Drag Me to Hell

Film: Drag Me to Hell (2009)
Dir: Sam Raimi
Rating: ***** out of 5 stars

For me, this is the cinematic equivalent of the second coming of Christ. I don't care if that offends you, I really mean it. This is Sam Raimi's epic return to horror and it more than delivers. It is scary, funny, outrageous, and dripping with Raimi's distinctive style. You'd be hard-pressed to find a better time at the theater this year.

Loan officer Christine Brown (Allison Lohman) is up for a promotion to assistant manager. After her boss informs her that she must "make the tough decisions" to get ahead, Christine denies an elderly gypsy woman an extension on her mortgage. She suffers the consequence when the woman places a curse upon her, whereby a vicious demon haunts the victim and ultimately drags them to Hell. With the help of her boyfriend, a medium, and a seer, Christine tries everything possible to dissuade the demon from taking her soul.

Drag Me to Hell will make you jump, scream, laugh, and possibly gag. This was exactly Raimi's intention, as the director loves the elicit a response from his audience. His self-proclaimed "spook-a-blast" has definitely achieved that goal. It is scary, hilarious, unique, and so damn fun. Do not be deceived by its PG-13 rating - this movie really pushes the envelope with gore and gross stuff. It is completely over-the-top in the best possible way.

I loved Lohman in the lead role. Originally, Ellen Page was cast in this role but dropped out. I am so glad she did because Lohman nails the sweet innocence of Christine. Her progression into desperation and borderline madness is perfect. Page would have been far too angsty and tough for the part. Lohman also takes a couple Bruce Campbell-style beatings. She is a real trooper. The rest of the cast are great, as well, even Justin Long who I usually am not a fan of.

So many moments in this movie recalled the Evil Dead films - even some direct references and recycled sound FX! For a Raimi fan like me, this is pure heaven. Sam is back in original form here with canted camera angles, twisted humor, and brilliant use of sound. He also recruited his friends - the greatest FX team in the business KNB - to handle the practical effects. As always, they did a great job. The only downside of this movie is it makes me literally ache for Evil Dead 4. If you have any doubts that another Evil Dead film could be as good as its predecessors, Drag will completely shatter them.

If you have not seen this film yet, GO! NOW! It is imperative that you see it in theaters with other people because it is one hell of a film-going experience. At each viewing I attended, the audience's screams, laughter, and stomping roared louder than anything I've ever heard. Believe me when I tell you this film is 100% unadulterated fun.

Read More

Zombie Night

Film: Zombie Night (2003)
Dir: David J. Francis
Rating: * out of 5 stars



Everything is wrong about this movie - script, acting, FX, cinematography - everything. But I gave it 1 star because it made me laugh. A lot. It probably wasn't intentional, but this was the hardest I have laughed in a while.

This mess of a movie is supposed to take place post-nuclear war, with the world overrun by zombies and only a small number of human survivors. They only real plot of the film is these characters moving from one refuge to another, and they meet some asshole who wants revenge after being expelled from the group.

Beyond that, there is no story. It is a meandering mess full of plot holes and terrible dialogue. Characters in this say and do the absurd, unrealistic things you can think of. Needless to say, the production value is piss poor. It looks like something I made in my backyard with a home video camera. There are cars on freeways in the background despite the setting being a war-ravaged wasteland. The FX are pretty lame, save for one shotgun-blast-to-a-zombie-leg that not only makes me laugh hysterically but looks pretty good, actually.

Now for the very worst of it (or best, depending on your mood) - the acting. This is priceless. Not a single person in this rises above laughably bad. Honestly, it's so hilariously awful that I almost want to recommend it. If you like bad movies, this is a must-see. If you are morbidly curious and don't want to sit through the whole thing, just watch this instead:

Read More

Star Trek

Film: Star Trek (2009)
Dir: J.J. Abrams
Rating: ***** out of 5 stars



Let's get this out of the way now: I have never liked Star Trek in any form. It always seemed silly and boring to me, and my affinity for the Star Wars universe never helped either. So I was more surprised than anyone at how AMAZING this movie is. Seriously, I cannot find a single flaw with it. And it has done the unthinkable - made me actually interested in Trek mythology!

