Tribute: Sam Raimi

Being the nice person that I am (what, you can stop laughing now), I have been asking people to help me out with some tribute posts. As much as I like to do them, I thought it would be fun to get other bloggers to do the same. It all started when I was a little girl...wait, wrong story. Sorry about that. Let's try this again, shall we? It all started when I was trying to figure out how to get some of my favorite bloggers to post something on my own blog. I like all the blogs that I have provided links for, don't get me wrong on that. But there are some blogs that I like more than the others. When I see they have been updated with a new post, I can't wait to check out what the post is about. And Now The Screaming Starts is one I usually look for as soon as the list comes up. So it was only natural that I asked CRwM to help with a tribute post. I sort of forced the issue though, since I didn't give him a choice as to who to do a review for. But I did know he was a big fan of the director I had picked out, Stuart Gordon if you have forgotten. Rachel from Top Horror Movies Club then asked if I would be willing to trade posts, which I was happy to do. This time, I actually let Rachel decide (Maybe I can talk CRwM into another post, this time one of his choosing) who to do a review for.

A week or so ago, I got an instant message from Jay at The Horror Section, who I had been waiting to hear from. While I had him, I asked if he would be interested in doing a tribute post. Jay's blog is another one of those blogs I love to read, so I'm glad that he agreed to do this post for me. Jay did it a little different though, giving me a post that talks about why he likes Sam Raimi so much. I figured this would be the person he would pick you see. If you have ever read his blog, it would be pretty obvious choice from him. If you haven't, you should!! Here is Jay's tribute to Sam Raimi.

While talking with mermaid heather a few weeks ago, she asked me if I’d like to do a guest post on her blog. Delighted, I asked her if she had anything specific in mind. "A tribute post", she said. It took me a while to figure out which horror icon I wanted to cover, but with Drag Me To Hell imminent, the right choice was obvious. Here is my tribute to Samuel Marshall Raimi.

Sam Raimi was born into a middle class family in Royal Oak, Michigan on October 23rd, 1959. His childhood was largely occupied by television reruns of Abbott & Costello, The Little Rascals and most significantly The Three Stooges. Due to his parents being fairly well off, his father brought home a 8mm camera one day. Raimi had an instant epiphany, realizing that with this device, he could actually control reality, instead of just watching it on TV. By age thirteen, he had his own camera, afforded by doing odd jobs around his neighbourhood. Acquiring the necessary equipment was the first step. What he needed now were willing subjects. In eighth grade, he found kindred spirits in Bruce Campbell and Scott Spiegel. The three of them, along with long-time collaborators Josh Becker and Sam's own siblings Ted and Ivan, formed the Metropolitan Film Group and filmed many shorts together. When Raimi went off to university, he met another likeminded individual named Robert Tapert and quickly brought him into their clique. After the success of low-budget independent horror films like The Texas Chainsaw Massacre, The Hills Have Eyes and Halloween in the mid-to-late-seventies, the young men saw an opportunity. Their first horror effort was a short called Clockwork, which starred local actress and friend Cheryl Guttridge besieged in her home by a maniac played by Spiegel. It was only seven minutes, but already you could see the innate talent of its director.

Once Clockwork was in the bag, they decided to make another short that could be used to illicit funds from investors. They began work on the script for Within The Woods – the precursor to The Evil Dead – and had it shot and ready to go by the summer of 1979. It was raw and grainy, but somehow partners Sam, Bruce and Rob (now known as Renaissance Pictures) managed to drum up $85,000 from local dentists, lawyers and relatives. With that, they packed up everything they had and headed to a rural area just outside of Knoxville, Tennessee. The rest as they say, is history.

I've talked enough about The Evil Dead at The Horror Section, for you to know that this film is very dear to me. I find it inspiring how all these young kids (Raimi was barely twenty!) were able to make something so seminal. It should be shown in film school to showcase ingenuity and perseverance on a shoestring budget.

