Vincent (1982) Review

Director: Tim Burton
Narrated by: Vincent Price
Genre: Short film, Stop-motion, Horror

Tim Burton's first directed work, a short titled Vincent. At just under six minutes long, this short stop-motion film is what sparked Burton's directing career, and perhaps even defined it.

What do you get when you combine Vincent Price, Tim Burton, Edgar Allan Poe, and Gothic German expressionism? Well, you get Vincent of course.

The short is about a boy who is obsessed with Vincent Price and Edgar Allan Poe, and is essentially a big horror fan. He often imagines being Vincent Price (who also narrates) and performs experiments and what have you.

Vincent Price does a great job narrating the short, which is really just a visual poem. Though this can be enjoyed by anyone, Price fans will be especially pleased, with not only getting to here the man himself but also with numerous references to Price films.

The stop-motion animation is beautiful and is done in that distinct Burton-style that was later repeated in his later films such as The Nightmare Before Christmas and Frankenweenie. It has a very dark, gothic style, and the sets here are very beautifully inspired by early German expressionist films. The chilling soundtrack compliments the theme wonderfully. 

One of Burton's best even till this day, and a story that resonates with any Horror fan.

Smiley (2012) Review

Director: Michael Gallagher
Stars: Caitlin Gerard, Shane Dawson, Toby Turner
Genre: Horror

I might as well get straight to the point and say that I was pretty disappointed by Smiley. Disappointed because it was a bit...better than I expected. No, that's not the right wording. I should say it was more serious than I expected. It's a pretty awful film, and I did kind of expect it to be, but I thought it'd be cheesy and over-the-top in classic slasher fashion. I thought it'd be fun.

But it wasn't, which I suppose is somewhat admirable since Smiley tried to be a bit different rather than taking the easy route and just making the antagonist go around and kill a bunch of people. But the film never really comes together to be a satisfying experience.

The film is about an internet urban legend where if you're webcam chatting with someone and you type in "i did it for the lulz" into the chat box three times a guy named Smiley will come up behind that person and kill them. Yes, that's right, you have to type in "i did it for the lulz." It's essentially a modernized Bloody Mary. Anyway, these two girls want to see if it's true so they try it and get a guy killed, but then the one girl fears that Smiley is coming to kill her and so on and so forth.

The film tried to be very modern, name-dropping particular imageboards and hacker groups (which quite upset the imageboards and hacker groups mentioned; rules 1 & 2). I'm not a huge fan of films doing this, it tends to feel trendy and forced, which it does in Smiley. Even the main antagonist is named after an emoticon. People unfamiliar with the internet probably won't even understand what they're talking about and those who are familiar will realize how fake they sound, and probably get pretty pissed off at them.

The scares are cheap as ever. Just about nearly every scare is one of those fake kind of scares where it's really just their friend coming up behind them or them bumping into a stranger. I hate those kind of scares. A film can get away with doing that once or twice but this film probably holds the record for most pseudo-scares in a single film. It gets annoying and after the first few times it stops being shocking and it becomes expected and unscary. Shock scares are just so easy to do and when they're not even an actual threat it's even easier.

But I suppose that's the theme of the film: nothing is as it seems. The main character thinks she may be crazy at some points, is sometimes unsure what is real and not. The film kind of even convinces you that she's actually just crazy and imagining it all. (Spoiler: Which is kind of true, but this technique made the ending a bit more satisfying.)

I will admit from now on I'll probably think of this film every time I talk to someone over webcam, so I suppose it deserves some credit for that.

But is Smiley the horror villain for the internet generation as Michael Myers and Jason Voorhees and Freddy Kreuger were to the kids of the 80s. I hope not. Let's try to do a bit better.

A lot of the camera angles compliment the scares pretty well, but there's nothing really too outstanding here. I liked how what was going on in the main character's life was reflected in her college class discussions. That was cool, slightly cliche, but cool.

[The following paragraph will contain spoilers] In the end we find out it was all a prank by the hardcore internet users of the film. They drive the main girl to suicide and then they all laugh about it. It's pretty sick. They all chant "For the lulz" at the end in unison. It's an obvious commentary on how much is too much, and how anonymity can lead people to do things they wouldn't normally.  Basically a statement on the internet generation.

I like films that make a statement and have something to say. And a lot of what Smiley tries to point out I find to be agreeable. But, alas, the film is still pretty shitty and the ending really isn't satisfying. Incredibly grim, yes, which I like, but still not very good.

