GUY: Wait, where's Sarah?
SOME OTHER GUY: I think he got her. We have to keep going. We have to make it to the car.
BLANDLY ATTRACTIVE GUY: No, I'm going back for her. We had this fight earlier and she has to know how I feel.

No. No, she doesn't need to know how you feel. Go to couples therapy when you get back to the city. Because, do you want to end up like this:


Happy and single in the city.

In a relationship and dead in the country.

In Which We Learn From... The Blair Witch Project (1999)
This is a note about technology. Don't depend on it. It will do you no good. Always assume the second you leave a metropolitan area your cell phone/pacemaker/laptop will burst into flames (if you're lucky, otherwise they become possessed) so don't even bother.

When you resort to filming yourself you invariably get some horrific up-the-nose shots.

Technology has a funny way of acting as encouragement to evil spirits. It's like a Ouija Board x100. Ghosts, witches, demons turn into show offs and like turning even more evil. So your friend that wants to make a documentary about what a cool group of 20-somethings you are, punch them out and throw them in the car trunk until you're ready to leave.

In Which We Learn From... The Evil Dead (1981)

What don't we learn from The Evil Dead? Seriously. This is a horror movie and self-help book rolled into one.
- When you come to a bridge with a sign that says "Cross At Your Own Risk." Think twice and look into where the closest Best Western Hotel is.
-Don't touch shit that isn't yours. It could be someone's vibrator or a Necronomicon.
-If you want to get out of there, go! Leave the douche-y guy behind. He'll only be a zombie-demon later.
-When killing something requires complete dismemberment, go for it. This is not the time to pussy out.
-If you make it to dawn. Prepare for the sequel. It's totally coming.
-When in doubt, do as Ash would do.

Happy Summer everyone!!

Revenge is a Dish Best Served Cold... Repeatedly

2011-07-13T10:25:00.002-04:00

Norway is a pretty great country. There are crazy Viking museums and it's the home of Ibsen who wrote depressing-ass plays and now Cold Prey (2006). In solidarity with Stacie Ponder's Final Girl Film Club I thought I'd give this one a whirl. It's got pretty great reviews and I love me some slasher fun. And there's snow! It's like The Shining allllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll over again.

Best. Stink. Eye. EVAR!

Well.... ish. The story is basic. Hot Norwegians go skiing. The least attractive one breaks his leg (bone poking out and all) and the group is forced to take shelter. They stumble upon an abandoned hotel, a seemingly perfect place to crash, attend to their friend and fornicate before getting help. Winning, right? Actually no. So no. It's the opposite of winning. Not just because of the tacky decor but because there's a crazy man who lives there who will eventually show himself and pick them off one by one.

Now if you troll the interwebs you'll find a lot of people hailing this as a slasher classic. My problem is that it absorbs all the tropes of slasher films, directly ripping off Halloween and Friday the 13th, and sticking it against a snowy backdrop.

Director Roar Uthaug (interesting fact: that's also my middle name) makes every shot beautiful. It adds a lot of class to this by-the-book slasher. Writer Thomas Moldestad attempts to deviate from the slasher mold by making the audience wait 45 minutes until the first kill. I assume this is so we care about the characters but the characters are dull. They're just regular 20-somethings with regular boring 20-something problems. I was actually relieved when the killings started because it meant the plot would actually be forced to move forward.

Now... let's talk about the killer. I have never been less scared of a killer. And I get scared easily. Some guy with a bunch of furs on with a normal looking birthmark over one of his eyes does not scare me. Perhaps it's because we get some many full body shots of him rather than teases at something creepier but he did not do it for me. It looks like my uncle went for a walk in a snowstorm.

Now we all know how these movies end. People die till there's a girl left standing. She "kills" the baddie and tra-la-la continues on her merry way. Well, until she gets picked off in one of the sequels. Which brings me to das sequel Cold Prey 2: Resurrection, the totally-necessary-and-not-at all-cash-grab of a sequel.

Cold Prey 2 picks off immediately where Cold Prey left off and continues merrily on the away to Halloween 2 Land. Final Girl is found, taken to the same hospital as the Killer and more deaths ensue. I appreciate that they try to explain the background of the unthreatening killer and making some kind of socio-economic point about Norwegian health care, but for realz, we've all been to this rodeo before.

Unless you're one of those weirdos that think slashers started with Scream. Then I just feel bad for you.

What Not To Do In A Remake

2011-07-08T10:02:00.000-04:00

Remakes are not a new subject here in Scare-Tactic Land (or as I like to call it, AlexAmazeballLand where the inhabitants ride around on panthers and everyone automatically gets a 401K, but I digress) but I constantly feel the need to touch on them, mainly because they are re-writing horror history in shitty shitty ways.

My last post was about one of my favourite films, Black Christmas. Out of curiosity I watched Black Christmas the 2006 remake (or as it's so cleverly called "Black Xmas") and to be fair to the movie I found it so awful I turned it off half way through. Maybe it gets better in the last half?

Probably not.

I don't know if it's the state of humanity but holy hell do these characters whine a lot. They are the least pro-active hurtbags ever. Expect for maybe in the Halloween remake. Or the Friday the 13th remake. Or the Nightmare on Elm Street remake. In the original Black Christmas a sorority house receives threatening phone calls that refer to "Billy" and "Agnes" and the killing of a child. In the remake the filmmakers go into explicit detail about some entirely random, pointless and un-scary back story about Agnes and Billy. I've argued time and again, what makes something scary is your own mind. Because what's scary to me might not be scary to you. Ambiguity is key.

Now I can rant and rave King Lear stylez all I want but then it does indeed become sound and noise that signifies nothing. Then I'm just part of the problem. So here are some helpful tips (in my mind) about what and what not to do when you remake a horror film.

1. For the love of everything that is good, stay away from the classics!
There's no point. If the original is beloved why remake it? Why not write your own goddamn horror story? (Platinum Dunes, I'm looking at you) Remakes that work like The Fly are awesome because there are inherent flaws in the original and when you have an auteur like David Cornenberg you say, let's do this!!!!! When you get bored sitting on your pile of money and randomly start searching IMDB for Horror Movies don't remake something that re-defined the genre. And for heaven's sake don't let the guy who directed the video of Smells Like Teen Spirit do it. He couldn't even get Kurt Cobain to get his hair out of his eyes!

Well, he couldn't.

2. No one cares about the Killer's back story.
Seriously. We don't. Rob Zombie should work on remixes of Dragula or whatever else he did before he decided to remake the Halloween series. No, I don't care that Michael Myers was a sad kid. I really really don't. Lots of people have sad childhood and don't go around stabbing people. Just give me evil. Pure unadulterated evil.

3. Hire actors of a certain caliber.
I'm not sure if the original Halloween would have been as good without Jamie Lee Curtis. Her version of Laurie Strode is a fully formed character. Rob Zombie's Laurie is a simpering idiot incapable of finding shirts to fit her. Jeff Goldblum is an all around great actor but he brings so much to the character of Seth in The Fly that you forget everything about the original.

4. Don't try to be clever.
Post-modernism (or "po-mo" if you want me to smack you) is killing every art form. Scream used it to propel the plot forward. Remakes seem to love to use winks and nods to the audience to show that they know that you know that they know that they're doing a remake. You know what? If you're making a movie and you don't know that you're making a movie, well, I just feel bad for you. Seriously. Every time a film stops to comment on itself the tension and tone of that movie is mainly lost. And, y'know, I'd hazard a guess that those two elements are kind of important.

Black Christmas I gave you my heart, the very next day you suffocated me with a dry cleaning bag.

2011-07-02T15:05:00.002-04:00

This post was meant to go up yesterday as it was Canada Day but in between helping friends move, saying goodbye to a friend going traveling and other various festivities it simply didn't happen. But here we are. I did manage to catch a free screening of Bob Clark's 1974 masterpiece Black Christmas and oh baby was I ever feeling national pride walking out of that.

Black Christmas is set in a sorority house that's been receiving obscene phone calls for the past while. The sorority sisters take the calls, some deeming them funny others feeling the impending dread coming. As the events spin out of control the audience is privy to the fact that indeed the calls are coming from inside the house. Simple, non? Well, not exactly. Black Christmas is a classic because it broke the mold on slasher films, created tropes that would be repeated endlessly, brought some terrific performances and is creepy as fuck well before John Carpenter got around to doing it.

If you've seen any of the Holy Grail slasher (Halloween, Friday the 13th, Nightmare on Elm Street) you'll be able to pick out its characteristics in no time. The POV killer scenes, the killer with a violent past, the inept authority figures, having John Saxon in it, and the Final Girl. Now, in almost every other slasher flick the Final Girl (the character who survives the traumatic events of the film, almost always female) is virginal and pure. In Black Christmas they subvert that right at the beginning having the virginal good girl die first and having the Final Girl figure contemplate having an abortion for an unwanted pregnancy throughout the film. This is both the antithesis of what we've come to accept as a Final Girl, yet also one of the best representations of it. Olivia Hussey's Jess is fragile and delicate but her transformation into someone who fights back is just as believable.

Bob Clark's direction is spot on devoting equal amounts of time to the goings on in the sorority house, the Killer and the disappearance of girls that begins to effect the outside community. Clark knows where the terror lies in pieces like this. It lies in the expectations of the audience and the lack of knowledge that the characters posses. Anticipation can be a bitch.

The script by Roy Moore, though having huge gaps in logic, does a fantastic job of developing each sorority sister into a full fledged human being and giving weight to the horror of the film while also imbuing it with comedic moments.

Remember when characters smoked in movies? Instant street cred.

Black Christmas is a true horror classic in every sense of the word. So much so that the unfortunate remake brought about more love for the original. Without Black Christmas the horror landscape would be completely different from how we know it today. It would be so different that I don't even want to imagine it.

Black Christmas, I stand on guard for thee.

Horror Movie Coolie! Clemens (Charles Dance) in Alien 3

2011-06-22T15:19:00.002-04:00

Charles Dance may be now better known as someone on Game of Thrones (No, I haven't seen it. Yes, I have every intention of seeing it.) But I will always think of him as Clemens in Alien 3.

And yeah, to look at him... not much, right? But he's sexy because he's kind, perceptive and damn helpful to Ripley without making a huge deal about it. The more she warms up to him, so does the audience.

Alien 3 is a tricky film. I like it though it's no Alien or Aliens, but it's a totally serviceable sci-fi flick and an interesting piece of film history as it's David Fincher's first feature film. Even though Fincher has basically disowned the movie, it's not that bad. I imagine the reports of studio interference while he was working on it was enough to make anyone want to forget the experience, but at least it's no Alien Resurrection....

But back to Clemens, the Alien series has an interesting way of provoking then disproving Ripley's suspicions which is a massive factor in her character (see Bishop in Aliens) and Clemens is no exception. While she jumps into bed with him quite quickly she is being told not to flaunt her sexuality around the prisoners who are all rapists and murderers. Clemens shows his loyalty early on and because the film's production was bleeding money Ripley suddenly becomes more trusting. Or she's getting soft in her old age and realizes people die around her all the time so she better get while the gettin's good. (cough, Hicks, cough)

What makes Clemens a Coolie is that I totally bought it. He's thoughtful without being creepy, he's charming without being gross and he's smart without being a know-it-all. A lot of men should be reading from the Book of Clemens.

