Reading About Zombies

Have you ever had a day where as soon as you wake up, it all goes to hell? Okay, so it wasn't that bad for me, but it was close. I walked around in a not so good mood today. I'm better now, but it my mood, and all the things that went wrong today, delayed getting a post up for today. So here it is, late at night, while I try to get this post done before I wake up with the keyboard etched into my face. I did manage to get Rose Red watched tonight, so hopefully I will have that review up tomorrow. After that, I have another screener to watch, before heading back into my Netflix stuff. I have to give a shot out to Jay, who did make my day a little better. He posted a commercial that showed how real women shop! You can check it out here. If the commercial surprises you, then I guess you never went shopping with your woman before.

Since it has been a while since I have done a book review, I figured it was time to do so again. I have been reading, just not horror novels. Instead, I have been reading books more in line with fantasy. Since my little blog has been keeping me busy, getting screeners, setting up interviews while finishing others, as well as the usual reviews, I don't really have a lot of time to read for my pleasure. I would end up taking my book with me whenever I would go eat somewhere other than my room. This would sometimes lead to conversations like this one:

Annoying Person: You are getting far into that book. Do you read much in your room?

Me: Yes, but mostly for classes. Rarely these kind of books.

Annoying Person: Doesn't it take you a long time to read a book that way?

Me: Yes it does. Takes even longer when someone notices I am trying to read, yet keeps talking to me anyway.

So you can see the problem I was sometimes having. Anyway, the book I eventually did manage to read is Book Of The Dead: The Complete History Of Zombie Cinema by Jamie Russell, published in 2005. I think I got this book when I ordered a few other horror themed books, as part of a package deal. Russell starts his book by exploring where zombies come from in the real world. This was very interesting to me. I knew that zombies are linked to voodoo, but I didn't realize how far into the past this was the case. He also shows us how Americans, and for that matter the rest of the world, came to know about zombies. Once this has been established, Russell then starts to talk about zombies on film. What I liked about this book, is that Russell broke down each chapter to talk about each decade. Sometimes he would jump ahead a little bit, but not by a whole lot. Russell mostly talks about the films that do something to change zombies, or films that he feels has a lot of meaning behind, or in, the zombies. I was actually surprised at how many of the films he talked about I have actually watched. This is a good thing because one of the things I didn't like about this book is the way Russell just assumes we have watched each of these films. He usually goes into a lot of detail about the plots of each film he talks about in length. Since he gives away a lot of the major plot points, this is a good book if you just want to make a long movie really short.

Russell has a fairly broad range with what he sees as a zombie. Listing such films as Invasion Of The Body Snatchers, The Crazies, and 28 Days Later as zombie films. Even though he admits that there are no true zombies in those films, he still likes to call them that now and then. When talking about 28 Days Later, he will often call them "the infected", and "zombies", in the same sentence. It is this indecision that would sometimes frustrate me. Another thing that I noticed, that would also frustrate me at times, is the way that any film that has meaning to it is an okay to great film. Rather it be an issue of race, the Vietnam war, or anything by Romero (zombie movie that is), gets a lot of praise from Russell. There are exceptions of course, but even the bad films get some praise for having at least some meaning behind them. If the film doesn't have any meaning, or what Russell deems as no meaning, then it is often written off. Such films as Return Of The Living Dead, and the remake of Dawn Of The Dead, are basically written off because they are mearly entertaining, but have no real meaning to them. While I disagree that some of the films he writes about in this way don't have any kind of meaning to them, I didn't understand why the need to just write them off even if they don't have meaning. I love a movie that makes me think, not just about the film itself, but even real life issues. At the same time though, it is nice to just be entertained now and then. Just because a film doesn't have some deep meaning, doesn't make it a bad film.

I did find Book Of The Dead: The Complete History Of Zombie Cinema to be a fun read. I found the real history of the zombie, which he picked up again when talking about The Serpent And The Rainbow, to be especially interesting. It was also really neat to see how the zombie has changed, and evolved, over the years since it started to show up on film. Since Russell goes into a lot of plot details, I would only suggest this book for those that truly love zombies. I ended up not reading the entire book, just because the back of the book is a list of every zombie film that Russell knows of. I didn't check, but I believe each film gets a small blurb about it as well. Even though I have watched a lot of zombie movies, Russell has watched a hell of a lot more.
3 out of 5 Giving away the plot for this book

Murder On Film

I lied, even though I didn't mean to. My plan for yesterday was to start watching the Rose Red mini-series, but things changed. I got the Dark Reel (2008) screener in the mail, so I decided I would watch that instead, and then start on Rose Red tonight. Since Rose Red is on two discs, at two hours each, it will take me two days to get through it. Since I am almost done with a book I have been reading, that I planned on reviewing, I think I will use that to fill the gap for tomorrow. I was a little surprised to get the screener for Dark Reel, because I found out that it is out on DVD. The screener is just the movie of course, so if you do decide to give this one a watch, you will get to see any extras it has.

Dark Reel starts off with Scarlett May (Alexandra Holden) at a bar. She is sitting alone, but a man comes over to talk to her. Eventually we learn that Scarlett is a small time actress, and the man works for one of the studios. He takes her to his studio for a screen test, where he eventually ends up killing her, while the camera catches it all on film. Fifty-three years later we are back at the same studio, where they are filming their latest film, Pirate Wench. Conner Pritchett (Lance Henriksen) is the head of the studio. Cassie Blue (Tiffany Shepis) is the star of the movie being filmed. Rhett Johnson (Jake Grace) has the lead male role, and also has a thing for red onions, much to his co-star's dislike. In the mist of all this is fan boy Adam Waltz (Edward Furlong), who is a big fan of the b-movies that this studio puts out. Adam manages to win a walk on part, which gives him one speaking line, and gets to meet all the people he so admires. Adam and Cassie seem to hit it off almost right away, often hanging out with each other, after filming is done for the day. One of his co-stars, Lorraine (Kate Orsini), is found dead one morning, soon after Adam joins the cast. She is found dismembered on the ship they film on. Detectives LaRue (Rena Riffel), and Shields (Tony Todd), are called in to solve the murder, and focus in on Adam. Not that Adam could have planned it, but Pritchett decided to rewrite the script, and expand Adam's role. After filming his new expanded part, everyone gathers to watch the daily. Adam starts to see the ghost of Scarlett May, but no one else seems to notice her. Adam thinks it is a joke they have all set up, and eventually leaves after getting mad over it. Was the ghost trying to tell him something, or accusing him?

Dark Reel is one of those films that may cause you to forget you are watching a horror movie. After the first kill, it takes a long time before there is another death. It seems fitting then that Adam wins a walk on role for a horror movie, that turns out to be a pirate movie. Maybe the pirate movie was a horror movie using pirates, but from what we see being filmed, it seems unlikely. It is fun to get to know the different characters though. They at least give us a lot of fun characters, which does keep it interesting. On the other hand, I can understand people calling this a bad horror film, since it takes so long to get around to it. Most of the horror part of Dark Reel doesn't show up until the last twenty minutes or so. With a movie that is close to the two hour mark, that is a long time to wait. I wasn't sure if it was the way Dark Reel was edited, or the way it was filmed, that I had a problem with. Some scenes felt like they were too short, while others dragged on just a little too long at times. There were also some fade to blacks that didn't really make a lot of sense to me either.

Maybe the reason for a low body count, not that it really matters, is because of the effects. The opening kill is a good example of this. The man attacks Scarlett May, putting a rope around her neck. When she falls to the floor, we discover she isn't dead yet. The man, it is easy to figure who this is in present day, then proceeds to hack up her body. Head, arms and legs, are all hacked off. What I didn't like about the scene were the effects. The effects are very obvious, as they can be in other scenes later on as well. I haven't said this about a movie in a long time, but the effects are rather cheesy looking. One thing I did like about that scene though, is that they showed us flashes of her life. I thought that was a nice touch, since many people say their life flashed before their eyes when something bad was happening to them.