Once The Evil Dead had established him as an honest-to-goodness director, Raimi helmed a project that he co-wrote with the Coen Brothers – who had just also just come off their own debut feature Blood Simple – called Crimewave. Unfortunately, this was Raimi's first time working on a studio picture and he quickly learned that he was no longer the one calling the shots. His lead actor Bruce Campbell was replaced by studio suggestion Reed Birney – whom I'd never heard of then or since – and the suits seemed to be at odds with Raimi’s vision at every stage. The finished product is uneven at best, but you can certainly see Raimi’s Three Stooges infused leanings throughout it. It remains largely unseen because it still has yet to be released on DVD.

After his experience with Crimewave, is it any surprise that Raimi went back to well and made Evil Dead 2? Raimi had much of the same crew from his first movie, a bigger budget and was now working with top notch special effects guys Bob Kurtzman, Greg Nicotero and Howard Berger, who would later form now legendary KNB EFX. Raimi decided to, again due to his love of physical comedy, combine the gore with over-the-top slapstick, birthing a style now known as ‘splatstick’.

Due to his sizable love of comic books, Raimi next wanted to do a superhero movie. After trying fruitlessly to secure the rights to The Shadow and Batman, he decided to create his own property, Darkman. Universal seemed interested in his idea and let him make it, which is somehow fitting considering the character of Darkman was inspired by classic Universal monsters like The Wolfman. The movie had Raimi's kinetic style all over it and was well received by genre fans. The character of Darkman proved himself lucrative enough to warrant two sequels, albeit without its creator at the helm.

Raimi and company returned for one more demonic hurrah with Army Of Darkness in 1993. With its lighter-toned fantasy slant and main character Ash now fully evolved into the wisecracking buffoon we know and love today, this was the most consumable of the three and the only one to receive a wide release. It was hilarious to me at the time; just how many people didn’t know Army Of Darkness was the third movie of a trilogy. The Evil Dead certainly wasn’t the institution then that it is now, largely due to its unavailability for so many years. That’s probably why there is a new DVD edition released every once and a while... They feel the need to catch up!

In late 1994, Sam announced he would directing a western called The Quick & The Dead, written by someone else (British scribe Simon Moore) no less. Not only that, but now Raimi would be swimming with the big fishes, dealing with Hollywood heavyweights Gene Hackman and Sharon Stone, as well as then up and comers Leo DiCaprio and Russell Crowe. He handled it with ease. His concept of shooting each gunfight a different way is continuously engaging and this love letter to the spaghetti western perfectly meshes with Raimi’s skill set. This movie came out at the tail end of my decade-long obsession with Sharon Stone (it began with King Solomon's Mines in 1985) and I ate it up. I still love this movie and watch it every few years. I always forget just how many great actors are crammed into this movie.

After a few years off from film to produce several television series, including American Gothic, Hercules and Xena, Raimi took the reins of the film adaptation of Scott B. Smith's crime novel A Simple Plan. Raimi had no trouble dialling it down and served up a masterfully crafted thriller. The tightly knit cast of Bill Paxton, Bridget Fonda and Billy Bob Thornton played off each other well, especially the latter who deservedly earned an Oscar nod for his performance.

Raimi's next move was even more unexpected. He was going to take on a baseball picture entitled For Love Of The Game. I remember thinking 'wtf?' I was starting to think that he had left the horror genre forever. However, he did manage to find the best person to partner up with for this project. Kevin Costner had already had major success in this area with Bull Durham and Field Of Dreams. This was one I didn’t watch for a while, mainly because baseball bores the shite out of me, but it annoyed me that there was only one film in Raimi's catalogue that I hadn't seen – kind of like Lynch's The Straight Story and Kubrick's Fear and Desire – so I finally broke down and watched it. For Love Of The Game is good. There are no cameras attached to baseballs in flight, but it made me interested in the sport for two hours, so that’s saying something.

Then came The Gift in 2000. It was a solid thriller, elevated by an excellent ensemble, which consisted of Cate Blanchett, Hilary Swank, Greg Kinnear and Keanu Reeves. With a script co-written by Billy Bob Thornton, who again regaled us with an uglier side of the South, Raimi painted quite a portrait. I was a little disappointed that he toned down his signature style for his return to darker themes, but I am ETERNALLY grateful that he convinced Katie Holmes to show off her goodies before she was captured by Xenu and replaced by a pod person.

