This night's movie was "Se7en" starring Morgan Freeman, Brad Pitt, and Kevin Spacey.
I first saw this movie several years ago at the recommendation of a friend of mine in High School. At that point I hadn't really conceived of a good movie that ran at a rather slow pace and used horrible, depraved crimes as something other than "AHA!" shocking gross-outs. Se7en presents these murders so matter-of-factly, even while its characters wretch on screen. To a degree I think the evenness of the treatment between routine police work and investigating mutilated corpses with deadly sins written in blood does the film a disservice, dramatically. On the other hand I can see it might be trying to make the point about the tediousness of work and the horrifying banality the killer sees in every day life. This was also one of the first movies I'd seen with Brad Pitt in it, and back when I originally saw it I was surprised to learn he was a very good actor.
While it's more a really tense drama with a few shockingly gross scenes than a thriller of any sort, it's still a really well done movie.
Tomorrow will have been "High Tension"
Monday, October 25, 2010
Sunday, October 17, 2010
October Horror Season 2: Day 17
Day 3 of Serial Killer week's feature presentation is "From Hell". This 2001 film was directed by the Hughes Brothers (previously known for Menace II Society and Dead Presidents) and based on the Alan Moore graphic novel.
Now, I confess I've seen this movie before, and it is one of my favorite movies. I don't know if it's Top 10, but I've always really enjoyed it. It seemed to be something that was artistic and stylish but still accessible a violent, so I felt I could enjoy it without feeling like a brute who just loves bloody movies. I think the assessment still holds up, but after repeated views and thinking about this after some slight "Film Schooling" by my better half, it's probably not as high art as I originally thought.
In fact, part of the reason I probably noticed the filming style was how heavy handed the use of angle and colored lighting was in the first act of the film. Later on, they seemed to film more using natural white light and enhancing certain elements with color. From what I understand from the DVD commentary the film was shot mostly chronologically, so it could've just been the brothers getting used to directing a movie like this, or perhaps some additional budget being allocated to allow them to film on locations instead of sound stages. Either way, after the funeral scene the quality of the lighting improves significantly. Also, while I really enjoyed the graphic novel style angles and contrasts in the early movie, I will admit that the later style feels a lot more natural while still maintaining some signatures (like the shot of Jack walking up the ladder shot from underneath the carriage).
Aside from the shaky start cinematography-wise, there really isn't much playing against this film because it's still very well directed and very well written. The cast includes Johnny Depp, Robbie Coltrane, and Ian Holm, so the acting is all very good. Even the lesser known actors and actresses playing the Masons and the Whitechapel hookers are very good. In fact, the worst casting choice was probably Heather Graham.
This almost hedges out Feast as my favorite movie of the month so far, but I still love the prodigious amount of unapologetic gore Feast pumps out. If I was trying to seem higher class than that, though, I'd put From Hell up front. Definitely see it if you haven't.
Tomorrow night was supposed to be High Tension, but due to already having the DVD and needing to catch up, we watched Se7en.
Now, I confess I've seen this movie before, and it is one of my favorite movies. I don't know if it's Top 10, but I've always really enjoyed it. It seemed to be something that was artistic and stylish but still accessible a violent, so I felt I could enjoy it without feeling like a brute who just loves bloody movies. I think the assessment still holds up, but after repeated views and thinking about this after some slight "Film Schooling" by my better half, it's probably not as high art as I originally thought.
In fact, part of the reason I probably noticed the filming style was how heavy handed the use of angle and colored lighting was in the first act of the film. Later on, they seemed to film more using natural white light and enhancing certain elements with color. From what I understand from the DVD commentary the film was shot mostly chronologically, so it could've just been the brothers getting used to directing a movie like this, or perhaps some additional budget being allocated to allow them to film on locations instead of sound stages. Either way, after the funeral scene the quality of the lighting improves significantly. Also, while I really enjoyed the graphic novel style angles and contrasts in the early movie, I will admit that the later style feels a lot more natural while still maintaining some signatures (like the shot of Jack walking up the ladder shot from underneath the carriage).
Aside from the shaky start cinematography-wise, there really isn't much playing against this film because it's still very well directed and very well written. The cast includes Johnny Depp, Robbie Coltrane, and Ian Holm, so the acting is all very good. Even the lesser known actors and actresses playing the Masons and the Whitechapel hookers are very good. In fact, the worst casting choice was probably Heather Graham.
This almost hedges out Feast as my favorite movie of the month so far, but I still love the prodigious amount of unapologetic gore Feast pumps out. If I was trying to seem higher class than that, though, I'd put From Hell up front. Definitely see it if you haven't.