The acting was the best thing about Dark Reel. While they do use people that have been in a lot of horror movies, almost everyone gives a very good performance. I especially enjoyed Jake Grace. His acting here can be over the top, but I loved his passion for red onions. To my surprise, when watching the opening credits, I noticed that Mercedes McNab's name showed up. Although her part was small, it was still nice to see her in this film. Tony Todd and Rena Riffel were great as the detectives on the case. I was a little surprised with Rena's part, since she comes across as a little silly at first. I figured out though that this was just an act, since she gets more serious when it is just her and Tony on screen. Even though Brooke Lyons has a small part, playing pretty much a lackey for Pritchett, I was really impressed with her performance. Jeffery Vincent Parise was the director of the film within a film. Of course Lance was also great. I know not everyone will agree with me, but I was actually rather surprised at how well the acting was in this movie.

Dark Reel is a film that is on the fence for me. On one hand, I didn't care for the effects at all, the plot could have used some more work I think, and it takes too long to fulfill its promise of being a horror movie. On the other hand, it was fun watching how all the different characters interacted with each other, and the acting was great. The ghost of Scarlett May is something that probably could have been dropped out of the plot. Outside of interacting with Lance's character, it made little difference to the plot. That one appearance of the ghost would have been enough, since it helps tie up a plot point. Since I did love the acting, and the characters so much, I'm going to go ahead and give it the higher rating that Dark Reel is on the fence for. If you decide to give this one a watch, at least you will know it is hardly perfect, but then what film is?
3 out of 5 The killer looks great as well

Writing In My Diary

Even though some friends talked me into a small road trip late last night, I still managed to get a movie in. I'm not sure how long ago it was, before I started doing reviews at least, I watched the made for TV mini-series Rose Red. I'm pretty sure this was on DVD, and I borrowed it from someone in order to watch it. I don't really recall a lot about it, which is why I will be watching it next. I didn't know that a made for TV prequel was made and released a year later. It wasn't until I started searching for haunted house films, for my challenge, that I came across The Diary Of Ellen Rimbauer (2003). Even though I probably should have watched Rose Red first, but since this film is a prequel, I decided to watch it first.

In The Diary Of Ellen Rimbauer, we meet Ellen Gilcrest (Lisa Brenner), who is being courted by John Rimbauer (Steven Brand). John is an oil tycoon, so has a lot of money. The day that John decides to propose to Ellen, he takes her to the house that he is having built, which he has named Rose Red. Just before he can pop the big question though, a gun shot is heard. Some of the men constructing the house got into an argument, and now one of them is dead. While the house is being completed, John and Ellen go on a world cruise. While is Africa, Ellen discovers that John has a kinky side to him when it comes to sex, as they end up in bed together with a native. He is also into bondage, which is shown in something of a bad light for this film. Ellen also meets Sukeena (Tsidii Leloka), who apparently agrees to become Ellen's personal maid. Once they return back to Seattle, where the home was being built, strange things begin to happen in the house. People disappear, sometimes right in front of other people. The women that disappear appear to be women that John is interested in. Is it John doing something, or is it the house? A friend of Ellen's suggests that she hire a medium, Madame Lu (Tsai Chin). The medium tells Ellen that the house wants her to build it to the heavens, which she promises to do. She needs John to do this though, since he is the one with the money, but is she ready to give herself to him in exchange?

From what I do remember of Rose Red, I found it to be a well done haunted house movie, considering it was made for TV. The Diary Of Ellen Rimbauer is supposed to take us back to the beginning. I assume it is supposed to help explain how the house became the evil house we see in Rose Red. Since I don't really remember a lot about the mini-series, I am just going by what others are saying in that it is an evil house. I seem to remember Rose Red as something along the lines of The Haunting, which is about an evil house. So the question becomes, does the prequel manage to do these things? It does take us back to the start of things, as you can tell from my synopsis. The spirit of the house, if you want to call it that, is pushed far into the background, and never really explored outside of a line or two in passing. That was the main thing I didn't like about this film, that everything felt rushed and passed over. When people disappear, Ellen will often gather up the help, so they can go in search for the missing person. I have to assume no trace of the missing person is found, since they never bring it up again. Ellen loses her daughter to the house, but the impact of this is just barely touched on.

Being a made for TV movie, there are very few effects to be found. We see the blood from the person that was shot, going into some grate that is connected with the house. We actually see one person vanish, and a couple of CGI effects of some faces in a stained glass window. None of them looked bad, but nothing to get the least bit excited about either. The acting is actually very good. Steven Brand and Lisa Brenner are both very good in the lead roles. The only other big role would be that of Sukeena. Tsidii Leloka also does a nice job with her role. Her character is kind of mysterious actually, like she knows more than she lets on at times. The rest of the cast also did well, but don't get a whole lot of screen time. You can also find Kate Burton, Deirde Quinn, Brad Greenquist, Courtney Taylor Burness, and Jacob Pearce Guzman.

Many people feel there are some key plot changes between the two films. In Red Rose, we get some of the highlights from the house's past. Many of these are shown in The Diary Of Ellen Rimbauer, with some slight changes. Some people feel, and I have to agree, that what we learn in Rose Red is stuff that has been passed down through history, over seventy to eighty years. In that time, details can be changed, not always on purpose really, but it does happen. So what we see in this film, is supposed to be what really happened. At least that is an easy way of explaining the difference in some details. The Diary Of Ellen Rimbauer chooses to focus on Ellen and John's relationship, and on Ellen herself. This is fine with me, but I would have loved to have seen more of the plot going towards the house. It is obviously haunted, since they go out of their way to show that at rare times. Another thing I didn't like is having characters whisper so damn much. Two characters standing out in the middle of the driveway, a good ways from the house, yet they are whispering to each other. I never understood why movies feel the need to have the volume way down on whispers. I hate turning up the volume, and then be blasted by the music. The story of John and Ellen is interesting, but it needed more to keep me really into the story. Maybe a haunted house? Just a thought.
2 out of 5 Bondage isn't so bad. Not that I have ever tried it.

Dying For Movies 3 Part Eight

Last night I put in the last of the new 8 Films To Die For. I can honestly say it has been a fun ride working my way through all of the films. I think my favorite film out of this new set would have to go to From Within, with The Broken coming in at a close second place. Where to go from here? Since my Netflix stuff has been sitting around all month, I think I will make a run with what I have here, and then start to alternate between that and my stuff once I get through all of these films. I have yet to return a movie this month to Netflix, so I hate to pay for the same films all over again. I have a screener, or two, on the way as well, so I will work them in between the Netflix stuff.

In Dying Breed, we meet Nina (Mirrah Foulkes), who is interested in the Tasmanian tiger, which is believed to be extinct. Nina's sister was looking for the tiger, she believed in the recent sightings of the tiger, but drowned accidentally while looking for it eight years ago, or did she? Nina has decided to take up the hunt in her sister's place. Unable to get funding for the trip, Nina's boyfriend, Matt (Leigh Whannell), talks a friend of his into doing the funding for them. Jack (Nathan Phillips) agrees to do this, but decided that he will take his girlfriend, Rebecca (Melanie Vallejo), along as a little get away vacation for the two of them. They eventually end up in a little town called Sarah, which is linked to the legend of the Pieman. The Pieman was Alexander Pearce. Pearce escaped from the penal settlement on Sarah Island, back in the days when the British Empire was using it as a penal colony. Pearce escaped along with eight other men. Two gave themselves up, but out of the other six, Pearce is the only one they were able to capture again. Pearce went on to say that his fellow escapees and Pearce would cannibalize their dead. He wasn't believed until Pearce escaped again with another prisoner. This time when they recaptured Pearce, he was found with chunks of flesh in his pockets, even though he had other food with him. These two legends catch up to our group, but how much of it is true?