Horror Genres: Satanic

2011-06-21T16:45:00.005-04:00

You've got to hand it to the Devil. That guy gets away with a lot. Sure he/she/it is does a lot of bad things but he/she/it doesn't give a damn because he/she/it is the Devil.

Keyser Söze, a Devil figure himself, said "the greatest trick the devil ever pulled was convincing the world he didn't exist." While the Devil can make you do just about whatever he wants there needs to be a human element or vessel involved to carry forward some diabolical plot which is where humanity comes in....

For me, the Devil just makes sense. I feel like his reasons to kill and destroy the population are probably the best out of any of them. He's pissed off so he's going to fuck with God's children. (bare with me on my knowledge of the Christian faith, I was raised by lapsed Catholics) If you were cast out of Heaven and in charge of a place with a bunch of rapists and murderers, wouldn't you want to schadenfreude that shit up? If you say "no", you're lying. Stop lying.

In any event, Satanic films were booming in the 1960s and 70s with the likes of Rosemary's Baby, The Exorcist, The Omen, Don't Look Now and the rise of counterculture. Cults, particularly after Charles Manson, were feeding into the paranoia of the time and the Devil has a way of attacking those most vulnerable; women and children. The paranoia that the United States in particular but the rest of the world felt as well during the Cold War, Watergate and Vietnam brought about the search and need for explanation of the sinister forces in the world.

One of the many reasons we watch horror movies is because we confront a threat and with a bit of luck, the threat gets neutralized. As the general public became aware of Satanic cults studios found ways to capitalize on the sensational aspect of sacrifice and a fully evil entity.

1960s
Rosemary's Baby (1968)

Based on the novel by Ira Levin (who also wrote The Stepford Wives) this Polanski classic follows the pregnancy and paranoia of Rosemary Woodhouse and her smarmy husband Guy. This is one of the most quiet and most unsettling pieces of film I've ever seen. It's an incredibly well crafted and watchable film. And while I'm not the biggest Mia Farrow fan, it's worth watching for Ruth Gordon in, what I would argue to be, one of the best performances in horror.

1970s
The Omen (1976)

I have a an incredibly fond memory of this movie. My father was so excited to show it to me (I would have been 8 or 9) that he gleefully described the scene where the photographer's head gets cut off with the glass pane then wandered around our house laughing to himself.

For a movie that is that far-fetched it feels very real and addresses the fear of the unknown as Gregory Peck knows it's not his child and must try to put his suspicions to rest. It is fraught with some extremely violent sequences interwoven with a thoughtful and well-rounded script. I always feel like the Omen never gets it's due as one of the all-time great movies. If you haven't seen it, get thee to thine local DVD store and thee can thank me later.

1990s
The Ninth Gate (1999)

Polanski and Depp. This should be right up there with the other films I've mentioned here but it ain't. I re-watched this recently and I'm torn between saying the film has little plot and spends over 90 mins trying to make it seem complicated or this plot is ridic complicated and the Polanski just didn't capture it. Either way, the silliness is only amplified by bizarre performances, an uneven plot and ending that almost made me break my TV. Sometimes potential is the biggest Devil of them all.

3 Evil Corporations and the Business They Do

2011-06-13T20:44:00.004-04:00

Perhaps it's my tiny woman brain but I very rarely understand business. It's complex. I know there's a lot of Power Point presentations, iPad use and latte drinking but what do they really do? When global markets were crashing a few years ago CEOs were put on trial and it was revealed the disgusting amount of money they make. As I followed the stories it seemed these people were best suited to setting briefcases of money on fire.

So who's to blame for this? Some would argue the inherent faults in the capitalistic system (read: my communist university professors) but I think it has much more to do with movies. Seriously.

Movies make corporations seem sexy and full of sexy sex.... or just in the business creating zombies. Which can seem kind of cool. Who doesn't like deity-like power? And if you're at the head of these corporations, you're pretty safe. Like, in a literal safe-house safe.

I would like to take a look at some of the business practices of the most infamous businesses in movies.

The Umbrella Corporation (Resident Evil)

I'd like to think that the key to good business is not murdering your entire client base, but I could be wrong. After four Resident Evil films, I've gleamed that Umbrella Corporation is a multi-billion dollar pharmaceutical business that would dig on getting into weapons.

Admittedly, it does help that when shit goes wrong you already possess the nuclear devices to blow up major city and attempt a cover up. But really, why reanimation? Especially when the reanimated eat you. At least cigarette companies are willing to invest 40 odd years in their buyers. And loyalty is rare these days.

But I would actually like to know how the dead rising or unleashing uncontrollable monsters would benefit profit margins. Granted there is talk of military uses for the zombies, but really. Zombies have to be the worst soldiers ever. Based on data I've gathered from Milla Jovovich looking hot and fighting in slow motion, the Umbrella Corporation has lost an average of one outpost per year, if not more. That just seems like bad business practice. Not Goldman-Sachs bad, but still.

Weyland-Yutani (Alien series)

Honestly, what the fuck do these guys even do?

From what I gather they spend stupid amounts of money, wipe out their own employees in an effort to capture the universe's most violent, uncontrollable being that can only breed by wiping out MORE of your population.

Over the four films, it's suggested that Weyland-Yutani is a space-exploration business that's really a front for capturing, harvesting and controlling these aliens. Why, you ask? Well, it's not explained. But statistically they've operated at a 100% failure rate over 200 years. So there's that....

CyberDyne Systems (Terminator series)

Oh, CyberDyne.... They're a pretty impotent company UNTIL they invent SkyNet, which is this super awesome robot system that controls things like nuclear missiles.

I don't even feel comfortable knowing people control missiles, let alone nuclear ones. So yeah, robots. Good call. Just make sure their switches are turned to good instead of evil. Oh, the guy who's in charge of that went for a smoke break.... that's okay...I'm sure it'll be fine....No, no.... just go live....

Exorcism 101

2011-06-08T19:32:00.002-04:00

I think most horror fans love a good exorcism. I mean, scary is always somewhat related to reality, right? And what's scarier than something that still looks human but certainly doesn't act human? Nothing. That's the scariest thing ever.

Or it can be the worst thing ever. Last night my roommate and I watch Exorcismus (2010). It's a surprisingly well shot movie that makes an attempt to be something more than your average horror film. (cough, The Rite, cough) But seriously, when your daughter levitates three feet off the floor while unconscious and your entire family is witness to it, you call a priest and do what he says. When he says "don't let her be alone with anyone." DON'T LET HER BE ALONE WITH ANYONE.

Shocking I know. I don't believe in religion but when people levitate and start speaking different languages you can bet your last penny I'm switching over to Team Jesus.

I'm bringing up Exorcismus as a very well intentioned but very flawed film. There are, on the other hand, a great many other exorcism films that are damn good. In my opinion they are....

The Exorcist (1973)

Well, duh. I mean Chris MacNeil is all like "shit, there's something wrong with my daughter." Then after a battery of medical exams that produce no conclusive results, she calls an exorcist. They strap her to a bed and don't let her leave. Now, THAT'S an exorcism.

Beetlejuice (1988)

If there was ever an upside to exorcism it's Tim Burton's Beetlejuice.But it involves "bio-exorcism" aka getting rid of the living. Bureaucracy does exist in the afterlife, but thankfully it's still funny.

The Exorcism of Emily Rose (2005)

This one is like a mix of an exorcism movie and an episode of Law & Order. Half of the film depicts the titular Emily's exorcism and the other half the trial of Father Moore who performed the exorcism. It's super creepy and an interesting examination of the psychosis involved with believing oneself to be possessed.

The Last Exorcism (2010)

I really liked this movie up until the last 10 minutes. then it just got stupid. Really stupid. Do everything in the first 80 minutes, then do the opposite of the last 10 minutes.

Horror Characters We Love.... And The Bad Decisions They Make

2011-06-02T20:19:00.001-04:00

This is a post inspired by a movie I'd heard a whole lot about and finally just saw, Eden Lake (2009). Jenny and Steve are a well-to-do attractive couple who go on a romantic weekend away only to be terrorized by a group of young'uns. Needless to say, it doesn't end well. For anyone. While watching it with friends there would always be one of us yelling at the screen for Jenny or Steve to do, or not do, something.

That's part of the joy of horror, put characters in life or death situations and you the viewer is bound to see something more that the character should do. Or because of our privileged knowledge of the plot, we know what they should not do. It doesn't mean we love these characters any less, we simply wish they knew a bit better...

**Beware Los Spoilers**

Sarah The Descent (2005)

Who doesn't love The Descent? It's a great movie, not just a great horror movie. But man, don't you wish Sarah knew just a little bit better? When your friend and your husband keep making mopey eyes at each other, you divorce the dirt bag. When your friend says, let's go spelunking! You say, I think a spa retreat would be great considering I'm the only survivor of a car wreck that killed my only child and my dirt bag husband.

Ben The Night of The Living Dead (1968)

Who doesn't like Ben? Ben is awesome. He's reliable and really tries to be proactive but perhaps a bit too proactive when it comes to the men with guns....

David The Mist (2007)

Now The Mist is a very tricky movie. The ending has infuriated more than a fair share of its audience. David, escaping an increasingly dangerous situation in a supermarket where he and his young son have taken refuge after a mysterious mist filled with monsters descends on their town he is forced to make a truly terrifying decision. He makes the decision he believes to be best only to have it thrown back in his face. Hindsight is indeed 20/20.

Dean Corso The Ninth Gate (1999)

What the hell Johnny Depp? I'm enjoying this awesome satanic movie and then the end? WHAT WERE YOU THINKING?!?!?!? All that time spent acting and character developing! WASTED! I don't care how hot Roman Polanski's wife is, your character should not be wandering through a gate, let alone nine, to meet Satan!

Wendy The Shining (1980)

Wendy, Wendy, Wendy.... I admire how much blinding love you have for your family, but for reals, you should have locked your husband in that closet a lot sooner. Also, don't let your husband make-out with sexy ghosts.

Horror Genres: Supernatural

2011-05-27T11:01:00.000-04:00

To be fair, almost every horror film has a little bit of the supernatural in them. It feeds our desire to explain the unexplainable, or at least observe it. Hence, the inherent trickiness of this post. If most horror films have a bit of the supernatural in them then how do you write about them? Well, there are a lot of ways... Ok, I'm stalling.

I LOVE supernatural horror. (but really who doesn't? seriously, if you don't let me know...) They were always the ones that scared me the most. But is not A Nightmare On Elm Street supernatural? Well, yes. But it's more slasher. As are Halloween and Friday the 13th seeing as the killer comes back again and again and again with little to no explanation. Ok, when Jason's corpse gets a metal rod stuck in him and comes back to life AFTER the rod is struck by lighting... well, that's just science. I think.

Ok, enough stalling. Let's start with the actual definition of "supernatural":

1. of, pertaining to, or being above or beyond what is natural; unexplainable by natural law or phenomena; abnormal.

2.of, pertaining to, characteristic of, or attributed to god or a deity.

3.of a superlative degree; preternatural: a missile of supernatural speed.