The film's cast is filmed with mostly generally unknown actors. Well-known YouTubers Shane Dawson and Toby Turner are in here. I'm not much fans of their work, but none of the actors in here are very talented. They do a suffice enough job but it's all very mediocre. Caitlin Gerard has such a beautiful smile though.

You may think going into this, as I did, that it will be a regular slasher film. Which makes sense if you've read the synopsis or watched the trailer. I mean the monster looks like he belongs in a slasher film. You'll find something a bit different, it's to an extent a slasher, it's more psychological horror, but it really doesn't do justice to any subgenre.

So even though the film tries to, it really doesn't do anything new and it plays out like a very typical horror film. There are some interesting things, and the film's ultimate goal seemed to present a message, which I suppose it achieved. But, I can't really recommend it.

Pros:

+Tries to be a bit different than other slashers

+Has something to say

Cons:

-Ends up being pretty typical

-Scares are cheap and dull

-Acting is sub-par

-Tries too hard to appeal to internet audiences, ultimately fails

-Nothing here is outstanding

The Night of the Hunter (1955) Review

Director: Charles Laughton
Stars: Robert Mitchum, Shelley Winters, Lillian Gish
Genre: Thriller

The Night of the Hunter is a film about a man who robs $10,000 from a bank and hides the money, telling only his two children where it is and entrusting them to never tell anyone, not even their mother. The man is then arrested and sentenced to death for the murders of two people in the bank.

While in prison he meets a preacher named Harry Powell (Mitchum) who, after being released, goes to the now dead man's home to try and find out where the money is stashed. The entire film is about this preacher trying to get the children to tell him where the money is.

The plot, which is based on the novel of the same name, is actually pretty good. It's simple and easy to follow but leads to many events and varied scenes. 

This is the only film that actor Charles Laughton ever directed. The film was mostly ignored at the time of its release but has since found the recognition that it no doubt deserves.

The cinematography and visuals here are stunning. Though not quite a film noir, it has very many noir qualities and themes. At times it even has a Gothic feel, and the German expressionist influences are quite present. The sets and scenes are all beautiful, whether it be children floating down river at night on a boat, or an angry preacher riding his horse in the distance; it's all beautifully done and very memorable. Let me not forget the perfect use of light and shadows, creating and incredibly sinister atmosphere. 

It's a pretty film to say the least. Charles Laughton should be applauded on his cinematography choices. Take for example the scene where Harry Powell has his tattooed hand parched on the fence post. Or the haunting scene with the dead woman's body at the bottom of the river, hair waving in the water with the seaweed.

The preacher, Harry Powell, is perhaps one of the most terrifying and memorable antagonists ever. Portrayed excellently by Robert Mitchum, he gives off a creepy and terror-filled vibe that is very similar to many horror films. His hands are tattooed with the word "LOVE" on his right knuckles and "HATE" on his right. A chilling trademark for a chilling character.

The latter part of the film follows the two children trying to escape from the preacher, and this was one of the few films of the time to give such a large role to children. And I must say the child actors did not disappoint. 

I'd call The Night of the Hunter a borderline horror film, just because of its deliciously evil and memorable antagonist and its creepy atmosphere. Plus it always seems to be night time in this film. There's even an angry mob towards the end, which I'm still not sure what purpose they served.

I can't remember the film having any music besides the songs that were sung by characters in the film. From little girls singing lullabies, to an old woman singing in unison with a serial killer. It's all wonderfully chilling and unsettling, which fits the theme perfectly.

The film has its flaws. The ending was....really weird. It just didn't fit the feel of the rest of the film, and it almost felt like propaganda the way the lady just looked at the camera. It is a happy ending, but it was just...I really can't describe it, it was just so unsubtle in its delivery. There were also some questionable directorial decisions, but for a directorial debut this film is superb.

It's a classic film that was ahead of its time and one of those films that everyone should watch.

Pros:

+Great visuals, cinematography, and atmosphere

+Feared and memorable antagonist

+Memorable scenes

+Chilling soundtrack

Cons:

-Questionable ending

Purchase The Night of the Hunter on Amazon: Blu-Ray - DVD - Stream

The Cabin in the Woods (2012) Review

Director: Drew Goddard
Stars: Kristen Connolly, Chris Hemsworth, Anna Hutchison, Fran Kranz, Jesse Williams
Genre: Horror, Comedy, Satire, Parody

I'll start out by saying that though there won't be any major spoilers in this review, I'd recommend, if you have yet to see this, that you watch it before reading this review as your viewing experience will most likely be significantly greater if you go into it with the least amount of prior knowledge possible.

