Change Your Image
chrysalis_writter
Reviews
Book of Blood (2009)
Good, low-budget film
Had to watch a crappy, low-quality 4:3 Region 4 DVD, can't wait for widescreen Blu-Ray. But, that's okay since it's not available in the U.S. yet, that's what we have to live with!!! I'll say this, it's no Hellraiser, but it's better than Midnight Meat Train. It looks like Clive Barker is so desperate to keep these films in production that he's not holding out for cutting-edge directors and imaginative adaptations.
The film, at parts looks like a made-for-TV film, at other times it's very cinematic. my hope is that once it's digitally mastered for wide-release the color balance and contrast will be cleaned up.
For the most part the story is strait forward, at the intersection of hell, the dead scribe their stories on a young man with ESP, the rich and demented want his skin. That's that. It's the book-end story for the collection "Books Of Blood" and as that it works, as a stand-alone it's a little thin. Still, overall I was never board and enjoyed the film. As a little, low-budget gore machine,it's a good-nights fun.
The Mist (2007)
Faithful to the last 2 minutes, then the entire film is blown.
"The Mist" has always been one of my favorite King stories, I'm not much for short-story reading but this one was really above the cut. When I heard the director of "Shawshank" and "The Green Mile" was behind this adaptation I was genuinely excited to see it, and after nearly two hours of an excellent horror film, the director twist the tale and spoils the effect.
The issue I'm commenting on is the end of the story as told by King who gives a grim, but hopeful final few paragraphs letting reader know that hope is alive and well.
Director Frank Dermont destroys hope.
The last minutes of this film screw up horribly. First, our main character kills his little boy just as the child opens his eyes and see's what daddy's about to do. Then, out of bullets and unable to kill himself the man awaits death at the hands of the mist monsters. But know, the military comes and the man is saved, just after murdering his own child. What's worse, we get a shot of a small religious cult formed in the grocery store where 90% of the film takes place being rescued, driving by, smirking, as if to say, see, if you put your faith in God, all would be well.
The film becomes an allegory for Christian faith, suddenly it's not "Kings: The Mist" but Kings Left Behind.
The director murdered, twisted and ruined the end. One of my favorite King stories, ruined on screen.
The Golden Compass (2007)
Very good and faithful, highly underatted!
It's a shame that so many "Spiderwicks" have to ruin it for the truly worthy adaptations out there. Sure, after the atrocious "Bridge to Tarabithia" we might all never want to see a YA audience film again, even GGI can't put all the Magic into the "Narnia's" of the world, but "The Golden Compass" works, period.
This is a solid effort, a good, strong film that has the daunting task of quickly building a complex mythology in the first thirty minutes (granted, these are hard minutes for some children, but the CGI sets and creatures helps suspend them in fantasy land until the action starts.
I won't go into great plot details, partially because this is the set-up film and most of the plot isn't clear from it. We desperately need the sequels before Dakota Blue is too old to pass for the child in the story. This is a worthy film, worthy of a trilogy.
Nightbreed (1990)
Sliced and diced by the studio, directors cut to come?
I was peeved that the best make-up academy award went to Dick Tracy, a horrible film with horrible make-up. The Nightbreed (based on the better titled "Cabal" novella) look terrific, the acting is excellent and David Chroneburg makes for a truly creepy and terrific antagonist.
The plot focus's on Aaron Boone, who has recurring nightmares about a society of monsters living under a cemetery. Is he making it up or are they real and calling to him? His Pyschologist (Chroneburg) convinces him he's a murderer, a slayer of families.
Troubled and suicidal, Boone seeks refuge in Midian but the monsters don't want him at first. He is also tracked by his girlfriend, Lori who refuses to give up on him even after he dies and comes back cold and monstrous.
But Decker isn't about to let Boone continue on. He raises the locals on an all out assault on Midian, like a holy war in gods name led by the devil.
Barkers themes of misunderstood monsters may come from his experiences as a homosexual male, but they are always strong and honest. Nightbreed turns the genre on it's head. The monsters are just trying to survive and want to be left alone, but man is hunting them.