So, basically anything that is unexplained. It's the noise that you hear late at night that you've never heard before. It's the thing you see out of the corner of your eye that you can't explain. Or it's the little girl on the bed having waaaaay too good a time with that crucifix.

Even though my goal with these posts is to explore the essence of different sub-genres of horror, some of the sub-genres have sub-sub-genres. How meta is that??? (answer: no idea, Scream 4 only confused me more about the use of the word "meta". Don't worry, I don't think most of the population knows how to use the word "meta")

So here's my proposed sub-genre breakdown. Bare in mind what I've already covered in terms of genre (Slashers, Literary Monsters, Creature Features and there's still more to come... see the original post here!) So I'm going to try and deal with the purely supernatural, which in my mind means:

-Ghosts

-Posession

-Demonic

-Witches

Ghosts... oh, those wacky, wacky ghosts. Ghosts are responsible for more shenanigans in movies than you can shake a stick at. Remember when they did the live action version of Caspar the Friendly Ghost and the CGI Caspar turned into Devon Sawa? Yeah, not those kind of ghosts. I'm talking about the less than friendly ghosts that can hurt you. And sometimes even possess you.

Let's take a look at The Shining (1980) as an example of two sub-sub genres rolled into one. If you're a regular reader of this blog you'll know about my hard-on for the The Shining. It simply can't be beat in my mind. Not only is it a beautifully crafted movie but the artistic merit is better than most mainstream films. Like all great stories it's a simple one. Family goes to hotel to look after it in the off-season. Hotel is filled with ghosts. Ghost possess father. Chaos ensues.

The Shining is an encyclopaedia of the supernatural. Little is explained except for a mention of a favourite trope of Stephen King's, building something on an Indian Burial ground, but within the Overlook Hotel there are few limitations for these ghosts. They can be everywhere and nowhere and appear in different forms, like your already emotionally unstable father.

Another purer ghost story is something like The Ring (which I like better than Ringu and it's my blog so there). The confines for this story is once you watch a creepy art school video you have seven terrifying days to live before the spirit of an evil little girl comes after you through your TV screen. The Ring is a creepy fucking movie that traumatized most people I know.

As for Possession/Demonic, well I'd have to say Paranormal Activity does it best for me. It also, in my mind stays out of the Satanic genre because the characters don't call in a priest, they call in a psychic. Paranormal Activity deals in the loss of control and with the supposed reality of the situation rather than an emphasis on the faith of the characters.

Now, to witches. For me, witches didn't really fall into any other category. They exist in literature but their stories almost always take on a power and control bent rather than a time specific story which is a must for literary horror. (Dracula 2000 being the exception) Take for instance Suspiria (1977) it's about a dance school run by witches. And boy oh boy do these witches like to terrorize their students. Not for any particular reasons (other than bitches be crazy) but y'know, just cause.

Now if you're sensing a pattern, you're not imagining it. The creepiness of the supernatural comes from an almost complete lack of rhyme or reason. It doesn't matter if you're good or bad, if you fall under the supernatural's awareness it will come after you. Unrelentingly. Because, let's face it, it's not like ghosts/demons/witches have to do their taxes or go to work. Haunting is their 24 hour a day job. And business is booming.

Vampires Dream of Electric Sheep

2011-05-24T19:17:00.002-04:00

I'm a sucker for things of a dystopian nature which is why I was so excited about Priest (2011). And it has vampires. And people doing ninja stuff. That's so cool. Right? RIGHT????

Well, the movie as a whole kind of turns into a blur. A real pretty blur. It's one of those movies that if I came in at any point and tried to watch it without seeing the titles it could be any movie in the genre like Blade Runner, Marathon Man, V for Vendetta, Book of Eli, I Am Legend or Legion. The latter sharing the same star and director as Priest, making Paul Bettany and Scott Stewart the De Niro and Scorsese of mediocre, CGI laden supernatural thrillers.

The whole thing smacks of effort. Each actor plays every scene at about 11, every battle is built up waaaay too much and characters bicker endlessly. In fact, there was so much stopping and talking and arguing and looking remorseful and then sitting around I began to feel like this is the Chekhov of mediocre, CGI laden supernatural thrillers.

So what's all the talking about? Well, Paul Bettany is a priest named Priest, though I liked pretending that his name was actually Greg. Or Sam. And, like, a really really really long time ago the vampires were going to wipe out all of humanity but then the Church discovered people that could kick ass and sent them to deal with the vampires. And they did such a good job that the priests rendered themselves unemployed. But now the vampire threat is back but no one believes it except Priest because they took his niece. So Priest goes rogue and starts kicking ass.

What's never actually answered is how this religious task force was chosen. One character mentions they were mainly taken as children. So, I guess next time you see a kid jumping in slow motion you should get their number in case there is a threat of the vampire variety. What's also never answered is what the fuck is up with these vampires? They seems to have wandered out of an early computer test for I Am Legend or Resident Evil. They're basically a big pair of teeth, no eyes and a lot of drool. Then you have your main villain, the aptly named Black Hat, the first human/vampire hybrid because apparently it had never occurred to the Queen vampire to do that before.

This is a movie filled with bizarre sweeping statements and images that are never explained. WHY don't the priests use guns? The one time a gun is successfully used in the movie it works out pretty fucking well. WHY are they keeping the remaining vampires in camps? It seems like it'd be a pretty great idea to, y'know, just get rid of the species that was going to destroy your population. WHY does no one have a fucking name? It's like the writers put in place holders saying that they'd totally come up with names in the next draft. I realize the answers to these questions and more is probably in the graphic novel of which it is based. But it feels like the movie is using it's graphic novel cred as a crutch to get away with not explaining things. I can hear the DVD commentary now, "you know, the graphic novel really explains the back story...."

Priest is like a bizarre sampling platter of sci-fi and horror tropes. Even as I write this I'm remembering bits and pieces that were kind of important to the plot then kind of not... Had they bothered to explore anyone of them at length, we might have had something worth watching rather than an extended trailer for a sequel that, God-willing, will never happen.

Hang Each Night In Rapture

2011-05-20T10:40:00.002-04:00

It's been a pleasure knowing all of you. With the impending Rapture approaching tomorrow I've said all my final goodbyes and Scare-Tactic is the last one. If you didn't get a personal goodbye from me it, it's because you've never been that important to me.

In the spirit of learning I thought we could take some time to look at how horror movies handle the Rapture/End of Days/Catholic mumbo-jumbo...

Robots/Hardware

Sure we think we're all fine and dandy living like the Jetsons but what happens when Rosie becomes self-aware and decides she wants more than one freaking wheel? Huh? HUH??!?!??!?!?!

ODDS OF SURVIVAL: Not good. Unless your mom has been talking about something like this for a while and been working out like someone who's scared her husband will leave, I'd say start doing drugs and hos now.

Zombie Apocolypse

In it's infinite wisdom the legit CDC has come out with a How-To-Survive-A-Zombie-Attack guide. Those nerds clearly think that Baby Jesus is coming to Earth and spent their last weeks making that guide.

ODDS OF SURVIVAL: Pretty good. If there's any attack horror fans are prepared to handle, it's a Zombie apocalypse. Ditch your friends and loved ones, they'll only hold you back, and get thee out of the city. If movies have taught me anything it's that there are hotter people waiting for you.

Alien Invasion

Alien Invasions are generally used for family bonding time (see: Signs and The Day The Earth Stood Still) so if aliens land, hook up with family members you've had past issues with. This will be the perfect time to work them out.

ODDS OF SURVIVAL: Unless it's E.T. you blow those fuckers brains out and you'll be fine. Tip: Assume their brains are in their groin area.

Supernatural

I'm going to level with you. This kind of ending doesn't end well because there are no rules. Anything can happen and rules can be made up as terror goes.

ODDS OF SURVIVAL: Really not good. Your best bet is to hook up with some peeps and try to be the least crazy.

So best of luck to all of you. I know I've got my hand-basket ready.

Terrible Performances in Horror: Mia Farrow in The Omen (2006)

2011-05-17T19:11:00.000-04:00

There's nothing more spectacular than an icon falling from grace. Ok, maybe the laugh of a child or something... but in our case I'm referring to Rosemary herself, Mia Farrow.

Rosemary's Baby is one of my favourite movies and an incredibly interesting look at femininity in the 1960s. And Farrow is great in it, very much helped by a boss hair cut. After the fervour and success of baring the Devil's baby she hooked-up with Woody Allen, named one of their kids Satchel and well... it didn't go well from there. She stayed quiet professionally but busted her ass in her charity work still appearing in the occasional play or film.

Then 2006 rolled around. Some studio executive realized the date June 6, 2006 would be coming and decided, nay, prophesized that The Omen was due for a remake.

They then called up Liev Schreiber for the Gregory Peck choice (awesome) and Julia Stiles for the Lee Remick role(um....). But who, oh, who would play the evil nanny Mrs Baylock? Why, what about the the chick who was totally already okay with a devil baby already??

I'll give the producers credit, it's a pretty cute gimmick casting Mia Farrow as the Devil's minion. But a gimmick cannot work on its own. It must have a purpose. Throughout the whole movie she veers between vacant stares and spider-monkey attacks. It's nothing if not consistent.

The hat says it all. This is the sexy version of Mrs Baylock.

In any event, Farrow is up against more than she can handle by living up to her own lineage as well as Billie Whitelaw's original Mrs. Baylock which had a side of extra-creepy. Sometimes being in a movie just to hang out with the chick in Save the Last Dance simply isn't worth it....

Hanna-Bana-Bo-Bana

2011-05-07T11:04:00.001-04:00

Mid-way through Joe Wright's Hanna, I realized my problem with it. I wanted to watch the Cate Blanchett movie. I wanted to watch the Eric Bana movie. Hell, I was pretty happy with the wacky-British-family movie. What I did not want to see was the Saoirse Ronan movie. Which is a bitch, since she plays Hanna.

A lot of people I know, and people I respect, liked this movie. It just angered the crap out of me. If I have to see another over-the-top metaphor about becoming a woman, people are going to get punched. The sentiments and archetypal figures just fall flat and become meaningless after a while. The thin guise of the plot is, in fact, so simple that the messy script and uneven direction only serve to complicate an unnecessary story. But hell, let's give this so-called story a brief description. Hanna (Saoirse Ronan) is a girl being raised in the wilds of Finland. Her father (Eric Bana) is a former CIA operative. He trains Hanna to be an assassin to eventually go up against the shady current CIA operative Marissa (Cate Blanchett). Hanna purposefully gets captured, breaks out of a compound and spends the rest of the movie trying to follow her father's rendez-vous plan which winds up with them meeting at the Grimm's house in Berlin.