In 2002, Raimi entered an area of his career, which would consume him for the next five years. Sam Raimi would be directing the new big-budget incarnation of Spiderman. This seemed like a match made in heaven. By now, Raimi had proven that he could handle any genre and was a big enough name to warrant the superhero movie he had originally wanted to make over a decade ago. He was more than ready. Spiderman destroyed expectations, showing that he was just as interested in telling the story of Peter Parker as he was the famed wall crawler. Some consider the sequel to be an even greater achievement, as visual effects technology was finally able to keep up with the demands of the larger-than-life characters, especially the multi-mechanical armed Doctor Octopus, played with absolute verve by Alfred Molina. When the third movie came around, many shunned it like the plague. Even though I can admit that it may have got away from him by the end, Spiderman 3 is still clearly a Sam Raimi film. He’s a goof at heart. Regardless of how it was received, it STILL went onto make truckloads of money for Sony and basically allowed him carte blanche for anything he wanted to do next.

Which brings us to the present and Drag Me To Hell. This is Raimi’s triumphant return to the genre that began his career and I’ll be first in line to witness it this weekend.

Women And Frankenstein

Last month I tried to catch up on my Netflix stuff, and didn't do so well. The film I watched yesterday, for example, I have now had for over two months. At least I am getting around to it I guess, but I hate that I ended up paying for it. Since Frankenstein Created Woman (1969) is part of my 999 Challenge, I thought I would update where I stand on it so far. This film marks the 22nd film I have watched now, but it is the first film from Hammer Studio that I have watched, ever actually. Jed has been pushing me for a while now to watch some, and this was a film that was specifically requested to be reviewed by Sneering. I was going to wait until after the Challenge before getting to any requests, but since this one is for a Hammer film, I needed to watch nine of them anyway, so why not?

At the start of Frankenstein Created Woman, we see a man about to be executed for murder. He is about to be placed in the guillotine when he spots his son watching. The priest tries to run the boy off, but he does watch his father lose his head. Many years later, we meet the now grown Hans (Robert Morris). We discover that he is working for the town doctor, Hertz (Thorley Walters), who works with Baron Frankenstein (Peter Cushing). We find out that the Baron and Hertz are working on experiments to trap the human soul. Baron Frankenstein believes that he can cheat death by taking the soul, and putting it in another body. When an experiment of theirs works the way the Baron wanted it to, he sends Hans out to get something to drink, so they can all celebrate together. Hans goes to this little restaurant, where Christina (Susan Denberg) works for her father. Hans is in love with Christina, but her father doesn't like Hans because of Hans' father. While there, Hans gets into a fight with some men that are there simply to make fun of Christina's slight deformity. Her father helps break up the fight, but later is killed. Hans is the prime suspect, and is found guilty. When Hans is executed, Christina decides to end her life as well. Baron Frankenstein now has two bodies to play with.

Frankenstein Created Woman turns into a revenge movie from there. It is hard not to give too much of the plot away, since the first hour of the movie basically sets things up for the last half hour. It is this slow setup that turns some people off from this film. Films today tend to shorten the setup in order to get to the action quicker, some even seen to skip it completely. I don't always mind this, but it does depend on the film. Actually, the slow setup for this film is there for a reason. Instead of rushing through it, we begin to learn about each of the characters that are important to the story. Despite the departure from the usual Frankenstein film, this ends up being an interesting movie. I liked getting to know each of the characters, and I liked finding out what happens with two souls in one body. It is the jump in logic that keeps the film from being great though, in my mind anyway. Even though Hans is wrongfully accused, we know who killed Christina's father. Hans gets Christina to take revenge on those that killed her father, and him in a different way, but how does Hans know for sure who did it? How does Christina know where to find the killer? The last time this happens is perhaps the biggest leap in logic in the film. You will know what I am talking about if you have watched it.