What does not surprise me is that Lost creator J.J. Abrams is the man behind this great movie. He has created a modern Trek film that is not only loyal to its origins but also exciting, funny, and smart. If you do not have fun watching this flick, something is seriously wrong with you.

The story begins with George Kirk saving the crew of the U.S.S. Kelvin after a Romulan attack. At the same time, his son James T. Kirk is being born. Twenty-some years later, Jim Kirk is a smart but rebellious Iowa farmboy who gets recruited into the Starfleet Academy. There he meets the members of his future Enterprise crew - Uhura, McCoy, Spock, Chekov, and Sulu. However, the events do not occur quite as we know them, since the aforementioned Romulan attack has altered the course of history. It is now up to Kirk, Spock, and the rest of the Enterprise crew to stop the rogue Romulans who are out to destroy Vulcan, Earth, and all the other Federation planets.

Screenwriters Alex Kurtzman and Roberto Orci have crafted a clever script that is remarkably consistent, plausible, and surprisingly faithful to Trek mythology despite changing it. They carefully cover their tracks. Even when the events stray from the original series, they explain exactly how this change has occurred and why. The writers also make sure to throw in LOTS of references for the fans. Even an anti-Trekkie like myself picked up on a few nerd references. And I have to admit, even I popped a few nerd boners during the film. It's impossible not to!

Visually, Star Trek is stunning. I love Abrams' style, which has a subtle hand-held quality. Often times, objects gets in the way of the camera, or it zooms in like a home video recording. It feels very unique and personal, and I am surprised it works so well for a big sci-fi action movie. Furthermore, the visual FX are perfect. All the space ships, alien makeup, and blackhole FX looked fantastic.

Now my favorite aspect of the film - the cast. Everyone payed great homage to their predecessors without completely ripping them off. I thought it was necessary to impersonate them a little, since they are playing younger versions of those original actors, but they did not overdo it and brought their own charisma to the roles. Karl Urban is especially fantastic as Leonard "Bones" McCoy, thus proving what I already knew - this guy really has more potential than his choices of roles would indicate (Pathfinder, ugh). I also loved Chris Pine, who nailed the cocky charm of Kirk. I officially forgive him for Just My Luck. And Smokin' Aces. Yes, he's that good. He has great chemistry with Bones and Spock, resulting in much of the film's ample humor.

I could go on forever about this movie, I really do love it. Comparisons have been made to last year's Iron Man, and that is a fair assessment. Both films are 100% excitement, humor and awesome visuals. If an ardent Trek-hater like me can love this movie, it is guaranteed to please everyone.

Read More

The Last Winter

Film: The Last Winter (2006)
Dir: Larry Fessenden
Rating: ** out of 5 stars



The Last Winter follows a team of scientists and drillers who are attempting to lay pipeline in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. Bizarre events start to occur, like rainstorms and a rapid temperature increase. When one of the team members starts babbling about a "force" coming after them, the others chalk it up to craziness. But they are soon forced to accept that things are not right here and that someone - or something - will not let them leave.

Many times I have watched films where a perfectly good plot was poorly executed and thus ruined the final product. The Last Winter seems to have the opposite problem - visually, it looks quite good, but the premise is ridiculous and preachy. This movie was doomed from the start. In his defense, I believe Fessenden told this story as well as anyone could have possibly told something this dumb.

There is some interesting camerawork and very nice cinematography, but ultimately, the film turns into a silly mess. There is very little horror involved, and the menace itself is both predictable and lame. If you want horrifying, let's talk about the CGI FX. Ugh. The filmmakers clearly allocated about $100 into their FX budget. Horrible. Just horrible. It's a shame because it cheapens all the nice cinematography throughout the rest of the film.

The pacing also leaves something to be desired. I grew bored very often, and the movie drags on and on before anything interesting happens. Don't get me wrong, I am a fan of slow-boiling tension, but there is none here. On the positive side, leads Ron Perlman and James LeGros are good, as always.

As both a horror fan and bleeding-heart environmentalist, I should have loved this flick. But this movie proves that liberal lectures and horror do not mix. The result is boring, preachy, and ultimately, batshit crazy. Without giving away too much, I'll just say the moral of the story is: don't rape the Earth or she'll rape you back. I wish I could tell you the ridiculousness that comes out of that, but my spoiler ethics overpower me. See for yourself if you're feeling goofy. Otherwise, just skip this one and go watch The Thing again.