Hey! You know what's a metaphor???? Meeting up at the fucking Grimm's House. Holy shit! Is it a metaphor for womanhood like every single one of those stories is about the acceptance of a female shame??? Wow. I think by the time Cate Blanchett emerges from the oversized mouth of a wolf my eyes rolled so hard it was audible. It doesn't help that Ronan is made up to look like a decrepit Stevie Nicks and that she's managed to maintain the exact same expression in Atonement and The Lovely Bones. The ethereal stuff is boring. But maybe only to me because she seems to keep getting cast in major roles. To me, she is the epitome of the nonthreatening female. Even knowing her character is a highly trained assassin, I was not the least bit intimidated. She is yet another boring, attractive, blank slate. If we're talking young actresses, give me Hailee Steinfeld (True Grit) any day. Give me a woman, old or young, that displays more than nonthreatening beauty. Give me some intelligence and some sense of conflict. Give me something to relate to. Not an over-simplified, glorified version of purity and femininity.

That being said, Blanchett and Bana do a lot with hidiously underwritten parts. Their dynamics are engaging and their scenes the best shot in the whole movie. The British family that Hanna hooks up with for a while are straight out of the best film Wes Anderson never made.

Hanna's getting my rough treatment because it hit my pet peeve right on the head. There are some truly inspired moments. Too bad none of them include the main character.

Horror Genre: Slashers

2011-05-06T15:49:00.000-04:00

Recipe For A Slasher:

1. A location with a past
       -a dash of collective secret/urban legend
       -a soupcon of shared trauma that has in some way stunted the location

2. A Killer with a vague motive
       - beat in a sense of loss or witness of harm
       - fold in a phallic themed weapon
   - sprinkle liberally with un-killableness

3. A group of local young people.
       -should be taken from the same stock as the dash of the collective trauma
       - be sure to include a Final Girl, otherwise your Slasher will not rise
      -boil until all their personalities meld into one.

I love me some slasher movies. I take pride in knowing a lot about them (by no means have I seen every one of them) but I like to think I'd be the one to make it out of the woods/town/dreamscape ... I mean, it sucks and all my friends would be dead, but I look at it like the potential for a social upgrade.

The classic trifecta of slasher films would have to be Friday the 13th, Halloween and Nightmare on Elm Street. But that list also doesn't include Black Christmas, Psycho, Texas Chainsaw Massacre, Peeping Tom, Scream and many, many others. For a sub-genre that's so formulaic it also spawns some of the most impassioned debates. For everything the three biggies have they lack something one of the smaller ones do.

My personal favourite is Nightmare On Elm Street. It's the most experimental and ambitious and it really pulls off a lot of what it sets out to do. My favourite all time scene is when the bloody bag containing Tina gets dragged along the hallways of the school. It still gives me chills. It also contains my favourite Final Girl Nancy Thompson. While the other major Final Girls fight in hopes to survive, Nancy fight and wins... at least in the original version Wes Craven wanted.

Slasher films are a mixed bag. For every great one, there are 10 God-awful ones. It's a use-with-caution or with-great-power-comes-great-responsibility kind of situation. But hey, if you don't go off into the woods alone, you'll never know if you make it to the sequel.

Horror Movie Coolie: Philip Stone as Delbert Grady in The Shining (1980)

2011-05-04T20:35:00.000-04:00

I cannot talk about much I love The Shining without talking about Delbert Grady. The film is crazy (mostly due to Nicholson) but the genius of the film is the quiet moments that lead to the deeply shocking and upsetting moments.

My favourite scene in the movie has to be when Jack Torrance encounters the ghost of the previous caretaker, Delbert Grady. For a movie filled with one of the most over the top performances EVAR, this scene is surprisingly quiet and ominous. Philip Stone portrays the mild-mannered thing to utter perfection and his quiet menace still gives me chills. Bonus points for being portrayed as Moe in the Simpson satire of it.

14-Oh-Wait...

2011-04-27T20:09:00.003-04:00

In 1408 (2007) John Cusack is sad. Not because he's a writer (which is what I thought) but because his daughter died a few years ago. Yes, one of those eerily perfect children vanquished by some anonymous disease. He seems upset because of her death, I feel like we've avoided another Children of the Damned situation. A once prolific-ish novelist, he now spends his days writing Scariest Places in America type books. Which is supposed to tell us he's a hack and has become disenchanted with writing. I personally kind of dig those books, but that's probably because I'm not a prolific-ish novelist and therefore too good for most things.

Cusack then receives a mysterious envelope telling him not to go to room 1408 in the Dolphin Hotel in New York. So he goes to room 1408 in the Dolphin. After Hotel Manager Samuel L. Jackson (I know he has a character name, but isn't he always really Samuel L Jackson?) tells him of the gruesome history of the room and tries every tactic in the book to get Cusack not to go in 1408, he still goes in. And this is where the movie loses me.

If we've established for the first part of the movie that he is not really into this whole writing about scary places thing then why actively pursue going to yet another one? Yes, there are potential motivations but the script is sooooo wishy-washy about the whole thing. Cusack just seems obsessive.

There are few things worse than sitting through an amazing, creepy beginning of a film only to have it descend into sheer absurdity. Interestingly, the bit of dread that is created in the film dissipates when Cusack enters the dreaded 1408. There are a few unsettling bits but the room get too full-blown too quickly. The crazier the room gets the more the plot tugs on our heart strings.

I guess that's my problem with Stephen King stories. They're too mushy. The dead kid, the ex-wife he still has feelings for... it all feels a bit much. Just scare me. Don't give me a Lifetime movie. I know the room is supposed to represent some kind of inner struggle with his own unresolved issues, but at least try to imbue the sequences with a little bit of subtlety.

For myself, horror/thriller movies work within constraints. (i.e. Freddy won't get you unless you're asleep) Not sheer, bat-shit crazy. That gets boring. When the room can do anything, it no longer feels familiar. It feels like a Michael Bay movie.

Reboots VS Remakes

2011-04-23T11:28:00.000-04:00

Much has been made of Scream 4's opening weekend. The results were weak and opinions were decidedly split on the movie's merits leading some film writers to decree that horror is dead. The two people I saw Scream 4 with decidedly did not enjoy it, while I thought it was fun. It actually made me curious to see where the franchise could go. But with it's inaugural box office returns it appears Scream 4 will remain an anomaly.

E! Online recently responded to Scream 4 box office take saying that reboots were obviously not as bankable as remakes. Now, the argument can be made for both forms of film. Aliens vs The Fly. Dawn of the Dead vs Evil Dead 2. Halloween (2007) vs Halloween 2 (2009). Which would you rather?

There is of course room for both but Hollywood loves broad sweeping statements that help finance movies. Proclaim the sequel dead, long live the remake. Personally I'd rather have my fingernails removed with rusty tweezers than to have ever seen last year's Nightmare on Elm Street remake or the paint-by-numbers Friday the 13th or Rob Zombie's circle-jerk of the Halloween series.

Platinum Dunes has made some people very rich by re-branding the already successful iconic horror films and marketing them to fans old and new. While I've hated many recent remakes I'm still inclined to see them. They are interesting if you looks at them as a sign of the times. As the filmmakers are given less control and producers are seeing an increased profit margin from their beloved remakes we will be watching this gravy train unfold for like a perverse, boring, almost unwatchable Möbius strip.

Everyone Kinda Likes Mandy Lane

2011-04-20T18:12:00.001-04:00

It's a funny thing being the underdog. One second your audience is rooting for you, the next they're talking shit about you. Much like the fabled Mandy Lane herself, All The Boys Love Mandy Lane (2006) has been hailed as a slasher classic for the modern era held back by its lingering residence in Distribution Hell.

Released overseas, the film has never been seen in North American and is being held hostage by the Weinstein Company. Well, I got my hands on it. After seeing Drive Angry and loving Amber Heard in that I wanted to see her first lead role as the infamous Mandy Lane. And the result is a confusing disaster. Director Jonathon Levine and screenwriter Jacob Forman try to subvert, destroy and ultimately recreate the slasher genre. The results yield a humourless Heathers rip-off. I've never seen a group characters have less fun in a movie.

In a glossed over prologue, Junior high school student Mandy Lane returns after summer vacation a total hottie. All the boys want to do her and all the girls want to be her friend or give her an eating disorder. The resident jock asshole dies in a very confusing sequence and we flash forward to nine months later. Mandy's still a hottie and a virgin. She joins a group of the popular kids on a weekend away in the country in a secluded cottage. Murders follow.

All The Boys... tries to revitalize the genre by revealing the identity of the killer early on and staking more emotional weight in the conclusion. The complete lack of humor and tension in the film is its real downfall. I liked how they took it to extremes within its constraints of sexuality and drug use almost creating a satire. Almost. The characters are bland and hateful. I found them almost unwatchable and wanted the deaths to come a hell of a lot quicker. And by the time the conclusion rolls around the film has aimed to such levels of symbolism and subversion it's rendered obsolete and kind of meaningless.

Again, we're coming up against a movie that is reactionary rather than focussing on entertaining and scaring its audience. While I congratulate the filmmakers for their knowledge of the genre, it's nothing that fans don't already know. I liked that Levine tried to create more visual interest on screen than your usual slasher flick but it all winds up looking like an emo art project aka a Death Cab For Cutie music video.

For all that Mandy Lane aspires to be, it's really just a cock tease.

Scream 4: Stab, Stab, Meta, Meta

2011-04-16T11:12:00.003-04:00

There's a scene in Scream 4 where a character returns home with groceries, puts them down and carries on a conversation with another character. This may in fact be the most interesting scene of the movie. Or it was for me anyway. I could not take my eyes off the innocuous box of cereal in one of the groceries bags that had already been opened and re-closed with the tabs provided. What purpose does this serve? Is Ghost Face hiding in there? Is this a subtle nod to the economic downturn Woodsboro has faced and the residents now have to re-use their cereal boxes??

Yes, it's been a long time since Ghost Face made an appearance on the Woodsboro scene but in that time a whole generation of youngsters have grown up celebrating the lore that spawned the fictional film series, Stab. Our final girl, Sidney, returns to her hometown promoting her self-help book and encounters the other survivors of the first three films Gale and Dewey now not-so-happily married. If this sounds like a very special Lifetime movie, you're not too far off.

The murders come fast and dirty and act as a backdrop for our illustrious trio to work through their issues that they've had since the first movie. Sidney tries to stand her ground that she's not the victim and Gale and Dewey try to prove that opposites attract. The younger generation spend a lot of time establishing the "new rules". While I'm not saying these new rules are wrong, the scenes are confusingly written. Essentially, the film should work within the "X + Y = the new status quo" and let the murders follow. What happens in Scream 4 is one group of characters start a conversation, something happens and the conversation is dropped. Gale/Dewey/Sidney demands information and the conversation kind of continues, then gets dropped. Then the conversation picks up and finishes a half hour later. Which you can imagine makes for a long-ass movie.

The film does work within it's own Scream conceit. If you're a horror fan, specifically a slasher fan, the film is a fun exercise in subverting the genre. Granted they subvert it to a point that it's not really a slasher film but it is interesting. Every character has a motivation to be the murderer so at the end of the film you're left with 98% red herrings. Also, there are some interesting interpretations of how cell phones do and don't work.

More over, once you reach the end of the film it doesn't really matter who the killer is. It's a superfluous conceit. What matters is watching the returning characters and trying to figure out with them what the new rules are and how they work. For me, it's a fun movie. I was definitely not dissapointed I saw it. I can see how Scream 4 would irritate some as it essentially goes around in illogical circles. But if you're interested in a rebooted-meta-slasher film it's actually kind of cool. (Also, a fun drinking game is to do a shot every time someone says "meta".)