The Cabin in the Woods is a extremely detailed love letter to the horror genre. Though it's really only barely a horror film itself, sure it has horror elements, even science fiction elements, but it really is just a comedy.

A group of five teenagers go out to a cabin in the woods (surprise) on a vacation or orgy or whatever. But, of course, some odd things start happening. So yes, it's essentially every other slasher film ever made. And that's the point. It's a satire of the genre. 

The entire first hour of the film is basically an Evil Dead remake. The cabin looks nearly the same. Even the interior is very similar, donning a mounted animal head as well. There is of course a cellar door. They read Latin text from a book they find and it in turn summons creatures back from the dead. The inescapable woods. The first hour is The Evil Dead. It really is. Though, admittedly, not quite as good as the Evil Dead.

But this kind of works negatively for the film. I was actually a bit bored in the first hour because even though it was done intentionally, it was still boring and predictable. It just plays out like a generic zombie flick. It's like a really bad parody rather than a clever satire. And that really holds true for the entire film: at times it can be a very clever satire but it's also very often just a dumb parody. The only thing that got me through the first hour were all the references, but putting references in a film is easy; no artistic talents needed.

The characters are stereotypical slasher film characters, again done intentionally. It was cool how they started out as regular people, but upon arriving at the cabin they all turned into typical slasher characters, due to the puppeteers of course. The only one that wasn't effected was the stoner because due to smoking so much pot he was immune, but he started out as a stereotypical character anyway. So it's cool how they did that, but, that being said, they're still boring and stupid characters.

They make stupid decisions, done intentionally of course, and the film will make a joke about it but it's still stupid. Just because the film is aware of its stupidity barely justifies its stupidity in my book. It's just a cheap excuse. Don't get me wrong, I love so-bad-it's-good films, but this just feels...too easy? I dunno.

Also, am I the only one that felt like they were Scooby-Doo characters? You have the dumb jock who tells everyone to split up (Fred), the stoner with messy hair (Shaggy), the smart, sensitive girl (Velma), the slut (Daphne), and I guess that other guy was Scooby. And they drive around in a van.

There are tons of references to other horror films in here. TONS. Even the title card is a nod to '70s grindhouse flicks. Just the ones I caught alone couldn't be counted on my fingers and toes. This truly is a horror fan's horror and anyone dedicated to the genre will be greatly rewarded with tons of references that will probably all bring a smile to their faces. There was even a Boomer from Left 4 Dead in here, which I thought I only imagined and even when I rewinded it I could barely believe my eyes. It'd be pointless to try and name half the references in here. Maybe when I rewatch it I will make another post listing all the references I caught. To give a brief idea here are just a few films that were referenced: Ju-On (The Grudge), King Kong, Hellraiser, The Thing, It, Cube, Evil Dead series, etc.

In the last 35 minutes is where things get especially good. Again, if you didn't see it yet, I recommend watching it before continuing. The whole film we know that the teenagers are being spied on and manipulated, we don't know exactly why, but we know. The film opted for letting us know early on rather than saving it for later for a twist ending type of thing. I think the twist ending route would have been more effective but the route they went with led to more laughs and more references. So I guess it worked out.

The last thirty five minutes not only contains the most references but also the most action. Seriously, shit just gets crazy. Dozens and dozens of monsters are on the loose and killing anything they see, and though I hate that they used CGI for certain parts that I feel could have been done awesomely without, I can't help but love it at the same time. Who can forget that bloodied room scene? That was unbelievably awesome. But as many have asked before, out of all those monsters they had, why in the world did they chose to have zombies for the first hour?

So the last half hour of the film really, really makes this worth watching. It stops being a typical slasher, it stops being a typical parody of a typical slasher, and it becomes complete mayhem and fun. Just pure awesomeness. Everything you hope happens, happens.

I hear a lot of people calling this film intelligent or clever or groundbreaking. I think those people are idiots. This film is not smart or artistic, it is just a very fun time with a load of references. So it is a bit overrated in that regard, but I also think that those who dislike this film because it's mindless fun are idiots also. Enjoy yourself, it's quite the fun ride.

Again, this isn't really a horror film, there's nothing scary in it. I suppose it's more of a comedy, but there's really only a few genuinely hilarious parts. It's a parody, it's a satire, I just think it's crazy. I can't say this enough, those last thirty five minutes man...CRAZY.

The ending was a bit of a cop-out and a tad unsatisfactory (I'm talking about like last 3 minutes). But it wraps up the film well enough while leaving it open for possible sequels (in typical slasher fashion). Plus we get a cameo by Sigourney Weaver (Ellen Ripley from Alien), so I suppose it suffices.