I was a little disappointed in Dying Breed (2008), as it wasn't what I thought it was going to be. From the trailer that I posted months ago, I assumed it had a lot to do with the Tasmanian tiger. I guess I thought it was going to be something like a creature feature horror film. The tiger is touched on, but it is used as more of a way of getting our group into the area, where the second legend is played up. I don't know about the rest of you, but I am getting a little tired of the sub genre this film falls into. Not to say that Dying Breed is a bad film, I just think they need to give this sub genre a little bit of a break. Dying Breed is a slow moving film. Even so, things were kept interesting, mostly by the character of Jack. Jack can be very annoying at times, but he does have a certain "bad boy" charm about him. I did find the area they are in rather confusing though. I didn't have much of a problem with director/co-writer Jody Dwyer, except that it was hard to figure out how the different characters were meeting up, when it appeared they were taking completely different directions. I know its not impossible, since a wooded area can get a person turned around. Jack splits off from the main group, the rest head off into another direction. The group heads into a mine shaft, and suddenly are near where Jack is. This was a planned thing apparently, so why lead them off in another direction to begin with?

The effects aren't as gory as they could have been, given the subject matter of the film, they had their moments. We get one person's throat ripped open by biting it. A couple of fingers get cut off. We see someone chowing down on human parts, and we also get to see a very messed up human body. I did think they could have done better with a throat being cut open, but one bad effect isn't all that bad of a thing. Once I figured out the shift in plot, or what I saw as a shift in the plot anyway, I was a little surprised the effects weren't very gory. The acting wasn't too bad either. I enjoyed the different people in the group that we follow through the film. The people from the town are a bit creepy, but under used. I thought they would play a bigger role than they ended up doing.

Dying Breed did manage to surprise me with its ending, but it really doesn't add too much to the sub genre that it is in. Outside of a little girl that likes to bite that is. I really wish they would have used her more, she was great. The film is flawed in some areas, as they suggest that the people in the town draw outsiders in, using the Tasmanian tiger as a lure. I wouldn't think that the tiger draws that many outsiders in, but I could be wrong there. I would think they would have to let some people be able to leave, since it would send red flags up that people disappear in this area all the time. Some people feel that the flashbacks that we see of Nina's sister are dreams that Nina keeps having. I was never so sure of this, as I saw it as a way to fill us in on what really happened to her, and possibly the fate of Nina herself. I think you can figure out which sub genre this film falls into without me telling you outright. So if you are really into this type of film, give it a look. The film is worth a look either way to be honest, but I really wish it had more to do with the tiger.
3 out of 5 Biting the hand the feeds me

Dying For Movies 3 Part Seven

I was a little surprised with today's movie, it actually fits into my 999 Challenge! And one in a category I haven't added to yet, mad doctors/scientists. After some delays, I'm back to writing again. I started this review Sunday, got two lines in, remembered I had some big tests to study for, so stopped writing. Since then, I did well on the tests, and managed to get some headaches to go with them. I'm feeling better now, so wanted to get back into this review, and watching movies again. If you haven't noticed already, please check out my review of Splinter when you can. I'm excited, since I have managed to set up an interview with director Toby Wilkins! If all goes well, this means I have not one, but four new interviews on the way! Back to today's review. Autopsy (2008) is the next to last film for me in the 8 Films To Die For set. As long as I don't get hit with yet another headache, I will be watching the last film tonight.

In Autopsy, we meet a group of friends that are at Mardi Gras. We only get a bunch of still pictures of this to set it up for us, as the credits roll by. Then we can hear a car crash, and find that our group of friends have somehow lost control and hit a tree. Their phones are either busted up, or can't pick up a signal, of course. Before anybody can figure out what to do, they spot a guy that is underneath their car. Luckily for them, an ambulance shows up out of nowhere to help out, since the ambulance has been looking for the guy. The guys in the ambulance talk our group of friends into going back to the hospital with them, in order to get checked out. They all agree, and head off. Once at Mercy Hospital, they all head inside to start filling out forms, all except Emily (Jessica Lowndes), who remains outside. Her boyfriend, Bobby (Ross Kohn), comes out to see what is wrong. They talk for a bit, and Emily notices that Bobby is bleeding. They go inside the hospital, and discover that Bobby has some glass stuck in him. Thinking it is no big deal, he pulls it out. It turns out to be a very long piece of glass, and as soon as it is out, Bobby starts to convulse and bleed from the mouth. He is rushed into surgery, where we see the doctor (Robert Patrick) removing organs from Bobby. What is going on?

I admit that I was getting rather annoyed with Autopsy right out of the gate. There is no character set up to speak of at the start of the film. They do give us a little bit as the film goes on, but it wasn't really enough for me. We find out a little about Emily, and discover that there is a bit of a love triangle going on with the three other friends. We find out why the doctor is doing things to people, which ends up being a reason I wasn't expecting. On the plus side of things, if you love movies with a lot of gore to be found, this is one that you won't want to miss. However, I got the feeling that this was the only thing going for it. Director/co-writer Adam Gierasch weaves us through the hospital, which often leaves us with more questions than answers. Adam has co-written several horror films, but this is the first time he has directed a film. I never had a problem with his directing, except for some odd lighting choices at times. I guess what ended up bothering me the most, outside of character development, were the characters themselves. The group of friends don't really seem to question why an ambulance would suddenly show up, or the way the EMT's (I guess they never claimed to be EMT's in their defense) handled the guy when putting him on the stretcher. I know they were probably still in shock from everything that was going on, but that would have sent a red flag to me. Once at the hospital, the place is pretty dead. The few times they do run across someone else, they don't talk to the person all that often. With what we find out is going on, it made me wonder why there would be people roaming the halls. I also had to wonder how, after seeing what was done to them, some of our group of friends were even still alive.

As I said, the effects are very gory. We see all kinds of organs and guts being removed. Body parts all over the place at times as well. While it is gory, it can be funny at times, the way things get set up with the characters. It is all done very well though. I never saw anything, as far as the effects go, that didn't look very real to me. Maybe there could have been more blood at times, but I will forgive it for that. The acting wasn't all that bad. Jessica Lowndes works very well in the lead role. Robert Patrick is always great as the bad guy. Jenette Goldstein, who many people may remember from Aliens, shows up as the kindly nurse. You can also find Michael Bowen, Ashley Schneider, Robert LaSardo, and Ross McCall.

Autopsy is one of those films where I didn't really care for the plot so much, or the way certain things ended up being played out in the plot. But the effects are so well done, that they alone will make the movie better. Another effect that looked very cool, had to do with the character of Bobby. If you have watched the film, you will know what I am talking about without question. While it does look very cool, I had to wonder how Bobby was still alive. And I had to wonder how this was helping the doctor any. I guess in the end it doesn't really matter. I do like films that let me figure things out on my own, but at times it does help if the movie gives a little more information as well. I liked that Emily got beaten up a bit, and eventually decided she had taken enough abuse. Once she went on the attack, I liked Emily a whole lot more. I did end up liking Autopsy, mostly thanks to the effects. If it wasn't for that, I don't think I would have given it the rating you will see. I think this could have been a better film, if they hadn't started things off so quickly, or perhaps added more to the characters as the film went along. Some funny moments do help things out a little bit. It was nice to know they weren't taking it too seriously. Not one of the better films in this set, but not the worst either.
3 out of 5 Making body parts look like a tree

Dying For Movies 3 Part Six

It is time for the only foreign entry in this set of After Dark films. I would actually like to see more foreign films in these sets, but you can't always get what you want. Voices (2007) was this year's entry. The original title, Du saram-yida, actually translates into the title Someone Behind You. This South Korean film was also called There Are Two People. Why is it some films can't seem to find a title that fits them well? I'm not sure why it was retitled to Voices for the After Dark films. It isn't like anyone is hearing voices or anything, and it's not like anyone is having to always look over their shoulder either. So what is the film about? Let me tell you.