Tomorrow night was supposed to be High Tension, but due to already having the DVD and needing to catch up, we watched Se7en.
Saturday, October 16, 2010
October Horror Season 2: Day 16
For serial killers day 2 we watched "Horsemen" from 2009, starring Dennis Quaid.
For a movie written by the man behind "Doom" and "The Expendables" and directed by someone who primarily does concert videos, this is surprisingly competent. Unfortunately as a good thriller it falls flat. The direction and the editing is jumpy and often confusing. The writing isn't horrible but it's not too impressive either. They seemed like they wanted to take the Pseudo-biblical overtones of "Se7en" and mix in a touching father/son reconciliation story, what they ended up with was a mess. Don't get me wrong, the movie was sick and disturbed, which helped as a payoff but it couldn't save it. There was no investment in the characters, especially not the victims since they barely even mentioned most of their names.
And the ending twist of Crying Emo kid Apocalypse was just sad.
Thorough disappointment, since "Se7en" already exists and does the same sort of thing so much better. As much as I enjoy visiting Dennis Quaidia and President Dennis Quaid, I can't recommend this either.
Stay tuned for "From Hell".
For a movie written by the man behind "Doom" and "The Expendables" and directed by someone who primarily does concert videos, this is surprisingly competent. Unfortunately as a good thriller it falls flat. The direction and the editing is jumpy and often confusing. The writing isn't horrible but it's not too impressive either. They seemed like they wanted to take the Pseudo-biblical overtones of "Se7en" and mix in a touching father/son reconciliation story, what they ended up with was a mess. Don't get me wrong, the movie was sick and disturbed, which helped as a payoff but it couldn't save it. There was no investment in the characters, especially not the victims since they barely even mentioned most of their names.
And the ending twist of Crying Emo kid Apocalypse was just sad.
Thorough disappointment, since "Se7en" already exists and does the same sort of thing so much better. As much as I enjoy visiting Dennis Quaidia and President Dennis Quaid, I can't recommend this either.
Stay tuned for "From Hell".
Friday, October 15, 2010
October Horror Season 2: Day 15
(Please note: This and the next several days will be back-dated to appear on their correct day while I play catch up. I was not able to watch for several days due to unforeseable circumstances.)
Day 15 kicks off Serious Serial Killer week with 2007's "Zodiac" which stars Robert Downey Jr and Jake Gyllenhaal among other big names. Really an A-list cast.
Directed by David Fincher the film is just about guaranteed to be incredibly well constructed. While I'm sure there's limitless possibility for film-nerding on this one, for a layman it just really didn't seem out of the ordinary. It was good, no doubt, but I couldn't really interest myself in the shots unless something was actually happening in them. With a film that clocks in at ~2.6 hours, holding attention is really important.
A good job is done here and I didn't really find myself wandering away from the movie for too long. The only thing I could really hold against it is that in certain places they did a lot of time skipping, so you'd see "2 weeks later", and then maybe 35 seconds of film, and then a fade and "3 weeks later". I'm told they did this to stay accurate to the actual time line of the case as laid out in the book, but it's really distracting when it happens so quickly. If you've ever seen the Sphere adaptation, they stuck the actual chapter names from the book as transitions between sequences and it really cut up and ruined the action.
Aside from that, Downey Jr is always a pleasure to watch, even Jake isn't bad playing the doe-eyed cartoonist. He fails a little as the serious journalist later, though.
Definitely not bad, but I wouldn't really do a recommend on this. I guess maybe since I'm too young to remember the Zodiac news coverage, if it had been my time I might be a little more interested in it.
Tomorrow serial killers week continues with "Horsemen"
Day 15 kicks off Serious Serial Killer week with 2007's "Zodiac" which stars Robert Downey Jr and Jake Gyllenhaal among other big names. Really an A-list cast.
Directed by David Fincher the film is just about guaranteed to be incredibly well constructed. While I'm sure there's limitless possibility for film-nerding on this one, for a layman it just really didn't seem out of the ordinary. It was good, no doubt, but I couldn't really interest myself in the shots unless something was actually happening in them. With a film that clocks in at ~2.6 hours, holding attention is really important.
A good job is done here and I didn't really find myself wandering away from the movie for too long. The only thing I could really hold against it is that in certain places they did a lot of time skipping, so you'd see "2 weeks later", and then maybe 35 seconds of film, and then a fade and "3 weeks later". I'm told they did this to stay accurate to the actual time line of the case as laid out in the book, but it's really distracting when it happens so quickly. If you've ever seen the Sphere adaptation, they stuck the actual chapter names from the book as transitions between sequences and it really cut up and ruined the action.