A 20+ minute longer cut was originally submitted by Barker, but the studio chopped it into this fractured masterpiece. Barker is hard at work trying to locate the missing footage for a directors cut release. Until then, this version will have to do.
Star Wars: Episode III - Revenge of the Sith (2005)
An excellent, if flawed, finale!
There are some surprises in Episode III, the first of which is most likely that it is actually coherent and gripping to watch. Unlike Ep.I which drug on and on in the middle, encumbered by an unexciting pod race to which the conclusion was a no-brainer (and is painfully longer on DVD) and barely resurrected by the excellent duel at the end with the mediocre space battle and silly-as-hell ground war; or Ep.II which held no plot and had an ending so muddled it barely makes sense and leaves you scratching your head; Ep.III has a tight plot and an emotional center.
Revenge of the Sith starts out with the pointless rescue of senator Palpatine, now since we all know he's the Sith Lord, why has he been kidnapped and what purpose does this hold? None. The beginning is nothing more than an action device designed to start the film off.
It gets better from there. Anakin has dreams of Padame dying in child birth like the ones he had of his mother in Ep.II (so that's why they made that movie?) which came true so he becomes obsessed with keeping his newly pregnant bride from dying, at any cost. In comes Palpatine, carefully placing Anakin in situations where he can point to the Jedi as leading him down the wrong path and seduce him with the idea that the Sith may know how to stop death.
Of course, it all works for Darth Sideous (Palpatine) as Anakin grows more weary of the Jedi "holding him back" and more frightened by the prospect of loosing Padame, he finally chooses to spare Palpatines life by attacking Mace Windou (don't ask me how they spell it!!!) His journey to the dark side has begun. From here on Anakin is sworn to the dark side, and betrayed by it as it is quickly revealed that it is everything he does to save Padames' life that are the very things that cause her death in the first place. By listening to Yoda and pushing those fears aside he could have averted everything, saved the Jedi and ended the Sith once and for all.
As finally the children are born (to an not nearly big enough Padame) cut with scenes of Vader being built onto Anakins mutilated body, the Shakespearian Tradgety aspect unfolds. And when Vader realizes just what he's done, it actually hits home and is deeply disturbing.
Of course, in the end he is the one that bring balance to the force, by fathering Luke that is.
This is an exciting and superior prequel worthy of its title and with too few flaws (like Obi Wons' silly bird / beast) to complain about.
Willy Wonka & the Chocolate Factory (1971)
A horrific and nauseating piece of moldy candy
This lame and terrible adaptation of the first book I read as a child should be burned and forgotten. So many pointless changes where made, terrible songs where added and the magic was drained from the original prose. Even as a very small child I did not understand why they gave the movie a different title, then I realized it was because it had nothing to do with the book.
Very little of Rould Dahls story is here, instead we are flooded with cheap sets, chocolate that looks like dirty water, bad acting and the some of the worse songs ever.
I've seen several trailers for the new adaptation, and I'm hyped to see the great glass elevator fly at last! Pass on this one, go with Tim Burton's film.
Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban (2004)
JK Rowling says "Best one yet" and I agree!!!
You want to slam the director for cutting, cutting, cutting, go for it. I agree, it's painful sometimes to watch a film based on a book and notice the missing pieces everywhere.
Now, get over it. Put the freakin' book down, clear your head and watch the film.
That's right, the film, not the book, the film.
First, let's get Chris Columbus out of the way. He's one of the blandest, clumsiest directors out there. Don't forget, this man forever left us with that damned us with that Home Alone film and I will never for give him. The first two Potter films were slow, episodic dribble that while holding the story of the book together where tedious and uninvolving to those who had not read it, and those who had. I dreaded the films from the minute I heard he was helming them and hoped beyond hope they would. Well they did.
Second, let's talk about what was done right. The dialogue is honest, the acting is ten-fold better, the special effects near perfect, the lighting brilliant, the tone flawless and the camera never stagnant and always involving.
Third, the story; the point is there. Don't argue that he cut stuff out because the Author okayed it and I think she would know what has to be there!