I have been told how gory the Hammer films can be, but this wasn't one of them. We do see a nasty cut, and a couple of heads being cut off, but this is as far as it goes. There is some blood to be found, but not a whole lot. It is probably good they didn't show the severed heads all that much, since it was pretty easy to tell they weren't real. The acting was very good. I really liked Peter Cushing's take on Baron Frankenstein. The Baron has this feel of being above everyone else in this film, and can't be bothered by everyday things. Susan Denberg was also very good. It is too bad that she decided to drop acting after getting involved with the '60s drug scene. She was in a couple of films, and a couple of TV episodes, as well as the Playboy Playmate of the Month August 1966.

Speaking of Susan, her transformation in the film was kind of funny in a way. I didn't think doctors back then were able to change a person's appearance in the way they do in this film. Fix up her face, and somehow her limp, as well as giving her hair a dye job, and you get a whole new person that no one seems to know. Christina being able to speak in Hans' voice is something else that threw me a little. Even though I was getting a little sleepy towards the middle of the film, I can't really blame the film for that. I ended up going to bed very early for me, things catching up to me I guess. I got a little ways into this review, started to feel my eyes close on me, so decided to head for bed. If you hate the films that have a slow pace to them, you might not want to bother with this one. However, I did enjoy the film, so if you find yourself agreeing with my scores, check this one out someday. If you haven't already that is. Despite the leaps in logic, it is a fun film to watch.
3 out of 5 I would have to kill the person that dyed my hair as well

Opening The Cellar Door

I still keep in touch with Kimberly Amato from time to time. Which reminds me, I need to update her interview since it is now complete. Anyway, she asked me if I had ever heard of a movie called The Cellar Door (2007), because she is friends with the lead actress in the film. I had not heard of it, but added it to my Netflix queue right away. I have since talked to Michelle Tomlinson, and will be doing an interview with her now that I have watched this film. Kind of hard to ask questions about a film one hasn't watched yet. As soon as Michelle gets back from a convention, I will start with the inquisition! I mean the questions actually, since that sounds a lot better, doesn't it?

The Cellar Door begins with a woman escaping her restraints, fighting off her capture, and getting away. Just when she thinks she has gotten away though, he tracks her down, and kills her. From there, we meet Herman (James DuMont), who is on the prowl for his next victim. He eventually spots Ruby (Michelle Tomlinson) and Christa (Heather Sconyers). He follows them around as much as possible, and eventually finds them coming home after having to much to drink. Herman breaks into their home, making sure he leaves no trace of himself being there, and takes Ruby. Christa wakes up the next day wondering where Ruby is, while Ruby wakes up in Herman's cellar inside a homemade cage. Ruby tries to escape, but Herman has done this a few times, and is ready for anything Ruby can think of. Will she be able to control his emotions in order to escape?

The Cellar Door doesn't really bring anything new to this type of movie. Generally most people very little good to say about this film. While I agree with them, that it was at least better than Captivity, I have a few other things to say about it. In the extras for the film, there are a couple of interviews. In one of the interviews, they talk about how the film has a fast pace to it. I didn't agree with that. The majority of the film takes place in Herman's cellar, and deals with the mind games they play on each other. While this isn't what I would call a fast paced film, it is what makes The Cellar Door work. There is almost a cat and mouse game going on between them, without all the chasing and hiding. Herman is trying to make the women that he takes love him. Ruby is trying to get Herman to drop his guard long enough to make a mistake. It is this back and forth game that makes it interesting. Just when you think Herman is going to drop his guard, he doesn't do it. Just when you think that the mind games are working on Ruby, we discover she is just playing along. One of the main problems I had with the film, is that Herman could be a little too nice at times. He does show his mean streak, but not often enough. This could have been by design though. When his mean streak does show itself, it comes as a bit more of a surprise.