Aside from that, Downey Jr is always a pleasure to watch, even Jake isn't bad playing the doe-eyed cartoonist. He fails a little as the serious journalist later, though.
Definitely not bad, but I wouldn't really do a recommend on this. I guess maybe since I'm too young to remember the Zodiac news coverage, if it had been my time I might be a little more interested in it.
Tomorrow serial killers week continues with "Horsemen"
Thursday, October 14, 2010
October Horror Season 2: Day 14
Monsters week is over after tonight's viewing of 2005's "Feast" starring Balthazar Getty, Henry Rollins, and Jason Mewes.
I wasn't too sure what to expect here since it was a pretty random looking Netflix recommendation, but I knew things were going to turn out well about 2 minutes into the film when each character was introduced with a still frame write up that included snarky "Fun Facts" and "Life Expectancy".
The whole movie is set in a dive bar in the boonies of some undefined country where a bunch of sad losers gather more out of habit than interest. Suddenly "Hero" bursts in and warns of a monster attack, and promptly dies. He is replaced by his girlfriend, "Heroine", who's life expectancy is given as something along the lines of "Better than the last hero's, we hope." The movie is well aware all its characters are really caricatures, but instead of becoming self-parody it just refuses to care. The "So what?" swagger really carries the audience through what always turns out to be the most boring part of any "survival" monster movie: The group's internal strife as characters fight for dominance or personal escape. There's all the requisite back stabbing and accidental death you should expect, but it just slides past so smoothly. All too often it feels like movies in this genre hit a point and have to slam on the breaks so they can have some good "human" drama before resuming the pointless killing, in Feast it makes sense.
Also like Slither last night it plays itself just amusing enough by its own ridiculousness to avoid having to make jokes at its expense. However the blood and disgusting gore is turned up several points, which makes it slightly difficult to watch in parts...but how often does a movie actually make you need to turn away from the screen because it's too gross? At this point even Saw movies are so hilarious you just kindof watch them and go "Oh, well lookie here. This character needs to remove that other character's sphincter with this rusty scalpel and carry at least 12 pounds of fecal matter and intestines to this rusty bucket without spilling anything on the electrified wire before the timer runs out and the pear of anguish surgically inserted into their chest cavity expands. Yawn." (Also, Saw producers: You are not allowed to steal my idea, if this shows up in a Saw or Hostel sequence I'm coming after you.)
In short, it was so good I'm actually planning on getting the 2nd and 3rd movies to see what kind of dive the series took. Knocks Slither out as best movie of the month thus far.
Tomorrow Dramatic Serial Killer movies starts with "Zodiac".
I wasn't too sure what to expect here since it was a pretty random looking Netflix recommendation, but I knew things were going to turn out well about 2 minutes into the film when each character was introduced with a still frame write up that included snarky "Fun Facts" and "Life Expectancy".
The whole movie is set in a dive bar in the boonies of some undefined country where a bunch of sad losers gather more out of habit than interest. Suddenly "Hero" bursts in and warns of a monster attack, and promptly dies. He is replaced by his girlfriend, "Heroine", who's life expectancy is given as something along the lines of "Better than the last hero's, we hope." The movie is well aware all its characters are really caricatures, but instead of becoming self-parody it just refuses to care. The "So what?" swagger really carries the audience through what always turns out to be the most boring part of any "survival" monster movie: The group's internal strife as characters fight for dominance or personal escape. There's all the requisite back stabbing and accidental death you should expect, but it just slides past so smoothly. All too often it feels like movies in this genre hit a point and have to slam on the breaks so they can have some good "human" drama before resuming the pointless killing, in Feast it makes sense.
Also like Slither last night it plays itself just amusing enough by its own ridiculousness to avoid having to make jokes at its expense. However the blood and disgusting gore is turned up several points, which makes it slightly difficult to watch in parts...but how often does a movie actually make you need to turn away from the screen because it's too gross? At this point even Saw movies are so hilarious you just kindof watch them and go "Oh, well lookie here. This character needs to remove that other character's sphincter with this rusty scalpel and carry at least 12 pounds of fecal matter and intestines to this rusty bucket without spilling anything on the electrified wire before the timer runs out and the pear of anguish surgically inserted into their chest cavity expands. Yawn." (Also, Saw producers: You are not allowed to steal my idea, if this shows up in a Saw or Hostel sequence I'm coming after you.)