But what of the cereal box friends??? Was the character simply hungry on the drive home? Is Ghost Face messing with Woodsboro's cereal supplies? I guess that's what they had everyone sign contracts for Scream 5 and 6 for.

An Ode To Scream

2011-04-12T17:44:00.000-04:00

I'll admit there's nothing original about this post. Yes, these are my thoughts on the Scream Trilogy on the heels of Scream 4's release. Lots of people are doing this but I've really enjoyed reading about the impact of this little movie on different people of different ages.

I was 11 when the first movie came out. I remember thinking how important that movie felt. I was only really just getting into horror movies and Scream provided a vocabulary with which to get through all the Friday the 13ths, Halloweens and Nightmare On Elm Streets. (which I did before I was 12) Granted it did give away a lot of spoilers but I genuinely thought these characters were cool, they spoke a secret language which was infinitely cooler than what I was saying. Also, they survived because of it. And who doesn't like living? Hell, despite my student loans I still like it.

The tropes that had become parodied within the genre were given a new life by Kevin Williamson's script. Scream still holds up and keeps the tongue-and-cheek tone while maintaining some truly scary moments. I still shiver a bit whenever I get near a garage door.

And oh, the first 15 minutes! They redefined the horror genre. It's a stand alone moment of truly eerie vulnerability and my favourite performance by Drew Barrymore. Scream created iconic moment after iconic moment. While it never scared me in the way something like The Ring or Pet Sematary did, it's an incredibly fun and suspenseful ride that deals with the sins of the parent and self-fulfilling prophecies.

Then Scream 2 and Scream 3 came out. They were... I guess underwhelming is the most polite phrase I can use. The cast were made up of a who's who of WB series and lacked any real importance. For a movie that aspires to comment on the inadequacies of a genre it gets a bit boring after a while. The series became its own beast relentlessly riffing on the failures of other horror films while falling prey to them. The monotonous and never ending red-herrings are pointless and boring. A true case for the fact that lightening does not strike twice. Once Dimension realized what a hit the Scream franchise would be the subsequent films seem to have gotten lost in endless gimmicks.

That's not to say I didn't get excited when they announced Scream 4. Maybe they would realize the error of their ways and give Williamson and Craven their freedom back. But recently both Williamson and Craven have come out denouncing their input into the film. I fear we may have another Scream 3 on our hands.

And what's the harm in that? I think the harm is the loss of potential. Look at the mass of blog, websites, documentaries, books, film classes and God knows what else that deal in discourse about our beloved genre. At worst Scream 4 will miss an opportunity to look at the impact of media on violence, which is a discussion worth having, but only from people who know what they are talking about.

The Problem With Female Characters in Horror

2011-04-06T19:05:00.000-04:00

I've been noticing something recently. I haven't stopped watching horror movies but I certainly turn them off a lot quicker.

To wit, last night I tried watching First Born a movie that came out in 2007 starring Elizabeth Shue whom I've harbored a deep love for since she was in Adventures In Babysitting. In this film she's a dancer living in New York married to some wealthy awkward British guy. They move into a weird house when she gets pregnant and then strange shit starts happening. But Dancer McDancey is all crazy. She's silly, thoughtless and kind of detestable. I stopped watching it because I didn't want to watch someone I was starting to like less and less solve something I couldn't really care that much about. Also, I think it was probably her fault.

She's not the only one. Sarah Polley in Splice, Emily Blunt in The Wolfman, that chick from Piranah 3D who's name I don't feel like looking up because I hated that movie so much, those chicks in The Walking Dead....
These are characters whom I'm supposed to be identifying with as a woman but mainly they're just whiny, incompetent, bratty and immature. The reason this is bugging me more than if this were a blog about romantic comedies is because horror has some of the best roles for women and they're letting me down. This is a genre that brought us the ladies of The Descent, Rachel from the Ring, Chris from The Exorcist and a bajillion Final Girls. But recently horror films seem to be centering their plots around women who can't figure things out.

It feels as though there has been a definite shift. Perhaps the problem lies in the actresses getting cast, the people writing the scripts, the directors or the companies that make the movies...

Let's do a case study, A Nightmare on Elm Street 1984 vs A Nightmare on Elm Street 2010. Nancy is one of my all-time favourite Final Girls. In 1984 looks and behaves like an intelligent teenager and when people start dying she gets all Inspector Clueso on us and solves that shit by thinking and setting traps. Awesome, right? I remember watching that movie when I was 11 and being so happy watching a character with drive and logic. It made sense to me later that Wes Craven stated he wrote that part as an inspiration to his daughter. In 2010 Nancy is 25 (not really in the film, but she sure as hell looks it) and whines and cries her way through this abomination of a movie. What happened? The filmmakers had a perfect model in Heather Langenkamp's Nancy but noooooooooooooooooooooooooo. Take away the strength and tenacity of Nancy in the first film and replace it with depressed simpering and you've got 2010 Nancy.

I fear the tonal shift in female roles comes from the way we represent ourselves. More often than not it is still socially unacceptable for women to take the lead and demand more from their partners, friends or themselves. The characters I've listed earlier (Sarah from The Descent, Rachel from The Ring and Chris from The Exorcist) are single mothers. There is something indicative of a strong woman being unable to keep a partner which becomes an inherent deficiency in the eyes of society .

Art hold a mirror up to society like nobody's business. I guess I shouldn't complain if the people I can't stand in real life are the people I can't stand in movies.

Spare Change

2011-04-01T15:47:00.000-04:00

There is no real way to write cleverly about Hobo With A Shotgun (2011). Filmmaker Jason Eisener packs every frame with a purpose, something truly rare in a Grindhouse movie. I mean, that's what I assume happened when I was wasn't yelping or trying to hide behind my friend who was in turn trying to hide behind me.

And this is a Grindhouse movie. Drive Angry, which I loved, is a more palatable version of Hobo. Not that one is better or worse but there were definitely moments where I had to look away. There were even a few moments where I scream, frightening myself and my friend.Out loud. In a packed theatre.

The plot is a simple one. A hobo can no longer tolerate the violence he sees in a corrupt town and fights back with a shotgun. Nothing you couldn't gleam from the title, right? Well Eisener (who also functions as the editor) wants that. He takes the simple plot and subverts and obscures most of what you think is coming.

Hobo With A Shotgun is not for everyone. It is extremely violent but Eisener again sets up the plot so the rise in violence makes sense rather than just bloodbath after bloodbath.When the Hobo fights back, the crime lord gets more violent to instill more fear. Not what I'd do, but it makes sense for the character. It's not violence for the sake of violence (ok, maybe a little bit...) The film in and of itself is impressive because it moves along and is imbued with enough plot to keep it going for just over 90 minutes.

Their best asset in the whole movie is the Hobo himself Rutger Hauer. The film never makes fun of him or being homeless. Rather we are shown an entire world view of someone who's been on the streets for a long time. It centres the film and gives it a greater weight to everything that happens because of this. It becomes a surprisingly poignant film which is perhaps why the violence is so effective. You actually like the characters because you understand their motivations. Funny that.

For a film that is so dated (I guess early 90s due to the snap bracelets) it remains relevant because it is about standing by and doing nothing only to see the world go to hell.

As my friend exited the theatre he was pretty shook up. Fair enough, me too. I remarked, isn't it nice to know that we aren't so desensitized to violence? He gave me a weary look and we decided there wasn't much to talk about in regards to the film. What more can you say? It's about social justice and responsibility and while making us squeamish it still made us laugh. I don't know what it says about us. But I do know my friend gave some shiny change to some homeless people that night.

An Open Letter

2011-03-31T17:36:00.000-04:00

Dear [Rec] 2,

I just want to say that I really, really love you. And no, I don't care what anyone else thinks. My love for you is pure and I just wanted you to know it.

My faith was dwindling in the horror genre and you've reignited my passion. It's the little things you do. It's the way each character matters and the way you effectively use POV shooting and the way you answer questions through plot. Hell, every camera used was shot in a style that made sense to the character using it. It's like you thought about it for more than two minutes when you were shooting the film.

Too many other films redo the formula that kind of worked in the original film. You, like Paranormal Activity 2, use the same (ish) time line to open up the themes explored in the first. So simple yet rarely done. I love the way you used the same location (opening it up only a little bit) to continue the story. The claustrophobia in [Rec] is nothing compared to what you guys do.

I used to never be scared of zombies. I used to never want to watch zombie movies because I found them monotonous but you subverted a genre and made them not zombies but still zombie-esque. You made them awesome because you never showed their faces for too long and made their movements epically creepy. For that I will always love you.

After I watched you I was nervous, my heart was pounding and I slept with the light on. You. Complete. Me.

Love,

Alex

A Whole New Monster

2011-03-30T13:32:00.002-04:00

Hey all! In the midst of moving I've asked my friend Tom McGee to pitch hit (that's a thing, right?) for me. Here's his take on Danny Boyle's theatre production of Frankenstein which was broadcast live in North America. Enjoy!

Frankenstein directed by the 28 Days Later guy, starring the bad guy from the latest season of Dexter (and Dracula 2000!), and BBC’s Sherlock Holmes trading roles every night? Sounds like a winning combo. Like Frankenstein’s experiment, Boyle’s production of Frankenstein being broadcast from the National Theatre works, but it isn’t exactly successful. An interesting mess, like the monster itself.

A couple weeks after seeing it, I still don’t know how I feel about the show; there is some incredible stuff going on in it –the portrayal of the Monster is the best I’ve ever seen and truly heart-wrenching and the scene between Frankenstein, The Monster, and the Monster’s Bride is extremely powerful- but the play is fairly choppy, and the human characters are boring and unsympathetic. You’re actually glad when the Monster starts knocking them off. Ultimately, it’s worth seeing as the portrayal of the Monster will, in all likelihood, alter how you think of the character forever; just don’t expect the play surrounding it to be great.

The basic premise of the piece is to give the Monster a voice, which is accomplished spectacularly: the Monster is the perfect counterpoint to the iconic, lumbering Karloff creature that has long since eclipsed Shelley’s capital R Romantic storyteller. As part of a generation of horror fans who only ascribe the line “Putting on the Ritz” to the creature, it was confusing and frustrating encountering Shelley’s for the first time; but this Monster finds a surprisingly touching mid-ground. The actors studied The actors studied stroke and accident victims in rehab, learning to regain the ability to move and apply it to devastating effect. The Monster’s struggle and gradual success in both movement and speech will invariably remind you of someone you know or have seen and it changes the Monster from a patchwork resurrected corpse into a person battling a handicap. It’s crazy how different this approach makes the Monster. By watching his step-by-step development we watch the victim become the murderer, rather than the other way round and it takes sexual violence to make the creature as evil as the people abusing it (done rather shockingly in the Monster’s revenge scene against Frankenstein’s wife). It’s a fantastic take on the character and one that I found made me completely rethink the story.