The main thing I didn't like about The Cellar Door, would have to be the effects. There aren't many to be found anyway, and I was fine with that. It isn't until the end of the film that we start to see some of the effects in the film. The main effect, that I can remember anyway (it has been a couple of weeks since I watched this actually), is a major bite. Maybe it isn't the main effect, but it is the one that stands out the most in my mind. Herman bites someone so hard, that we see blood coming out of his mouth when he looks up again. He bites this woman's arm, and I was looking to see what the bite mark would look like, since Herman had blood on his mouth. To my surprise, there wasn't one. However, after we see Ruby's reaction to what happened, there is now a bite mark. I guess it was nice that they did include the bite mark, even if it did look bad, but I was surprised they made such a big movie mistake. The acting was actually pretty good, except in some minor roles. James DuMont and Michelle Tomlinson work well off each other. In their interview on the DVD, it was a little weird seeing them joking around with each other after seeing what they put each other through in the film. Personally I thought that the interview should have included Michelle more, but I guess I can give her more of a spotlight now.

I really liked it when Herman would get mad. You never knew what he would do when he reaches his limit. At one point he goes after a woman that works at a grocery store, mainly because she was being a very big smart ass towards him. But that leads me to something that I didn't care for as well. He manages to do all these things without anyone seeing him? Most of what he does happens at night, so in a way I can see it. Still, there were some things I thought were a bit of a stretch. As far as no one thinking it was a bit strange to say the least anyway. The Cellar Door gets a bad rap because it tries to focus on what is happening between Herman and Ruby, instead of getting into a lot of action and/or gore. While I didn't feel it was what I would call a bad film, there were too many little mistakes, and sometimes bigger ones, that kept it from being a great film.
3 out of 5 Grocery clerks beware!

It's Official!

I haven't gone through the graduation ceremony yet, but it is official that I will be doing so. Soon I will be the proud owner of a Bachelor of Science degree, or more specifically, BS: Forensic Chemistry. I took today to just sit around and enjoy doing nothing all day. Since I have very little to do over the next two days, I hope to get some actual reviews up again. I have a movie for a review over at Top Horror Movies Club, and I have been slowly working on a review for here. If all goes well, look for them both tomorrow!

Reading About Edbrook

I'm really sorry there has been nothing out of me for the last week, and for this month in general. I haven't been on the computer much, and I haven't been watching any movies either. Instead I have been busy with finals. I'm hoping to pick things up again this week, as I should have a little more time to do things besides study. I have been a little more nervous about this set of finals, since they are harder classes, and it leads directly into graduation. I'm sure I have been doing fine with them, but it is still in the back of mind. Meanwhile, I have been taking a break from my studies once in a while. I have been reading James Herbert's novel, Haunted, first published in 1988. Since James Herbert is one of my favorite authors, I noticed that I have some catching up to do with his books. I'm seeing a few I didn't know about! This novel was easy to get through actually. The big print made it go by a little quicker than my last novel I was reading.

David Ash works for the Psychical Research Institute, and has been called in by Kate, the head of the Institute. Kate wants David to go to a place called Edbrook Manor, in order to investigate claims of the home being haunted. The reason David is going is because the Mariells have asked for him by name. At the start of the novel, David is already on his way to the house by train. Even though the Mariells' aunt, Miss Webb, is supposed to meet him, it is actually Christina that does so. Once at the house, he meets Christina's brothers, Robert and Simon, along with Miss Webb. David also meets the family dog, Seeker, who doesn't take well to David being there. David quickly learns that Christina and her brothers are very childish in a way. They love to joke around, and rarely take anything seriously. Miss Webb takes care of the large house on her own now, and seems sorry that David is there. We eventually learn that David's sister drowned when they were children, and he still carries a lot of guilt over that accident. Will David discover the truth about Edbrook?