In short, it was so good I'm actually planning on getting the 2nd and 3rd movies to see what kind of dive the series took. Knocks Slither out as best movie of the month thus far.
Tomorrow Dramatic Serial Killer movies starts with "Zodiac".
Wednesday, October 13, 2010
October Horror Season 2: Day 13
On Tuesday the 13th we watched Slither starring Nathan Fillion.
Slither is part of a new batch of monster movies with the old-school "small town horror" aesthetic but modern production values, and it was a hell of a lot of fun.
It managed to maintain a certain air of light-hearted fun without actually being funny, the situation and the way everything was put together was just so weirdly amusing on its own the movie didn't feel the need to force some more jokes. Plus it was absolutely disgusting, especially at the end during the final transformation of the Grant/Alien/Monster/Zombie thing. Again, not so over-the-top like Dead Alive was. The monster was also worthy of note since they never really went so far as to define what it was, where it was from (except SPACE), what it wanted to do, or even really how it worked. So whatever they decided they needed the monster to be capable of, it suddenly was. But they didn't abuse the mechanic too much so you were never sitting there going "Oh. Yeah, of course it does THAT now too! The hell, movie?"
This is probably the best movie of the month so far since it was really fun to watch and well paced but also bloody and gross without becoming ridiculous.
Monster week ends tomorrow with Feast.
Slither is part of a new batch of monster movies with the old-school "small town horror" aesthetic but modern production values, and it was a hell of a lot of fun.
It managed to maintain a certain air of light-hearted fun without actually being funny, the situation and the way everything was put together was just so weirdly amusing on its own the movie didn't feel the need to force some more jokes. Plus it was absolutely disgusting, especially at the end during the final transformation of the Grant/Alien/Monster/Zombie thing. Again, not so over-the-top like Dead Alive was. The monster was also worthy of note since they never really went so far as to define what it was, where it was from (except SPACE), what it wanted to do, or even really how it worked. So whatever they decided they needed the monster to be capable of, it suddenly was. But they didn't abuse the mechanic too much so you were never sitting there going "Oh. Yeah, of course it does THAT now too! The hell, movie?"
This is probably the best movie of the month so far since it was really fun to watch and well paced but also bloody and gross without becoming ridiculous.
Monster week ends tomorrow with Feast.
Tuesday, October 12, 2010
October Horror Season 2: Day 12
Day 12's movie was the Wolfman (2010) starring Anthony Hopkins and Benecio Del Toro.
I didn't read many reviews of the movie, but I did see it reviewed by Escapist's resident film geek Movie Bob and he gave it a fairly lukewarm reaction. His complaints stemmed mostly from the meandering nature of the movie which had been rewritten and redirected so many times it suffered from a sort of schizophrenia.
On my watch through I couldn't really see the jumpy nature, but I did notice a few things felt a little tacked together. The first half of the movie was pretty dull, to be totally honest, I know it was trying to build some kind of tension but I couldn't stop making jokes about Hugo Weaving wandering around calling everyone in town Mr. Anderson. All of a sudden, immediately following the attack on Benecio's Lawrence Talbot, it took a sharp turn for the AWESOME. Out of nowhere there were creepy shots of some deranged kid, talking statues, jarring flashbacks, and VERY well done gore. It got bloody real fast and then sprinted across the finish line. I got a little confused about exactly what happened towards the very end when they started killing off named characters, but it didn't matter because it was still fun.
Definitely a recommend, even if the first half was a little on the snoozery side it pays off by the end.
Tomorrow: Slither.
I didn't read many reviews of the movie, but I did see it reviewed by Escapist's resident film geek Movie Bob and he gave it a fairly lukewarm reaction. His complaints stemmed mostly from the meandering nature of the movie which had been rewritten and redirected so many times it suffered from a sort of schizophrenia.
On my watch through I couldn't really see the jumpy nature, but I did notice a few things felt a little tacked together. The first half of the movie was pretty dull, to be totally honest, I know it was trying to build some kind of tension but I couldn't stop making jokes about Hugo Weaving wandering around calling everyone in town Mr. Anderson. All of a sudden, immediately following the attack on Benecio's Lawrence Talbot, it took a sharp turn for the AWESOME. Out of nowhere there were creepy shots of some deranged kid, talking statues, jarring flashbacks, and VERY well done gore. It got bloody real fast and then sprinted across the finish line. I got a little confused about exactly what happened towards the very end when they started killing off named characters, but it didn't matter because it was still fun.
Definitely a recommend, even if the first half was a little on the snoozery side it pays off by the end.
Tomorrow: Slither.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
