Reviews

I felt "Drive" was a great western. I would like to think the director chose L.A. for the setting because of its literal geographical location.

I felt that I needed to reinstitute the current score this film has received, a much deserved 8 out of 10, because I feel I had just watched an 8 out of 10 movie. It was mostly subtle, oftentimes graphic, but when a film like "Drive" is shown alongside the dime-a-dozen products the Hollywood Machine is grinding out, it should be respected.

I'm not going to persuade you to like it. There are some viewers who can read images the way the director has written with his camera, others cannot. No review can change the aforementioned. Some notice the Goodwill Billboard above Gosling's character when he puts on his mask and connects the two images as more than coincidence. Some may not. Some may notice a small hole in the wall, where a family picture might have been, in between Gosling's character and Mulligan's. Some may not have picked up on the significance of this hole.

My point is, this movie isn't for everyone. I don't mean to read as pretentious, but again, this movie isn't meant to be enjoyed as much as it's meant to be observed. Simple as that. If you're an impatient movie viewer, "Drive" is not for you.

How many times do we go out of our way to avoid "that type of person"? Whether that "type" is someone we feel is threatening, dangerous, or just somebody we think would just ruin our day? I know I have.

I'm not proud to admit it, but I've often created entire lives for people from just one glance, and assured myself that my imagination has threaded their personalities to a tee. So much so, that I feel satisfied not even confirming my suspicions; affirmations become by products of my delusions. Sometimes, I won't even allow myself the possibility of surprise. All from just a glance.

Tucker and Dale Vs. Evil is a horror movie at a glance, but given the opportunity, it may surprise its viewers, revealing itself as a heartfelt fable at its hill-billy core. In this film, the horror genre is more of a paradigm, used to tell a deeper and more insightful tale compared to most contemporary horror films.

Like most horror films nowadays, it begins with a young cast of teenagers, en route to escape the civilized world and embark on a camping trip filled with sex, drugs, and everything else college kids are expected to do. All of the token victims are present, accounted for, (the alpha male, the one black kid, the ditsy blonde with big boobs etc.) and seemingly placed upon the slab, practically begging a villain for killin'.

Then, there's Tucker and Dale.

The innocent group of college kids immediately type-cast the duo as two lunatic hillbillies straight out of a horror movie, poisoned from dime-a-dozen Hollywood clichés! They're instantly threatened by the pair and agree to stay far away from them through the remainder of their vacation.

Meanwhile, there's Tucker and Dale.

Tucker and Dale would like nothing better to do then fix up their new vacation home, which happens to look like it came from the set of an Evil Dead remake. The two characters are good ol' boys, a bit cliché, again at a glance, but have the tendency to grow on the viewer quicker than one can pop the top of a Pabst Blue Ribbon. Tucker is the grounded center of the two and the voice of reason, leaving Dale as the lovable comic relief.

I have to say, Tyler Labine as Dale really steals the show. His portrayal of the moronic oaf constantly reminds the viewer that amongst all the blood and guts, this film has a big soft gooey heart on the inside. His character is the medium that best delivers all the sincerity of this film home, and another quality that sets this movie apart from the rest.

Honorable mention goes to, of course, Alan Tudyk, a very underrated "hey, it's that guy" actor. His comedic delivery was never in question, personally, however. Don't agree? Check out "Death at a Funeral" and not the one with Chris Rock! The original! "Death at a Funeral" has Alan Tudyk constantly delivering comedic blows.

Things really begin to turn a darker corner when Tucker and Dale rescue one of the college kids from nearly drowning. As Tucker and Dale are merely trying to do the right thing, the rest of the collegians think that the two hillbillies are kidnapping their friend, because that's what hillbillies do right? Kidnap young girls, take them back to shady cabins in the middle of nowhere, and skin them alive! Right?

"Tucker and Dale Vs. Evil" succeeds in addressing a major concern in modern America, miscommunication! Personally, I really felt as if Eli Craig, the director and co-writer, was commenting on our fears and our lethargy, as Americans, concerning how we perceive "strangers" or people we do not know. According to Craig, and I would have to agree, we would rather allow our imaginations and context misrepresent "strangers" than assemble the responsibility required to get to know them. It's just easier to dismiss "them" as simply someone that is similar to somebody we have met in the past or somebody we do would not have pleasure in knowing.

There's a conversation in the beginning of the movie between two characters about the owners of a dirty pick-up (who happen to be Tucker and Dale). One character says, commenting on the vehicle, "We're in hillbilly country, now, boys! Squeal like a pig! Sooo-weeee!"

In response to this statement, a young girl says, "Chad, just because they're not in your fraternity doesn't mean their freaks".