My main reason for reading Haunted, was to compare it with the movie that was made around seven years later. I didn't think I had read this book before, but judging from the way the book looks, I did at some point. The first thing I noticed different is that Herbert describes David as a child hearing his dead sister's voice. As he follows it, he finds his sister in a candle lit room inside her open coffin. Something happens, but we aren't told what it is, until much later in the book. In the movie we are told what happens to cause David's sister to drown. In the book we aren't told what happens until late in the book. We know she drowned, but we don't know the story behind it until late in the book. His sister is very different between movie and book. Of course she plays a part in the over all story, especially since it would be kind of silly to keep bringing her up for no reason if she didn't. The second difference I noticed within the first chapter, is that David works for this Institute. In the film he doesn't work for anything such thing, he is simply a college professor that is deeply into the paranormal. The third major difference is that somehow Seeker got turned into a doctor.

While reading the book, I was surprised at how different it was from the movie, yet so close to it as well. There will always be differences between a book, and the movie that is based on the book. There are simply too many things an author can put into writing that would take much too long to tell in a movie. For the screen adaption, writers Timothy Prager, Bob Kelett, and Lewis Gilbert (also the director), kept the basic story, while changing certain things around. The reason David is asked to go to Edbrook is only slightly changed. The twist ending is also slightly changed, but remains the same. The siblings' childish behavior was captured very well in the film, which only goes to show how well acted it was as well. There was a hint of incest in the film that never shows up in the book, so that was something that was added. What really got me is I kept waiting for the doctor to show up in the book, but he never does. Then I realized there wasn't a dog in the film, but there is in the book.

There are some things in the book that I would have liked to have seen on the big screen. Herbert pads his book by stepping away from the main story of David investigating the house. This is done in two ways. We get a little bit of insight into the characters of Kate and Edith, a co-worker of David's, and a psychic. The second way, which sometimes crosses into the first way, is that Herbert goes into a couple of David's past investigations. One also deals with Kate, and the relationship they have, and the other one involves Edith. This second investigation is one I wish they had found a way to put into the film. I really liked the mini story told there, even if it did sort of leave the reader hanging. The ending is also different, but in some ways the same as the movie. I would have liked to have seen the book ending in the film, instead of the CGI effects that are actually found there. It ended up being a much more interesting ending, than what we got in the film version.

The only thing I didn't really care for in Haunted, is that it starts to drag a little before getting to the twists. Herbert has David getting frustrated a lot by what he is finding, or not finding, at Edbrook. David also thinks about leaving the investigation several times, but always finds some reason not to leave. That can get a little annoying after a while. Still, Haunted is a good book. If you have yet to read any of Herbert's novels, this is a good one to get started with.
4 out of 5 Making love with ghosts

Horror By Mail

A few weeks ago I got an email asking if I would like to review a film called Isle Of The Damned (2008). Of course I'm not going to turn down the chance to review a movie, so I wrote back with my information for it to be sent to me. I didn't hear back from the person, so I wasn't sure if it was going to be sent or not. A day after getting Dark Reel, another film sent to me for review, I got Isle Of The Damned. It has taken me longer to get around to this film that I intended, but I did sit down with it last night to give it a watch. Meanwhile, I added to my 999 Challenge over at Top Horror Movies Club, with my review of Baby Blues. This is a film I happened to come across at the rental store, which ended up having some children being killed. I probably could include today's review as well, but I don't think I will. I have plenty of other films to watch for that yet.

Isle Of The Damned starts off with a warning and a story about the film. The warning is if your health isn't so good, or you have children with you, you might want to leave right now. The story I will get into a little later. Once we get into the film itself, we meet Jack (Larry Gamber), who is a private investigator. He has been hired by Thompson (Patrician Rosa) to help look for the lost treasure of Marco Polo. This isn't something that Jack wants to do, since he doesn't like, nor trust, Thompson. He has to get some money though, since Jack and his wife have taken in Billy (Peter Crates), who they want to adopt, or maybe they already have. They hire a boat, and head off to some islands off the coast of Argentina, where the treasure is rumored to be. There is one island that is mostly unexplored because of the cannibals that live there, the Yamma Yamma tribe. Thompson believes this is where to find the treasure. Along with Jack and Billy, they head into the island, and soon come across the cannibals.