Finally; JK Rowling approves the film and proclaimed it the Best of the Three! Okay, the author herself, the person who penned those books you lonely fanatics hold so dear signed off on it and showered it with praise.
So there, detractors, take that.
The Passion of the Christ (2004)
The Flaying of the Christ; Incomplete, and uninspired.
Not being religious I have no bias toward watching a Christ figure get caned, torn up and crucified, however watching Scorsese brilliant, if too long, The Last Temptation of Christ (the temptation being Lucifer offering Christ a mans life if he gives up his role as the savior, guess which choice Jesus makes?)I was able to become involved with the character and what drove him. In Gibson's telling of the last 12 hours (with a few flashbacks to fill in plot holes)I get nothing but a feeling that Christ should have just stayed down when he had the chance.
Let me make some points here:
First: The story starts with Judas selling out Christ, it should have started with Christ coming to the Temple and saying he would tear it down and rebuild it in three days. This is the thing that inflamed the Jews to want him dead so bad, he threatened their power. Leaving this out of the film only leaves the viewer trying to grasp why they hated him.
Second: No emotional involvement. Gibson tries to let the torture speak for itself. There's nothing more than fleeting flashbacks with Jesus (pronounced hea'shu) and either Mary his mother or his love, nothing to emotionally attach them to him, or us. Watching his mother weep over him when he gets back up after a brutal beating is called to an end, inflaming the Romans to inflict more damage, feels hollow. We haven't established anything beyond 'this is mom.' He could have pointed the camera at any weeping extra in the crowd and put a subtitle 'my son!' under her with equal impact. You have to ask, what the hell did he get up for? To be hurt more! Why? So he'd be a martyr. You know, I want Kerry elected president, should I invite Republicans to beat me to death to prove how horrible I think they are? There is a scene in The Village where a character is stabbed, there's nearly no blood, zero gore, yet the emotional impact is heavy, you fear for his life, you feel for his girl and you hate his killer. There's a castration scene in I Spit On Your Grave that shows nothing because it all takes place under a bubble bath, yet you know it's happening and you squirm and you want to look away. Then there's the F*** me Jesus scene in the Exorcist when you desperately want the suffering of the little girl to stop. In this film I just wanted Jesus to Stop Getting Up!
Third: Gibson's Christ is not a persecuted Jew trying to lead people to the love of God, his father, he's a self righteous bastard who says "father my heart is ready" before torture "Father, why have you forsaken me" when he's nailed to a cross and "I'm ready" when he's had enough. Now why does he tell God he's ready to be flayed, then complain when it happens. Christ offers himself up for torture, then looks on as if to say, "see what I do for you?" Well, how asked him?
Forth: No conclusion. Not only does Gibson not bother to show us why they Jews hate him (oddly, only Pilot's motivations are clearly shown, in the end he's the one you feel bad for, he doesn't want to hurt anyone, but doesn't what his head off either.) but doesn't show that any good comes out of it.
Fifth: The Devil. What's with the Nelly - Demon - Reaper??? Some androgynous freak torments Christ, yeah, see the root of homophobia is that Gibson portrays Tran gendered people as Lucifer.
Sixth: Now Ascension? What the hell, he rises and fade to black? What's this? Where's the lords message? Nowhere in this film. This film is a knock-off of Barker's Hellraiser. 127 minutes of torture with no beginning and no conclusion. A three hour film would have let us see Christ live and love before the crucifixion, and let us see the impact of resurrection. However Gibson just wanted an exploitation of pain thinly veiled as religious rhetoric.
Last: If you believe in Christ, share what he stood for, not how he died! Peace, Love, Good Will. Not self righteous martyrs! Not Pain! Not Violence! Not hate and ignorance! This is a film only for those who know the entire story by heart because this is just one long scene way out of context.
Finally: See the Last Temptation of Christ and Dogma, two misunderstood films made by people who love there lord and savior and want people to walk out with the positive not negative. Enough with the hell and damnation, let Clive Barker do that, he's better at it.
Day of the Woman (1978)
Don't dismiss because of title.
I Spit On Your Grave has the worst title in history next to Attack of the Clones! This is not the campy, horror, gore fest you expect, it's an angrier, nastier take on deliverance.