In Voices, we meet Ka-in (Jin-seo Yun), a pretty average teen from the looks of it. Ka-in is on the fencing team, which is an odd sport to be in. Anyway, one of her aunts is getting married, so the family is there to watch. Ka-in, and her sister (So-eun Kim) find their aunt, and tease her some before the ceremony. Before it can begin though, their aunt suddenly hits the floor from a couple of floors up. She is rushed to the hospital, where she goes into surgery. What I found kind of amusing here, is that shows peoples names and where they are, kind of like something you would see in airports for planes. While the family waits, Ka-in's parents are worried that one of them might be next. The aunt (I would list her character name and the name of the actress, but IMDb only lists three of the character names) gets through the surgery, and is expected to live. Ka-in decides to stay longer, so she can visit her aunt. When she gets to the room, she discovers that it is locked. When she looks through the window in the door, she sees her other aunt brutally stabbing her sister to death. The next night, I think, Ka-in has a dream where a pool of blood appears above her. In this blood, a messed up face appears, and tells her that she is next. A guy Ka-in goes to school with tells her to trust no one. Not her friends, family, or even herself. Sure enough, those around her seem to want her to die.

I don't get it. The plot seems simple enough, but this is probably one of the most confusing films I have watched in a long time. Ka-in finds different stories that mostly deal with jealousy. Her aunt is one of them, jealous that her sister was happy. We also find out that the guy was seeing both sisters. He tells one he loves her, but is going to marry her sister instead. A guy that Ka-in's father sends her to, tells Ka-in about how he killed his wife after a mystery caller told him that his wife was seeing another man. How this is all connected to what Ka-in is going through, is something I was never able to figure out. Even though the plot was confusing to me, I still thought the film itself was good. There are moments when I wasn't expecting anything major to happen, only to find that I was wrong. I jumped onto IMDb forums to see what other people had to say about this film, and maybe exchange ideas of what we all thought happened in this movie. To my surprise, next to no one is talking about Voices. There is one thread talking about what they thought happened, I wasn't the only person completely confused by it at least. That thread wasn't very helpful to me though.

Not a lot of effects to be found, but they are very well done. The face that appears before Ka-in in her dream was great looking. I was very impressed by it. Too bad they didn't use it more often. The aunt killing her sister was another great scene. A lot of stabbing going on in this movie. The acting was also very good. I thought that Jin-seo Yun did an very good job with the lead role. She covered a lot of different emotions in this film. From being playful with her sister, to being confused and scared. My only complaint doesn't have to do with the acting, as it does with the subtitles. It could be the way the film was scripted, but not a whole lot was explained in what people were saying. What someone else also pointed out is how people always referred to their sisters as "sister," instead of by their name. Maybe it is a cultural thing, but I don't know anyone that says things like, "Why are you doing this sister?"

Even though the plot confused the hell out of me, I still found enough in this film to walk away liking it. Maybe I am just missing something that puts everything together. If anyone would care to try explaining it to me, feel free. There are some things I figured out on my own, but I still don't understand how they fit into the overall story. I noticed they used all of one scene to connect Ka-in's boyfriend to her, and her family, when they were all much younger. It still didn't explain to me why he ends up doing what he did. If you are up for a challenge in trying to put together a confusing plot, you will like this film. I am still trying to wrap my mind around it, and failing to do so. This just might be a film that takes another watch in order to figure everything out, but right now, I don't have the time.
3 out of 5 How many stabs does it take to kill someone? Lets find out!

Dying For Movies 3 Part Five

When I started to watch, and post, the trailers for the new After Dark films, From Within (2008) was one of the films I wasn't too sure about. I couldn't tell what the movie was about just from the trailer alone. I didn't want to look into the film too much, since there are only a few reviews I will read of a film I haven't watched yet. Since the film wasn't out yet, I wasn't expecting to find any reviews on it anyway, when I posted the trailer that is. I haven't gone out of my way since then, since none of the people I would read a review from seem to watch these films all that often. Letting the movie surprise me, I put it in last night, and pressed play. I must say, I was very surprised by it. It wasn't really what I was expecting at all, but is that good or bad?

In From Within, we are introduced to a small town, that could be anywhere in the United States. It is a town that is dominated by its Christian belief. In this setting, we meet Lindsay (Elizabeth Rice), a high school student that is being courted by the local minister's son, Dylan (Kelly Blatz). A rash of suicides have started, all starting with a boy and his girlfriend. As more people die, the flock begin to get scared. The police don't seem overly worried about what is going on, so some of the flock decide to take matters into their own hands, with Dylan as their leader. They push the blame on the first boy that killed himself, because his girlfriend was found with a book that isn't very Christian like. It doesn't help that his family is hated by those in town, all expect Lindsay, who is willing to reach out to the last person in the family, Aidan (Thomas Dekker). Is his family somehow responsible for the suicides, or is this just a case of religion run amok?

I have to admit that once I realized that religion was going to be a big part of the plot, I started to be turned off by it. I don't consider myself to be religious. I'm not saying I don't believe in God, I just choose not to be part of a religion is all. When I was real little, I kind of remember going to church a few times, but I can't tell you which religion was followed there. I don't really see religion as a bad thing, but it can be. Some reviews put From Within down because it shows Christians in a bad light, while the "witches" are shown as the victims. This is only partly true actually. In truth, From Within shows the dangers of taking religion too far. Every religion has a good and bad side to it. I know people get tired of seeing Christians in a bad light, but it is the dominate religion to be found, so more people can identify with it. Plus, this is a horror movie. I think people only look at the bad side that they showed. The good side, represented by Lindsay, is overlooked, but it is there. She reaches out and shows kindness even though she doesn't know much about Aidan. Even when she does learn more, she is still friendly with him, even though she obviously doesn't agree with everything he believes. I have been given the cold shoulder more times than I can count, when I tell someone I'm not part of any religion. Not everyone is like that though, as Lindsay shows. I guess some people forget the golden rule, treat others as you would have them treat you.

Once I got past religion being a large plot point, I started to realize that this is one hell of a good film. The movie starts off with a bang, literally, and doesn't really let up either. It takes a while, but we eventually learn that From Within explores the same idea as The Broken does. But with a different take on it all. Maybe this was a good idea, maybe it wasn't, since we eventually learn this is just something that the person being affected can see. I have mixed feeling on how well this worked, but at the same time I understand why they decided to explore this idea. I didn't find it scary, but it was effective in some scenes. Some people are complaining about seeing the same things in horror movies, like the mirror image doing something different than the actual person. Some horror movies do this just to try and throw in another scare, but for From Within, there is a reason for it.

The effects, while not all that gory, are actually pretty cool. The makeup effects for the other self can look really neat at times. Only one time I didn't care for it, CGI fire. The bloodiest death happens fairly early in the film, so don't expect a lot of gore here, if that is what you are looking for. The acting was well done all around. Having Elizabeth Rice in the lead role surprised me some. She doesn't represent the typical lead role star to me. Her looks, while not strikingly beautiful, do seem to growon you, the more I was seeing of her. I think her character had a lot to do with that. Lindsay has inner beauty, which when you start to figure that out, adds to the outer beauty. I was impressed by her, and hope to see more of her in film. Thomas Dekker did a fine job with his acting as well, but I was starting to get annoyed by his character, since they seem to give him the same mood all through the film. It was Kelly Blatz and Margo Harshman that surprised me the most though. Kelly because how serious his role became, and Margo for adding a touch of comedy - after being told the door was open, "Does that mean if your pants are open, I can come on in?" You can also find Laura Allen, Adam Goldberg, Rumer Willis, and Jared Harris.