All I really knew about Isle Of The Damned is that is a throw back to the late 70's, early 80's, films that came out of Italy. I guess I was thinking this was going to be a zombie film from the title. I was wrong of course, but they both eat flesh though, so not that far off. The start of the film tells us about the director of the film, who they name Giallo, being charged by Argentina for possibly abusing native people. Argentina wanted Giallo to show up in court with the actors from the film, to prove they were still alive. Giallo instead managed to leave the country. If you know your cannibal film lore, this story will sound familiar to you. Isle Of The Damned takes from a lot of these films in that way. I can't claim that I have watched all of these films, but I have watched my fair share of them. You will see many scenes that, while slightly changed, will remind you of scenes from these other films. Instead of trying to be serious, like the films it borrows from, Isle Of The Dead instead goes with making fun of those films. Since the film is supposed to be from 1980, it is complete with film damage. Mostly just seeing lines in the film. The actors are dubbed over, very obviously. Some of the voices used for the dubbing are amusing in themselves. It was also funny to see the actor being very dramatic about their lines, while the voice over is rather flat. Writer Mark Leake has something for, or against, anal sex. I can't tell you the number of times this is brought up.

The effects can look a little cheesy at times, but for the most part they are done very well. Sometimes when arms, hand, or legs, were being removed, it could look rather fake looking. At one point, the part of the leg that is supposed to be missing is inside a box. I think that was done to be funny, more than it being a bad effect though. You will see a lot of guts being pulled out, and munched on as well. They take things to the extreme with cutting off a penis, and sticking a finger into where it used to be. Pulling out an unborn baby, and chowing down on it. If you really love your gore effects, this is a film for you. The acting wasn't great, but not bad at all either. People I haven't talked about yet are Keith Tveit Langsdorf, who's character lives on the island, trying to find the true meaning of being civilized. Dustin Edwards, who's character is said to be a mute, and a one time professional hit man. He lives on the island as well with Langsdorf. Then there is Megan Mae, who is rescued by Jack after her parents are killed by cannibals.

There are so many things about Isle Of The Dead that is just wrong. Not in a bad movie type of way, but in the way of what the film makers feel is funny. Okay, I admit I had to smile at the babies being ate or stepped on. I didn't really get why there are so many anal references to be found. If Thompson wasn't trying to have sex with Billy, then it seemed like someone else was trying to. There is also a few things that ended up there that shouldn't have been there, if you catch my drift. I guess no one believes in carrying extra ammo in this film either. Once they have used up what is in the gun, that is it. I did find myself laughing at times, and I really enjoyed some of the effects that can be found, but I didn't really find myself loving it. Depending on what you find funny is what will help you decide if you should watch this film or not. I would suggest at least giving it a watch once, and deciding from there. This is a raunchy comedy that I think only independent film makers could get away with.
3 out of 5 You want to stick what up my where?!?

Waking Up Rose Red

I'm really behind on things. Sorry this has been the case, but with graduation creeping ever closer, things are getting harder. I'm taking it all in stride though. A few nights ago, I finished watching Rose Red (2002), which happens to be on the Sci-Fi channel as I write this. Netflix listed each disc at just over two hours long, which is half of the running time of the complete mini series. Actually the first disc is almost three hours long, while the second disc fills in the rest. This wasn't a problem really, just ended up staying up a lot later than I intended too. I guess that is what I get for trusting Netflix. My next review, which I really hope to get done today if at all possible, will be for Top Horror Movies Club. Make sure to come back here though for my review of Isle Of The Dead!