This new take ultimately reminded me that Shelley beat modern zombie writers to the punch by a long shot: the new trend across horror seems to be to romanticise and humanize monsters, such as Twilight’s castration of vampire and werewolves, to the romantic zombie genre, where the inner thoughts, feelings, and conflicts of the zombie psyche are explored. I remember first stumbling across this in Breathers, a book about sentient zombies, thinking it quite novel. But really, the resurrected corpse learning to become a monster has been around for a really long time, but it took this uneven film/play to remind me how beautifully it had been done waaaaaaay back in the day.

So what’s the problem?

Humans. Bloody boring humans. Frankenstein himself has a grand entrance run-by cameo in the first scene where he appears, randomly yells at the Monster and then runs away. His voice was strained and kind of painful to listen to. I was really excited to see Miller play the Doctor, but I suspect he put all his work into the Monster, as he seemed to be constantly hiding twitchy hand gestures and limped occasionally like the Monster was. Not exactly riveting (with the exception of the scene with the Bride of the Monster, which was perfectly executed). The Doctor is a big part of the second act and kills the momentum established in the first (there’s no intermission, but the perspective shifts after the Monster kills Frankenstein’s kid brother.) The support cast fares no better, aside from a fantastic maid and Cato from HBO’s ROME as the Blind Man who teaches the Monster to speak. Frankenstein’s father is particularly terrible, declaring that his son is dead with all the concern of one who has grabbed take-out and realizes they forgot the cutlery. I was pretty happy when the creature showed up and started killing them. And the play ultimately limps off stage, after a final great moment with the Monster and Frankenstein, cheapened by a walk-off into the light.

It’s almost like watching two shows: a brilliant one about the Monster and a generic, flat one about a reclusive jerk and his annoying family. It’s the opposite of other recent productions, such as Catalyst Theatre’s haunting production which dies when the dull Monster shows up and bitches about life for half an hour straight, but that sadly doesn’t make it better...only different.

But nevertheless, I can’t bring myself to hate the show. Benedict Cumberbatch’s Monster is entirely worth the price of admission, and has completely re-shaped my idea of an iconic horror character, which is a rare and awesome thing. I can only assume Johnny Lee Miller’s Monster is also great, although I have a suspicion that Cumberbatch’s Frankenstein will probably be just as good; he’s a brilliant and surprising actor and worth seeing. It’s frustrating, uneven, and kind of unsatisfying, but still somehow worth it. If you have any interest in the character, be it Karloff’s or –God help us, Van Helsing’s- you must see this show.

It also answers the burning question of what happened to James Franco’s arm after 127 Hours. Frankenstein was the original recycler.

Antichrist: Come On and Feel the Symbolism

2011-03-25T12:22:00.000-04:00

Oh, Lars Von Trier. I think most people hear more about his films before seeing them than any other filmmaker's. And people often don't like them. Von Trier is a genius in that he can take a deeply symbolic film and present it as a straight forward movie. Which is part of the problem and genius of them. By subverting our ideas of an experimental film and making it watchable we as an audience are duped in some sense by letting our guard down and engaging more than we might normally

I find his movies surprisingly watchable. I'd held off on watching Anitchrist (2009) because of what I had heard. The explicit sex and deeply intense violence against the female body in particular . It's not that I didn't want to see it, but I like Charlotte Gainsbourg, clit intact. None the less, it felt like a movie that needed to be seen. I needed to have an opinion on it. (you can see from my past entries I felt similarly about Martyrs)

Willem Dafoe and Charlotte Gainsbourg retreat to their country home after their young son dies while they are having sex. In my mind, the country home functions as their Eden with Gainsbourg desperately trying to reconcile her masculinzed sexuality. She attempts to literally desexualize them both therefore reclaiming their innocence. And if you look back to Genesis (as I do everyday (...ok not really)) when Adam and Eve are cast out of Eden that is the beginning of Satan having some kind of presence and influence on Earth which is how I read this film. You can Google "Anitchrist meaning" and come up with endless different interpretations. And similarly to Martrys what you take away from this movie says more about you than the movie. Which can often cause panic and distress in the viewer. It is a rare thing for a film to put us on the spot and ask us to participate in some way.

Much has been made of the depiction of men and women in this film. I can't take offense to this because these characters are not broadly drawn, they are painted with a fine brush. There are too many specific for me to feel that I have to identify with Gainsbourg's character any more than I feel I should identify with Willem Dafoe.

Now, the movie is shocking and graphic. But the genius comes in when you realize most of the violence is in your head. Von Trier, ever the master of the camera, uses multiple trick shots and fast cut-aways to place the violence in your head. Then, when he makes you feel like it's safe to look, he'll show you what he was hinting at for the last hour.

Now, the all important question: is it a Horror movie? Well, sure. Why not. I'm saying that because I like the movie and would like to put it in the horror cannon. But I can't rightfully put it in the horror canon. It uses many tropes though. when the couple cross a bridge to get to the country house well, shoot, it's straight out of Evil Dead. And for one of the few times in the film I got all warm and fuzzy inside.

To sum up, because I could talk about this movie forever, Antichrist winds up being a reflection of you if you let it. You have to engage and I think us horror fans are in a better position to do it than any other kinds of film lovers because we are used to gore and intense scenes.

Whether you love him or hate him, I have a very clear image of Mr. Von Trier sitting in Denmark doing whatever it is they do in Denmark and laughing his head off at all of us trying to make sense of a movie that was never intended for a collective understanding. .

In The Woods (2010) A Review For Another Website

2011-03-23T21:18:00.000-04:00

More horror writing in more places!!!

This time it's for one of my favourite sites FanGirlTastic.

I managed to check out a couple films at this year's Female Eye Film Festival. In the Woods was one of them.

Between you and me, it was crazy. The movie was so bad I was guffawing and covering it up with coughing. Now I'm no stranger to being a vulnerable artist. But there's learning your craft and just being inept. In the Woods was definitely the latter.

Ludlow: A Thought-ening

2011-03-19T10:49:00.004-04:00

I've been wanting to see Ludlow (2010) for a loooooong time. It's no secret that I'm a fan of Stacie Ponder's Final Girl and Ludlow is the beloved blogger's first almost-feature-length-film. For someone with enough smarts and wit to put most of the horror community to shame I had high expectations for it. Luckily Ponder delivers, for the most part.

The plot of Ludlow is a simple one. Krista (Shannon Lark) makes a daring escape from an abusive boyfriend and holes up in a motel in Ludlow waiting for her sister Maddy to join her. In the ensuing days Krista begins to lose her grip on reality. Her only connection to the outside world is a permanently refilling bottle of vodka, a tv forever on the blink and a cell phone which alternates between receiving phone calls from her ex and from her sister. The phone functions as the film's deus ex machina offering her comfort, support and fear all at the same time. It is the only thing that truly helps the viewer distinguish between days, helps move the plot forward and reveals the true nature of Krista's mental state.

The film works on many, many levels. Ponder has been able to distill some powerful moments of filmmaking. There are some incredibly effective jump scares (all the more impressive because a good jump-scare is like trying to re-inventing the wheel, but scarier) and builds the dread that is inherently present in the situation. Ponder is able to do this because she focuses on character. Without giving too much away, Ponder builds the audiences sympathies to Krista by employing experimental film techniques to let the audience understand her and her plight.Well played, non?

There is an interesting problem in films of this nature. Namely its pacing. I know several other bloggers including Ponder herself have listed a litany of influences for this film. For my money, I could not get away from Roman Polanski's Repulsion. Between the dependent sister relationship to the isolation within a small living space it seemed to ring the most true to me. I mention this only because they suffer from the same problems. It is difficult at the best of times to make a film with your main character suffering from a psychotic break. it is even harder when that character is confined to a small space. The film plays out in chapters that all feel startlingly similar. The day starts normally. Krista undergoes a traumatic event, usually involving blood, freaks out then realizes it was all in her mind. Blackout. The next day begins. There is a definite build in tension during these days but the formula becomes the same. Watching it at a film festival last night I could feel the audience around me getting increasingly restless as the pattern repeated.

Ludlow suffers from another problem, an extremely rare one at that. It has multiple endings. All of them good. But I went to put on my coat three times. That was the point the film really began to drag for me. We'd hit an ending I thought was incredibly satisfying then it would continue. It felt like reading a Choose-Your-Own-Adventure novel and reading all the endings to see what you were in for. While this is a criticism of the movie I think it's a credit to Ponder's writing abilities. And the boundaries you can push within the medium of film.

All this to say, it's not an easy viewing. It forces you to engage rather than passively sitting in front of it. It is, however, worth the effort.

Check the Ludlow Facebook page for upcoming screenings near you or view the trailer and order from Final Girl

And Now For Something Completely Different

2011-03-19T09:51:00.000-04:00

Where would we be without experiments? Either in a Utopian paradise or some horrific zombie ridden near-future. It's a For the Win or What the Fuck kind of situation.

Which is exactly what my colleague Tom McGee and myself have set out to do. In this experiment Tom and I will be watching a movie that neither of us have seen and is both loved and reviled by its audience. We're recording our commentary so that it may serve as a document of what viewing the movie is like so that you may either choose to watch along with us or just listen to our Dickensian level of descriptor use.

For our first episode we settled on The Wolfman. I mentioned it recently in this blog as it won the Academy Award for Make Up and has found its defenders in the horror community.

We will be storing the episode online and it can be found here:
http://www.archive.org/details/ScareTactic-FtwOrWtfEpisode01TheWolfman

Listen, enjoy and, as always, tell us what you think.

Werewolves Get Angsty and Acquire Dodgy Accents: The Live Blogging!

2011-03-14T01:24:00.000-04:00

Sooooooo we're back and I've had several adult beverages.

Go-go Gadget Live Blogging!

12:16am OMG there is the most boring scene where comic book guy explains to Vivienne what werewolves are. Is this irony? If so it's retarded.

12:18am So Comic Book Guy and Vivienne are on a date and she takes him to the "best view of the city" which, apparently, is a sound stage.

12:20am They mac on each other then suddenly it's daylight. Happens alllllllllllllllllllll the time.

12:21am There was just a shot of her dancing in the rain which came from nowhere I might be drunker than I think. No... No... it's the children that are wrong

12:22am Oh SNAP! The werewolves are on to them! There must not be much to do when you're a werewolf. Seriously. This date-montage is bo-ring.

12:29am The dude with the hair jumps out of the shadows. Ruins the boring date and is all like, "she's taken! And she got her parents killed!" Then jumps in an SUV and drives off. This movie is nothing but consistency.

12:36am The leader of the werewolves who wants to get it in with Vivienne tells them to get rid of comic book guy. I don't get it. This guy is a nerd who's never been in a fight. Why do they need to send an entire pack of werewolves after him?

12:45am Lame Romeo and Juliet-esque montage. FYI - This is the 5th montage in this movie.

12:47am Holy crap. Comic Book Guy just quasi beat up Bad Hair guy. This is literally the lamest fight ever.

12:49am Best. Dialogue. Ever.
Comic Book Guy: I swear, I'll get on the train.
Bad Hair Guy: I AM the train.

12:52am Comic Book Guy kills Bad Hair Guy with a necklace and some bad CGI.

12:56am Comic Book Guy is all mad that Vivienne never told him she was a werewolf but he literally stalks her from the beginning. Yes, Comic Book Guy, it's her fault she's a werewolf and her fault she told you NOT to get involved with her. Manipulative douche, much?