"Well, actually it does Allison," says Chad. "You're either Omega Beta or your a freak".

I think that exchange sums up the series of misunderstanding that plagues the group of college students during the entire film. The college characters were quick to assume and judge based upon surface details. I feel that Eli Craig was cautioning those who are quick to make snappy assumptions based upon only what the eye can see.

Whether or not "Tucker and Dale Vs. Evil" will teach you the significance of getting to know you're fellow man, it will certainly entertain. The film is a blast from fade in to fade out and full of fun, to boot. I highly recommend this title for anyone wanting a break from your typical horror movie slasher.

"Tucker and Dale Vs. Evil" certainly spins a healthy alternative to the excessively worn Slasher sub-genre of horror and even leaves something for the audience to critically think about after the credits roll.

Believe it or not, there is even evidence of Rom-Com formula in this movie, so it is definitely couple approved. Now when was the last time a horror movie had all of the above? For all of my fellow gore-hounds, don't expect any Fulci or Jackson splatter, not even on the levels of "Shaun of the Dead". This film is tame by those standards, but the "money-shots" do exist. Woodchipper = Awesome!

For a film that mainly revolves around a cast of three to carry the movie, seven stars can seem like seventeen. What makes this film work is the realism. Every choice, every consequence, everything! Like a movie studio trying to emulate the moments before a car accident, then its aftermath.

I'm not one of these reviewers that will take you through the entire plot of the film. Especially in this case. This film's simplicity works. Three skiers accidentally get forgotten on a ski lift as the resort closes for the week.

That's it! Yet, this simple formula works better than any horror movie I have seen in a long, LONG time! This opinion may be a little biased and I'll tell you why. Personally, I am petrified of open heights. Adam Green's chosen camera placements are well picked, never once allowing any hints of fiction into the story. That's the beauty of shooting on location, despite how deadly the location can be.

Deadly, indeed! This movie really got under my skin. Not in anyway gore-filled, like "Hatchet" or its sequel. So for all the gore-hounds out there scanning the reviews for bloody details before watching it, make-up effects enthusiasts won't be completely disappointed, but it's no "Hatchtet". However, Adam Green focuses more on his Actor's/Actresses' reactions to the horrors within the film. This works! Lord, does it work! I'm a huge GOREHOUND, I welcome squeamish scenes, but the subtle incidents that happen to these characters while exposed to harsh weather works better than a graphic depiction of a chainsaw to the gut! I'm almost ashamed to admit that I had to turn away and groan at what I witnessed on screen! This is from someone who giggled like a girl-scout throughout "A Serbian Film"! "Frozen" works! In all the right ways! My only complaints about the film are the lack of themes. Usually a survival-horror like this contains some smug theme that ties the film together, a topic the film tries to make aware to its audience. Romero does the aforementioned flawlessly, just to provide one example. "Dawn of the Dead" and its issue of consumerism. For example, one would assume that being trapped with two other people in a situation like that, the throes of "cabin fever" would naturally work its way into the script. Yet, Adam Green chooses to focus on the reality of the situation his characters find themselves in. As a result, the film remains simple. Leaving the audience with no other thought to ponder upon besides their own feelings of fear. To some, this may be a compliment to the film, to others, a weak link.

The dialogue is probably the strongest device in the film. Revolving your film around only three characters, the script better be able to keep the dialogue interesting or your audience is going to give up on these characters. Adam Green's dialogue is just that, interesting. Realizing the situation the characters find themselves in, the conversations that follows feels significant, but above all genuine. Dialogue, outweighs the action, so be prepared for a lot of talking. However, when the action arrives it's like an avalanche; disastrous, yet magnetic. I was, literally, frozen, couldn't take my eyes off the screen.

I've said enough...

To reiterate a few points, I have to say, again, this film really shook me. After it was over I had a deeper appreciation for the bed I was watching it in. I also made a vow never, EVER to go skiing.

I love film! Love it! Since I was as young as memories will allow, I have been constantly immersed in the world of film. Most father and sons share camping trips, baseball game visits, or fishing ventures, but father/son time, for me, was the trip to our local video store. We would spend hours browsing each section. Curious, I would inspect each box representative, the avatar of the actual film (VHS at the time) being kept in reserve behind the counter, in utter fascination and admiration. Detailing each's art, each's still photograph, each's opinion of what could possible be in store for the viewer if chosen.

I literally grew up on film.