Read More

Session 9

Film: Session 9 (2001)
Dir: Brad Anderson
Rating: ***** out of 5 stars

It pains me that there are so few horror movies like Session 9. I guess modern movie audiences don't have the patience for slow-boiling tension. This movie is one of the scariest I have ever seen, and yet it draws upon atmosphere and suggestion rather than jump scares or gore.

The film takes place in a run-down asylum with a violent past. An asbestos abatement crew are brought in to clean the place up. Their foreman Gordon (Peter Mullan) is a working-class guy with a new baby and a lot on his mind. His best friend Phil (David Caruso) is along to help, but constantly fighting with Hank (Josh Lucas), who is dating his ex-wife. As the days drag on, tensions rise among the men and mysterious occurances in the asylum become more frequent. Unbeknownst to the others, Mike (Stephen Gevedon) has been sneaking into the hospital at night to listen to old recordings of a schizophrenic patient's therapy sessions. As the tapes approach the ninth and final session, dark truths begin to reveal themselves.

Spooky old buildings - especially those once inhabited by the violently insane - really creep me out. You just know they are full of crazy, pissed-off ghosts! But Session 9 isn't really a ghost movie - it's as much a ghost movie as Kubrick's The Shining. In other words, there are creepy apparitions, but they derive from the damaged psyche. Or do they? Everything in the film has a clinical/psychological basis, and yet it does hint at supernatural influence. I love that the movie approaches the subject from both angles and leaves the viewer to decide what is really going on.

Session 9 achieves tension and terror with hardly any effort. For starters, the title alone builds incredible suspense. As Mike plays sessions 1, 2, 3, you just know something CRAZY is going to occur at 9. Each new tape reveals something increasingly more dark than the last, and I was constantly on edge wondering what was coming. Furthermore, the setting is spooky, as is Brad Anderson's unnervingly calm cinematography. There are no ghostly children here - just dark hallways, isolation, and implications of shocking violence. There is also spooky voice-over thanks to multiple personalities on the session tapes - very, VERY creepy. Try to get "Simon"'s voice out of your head after watching this movie.

Finally, I want to mention the actors, who are all great. Especially Scottish thesp Peter Mullan, whose performace as Gordon is sympathetic and haunting. And Caruso keeps his hamminess to a minimum (minus one hilarious shot you have probably seen as a .gif file online). I think Session 9's only fault would be a few superfluous details and points left unexplained. But overall, this is an amazing, unique horror film that haunts you long after it's over.

Read More

End of the Line

Title: End of the Line (2007)
Dir: Maurice Devereaux
Rating: ***1/2 out of 5 stars



As any seasoned metro commuter could tell you, subways naturally lend themselves to fears like crashing and claustrophobia. Canadian horror film End of the Line takes the terror to another level by adding demons, a crazy religious cult, and the apocalypse. It is not without its flaws, but the movie has solid scares, cool gore FX, and a thought-provoking script. Writer and director Maurice Devereaux goes beyond the standard genre conventions and delivers a unique twist on survivalist horror.

After a record number of crazies pour into the psychiatric ward one night, young nurse Karen boards the last subway train home. Despite a rough work day and being accosted by a creep on the subway platform, her nightmare only just begins when the train stops in the middle of the tunnel. Some of the passengers receive mysterious beeper pages and suddenly start killing the others with crucifix-shaped daggers. Karen and a small group of survivors escape into the tunnel system to evade the attackers who, as it turns out, are members of a religious cult. Believing the end of the world has come, they take it upon themselves to “save” everyone by killing them, before demons can get a hold of their souls.

The acting in the film is not always top-notch but the characters are likable enough. On the down side, there are way too many of them. In Karen’s group, there is a guy she met on the subway, a religious girl and her horny boyfriend, two rail workers, and then another two characters who serve little purpose other than to be abused and/or killed. On the crazy side, there is an insane old lady, a creepy rapist (whose resemblance to Quentin Tarantino makes him that much creepier), and a slew of other cult members. The excess of characters leads to a few boring conversation scenes that drag the film down and should have been cut.