1:00am These people are soooooo whiny. Yeesh. Lighten up.

1:02am This was made in 2007. Why is she wearing flares???????

1:06am I'm pretty sure this movie was made for $37 and someone's uncle wrote the script for free.

Werewolves Get Angsty and Acquire Dodgy Accents

2011-03-13T17:22:00.000-04:00

"Would you be at church at 2 in the morning if you had a boyfriend?" And that my friends is one of the lines said with utter conviction in the pre-Twilight movie Blood and Chocolate. The movie functions as the bastard child of Chocolat, Eatern Promises and An American Werewolf in London. Three things which should never ever be put together.

Basic plot is Vivienne is a werewolf in Romania. But she's American. She's 19 and is in with the secret society of werewolves which is super secret and they use their secret influence to run a chocolate store. Did I mention that they're secret? Because they spend most of the movie talking in raised voices about how they're soooooo secret. And the head of the pack keeps talking about some prophecy that she might be a part of. Which is also a secret. Also, he wants to bone her.

Then she meets this nice and stalkerific guy named Aiden who also wants to bone her. But he says shit like, "I want to hear what you dream about." (seriously) And he's a graphic novelist/artist. So he's non-threatening and therefore the better choice.

The great thing about this movie is that Vivienne sulks around the whole time with the most epic sour-puss face which consists of a too large forehead that's really bugging me. Also, when they turn into werewolves there's a flash of light then they're a literal wolf. Boringest. Werewolf. EVAR.

And because I'm halfway through and have to head out for a bit I thought I'd do an old fashion live blog. Whoot!

I mean, there are so many questions. Which guy will get it in first? Will there still be secrets? And will this character:


Yet another werewolf douche who wants to bang

fix his hair trauma?

Stay tuned.

5 Horror Movies Worth Watching When You're Sick

2011-03-11T12:47:00.000-05:00

So, I'm sick. Not enough that I can stay home for a few days but enough so I feel like crap and can only pitifully whine about it. Also, it's raining outside.

On days like today I'd rather be at home under a blanket, in front of the TV with a stack of DVDs to get through. I'm pretty particular about the movies I watch when I'm sick. I should have seen them before because I'll most likely pass out during it. A lot of this is down to taste, these are films I really like, are highly watchable and it doesn't matter if I only watch the first five then the last 10 minutes......

5. The Ring

Why? Why would I subject myself to one of my all time scariest movies? Because it's so damn watchable. Director Gore Verbinski keeps the action coming. Seriously, that shit gets trippy when you're doped out of your head on Cold & Flu stuff. Last time I watched it when I was sick I spent a great deal of time wondering why hotties like Naomi Watts and and Hot-Absent-Dad-Guy didn't have an equally hot child. It skips a generation I guess...

4. Carrie

This is like the best Lifetime movie there ever was. Though heavily steeped in 1970s culture, Carrie still plays out the nostalgia card while still being relevant. Trust me, teenage girls don't change that much - they just gain more technology to hate on you.

3. I Know Who Killed Me

LiLo!!!!! Oh God, this is an epic cluster-fuck of a movie. But with a delirious fever you'll be prone to fits of giggle and if you reach a true level of sickness while watching the film you may finally understand the secret meaning in it. Just like that chick in Martyrs.

2. Quarantine

Yes, I know REC is better. I'm not debating that. BUT if you need to shut your eyes for a bit or you don't really want to focus the subtitles will drive you crazy. And Quarantine is still decent, it may even prompt you to re-watch REC when you're better. I watched this when I was sick and spent the whole time wondering how you can play someone's sister on TV and then be married to them in real life. But they divorced. Guess that didn't work out. Stupid actors.

1. The Stepford Wives

The orginal. Though if you feel like punishing yourself by all means watch the Nicole Kidman one. That one always ends with me yelling at the TV screen "BETTE MIDLER BURNT HER HAND IN THE MOVIE. WHY IS IT NOT BANDAGED IN THE LAST SCENE???? FASKUGJI LEFU;HOWNKLGIUOFABKGKLJAHIUBBN"

But I digress.

The original is hella crazy. And, like The Ring, surprisingly watchable though much more dated than Carrie. The best part is how dark the whole movie gets. Worth watching anytime, but surprisingly comforting in the pay off at the end.

Horror Genres: Literary Monsters

2011-03-08T19:01:00.002-05:00

Granted, this one could fall under the heading of Creature Feature but I have a big-ass soft spot for literary monsters. I mean, I do have a minor in English Lit. JEALOUS??

Literature feeds a lot of horror movie themes, most of them stemming from Victorian Era novels. Indeed Frankenstein, Dracula, The Wolfman and Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde all stem from this period. Ghost stories were also of great interest as the Victorians developed an interest in seances and resurrections just see The Turn of The Screw by Henry James which still scares the the bejesus out of me.

But if you look even further back you'll find an entirely other history to deal with. These often become apparent as it will give storytellers something to either absorb or deny in order to tell their story. Some carefully select pieces to create their own folklore. Some movies just outright ignore everything ever. (Underworld series, I'm looking at you.) So without further ado lets look at some monsters.

Frankenstein is pretty damn cool because he was fully a creation of the mind of Mary Shelly. The lore goes that Shelly dreamed the basis for the novel while staying at Lord Byron's estate (there where no houses in England at the time, only estates. Like what Madonna owns) Anyhoozle. It's technically Frankenstein's Monster as Victor Frankenstein is the creator behind the Monster. The entire book questions the control a man should have over life and while it is still referenced and studied widely, it makes for one hell of a gruesome read.

Frankenstein also functions as a form of zombie story. While the origins of zombie stories are based in Voodoo Frankenstein introduced the idea that reanimating a corpse could be scientific rather than purely mystical. HP Lovecraft and WB Seabrook also wrote stories that dealt with zombies though never calling them that. Romero really did define the modern zombie but there's definitely some love owed to the literary tradition.

Dracula, Dracula, Dracula. I've mentioned this sucker (geddit?) so many times on this blog that I don't really want to go into it again. But I will. So Bram Stoker made this guy famous. But of course the story stems from folk lore. The main difference in Stoker's version is that Dracula was nobility which was a very contrary idea in the Victorian era. Vampirism is technically a disease so the idea of a nobleman suffering from a disease was quite a challenging one. Looking at today's pop culture take on Vampires is like looking at at a who's who of the upper class.

One of my favourite parts of Van Helsing was when Kate Beckinsale drolls in some God awful Romanian accent "There is nothink faster than Transylvanian horses. Not even verevolves." It's so bad, yet so very, very good. Kind of like how I feel about werewolves themselves, though forever in my head I hear Kate's "verevolves" (that's right, we're on a first name basis). Werewolves can be traced back to Greek mythology. Lycaon was the son of a Greek God who pissed off Zeus enough times that Zeus changed him into a wolf. Hence we can also use the term "lycathrope" to mean werewolf. The term makes appearances all through our culture though my personal favourite is Webster's The Duchess of Malfi. People without a Minor in English Lit say what?

Friends - Where Are They Now.... In Horror!

2011-03-03T18:11:00.002-05:00

I used to loooooooooooove Friends. When you're ten it's a pretty great show for you and your friends to watch because you can so play the "you're such a Phoebe" game. Which is waaaaay cooler than the "you're such a Miranda" game.

I caught a couple episodes of Friends recently and it just doesn't work for me anymore. It's nice in an isn't it nostalgic kind of way because I know all the lines. (yes, I was the nerd that used to record new episodes, on VHS no less)

So let's play the where are they now game. Admittedly, I'm going to cheat with this one and use pre-Friends credits for this. I hear your cries of "but that's not how you do the Where Are They Now game, Alex!!!!! And to you I say : deal. These hurt-bags made so much money off of Friends they never have to work again. And except for a few embarrassing attempts at movie-stardom, they haven't.

Let's start with the bottom where we have:

Chandler!

That's right. He's at the bottom because he was in a TV movie called Deadly Relations in 1993 where he had some screen time with Gwyneth Paltrow.

And this is the only thing about the movie I could find image-wise

Which is the smallest picture of anything I have ever found. But, it's in the name of research so get out you magnifying glass.

Here is the summary I found of it on IMDB: Leonard Fagot has four daughters and loves them so much, that he usurps his control over them. He lets them know how he feels about the men they date. And if he disapproves of them, he probably will have them killed to get them out of his daughters' life.

So it's a thriller and the main family has an interesting last name. As a writer I wouldn't have picked it out myself. But maybe that's why none of my made-for-tv movies have been produced. I assume Chandler's trying to date one of the daughters and he probably meets an untimely end. His character's name is: George Westerfield. Something about that name just screams gardening shears to me....

Next up is ....

Joey!

Sweet, sweet Joey. I bet you didn't know he was in a little movie called The Killing Box aka Grey Knight aka zombie confederate voodoo. That's right. AND Corbin Bernsen AND Martin Sheen AND Billy Bob Thorton AND AJ Langer are all in it.

It's actually kind of a beautiful story because while the Americans were fighting each other, zombies teach us that we can all be eaten, therefore - we're all interconnected. aaaaaaaaaaawwwwwwwwwwwwwww

Now Ross is above these guys because a deranged fan took the time to take screen grabs of his performance in 1994's Wolf where he seems to get all up in Nicholson's face.

BAM! Suck it most acclaimed actor of his generation! You just got Ross'd in a shitty movie that Jack would probably like to forget about.

Did you know Lisa Kudrow was in The Unborn? I bet you didn't.

Well, she was in the 1991 version. Which I figure is kind of the same thing. Let's talk about the Unborn for a second. What a godawful movie. Seriously. Not even Gary Oldman could make it better and he makes EVERYTHING better. It wasn't scary and it didn't make sense. I like that they tried to explain why they had to have a Jewish exorcism but that lead girl, Odette something was awful. Her mouth is open in every scene. For real. I'd tell you to watch it understand my pain... but then you'd have to watch it.

The only thing I like about Jennifer Aniston is that she's in Leprechaun.

No that, my friends, is some pretty epic baby-fat.

And our winner is: GALE WEATHERS!
I mean Monica.
She was pretty badass in the first Scream... then the other Screams happened. And I hated them.

Scream 4 is soon, isn't it? I know I'll be seeing it. And I'm pretty sure I'll be leaving disappointed. Damn you, Hollywood Marketing!

Horror Genre: Creature Features

2011-03-02T18:26:00.000-05:00

Every so often I'll set myself a huuuuuuge task, then wonder why I did it. This Horror Genre Breakdown is going to be my War & Peace. But like Nike and Charlie Sheen keep telling us, "just do it." So here we go. Right now. This very second. Wait, I'm going to go get some water first.

...

Ok. I'm back.

So where were we? Ah yes, Creature Features. This is one of the bigger genres mainly due to its history and
variance in meaning. The original creature features were Universal movies from the 1930s such as Frankenstein and King Kong. They eventually shifted to nuclear and futuristic themed movies such as Attack of the 50 Foot Woman and It Came From Outer Space. Films like these would be broadcast on a Friday or Saturday night and were a mainstay of American culture for quite a while. Films were in your home. You no longer had to go out and search for them. It could also become a private experience if you chose.