Now, 24 years in age, I find myself still an avid film viewer. Currently, my niche in cinema has been viewing the films that "dare" you to watch them. The types that have disclaimers a mile long, proclaiming with bold text how many countries they were banned in, and even hinting at the stir the film has caused or causes. So for the past three or four years I have been exposing myself, happily I may add, to the style of cinema that may bare such adjectives as raunchy, trashy, and even pornographic. Pushed by these adjectives to points where some viewers would even dare to disregard the levels or degrees of art.

The concept of a film having such a profound effect on its viewers and inspiring extreme levels of emotion is a concept that will eternally fascinate me. That is the very essence of art, to conjure emotion; raw emotion. Despite what label we associate the emotion to, if a medium of art is implying feeling upon its viewers than that medium of art has succeeded, in my opinion of course.

This is why I chose to award "A Serbian Film" with 10 stars. Because it is the bravery of such film crews, under the direction of such film directors, that allows our perception to trace the lines between what is art and what is not art (if there is such a concept).

The nature of this film is INCREDIBLY SHOCKING, graphically depicted, flinching, yet beautifully unmerciful. To be honest, I did not believe I would have been moved by this film the way it has. Every time a new "controversial" film hits the news, it always seems to fail upon execution, regarding the hype that followed. "A Serbian Film" was the exception to that rule. I was completely unhinged by the content.

However, within the fact of my discomfort resides my love for its boldness. After gushing over the horrendous details found within the film, I am grateful that everyone responsible in this film's production did what they did. They exercised the greatest liberty any artist can wish to achieve, expression. And not only the liberties of expression, but being able to share that expression with an audience. What we do with it is our art, our expression, a never ending cycle that is the further essence of art.

So whether we love it or hate it, if that emotion is felt, this film has succeeded. Furthermore, if that emotion is voiced, this film has succeeded.

I, personally, will be eternally grateful for this film's existence. Whether it be a political statement of injustice, a target for media controversy, or just a limit of how far art can push a viewer's emotions. Hats off to all the crew that was involved. I feel that this is a new benchmark for cinema. Positive or negative? Time will tell.

If I was Alan Moore, right now, I would feel somewhat like "The Comedian". I would be laughing at the great joke that Watchman turned out to be.

Alan Moore was right. There are certain things a comic book or graphic novel can do that film cannot. I'm a film follower first. It is a much more entertaining medium, after all a movie reads for me. And there is a lot a film CAN do that is impossible to recapture in any other art form, such as songwriting, painting, etc. But the story of the Watchmen was never meant to be lifted from its pages to the big screen.

Their are just too many details a comic can preserve in front of you, transfixed long enough to be studied so the smallest detail can become aware. A movie cannot do this.

In a comic, it is accepted to survey several backstories of multiple characters at a time. One cannot be overwhelmed this way, because a READER can stop, flip back a few pages and review the material that they were just being asked to accept. If you are having a hard time keeping up with the parallels between the old and new "Minutemen" flip back a couple pages and read it again. If you didn't quite understand Dr. Manhattan's conversation on Mars and its irony concerning time and human matters, you can stop and allow time for insight.

VIEWERS do not have this pleasure. When a viewer is forced to absorb four flashbacks, one on top of the other, the movie's time line degrades and the viewer loses interest.

Again when the comic book series came out was what made the series so revolutionary. It was a time in comic book history where the biggest problem a superhero had was who was robbing Chase Manhattan today. Alan Moore stepped in and gave real lives to his fictional comic book characters. These characters lived and breathed, they drank when they were unhappy, they had sex, they even had bad breath in the morning. They had something no other comic book personalities shared. Flaws.

The world was not ready for a Watchmen movie. The average movie-goer is not yet bored with the same superhero movie paradigm. They still want to see more special effects and wire-fu especially over something as menial as story, right? A comic book reader, or reader in general, has nothing to look forward to but the story and its substance. It is easier to put down a book than walk out of a theater.

But Snyder did his best to appease the average superhero movie senses. There is a lot of bone crunching and neck breaking action. And the entire movie looks great and is directed like it was from somebody on top of their game, because it was. This movie looks, sounds, and watches just fine. It just looks, sounds, and READS better. The fact that Hollywood had to change the ending of the book goes to show the comic never should have made a film debut.

Ironic enough Hollywood fought and fought to keep the rights from going to Alan Moore and his company. After witnessing the crowd's response to the film tonight, I have a feeling Moore is not going to have too much trouble getting the rights now.

What was the icing on this cake of sheer irony is the song that exits the film. Desolation Row is a song hailed to be one of the better Dylan songs of his whole songwriting career. The fact that it was perverted by "My Chemical Romance" of all bands, just proves a point I've been trying to make: some things should not be meddled with.

(this was piece is presented raw and not proof read. All typographical errors remain unchanged and untempered)