A you writer goes to a secluded cabin for the summer to write her first novel.
Three local twenty-something's and the town idiot snatch her in the woods, take turns rapping and tormenting her, and in an obviously moronic move, put the dumb guy in charge of killing her. Well, he just can't do it and when she recovers she gets even.
What's working here is that there's a true emotional bond between the character and the audience. She's harassed a bit at first, then when a couple of the guys try for her attention and she turns her back they decided she's a tease and just needs to be getting some to come around. One by one they take her, let her go, then surround her again. The rapes are brutal, but honest, clumsy, messy, bloody affairs, her situation is tragic and hopeless and her revenge more than justified.
She has a gun, she could waste her time and ours being Chuck Bronson and just shooting them, but instead she plays them. She draws them back, seduces them, then Hangs, Castrates, Axes and out-board motor's them. The tag line says there's five men, they can't count, there's only four.
There's a genuine film under all the gore and fact that our protagonist spends nearly 80% of the film completely naked. However her emotions are as exposed as her body, her transformation from normality, to victim, through recovery and finally as executioner.
Kill Bill: Vol. 2 (2004)
The sequel proves a greater single film exist
The only problem I had with Kill Bill 2 was that it was completely linear but for flashbacks. Unlike the first film where Tarantino follows his Reservoir Dogs / Pulp Fiction editing style, Bill 2 moves only forward. My feelings toward this, edit it back together as one film! I really don't want to buy the theatrical Kill Bill DVDS (not that that has stopped me) because I know, somewhere down the road there will be Kill Bill the Directors Cut special ultimate deluxe edition DVD that features a completely new version of the two films as one films edited with a more balanced sense of pacing and no distinction between a first half and a second half.
Hopefully someday Pete Jackson will do the same with LOTR and get rid of the 20 minutes of overdubs in the 2nd film!!!
So, how is Kill Bill 2? Well, if you where disappointed by the first film this will bring you back into the familiar Quentin world, less showy fight sequences, more realistic blood, and... wait... dialogue!!! Yes, they talk in the sequel, cool, huh?
Great film if you are willing to escape from reality and let the master take you by the hand.
The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King (2003)
Great! Now, how about editing them together as one story???
I can't comment enough on how amazing these films are, screw the Tolkien purist, I've read the books many, many times and the films do more than justice.
Now, how about we all write Pete Jackson and beg for a new LOTR DVD that edits all three films into one and gets rid of all the annoying, boring, pointless voice over in TTT. All that pointless elf crap was thrown in to remind viewers of characters that didn't exist again until the third film. I hate it, it's annoying and pointless and in a linear version of all three as one (Tolkien did, after all, write one novel, not three) it could all be taken out. More so a better place could be chosen for the Gollum flashback, it really kills the pace of watching the three movies congruently over three nights.
Let's all write Pete Jackson until he caves.
Hamlet (1996)
Relax and enjoy...
This uncut version of Hamlet may yield annoying cameos (except Billy Crystal) and pathetic special effects (do we really need the earth shaking when the dead appear?) but it also shows off where it truly counts. Also, keep in mind, no one would finance this, Branagh had to scrape just to pull it together.
I saw this twice in two weeks on a 70mm print, and would have gone again had it still been playing!) Branagh's film is at first, visually stunning. Who cares what century it's in, this in not a story about time. It would matter if a WWII story was transposed to Vietnam, but really all you harsh reviewers and purist, lighten up!
This play is the epicenter of the Shakespeare world, and unfortunately to sell the play Branagh allowed inferior Hollywood heavyweights slither into minor roles, ignore them there's three hours thirty minutes of film here without them!!!
This is one of the most moving and beautiful productions I've ever seen, period. With all the grace and elegance of the Godfather films, this movie sucks you in if you just relax and allow yourself to be absorbed.
I'm waiting, patiently for a DVD version (please Kenneth no 4 hour commentary!) hopefully they will fix the crappy effects via CGI, but until then the lousy, cropped, two videocassettes will have to do. If you haven't seen it, see it.
This isn't the best Hamlet could be, but it's the best it's been done.