With From Within starting the way it did, it managed to get my attention right away. Once the religion plot started though, almost right after the opening, I started to not care. The fact that it managed to pull me back into the plot speaks a lot for how well done this film is. I really enjoyed the mystery of what exactly is going on. Is it exploring some of the same things that The Broken did? Is there really a curse, like many of the characters believe? If there is a curse, why is there one? Even though religion is shown in a somewhat bad light, fearing anything that isn't part of their faith, there is a twist that counters that. The end of the film also has an interesting twist to it, but I'm wondering if any of these films will give us a truly happy ending, not that I really care if they do. It does bother me when people get upset about religion is being shown in a bad light, in this film and others. I'm smart enough to know that not everyone will take their religion too such extremes, but history has shown that some people do.
4 out of 5 Be careful what you wish for

Dying For Movies 3 Part Four

Here I am at the half way mark. Four down, four more to go! Even though there have been some disappointments, I have thought well of this series of films so far. Not every film has been great, but what is great to me can be shit to someone else. When The Butterfly Effect 3: Revelations (2009) was announced as part of the 8 Films To Die For, I was pretty surprised. I did watch The Butterfly Effect, and thought it was a pretty good movie. I knew there was a sequel, but I have yet to watch it. The sequel was a stand alone film that didn't have anything to do with the first film. Since this third film was included in this set of films, I had to assume that once again it would be a stand alone film.

To those of you that are new to the butterfly effect, it is the ability to travel into the past. The person with this ability can only jump back in time within his/her own lifetime. Once they are in the past, they will find themselves in their own younger body. So the time travel is limited. As Ashton Kutcher finds out in the first film, there are always serious consequences when changing the past. In The Butterfly Effect 3: Revelations, we meet Sam (Chris Carmack). Sam has the butterfly effect ability, and has been using it to help police with unsolved murders. As we see at the start of the film, he goes back and sets himself up somewhere to observe what happens. Sam then shows up at the police station to help Detective Glenn (Lynch R. Travis) anyway he can. Since jumping is dangerous for the person doing it, it heats up their body, Sam gets in the bath tub with a lot of ice. His sister, Jenna (Rachel Miner), watches over him so she can snap him back if something goes wrong. When Elizabeth (Sarah Habel) shows up asking Sam for help, her sister Rebecca (Mia Serafino) was murdered, Sam isn't so sure he wants to help. Rebecca was Sam's girlfriend at the time she was murdered, and he isn't so sure he would be able to just observe, and not change the past. He tried changing the past once, when his sister was killed in a home fire, at the cost of their parents being killed instead. Sam eventually changes his mind though. He jumps back in time, and already things get messed up when he is spotted by Elizabeth. Sam gets Elizabeth to stay in her car, while he goes to find out what happened to Rebecca. When he finds Rebecca dead, we see Elizabeth being killed in her car. When Sam returns to the present, he learns that a serial killer has been created by the past being changed, and he is the lead suspect.

Since the original film is a straight up drama, I wasn't sure what they would do to turn it into a horror movie. Even though there is now a serial killer, and some pretty gory deaths, it is still more in line with drama instead of horror. I at least appreciate the effort of adding a little horror into the mix though. Like most time travel movies, The Butterfly Effect 3 can be a bit confusing at times. The most confusing thing to me is that each time the past was changed, Sam would "wake up" somewhere different than before the jump into the past. Does this mean he didn't go into the past? Or went back at a different time? Even though it managed to confuse me at times, every time travel film has so far, I still enjoyed trying to figure out if it is Sam killing people, or someone else. It had me guessing until the big reveal, which I managed to figure out just seconds before. Sam's last jump, that we see anyway, is also a little confusing. I can't get into it here though, since it would spoil things.

The effects are very well done, and surprisingly gory when need be. We get all kinds of crime scene photographs that show bloody carnage. There is also one person shown cut open, a throat gets cut open, and fingers get cut off. This is just some of the things that can be found. It ends up being a very nice mix of the drama and horror genres, along with a little sci-fi since we have time travel as well. The acting was also pretty good. Rachel Miner is becoming a staple of the 8 Films To Die For it seems. She has been in at least one film in every set. Penny Dreadful in the first set, and Tooth & Nail in the second set. Even though her part in The Butterfly Effect 3 is a lot smaller than in the other films, I still felt she did a very good job with it. Rachel seems to get better with each film. Chris Carmack also does a nice job with the lead role. There are times I thought he should have acted more confused by the change of events. I felt he took everything in stride a little too well. Even so, not a bad effort at all.

Sam's timing seemed to get worse with each jump. As he tries to set himself up to see the murder happen, he misses it completely, more and more each time. I think the way the film ends helps explain this though. I have to admit that The Butterfly Effect 3: Revelations managed to surprise me in a good way. I wasn't really expecting much out of it, and got a lot more because of that. Maybe I will watch the second film someday, but from what I have been reading, this one is a big step above the second film. If it wasn't for the time travel stuff getting rather confusing at times, I would probably have rated this one a little higher. If you can let yourself just go with it though, this turns out to be an okay who done it type film.
3 out of 5 Someone at After Dark likes the incest subject

Dying For Movies 3 Part Three

My plan for the week seems to be working out so far. Watch a movie before heading to bed, do a little research on it as well, then write about it once I am up and moving. As long as I just write, and not get too distracted, I can get through a review in an hour or so. Problem usually is, I tend to have the TV on, and have something on that I like to watch. Like right now I have the UFO Hunters on. I don't consider it a great show, but will watch it when nothing else catches my interest. Anyway, last night I put in Perkins' 14 (2009). From the trailer that I posted a few months back, this was one of the films that I was looking forward to. It looked to have an interesting story to it, and also looked pretty gory.

In Perkins' 14, we meet Dwayne Hopper (Patrick O'Kane), a local police officer. Over the course of the first act, we learn that Dwayne lost his son to a kidnapper ten years ago. His son was the last child to be kidnapped, the fourteenth in all. His son, and the others, are believed to be dead. This still haunts Dwayne, and it is tearing his family apart. His wife (Mihaela Mihut) is having an affair, and his daughter (Shayla Beesley) is going with the punk rock look. On this night, the tenth anniversary of the first kidnapping, it is Dwayne's turn to watch the station for the night. There are a couple of people in the jail on this night. One of them, Ronald Perkins (Richard Brake), seems to know a lot about Dwayne. He knows that Dwayne has a daughter, even though Dwayne told him that he has one child. The more he thinks about it, the more Dwayne begins to think that Perkins is the kidnapper from ten years ago. Ignoring procedure, he gets his partner to investigate Perkins' house. His partner find something in the basement that unleashes terror and death onto the town.

Perkins' 14 is interesting in the way it came about. A contest was started where people could submit ideas for a horror movie. The best of those were put up on a web site, Massify.com, and then voted on. Even the cast was voted on. So we get a film, as the trailer likes to say, voted on by the fans. So what kind of film did the fans get? It depends on who you talk to of course, but for me, it wasn't a very good one. The back story is told in a series of flashbacks, the looks like it would be a more interesting story than what we got. We are never really told what happens to the kids in order to make them kill anyone they come across. It is hinted at a lot, and the reason for it seemed rather stupid to me. When the kids, I guess I should call the young adults, are unleashed onto the town, I kept asking myself, are there really fourteen of them? I'm pretty sure the most we see at any given time is three of them, and I'm pretty sure we keep seeing the same three. It would be easier to tell if the film wasn't so dark all the time. Some of the kills are very cool, but most are hampered with quick editing that tries to show everything, and nothing, at the same time.