In Rose Red, we meet Professor Joyce Reardon (Nancy Travis). Joyce teaches classes about psychology. Joyce is trying hard to prove that the paranormal is a real thing. Professor Carl Miller (David Dukes) thinks otherwise though, and is willing to do anything to prove Joyce wrong. Joyce has taken the last of the Rimbauer's, the owners of Rose Red, as her boyfriend. Joyce believes that because of the rich history of the Rose Red house, she can prove that the paranormal is real. Steve Rimbauer (Matt Keeslar) has agreed to let Joyce take a team of people, all of who have psychic powers, into the house. Rose Red has stood unused for a very long time now, and Joyce feels she will need these people with psychic powers to wake up the house. A reporter that Miller has hired is trying his best to embarrass, if not out right discredit, Joyce. So you can see why it is so important to Joyce that she prove hunting's are real. She is getting very tired of being laughed at, so to speak. Along with Joyce and Steve, there is Cathy (Judith Ivey), an automatic writer. Emery (Matt Ross), who can see and talk to spirits. Nick (Julian Sands), mostly a mind reader, but seems to have other powers as well. Pam (Emily Deschanel), who can get psychic impressions, or memories, from some objects that she touches. And last, but most important of all, is Annie (Kimberly J. Brown), who appears to be a telekinesis more than anything. Since Annie is only 15 years old, her older sister (Melanie Lynskey) also comes along. Joyce thinks that Annie is the key to waking up Rose Red again, but with over twenty people disappearing inside the house since the early 1900's, is that such a good idea?

The story behind Rose Red goes something like this: Stephen King was approached to rework The Haunting story for a new film. King loved the idea, but the accident that almost took his life happened soon after. The team that approached King went on to make the remake of The Haunting, instead of waiting. King still wanted to do this reworking though, and presented it to ABC as a miniseries. Which as we know, they went through with it. I guess that explains why Rose Red reminded me of The Haunting in some ways. The discs looked pretty scratched up to me, so I cleaned them as best I could. I didn't have a problem with the first disc, but the second disc had a spot where I ended up missing about eight minutes, because it kept skipping ahead. I didn't feel to bad that was the only time I had a problem though. I did miss what happened to Nick though. While four plus hours does sound long, it actually goes by fairly quickly. The four hours leaves plenty of time to get to know each of the characters, which the film actually fails to do in some ways. Some characters get a lot more development than others. The Rose Red world is also a little odd. Psychic powers seem to be fairly normal, which is what struck me as odd. It wasn't all that of a big deal that Joyce had gathered up these people who can do things most others can't. It was a big deal that they are trying to prove ghosts are real.

The thing that bothered me the most with Rose Red is all the CGI effects they felt the need to use. It wouldn't have been such a big deal if they had kept them down. However, they feel the need to show us the same effect over and over at times. They show us John Rimbauer (the original owner of the house) falling to his death many times over. I don't think this was done with CGI effects, more than likely it was blue screen, but it still looked badly done. Not all effects look bad, but I guess uninspired. The ghosts generally look more like zombies. From the special features, it would appear that all close ups of the zombies are on masks specially created. It got a little confusing because sometimes we would see them as ghostly white, and then other times they had the zombie look to them. The acting was well done by everyone. I was a little disappointed that Nancy Travis' character turned a bit crazy. She seemed normal enough by the end of the first disc, and then was a bit off the wall on the second disc. I would loved to have seen Julian Sands and Emily Deschanel have more screen time, and had their characters more fleshed out. That is how it goes sometimes though I guess.

I guess what surprised me about this movie is the fact that even though they were there to prove ghosts are real, they didn't appear to be doing much in order to do just that. When they first get to the house, which is a lot bigger than it is in the prequel The Diary Of Ellen Rimbauer, Joyce takes them on a tour of the house. Giving them more of the history of the house, and showing them where the hot spots are, or at least where they used to be. They bring all kinds of equipment, which we barely see any of them actually using, and it appears to be all set up in one room anyway. During the tour, a couple of strange things happen. I noticed that no one bothered to bring a camera, tape recorder, or anything like that, in order to catch these things. The equipment does capture some things on them, but only when no one is paying it any attention of course. I did end up liking Rose Red, but I felt it could have been better if they had decided not to make it such an effects driven film. I loved the first half of the film, because of the character development. There are some great characters in this film. The two things balance each other out though, which just leaves an average film to watch.
3 out of 5 Shoot the zombies in the head and drag them out as proof!

MIWTS: H2

Just in case you haven't watched it yet, here is the trailer for Rob Zombie's H2. From the trailer it looks like it is a remake of the original sequel. Isn't that a first?