Devereaux’s script is unique and thought-provoking. The true villain in his story is a televangelist, whose cult is cleverly disguised as a children’s charity and recruits its members by handing out psychotropic muffins. The significance and prevalence of these muffins throughout the movie is pretty amusing. The cult members are very scary in a Wicker Man-kinda way, where you absolutely cannot reason with them. They completely believe in the validity of their murderous agenda. So when demons really do show up, you start to question who is truly the insane one? Has Armageddon really come or did you eat a muffin today? Thankfully, Devereaux leaves this question open for the viewer to decide.

Devereaux excels as a director as well, telling his story in a nonlinear fashion, while staying remarkably consistent. The film is not without a sense of humor either, especially when it comes to satirizing religious fanaticism. He handles the horror aspect quite well, too. Personally, I think an old lady stabbing you with a crucifix and singing about God is 100 times scarier than most horror villains these days. The demons are pretty scary too, especially one subway scene involving a mentally ill girl.

The movie is also occasionally brutal, so much so that it might shock you. Be warned: children and babies are not safe here. The gore FX are great, with the exception of a few fake shots early in the movie. Highlights include one character getting the Pez dispenser treatment courtesy of a sword, and a very fucked-up “family portrait” scene. Over-the-top, perhaps, but I promise you won’t soon forget it. Even the demons are costumed actors, rather than CGI. I cannot praise this decision enough!

My biggest complaint about End of the Line is the slow scenes. It strays off on a few unnecessary tangents, but when it gets back on track (no pun intended) the film is smart and scary. It is not perfect, but it has Maurice Devereaux’s talent as a writer/director and it delivers effective scares and gore. The movie does not make subways seem as scary as Cloverfield or 28 Weeks Later did, but it will definitely make you think twice about Jehovah’s witnesses and free muffins.

Read More

X-Men Origins: Wolverine

Film: X-Men Origins: Wolverine (2009)
Dir: Gavin Hood
Rating: ** out of 5 stars



Just when I thought Hollywood couldn't bastardize the X-Men franchise any more, along came this film. The story is lame, Wolverine is a pussy, the visual FX are terrible, and the film completely botches Marvel icons like Deadpool and Gambit. The 2-star rating is generous, as the film has very few redeeming qualities.

The movie begins with young James "Logan" Howlett losing both his real father and adoptive father and then running away with his brother, Victor. The two mutants - who both have the gift of regeneration - live for hundreds of years. Over time, Victor becomes reckless and cruel, getting both brothers into trouble. Since they cannot be executed, they end up in prison until Major William Stryker recruits them for his elite Team X. After a bloody mercenary mission, Logan walks away from the gig and settles into a normal life.

His peace is shattered when his girlfriend Kayla turns up brutally murdered. He sets out to find the culprit - Victor (or Sabretooth as you know him) - to get his revenge. He also goes after Stryker, who is trying to use Logan and other mutants to engineer an ultimate weapon. In his quest of revenge, Wolvie encounters some famous X-Men characters, such as Gambit, Blob, Cyclops, and Deadpool. We see how Wolverine got his name and that Adamantium skeleton through the Weapon X program.

I'll begin with what little I liked about this movie. I liked the opening credits, where Logan and Victor fight in the American Civil War, WWI & II, and Vietnam, and Victor becomes increasingly more brutal. I liked Liev Schreiber, even if his character was occasionally inaccurate (the claws don't grow on command, dammit!). He was unexpected casting choice, but he did a good job. Danny Huston is also good (duh) as Stryker. He plays the best bastards, doesn't he?

Now for the awful: Wolverine himself is boring and a weenie; most of the visual FX look like pure shit, most notably a shot of the metal claws which could've easily been a prop but instead are horrible CGI; Gambit is a shit actor with hardly any accent, and has ridiculous powers that he never truly had; and Deadpool...oh my god Deadpool...he shoots lasers out of his eyes. 'Nuff said.

I don't know how much Gavin Hood is to blame for this travesty versus Twentieth Century Fox, who of couse have a reputation for fucking things up. No wonder they were so pissed off when the film leaked online - there was plenty of time for word to spread about how much the movie blows. I wish somebody could get the X-Men film rights out of their greedy hands, but sadly, it looks like they'll just keep churning out one horrible spin-off after another. I weep for the future of cinema.

Read More