Even though the effects do take a backseat to the editing at times, some still manage to shine through. My favorite kill, even though it doesn't show much, was a woman being pulled into the ceiling, and then being ripped to shreds. Actually, I have no idea what happens to her since we don't actually see it. What we do see is her twitching, hanging body, with a lot of blood flying around. Some other nice effects include glass to the eye, legs shotgunned off, and guts being pulled out. The one that caused me to shiver some though, is when the entire fingernail gets broken off. That has to hurt! While many people praise Patrick O'Kane for his acting, I found it to be a little dull most of the time. Richard Brake was great, but given too little screen time. The supporting cast isn't great, but they do a nice job with what they are given. It seemed that Shayla Beesley and Mihaela Mihut do a good job with their roles, once given the screen time to do so.

I guess what bothered me the most about Perkins' 14 is the fact that the Dwayne Hopper story felt like it should have been more of a subplot, instead of the plot the movie centers around. It would have been nice if they had centered the story around the fourteen kids that were kidnapped instead. Perkins is said to be a serial killer, even though he never killed anyone, or maybe he did since we do see a body in his basement. I was wondering why the police assumed he was killing the kids? Was there a body found that made them think this? We will never know, since it is never explained. The subplots for the wife and daughter aren't much. Basically they are just ways to put them in danger. Even though the ending ends on a down beat, which I like, I didn't see any other way for it to end. By this time though, I didn't really care anymore. Perkins' 14 to me could have been so much better than it turned out. I'm only three films in now, but this has been the weakest one yet. Tune in tomorrow for the half way mark!
2 out of 5 Wanting a bottle that never breaks as well

Dying For Movies 3 Part Two

After getting all my stuff done for my classes last night, I sat down to watch my next film. Next in the box is one called Slaughter (2009). The DVD claims the movie is based on true events. Once the film starts though, it says it was inspired by true events. There is a big difference between the two really. When a film is based on true events, the film will stick somewhat close to the actual events, but will embellish it a lot if need be. Inspired by true events will take the basic story, but change everything else. At least that is how I see the difference between the two. It does seem like some of the films based on true events will just keep the basic story at times as well.

In Slaughter we meet Faith (Amy Shiels), who is moving to Atlanta in order to get away from an abusive boyfriend. Her best friend is helping Faith with the move, and they decide to go to a club before she leaves. While at the club, Faith spots Lola (Lucy Holt), who looks like she is trying to get away from a guy, but not having much luck. Faith walks over, and acts like she knows Lola in order to get her away from the guy. Lola, ever thankful, gives Faith her number so she can repay Faith for her help. It doesn't take long before Faith's boyfriend finds out her new number, and starts calling. Faith decides to call Lola, and they begin to hang out. Eventually Faith even moves in with Lola at her place on the family farm. Everything seems to be going a lot better, except that Faith doesn't agree with Lola taking home her dates. After one such date, Faith finds the guy's keys laying on the ground. She starts to look around the slaughter house that in on the farm, and finds some things that makes her believe that Lola's dates aren't returning home.

Slaughter is another film that is a slow burn. Not a whole lot happens in the first hour of the film. I didn't mind the slow pace in The Broken, but it didn't work as well for me here in Slaughter. We get to know Faith and Lola some, discover their past a little bit. I'm all for character development, but when there isn't much else going on, it can get a little boring after a while. The only reason I knew that Lola's dates were disappearing, is because it says so on the back of the DVD. We see one of them walking around outside, holding onto his cut off arm, but of course Faith never sees this. Lola brings home all of two guys while Faith is living with her. Faith does find the car keys, I assume from the second guy, but is that really enough to suspect that they are disappearing? Slaughter fails to build any kind of tension, even though it at least tries to do so, within the first hour. This was quickly heading for a two star review, or worse, but then it took a sudden swing for the better. The last part of the film gives us everything that was missing up until that point. They do try and play up the creepy father and brother, which also fails, so at first I wasn't sure what was going on. The end story isn't what I thought the film would end up being. This is always a good thing, I don't always like it when I can guess what is coming. The actual ending also surprised me, since I was expecting a more happy ending, and didn't get it.

For a film named Slaughter, the effects were a little on the light side of things. They are all done well, for what we do get. Besides the severed arm, we get some teeth being pulled out (nothing like what you would see in The Dentist though), and a few dead pigs along with a bunch of pig parts. I was a little disappointed with both Amy Shiels and Lucy Holt at the start of the movie. As the film went on though, I thought that both were doing a better job. The other actors were very under used for this movie. One of the extras, yes there are actually a couple of extras for this movie, is a making of feature. C.J. Singer, who is also in Perkins 14 (my next review), talked about his character in some detail. I found this rather amusing since he is barely in the film!

Slaughter didn't start off so well, but it improved. I'm just not sure many people will forgive it for waiting so long to get to the actual horror part of the horror movie. I'm actually hearing some complaints about the ending of this film. Calling it too predictable, and some are getting tired of the down beat endings. I didn't think this film was all that predictable, and I was glad for the ending. Sorry folks, but the good guys don't always win. I don't have to feel good about the end of a film in order to enjoy it. While I was glad they didn't take the easy way out, I was very disappointed they didn't have the guts to kill off one of the characters on screen. I can't say that I was mad they didn't do it, but I was swearing a little at the TV when it didn't happen. I was also wondering where the hell Faith got shotgun shells at? Did I miss something there? Oh well, in the end I did end up liking Slaughter. I don't love it, but do feel it turned out to be a fairly well done movie. Some seem to think this is the weakest of the set, I guess I will find out as the week goes on.
3 out of 5 Kill the little shit already!

Dying For Movies 3 Part One

After being very disappointed back in January, because the After Dark films didn't show up where they were promised, I was considering not even watching them on DVD. Of course, when they came out, I put in my pre-order for them. So much for sticking with how I feel. From what I could see though, this new batch of films looked really good. There was no way I was going to miss them, even if I had to wait for the DVDs. But which order to watch them in? I decided to watch them in the order that they are in my box. The one film I wasn't very sure what it was about was The Broken (2008). This just happened to be the first film in the box, so I watched it last night. While many people have hated the films After Dark put out in the last two years, I have always supported them. Will this year be any different? Even though I am still ticked about not being able to see them in the theater, I'm still looking forward to giving these a watch.

In The Broken, we meet Gina (Lena Headey) helping surprise her dad (Richard Jenkins) for his birthday, along with the rest of her family. During the dinner, a mirror suddenly breaks for no apparent reason. They write it off, and go about their dinner. The next day, we watch Gina as she gets ready for work at the hospital, where she works as a radiologist. Meanwhile, back at her apartment, we see a mirror break and someone who looks like Gina walking down the hallway. Eventually we see Gina using a payphone, when she thinks she sees her Jeep coming towards her. She watches it drive by, and sure enough, she sees herself in the Jeep. She follows on foot, and thankfully the other person doesn't go very far. She follows this other Gina to an apartment, where she waits. We hear the other Gina coming, but then it cuts to Gina driving her Jeep again. As she gets distracted while looking in the mirror, she gets involved in a head-on crash. Gina survives, but has no memory of the crash, or the events leading up to it.