What I find particularly interesting about these movies is their throwback quality. They are deeply embedded in the psyche and paranoia of the post-WWII, the Cold War the race to the moon. Looking back now you could say they were a precursor to the horror genre we know and love today. You might never meet the people who are also watching all these movies but through the internet we have a way of making connection we might never have made were it not for blogs. It's all very Back to the Future/ Mobius Strip... but still. Creature Features and the way they were marketed and viewed created some of the foundations for the contemporary horror community.

This is a genre that seems to have died out. The Creature Features of old are fun, yet dated and appeal to a very specific group of people, I think, for their throw-back quality. The more recent Creature features I can think of such as Cloverfield, The Wolfman and Splice fall prey to filmmakers trying to make too much sense of them. By injecting them with too much science they lose what initially drew fans to them. The fantastical and the-over-the-top quality of them does not necessitate realism.

Nic Cage Justifies "the way of God to Men" with an emphasis on Jusitfy

2011-03-01T17:32:00.001-05:00

Drive Angry is so Grindhouse it hurts. I feel like I should have been watching it in some slummy Times Square cinema in the 1970s with Travis Bickle sitting behind me.

I know some people may not believe me but it's a damn good movie. It's funny, schlocky and full of escapism. And at this gray time of year, it was exactly what I needed.

Explaining the movie is as pointless as trying to make sense of it, but hey, let's give it a shot. Cage is John Milton. I think they're trying to pass it off as just a name but for kicks let's pretend it's actually the dude that wrote Paradise Lost. Milton has broken free from Hell and is on a mission to avenge his daughter's death at the hand of a cult leader (who's incidentally trying to bring about Hell on earth) and reclaim his granddaughter before she is sacrificed. Along the way he meets Piper (Amber Heard) a butt-kicking, straight shooting Southern broad who helps him along his way.

The movie gets increasingly crazy with a version of Death showing up to collect Milton and bring him back to hell, the cult leader who seems to have escaped from an Anne Rice novel and the already infamous scene where Milton takes on 10+ guys while having sex. That scene isn't all that shocking, it's just impressive. If you enjoy these kinds of movies it's hard not to get caught up in the giddiness of the whole thing.

Cage gives his now standard dry-witted performance. Its what we all now know and love. The audience I saw it with was cheering for him every time he stuck a one liner. There are a lot of great smaller parts as well but I really want to give some props to Amber Heard. She's frickin' fantastic. It's not a love story between her and Cage. It's a partnership. She's fiesty, hawt and incredibly alive onscreen. I've heard rumblings about her for a while now and she's worth all the fuss.

Drive Angry is one of the best ways to kill two hours. If you're down for some illogical, over-the-top insanity make sure you check it out.

It should also be required viewing for anyone in Religious Studies.

Horror Movie Coolie: Rick Baker in everything

2011-03-01T15:30:00.000-05:00

If you haven't surmised this already, I'm a huge movie geek. I love them all. But, of course, like horror movies best. Similar to the way Charlie Sheen views his goddesses.

Looking back on this year's ridiculously boring Oscars, there was one truly exciting moment, Rick Baker won an Oscar!!!!!!! For The Wolfman!!!!! ... um, I'm less excited about the last part but I thought it would be a great opportunity to look back on one of the living legends in the industry.

His first professional job was on The Exorcist as an assistant. How cool is that? Even looking through Exorcist photos they still creep me out.

An American Werewolf In London followed for which he won the inaugural Academy Award for Best Make-Up.

His career continued working on major studio films but he still worked on smaller films such as The Frighteners.

He classes up his big studio work, such as The Ring and Hellboy, with his singular style

Rick Baker rules. You probably have your own favourites of his work, these are mine. He blends surrealist style with the real, which has helped create some of the most memorable and enduring images in cinema history.

Horror Genres: The Breakdown (updated!)

2011-02-23T18:50:00.001-05:00

Horror is a big-ass genre. A lot of things could be called "horror" as much as they could be called other things. Some people are adamant that Silence of the Lambs is a mystery-thriller while others are staunchly supportive of its horror status. Now, this all comes down to personal taste and one's own views on the horror genre. To some it's still lowly schlock and they could never imagine an Oscar-winning movie to fall in that category. To each their own I say. I'm not out to change anyone's mind. (and if you're reading a horror blog you're probably more to my way of thinking which is: horror rules - suck it, nerds!)

I'm going to do a series of post breaking down the different sub-genres with a description of each as well as some highlights and low-lights.

This one is going to be a list of the genres. If you think I've left something out, let me know. But for now, on to the list!

In no particular order...

Creature Features

I submit that this genre is more about monsters. Jeepers Creepers to King Kong to Hollow Man I would consider a Creature feature. Basically a creature or monster we as a collective consciousness do not have an understanding of. It needs to be explained.

Literary Monsters

These ones are monsters that we do share a collective knowledge of, specifically from the Victorian era such as Frankenstein, Dracula, Phantom of the Opera and Dr Jekyll and Mr. Hyde. Filmmakers are forced to produce a representation of the monster that either affirms our understanding of it or challenges it.

Slashers

Killer - usually masked - usually chasing and killing sex loving teens until a virginal chick offs him until the next sequel

Supernatural

Ghosts, demons, the generally unexplainable. These forces follow unassuming people either warning them or harming them.

Satanic

The big-bad-Devil did it!!! No seriously, he totes did. Big in the 60s and 70s they make reappearance every so often trying to re-define our relationship with religion.

Sci-Fi

A lot of people consider this one a genre unto itself and rightfully so. Science Fiction has enough of its own history to accomodate that. But there's still an awful lot of horror that scares the bejesus out of me.

Horror-Comedy

Funny yet still scary. This one extra super tricky to get and maintain balance in. A lot of people have tried. Few have succeeded.

Exploitation

Big in the 70s it's recently had a bit of a comeback riding on the torture-porn wave. Lots of time is devoted to violence in this. The plots are generally quite simple with the goal being an emotional and cathartic outcome.

Zombies

'nuff said.

Survival

Mother Nature can be a cold hard bitch sometimes. These movies have nothing to do with killers, possession or any other thing. These movies establish fear through real elements. These situations, though extreme, are plausible. This genre lends itself to establishing a link with the audience through identification.

I'll mention at this point, which most of you already know, that movies can be a blend of genres. Survival of the Dead could be considered both a Survival and a Zombie. The ensuing blog posts will deal with the best possible examples of each genre. Thanks for all your input and keep it coming! Let's dork it up and make this as thorough as possible.

Stuck In A Moment That You Can't Get Out Of

2011-02-21T00:15:00.000-05:00

I've never been skiing or snowboarding. Every few years I'll start think about trying it and inevitably a celebrity dies. So to prevent another rash of celebrity deaths I've stopped thinking about my potential as a Gold Medal skier.

Watching Adam Green's Frozen has now made me think twice about getting on the muthaeffing lift. But I've got mad respect for a blog called Final Girl and the film club there, which Frozen is the latest selection in. When you get on that lift anything could happen. It could stop. You could fall. There could be wolves. You could reveal deep personal truths to someone you previously didn't even like.

Which is what happens to a trio of American Eagle Outfitter models. This movie should not work. The premise is exactly what's in the poster. The actors, though very attractive, are bland. An hour of the movie takes place on a ski lift, there ain't no secondary plot about a lonely ski resort worker. But, y'know what? Writer/Director Adam Green makes it work. I've never seen Hatchet but I've heard a lot about his work. While I wasn't blown away by the script Green manages to create a surprising amount of tension and empathy towards the characters. Green makes sure to milk every opportunity and explore every option of their escape to make it clear how bleak the outlook is.

And in the great tradition of movie metaphors every character becomes frozen in one way another. Some more literally than others.

Movies like Frozen aren't my cup of tea but this one genuinely milks the potential of the situation. Even the emotional parts between the tension filled moments are tolerable. Check it for something that stays inside the box but that still make you cower behind the larger pieces of your furniture.

The More You Know: February Is Women In Horror Month

2011-02-19T12:09:00.000-05:00

Yes, yes I realize we're more than half-way through February but it's Women in Horror Month, people!!! It's a month long celebration of female directors, writers, bloggers, actresses, cinematographers, academics and more with a tie to horror movies. I cannot possibly explain the importance of women in horror in one wee blog post, especially when others are doing it a real service, so here are some resources for those that are interested.

PAST:
The best way to start is with some books which is where I learned my horror theory. After watching movies after movie it's great to be able to put some context to the whole thing. The best one to start with is Carol J Clover's Men, Women and Chainsaws. It's pretty contentious and not for everyone but if you're going to get all uppity about theory and opinions you have to understand them and any book that carefully deconstructs Texas Chainsaw Massacre 2 is ok by me.

PRESENT:
Research! Did you know Pet Sematary was written and directed by a woman? Did you know one of the handful of female writers to win an Oscar for Best Screenplay also wrote a horror movie? Did you know the first woman to win a Best Director Oscar also directed one of the most accalimed horror movies of the 80s? Didja didja didja????? There are many more out there. So get on IMDB and start checking your favourite movies and see where the ladies are at.

I'm going to try and stop beating the dead horse of "everything's a boy's club waaaaaaaaaaaaaah!" but there certainly is a pull towards that. Writers like Stacie Ponder of Final Girl and Heidi Martinuzzi founder and writer of Fangirltastic are really challenging and giving hilarious thought and debate to all things horror and women related on their respective websites and their equally awesome weekly podscast The Scarening. There are a TON of other great horror blogs and websites to check out and I just happen to think these ones in particular are the bees knees.

If you've read this far and you're still interested in all things women and horror check the website aptly named Women in Horror Month.

FUTURE:
The future is in your hands. Making an impact by adding to the number of people that read my blog is really nice... but doesn't do much to the promotion of women in horror. So start making stuff. Get creative. Yes, this sounds like the end of Dead Poet Society or something. But, for real. Stop talking about wanting to do something and start adding to the conversation.

Horror Movie Coolie: Milla Jovovich in Resident Evil (2002)

2011-02-17T18:44:00.000-05:00

I have an unabashed and deep love for Resident Evil and an even deeper love for Milla Jovovich. My M.J. love stems from The Fifth Element because that movie also fucking rocks. But in Resident she looks hot and believable holding gun. The other great thing about Milla Jovovich is, as Alice, she looks and acts like a woman. Not a girl. Not a plaything. But a woman. Who happens to be wearing a sexy red dress. But she's wearing flats so I feel like that balances it out.

No bra, no problem.

Writer/director Paul W.S Anderson makes one of the best action-horror hybrids ever, which isn't that surprising when you consider he also brought us Event Horizon. Now, I know a lot of people go on and on that it has almost nothing to do with the video game except for the premise. To be honest, I can't really get behind people getting upset about changing fictional things that never happened.

Anderson's film takes the common root of an Alice in Wonderland structure with the main character being called Alice and the computer program being called The Red Queen and all the zombies and what not. I love this darn movie so much I even love it's horrible sequels. You won't be able to convince me otherwise. They may never be able to duplicate the simplicity and effectiveness of the first one, but I sure do enjoy watching them try.

Good and literal brainless fun. Also, awesome side-boob.