So The Cabin in the Wood's strongest points are also its weakest. All the references are cool, but references alone don't make a film good. It makes fun of the stupidity in slashers, but that in turn makes itself stupid. The characters are humorously portrayed as stereotypes, but they're still stereotypes. So I suppose it conforms to as many conventions as it breaks. I also feel that there was a bit of missed potential in the first half of the film; I liked where they were going with the whole "chose how you die" thing, but it never capitalized on it.

The Cabin in the Woods really is just as dumb as the films it pokes fun at, and it's much less intelligent than many of the films it references. The plot, even towards the end, is not incredible. It's just ridiculous. Which bring me to my point: This film is not art; it is pure enjoyment and any one who can't enjoy themselves while watching this, the end in particular, is either completely missing the point or is a real boring person.

I will compliment the point made in having the evil gods (ancient ones), or gods of any sort really, of whom many sacrifices have been made to, be a big metaphor for the audiences themselves. It is the audiences who demand and truly create the stereotypes of film. The audiences demand a certain formula, a standard, and must be kept entertained by the directors. That is an example of cleverness in this film. 

Maybe one of the main problems I have with this film is that it is demanding horror filmmakers to up their game and create something new and unique, but yet The Cabin in the Woods doesn't practice what it preaches. Instead of setting a new standard by creating a groundbreaking horror film, it just threatens to ridicule any that don't. Sure, The Cabin in the Woods is much fresher than many releases we've been seeing lately, but it still doesn't really do anything new, it just spices things up a bit. 

There's no amazing cinematography or engaging characters here. No impressive script writing, no great non-CGI effects. It really is a B-movie with a big budget, no matter how contradictory that may sound.

I hate this film as much as I love it. And it's just as easy to hate this film as it is to love it. I'm a bit in-between but I'm immensely glad I watched it, I may even watch it again, and I'd gladly watch a sequel.

Watch it, you'll have a good time. Horror fans will love trying to catch all the references and nods, and it may even warrant a second viewing to try and spot them all. The first hour is pretty unlikable, but I'll be damned if I can think of a single person who wouldn't enjoy the last thirty five minutes.

Pros:

+References galore

+Highly enjoyable

+Puts a bit of a spin on the genre

Cons:

-Not much originality or artistic merit

-The first hour kind of sucks and rides a fine line between plagiarism and parody

-Characters, though satirical, are unlikable

-Stuck between genres

Purchase The Cabin in the Woods on Amazon: Blu-Ray - DVD - Stream

The Month of October: When Horror Fills the Cinema

In festive Halloween fashion October is a month where we get to see a lot of horror films being released in theaters. This is a list of all the horror films being released in October and I will note which ones I will be seeing an reviewing. (Click each film's title to see my review) Here is a list of October 2012 horror releases:

October 5:

V/H/S - Was released through VOD services last month, now seeing a nationwide theater release. I held out on seeing this on-demand just so I can see it in theaters. Will be seeing this and reviewing it, hopefully on release day.
Trailer

Frankenweenie - I've been hearing some great things about this Burton film. Definitely going to see this.
Trailer

#Hold Your Breath - Yes, there is a hashtag in the title. I'm pretty sure I'll pass on this one.
Trailer











October 12:

Sinister - I don't know all too much about this but I've been hearing its name tossed around a lot lately. Will being seeing.
Trailer












Smiley - Been waiting for this for awhile now. Should provide some B-movie goodness.
Trailer

Grave Encounters 2 - I never saw the first one, and it doesn't seem very interesting to me. If for some reason I end up watching the first one in the next two weeks then I'll go see this.
Trailer









October 19:

Paranormal Activity 4 - Yet another in the franchise. I'm not too big of a fan, but I will be seeing this, just for completion's sake.
Trailer












Citadel - Pass.
Trailer









October 26:

Silent Hill: Revelation - Follow up to 2006's Silent Hill, both of which are based on the video games. No doubt seeing this.
Trailer









October 25 to 31st:

Halloween - The original Halloween film by John Carpenter is getting a special nationwide re-release to finish off the month. Will definitely be seeing this. See here to find a theater near you that will be showing it: http://www.screenvision.com/cinema-events/halloween/
Trailer

















I will be seeing the majority of these films and you can expect a review for each on the day of its release or within a day or two of its release. Other films I will be seeing in October (non-horror) include: Seven Psychopaths and maybe Paper Boy.