After I watched The Broken, I got online to see what others thought of it. I ended up staying online longer than I had intended, but that is okay. Just before I started to read other peoples thoughts, I had a feeling that two things were going to give this film a low rating. First and foremost is the fact that The Broken is a slow moving film, with not a lot always happening. I seem to be able to sit through a film that is slow moving better than most of the people I know, so this wasn't a problem for me. The mystery the movie presented was interesting enough, with enough clues being dropped, that it kept me glued to the TV. The other thing I knew most people wouldn't like, is the fact that not a whole lot is explained. We learn why there are two Gina's, and what happened in the apartment, but outside of that...nothing. This happens to be something that I really liked about the film though. If we so desire, we can fill in the blanks ourselves. Until a sequel comes along, and gives everyone what they want that is. In truth, everything we need to know for this story is provided. It is the bigger picture that is left unexplained, but really has no bearing on the story we are watching. There were a couple of things I didn't like, but it had nothing to do with what others complained about. Well some complained about the same things, just not the majority. The silly way bodies were being hidden, if they were at all, bothered me some. Also the way they kept flashing back to the crash, going as far as showing it in slow motion at times, was starting to get annoying. It doesn't help that the dummy used in place of Lena Headey sticks out like a sore thumb.

Only a handful of scenes use any kind of special effects. In a nightmare we seem to get the most effects, mirror image moving in a different way than the real person, and more. A couple of dead bodies, that look pretty cool, can also be found. Only one really gory effect, with a lot more blood than I was actually expecting from it, shows up about midway through the film. Not a lot to be found here, but director/writer Sean Ellis seemed to be going for more of the mystery than effects, so it fits. The acting is good, but a little hard to judge. As Horror Movie A Day pointed out, this is a very quiet film. Not a lot of music in the background, and not a lot of talking goes on. Lena Headey does a good job with the lead role. I loved the look she gives at the end of the film. Always cool to see Richard Jenkins, even if his, and the other roles, are underused. You can also find Asier Newman, Michelle Duncan and Melvil Poupaud.

It bugged me that people hate this film just because it doesn't bother to explain every detail. What ever happened to working things out for yourself? The only time I wish a writer would explain things more is when it comes across as confusing. I wasn't confused about anything that happens in The Broken, I just never learned some of the whys that are present in the film. It didn't make it confusing, it just left some questions up in the air. The Broken ended up being a really good film. Sure I knew there was going to be a twist, and I had a pretty good idea of what that twist was going to be. Maybe they should have done a little better job of hiding the twist, since it is pretty well spelled out before it ever comes back around. But I am able to forgive it for that. If this sounds like an interesting film, and you think you can deal with the slow pace, give it a try. I don't think you will be disappointed by it. If you think it sounds like a bad film, find your double so I can tell them about this film.
4 out of 5 Wondering what my double is up to at this moment

Turning Agents Invisible

With my convention reviews all finished at last, I only have one more review to write up before heading into some new movies. Before I went to the convention, I had watched Invisible Agent (1942), and I had planned on doing the write up before I left. Instead, I ended up taking a break while I got packed and all that good stuff. This actually works out, since it has been a couple of weeks since I have done a challenge review. I could have skipped this movie, since it is a pretty big stretch to call it a horror movie. But it was in a horror pack, and I did watch it. On the good news side of things, I have been busy with Kimberly Amato in order to give the interview with her an actual end, and I have started an interview with Zack Parker. Thanks to Kimberly, I might have another interview to do with a different actress. I will need to watch the movie she starred in, but that isn't a problem for me. On the really good news side, I have my cold on the ropes, but so far it is refusing to go away completely.

Invisible Agent starts off in a print ship owned by Frank Raymond (Jon Hall). A group of guys comes in, and starts to talk to Frank about placing a personal order. Soon though, Frank learns that this group of guys are actually Nazis! They know that Frank is the grandson of the original invisible man, and they think he has the secret that will turn people invisible. At first he acts like he knows nothing about it, but eventually they get the truth out of him. Frank manages to get away before giving up his secret, but now the United States government wants Frank to turn it over to them. Frank thinks about it, and eventually agrees. But only if they use the formula on him, and not someone else. To my surprise, they agree. Before you know it, Frank is behind enemy lines, trying to find out when the next big attack from Germany will be.

Invisible Agent is a movie that wants to be taken seriously, but tends to throw in comedy at the wrong time. We get the usual things when it comes to comedy in one of these films, things moving around and someone reacting to them in a funny way. The thing is, and it is something I didn't think fit well, is why would you give yourself away like that? Since Frank is behind enemy lines, I would think he would want to keep as low a profile as possible. Yet he is always picking things up, moving them around. Eventually this does attract the attention of those that know about the formula, which I guess does add some tension to the film. I think they could have found a better way of them finding out he was there though. Even though they are back to using the drug, there is no mention of it driving the person using it insane. I guess we are to assume the government fixed this little problem? I hate to spoil anything for a movie, but this isn't that major so will say it anyway. If you don't want to know, you can skip ahead some. Another thing that ended up annoying me is that every character with a high rank on the enemy's side, ends up being killed in this film. What are the chances of that actually happening?

One thing I liked in the original film is that they kept the effects simple. Outside of the invisible man that is. When objects were moved, they were done so quickly that you didn't have time to tell if they were done by the invisible man, or by strings. With each sequel, they try to do more and more with these type of effects. Each time they do more, I have noticed more strings being used. Being back before they could take things like that out in post production, it can be very noticeable at times. The acting could have been better, but wasn't bad overall. I personally didn't care that much for Jon Hall in the lead role. Maybe it had more to do with the stupid things that character did, and not so much the acting. Ilona Massey got the lead female role, in fact I think she was the only female in the film! Her character got caught up with the film in not deciding what it wanted to be. While she played her role in a serious way at times, there were often times that she was stuck with playing off comedy situations.

This is really the first sequel in the series I didn't care for. The other films, while not great, were at least entertaining to me. I'm not saying that Invisible Agent isn't. It is just that it didn't work nearly as well for me. I still fail to see why he would take the risk of being found out. I know they can't see him, outside of the objects he is moving, but I still wouldn't be taking that chance. He might be invisible, but he can still make noise, so why not just pick an out of the way spot and listen in? I know that Frank isn't someone trained to be a spy, but I would think this would be common sense. I guess with him making these mistakes they manage to drag the plot out a little longer, but I really do think they could have come up with a better way of doing this. Just one more film to watch in this set, and then I can move on to the next one. Not sure when I will get around to it though. The new set of After Dark films is up next, which I will likely watch all in a row. I was offered a screener of a new movie, which I hope will be sent to me. If it is I will work that in somewhere as well. So much to do, so little time to do it.
2 out of 5 Glad real American spies weren't this stupid

Suffering For Movies

After fighting through some writer's block, I managed to get my review for Mum & Dad done. You can read it over at Top Horror Movies Club, even though I'm not sure how well it turned out. Since I still have some writing to do before I get into the new batch of 8 Films To Die For, and since it is Good Friday (which means I have the day off!), I decided to try and write about Martyrs (2008). I was looking forward to watching Plague Town and Martyrs the most, when I found out they would be showing at the convention. Since I have been becoming a fan of films from France lately, High Tension, Inside, Frontier(s), this was one movie I was going to catch, no matter what. Heading in early, during the Q & A with the writer of Dark Night Of The Scarecrow, we managed to find a couple of seats in the fourth row. I wanted to sit as close as I could since I knew there would be subtitles. The first two rows were supposed to be reserved for those with a gold pass. I couldn't justify the money ($100) for this pass though. This was the only movie that I saw them make people leave the front rows, if they didn't have that pass though. I had to laugh at some people. After getting kicked out of the first row, they moved to the other side and sat there in the second row, after being told the first two rows were reserved. Of course they got kicked out of those seats as well. Did those people really think they wouldn't notice? With only one person sitting between me and the screen, I settled in to watch Martyrs.

Martyrs begins with a young girl running down a street. It is obvious from her appearance that she has been through some hard times. We learn that this young girl is Lucie, once she is placed in a hospital. Anna befriends Lucie, becoming almost like a mother to Lucie. We discover that Lucie managed to escape captivity, where she was mostly beaten. Fifteen years later, Lucie (Mylène Jampanoï) is looking for those that kidnapped and held her captive. She thinks she has found those that did this to her, but Anna (Morjana Alaoui) wants Lucie to just watch them in order to make sure. Lucie has other ideas though, and heads into the house armed with a shotgun. Inside the house is a family of four, going about their normal lives. Are these people really the ones that did this stuff to Lucie? What follows may be the most violent film I have yet to watch.

Going into this movie, I knew it had a reputation as being a hard to watch film. I discovered that it wasn't the subject matter that made it so hard to watch, but the in your face violence. This is one movie that does not hold back when showing you things. Only once does it not show you what is happening, and I think that was done to make it more shocking. This actually confused some people, since the film doesn't hold back. This one time it did though, so why do that when it never did before? When we see what happens, after it cuts away from showing us, I think the shock of seeing the end result was more than it would have been, if we knew what was happening. This end result image has stayed with me, so it did its job well. Martyrs can basically be divided into two halves. The first half is a revenge flick. During this time we learn about Lucie and Anna as well. Even though it was never said, I got the feeling that Anna and Lucie had been down this road before. We slowly learn what happened to Lucie all those years ago, and why. Then the film shifts into the second half of the film, which is still very violent, but takes off in a direction I don't think many people will ever come close to guessing what will happen. The only thing I have noticed people complaining about, outside of how violent it is, was the fact that Anna and Lucie stay in the house for so long after what happens there. The events appear to take roughly a day, so it isn't like they hung around for days on end. At the same time though, the thought of why they were still there did cross my mind. The house appeared to be pretty secluded, but I was still wondering what if someone shows up? Some answers are resolved before the second half ends, while more questions come up. Martyrs ends up with an ending that isn't straight forward. Because of this, I am still changing my mind about things.

Since Martyrs is such a brutal film to watch, you are probably wondering how the effects stand up. They are actually done amazingly well. There were times I wished they showed more blood though. One scene showed someone cutting themselves down the length of their arms. I would think there would be a lot of blood because of that, but there wasn't much. I don't want to talk about the effects too much, since discovering them was half the fun of this movie. If you want to call some of the sick things fun that is. The acting was great. The two leads do an outstanding job, and make you care for their characters, even if they do come across as a bit crazy at times. Even the child actors at the start of the film were wonderful.

If you are worried about the subtitles, don't be. To my surprise there isn't a lot of reading to do. There are only a few scenes in the film that have a lot of talking involved in them. Outside of that, you only have to watch. Even my friend, who I have a very hard time getting to watch subtitled films, admitted that for once it wasn't bad. I had to dodge around the guy a few times to read the subtitles, but it wasn't too bad for me this time around. At least I didn't miss anything that was said. I was sitting against the wall, so I would either lean against the wall or lean against the chair in front of me, that had no one in it, so that I would stay out of the way for the people behind me. Not everyone thinks about that though. I will say that if you are a horror fan, and I assume you are if you are reading this, then you need to watch this film at least once. It isn't for every horror fan though. The acts of violence they do show will turn some people away. Some are calling it pure trash because of the violence found. I didn't mind that director Pascal Laugier, who has said this is his answer to the film Funny Games, didn't hold back. At the same time, I do have to admit that this also made the film hard to watch at times. It is the realism of the first half, and the brutality of the second half, that makes it so hard to watch at times. The DVD is on the way, released April 28th. I have already put my pre-order in. If this doesn't end up being one of the most shocking films you have watched, I would be very surprised.
4 out of 5 Wondering what others thought of the ending

Whole Town Filled With Plague

One of the films I was really looking forward to over the convention weekend was Plague Town (2008). I have known about this film for sometime now, so was very happy to know that I would be getting a chance to watch it. This was the third film shown on Saturday. The second film, Blood River, you can read about it here. The friend I went with decided to go check out something else that was happening around the same time as the movie started, so we parted ways for a little while. When I went in, they were handing out pins and posters for the movie, so I made sure to get one of each. As far as I know, this was the only movie to give out free things. After the film, the next one to show was Dark Night Of The Scarecrow, which I decided to skip out on, in order to get something to eat. While returning to the hotel the convention was in, we noticed three police cars pulling in. I found out later that a fight had broke out in the hotel lobby. I was disappointed that I missed it! On a side note, sorry reviews from the convention have been slow going. I was feeling better over the weekend, but since getting back my cold has been making a come back.

Plague Town starts off with a child birth. We never see the baby, but there is something wrong with it. How do we know this? Well, the priest pulling a gun and pointing at the baby is a good start. The father of the baby won't have it though, and attacks the priest, eventually killing him. From there we meet the Monohan family, an American family visiting their Irish roots. Annette (Lindsay Goranson) and Jerry (David Lombard) are the parents of the group. The two daughters, Molly (Josslyn DeCrosta) and Jessica (Erica Rhodes), don't seem to be getting along too well. They are always calling each other names. To round out the group, we have Jessica's boyfriend Robin (James Warke). They set off to explore the country side, which is pretty uneventful, except for the family squabble. They return to where their bus will pick them up a moment too late. They start walking, while trying to figure out what to do. They eventually come across a car that is unlocked. Figuring the owner of the car will return, they decide to get in the car and wait. What they don't know is that near by is a bunch of kids that are very pale, and their faces are messed up in some way. Their minds are also messed up, as they would just as soon kill you, than get to know you.

The in fighting with the sisters felt a little extreme to me. Then again, I don't have a sister, so what do I know. The funny part about the first act of the film, is that the family is sitting at the entrance of a barn, with a dead body not far behind them. While the body was hidden from their view, I was wondering why none of them managed to smell it. I guess the wind was blowing just the right way. Plague Town ends up being pretty creepy, thanks to the weird looking kids that can be found. They sometimes wear a mask, to hide their true face. The music also plays a key factor into this as well. The bass was strong enough to move the lights in the next room, at least that is what my friend said. "In L.A., this would be considered a bad sign." While I really enjoyed the mood the film set, I was often a little confused by what I was seeing. Not the "what's going on?" type of confusion, but I was confused over what they were showing, as far as the kill scenes went. Sometimes they had no problem showing the full kill, while at other times they would only show us the person doing the killing. Not that I have to see someone being killed, I just felt like if you are going to show it some of the time, why not all of the time?

This leads me to the effects, in a way, which were actually pretty impressive at times. The opening kill was pretty brutal, but would pale in comparison with the movie I will review here next. There are some nice effects to be found. My favorite was perhaps a skin from the cheek hanging down. The makeup for the evil children was also well done, and is probably the highlight of the film. The poster girl, Rosemary (Kate Aspinwall), is not in the film as much as I thought she might be, since I see her on advertisements more than anything else. I understand why though. The makeup is outstanding, and the character itself is one that will stay with you. Dare I say we might be looking at a horror icon? The acting wasn't too bad either. Even though I am giving Josslyn DeCrosta credit as the lead role, Plague Town is actually one of those films where there is no real main character. Even though this is Josslyn's first major role in a film, she carries it well. I enjoyed her character, and her acting. Josslyn is a little on the short side (at 5'1"), and cute. What is there not to like about her? While everyone does a good job with their roles, I still think it will be the children that will be remembered above everything else.

Like Blood River before it, not much is explained in Plague Town. Whatever it is that is wrong with the children in this area of Ireland, is never touched on. This didn't bother me at all. We don't really need to know what is wrong them in order to enjoy what it is we are watching. I do wish they had come up with a different ending for the film, but it wasn't so bad that it ruined my enjoyment. Even though some of the kills were rather disappointing to me, I still walked away from this film feeling it was worth the wait to see it. I'm pleased to say that Plague Town comes out on DVD next month, on May 12th. Be sure to look for it!
4 out of 5 Staying away from people wearing masks unless it's Halloween