Dell's Good, Bad & Ugly Movie Reviews

[dell71]

Win Win
<strong>Directed by Thomas McCarthy.</strong>
<em>2011. Rated R, 106 minutes.
Cast:
Paul Giamatti
Alex Shaffer
Amy Ryan
Jeffrey Tambor
Bobby Cannavale
Burt Young
Melanie Lynskey
Sharon Wilkins
Margo Martindale
David W. Thompson
Nina Arianda</em>​

Mike (Giamatti) is a lawyer struggling to keep his practice afloat. One of his clients is Leo (Young), an elderly gentleman whom the state deems incapable of caring for himself. They want to move him into a rest home. His only relative, an estranged daughter is nowhere to be found. Of course, Leo thinks he’s perfectly fine and wants to keep living in his own house. Mike is going along with the state’s program until he learns that Leo’s guardian is paid $1500 per month. He himself assumes guardianship under the pretenses of making sure Leo’s wish will be granted and he will be well taken care of. He then dumps the old man in a home, anyway and begins collecting the monthly checks. Things are going according to plan until Leo’s 16 year old grandson Kyle (Shaffer) shows up out of the blue. No one, including Leo, even knew of the boy’s existence. Since he’s obviously a troubled kid, and to keep his lie going, Mike takes him in.

Despite his issues, Kyle is a nice, quiet kid. Eventually we find out his mother Cindy (wonderfully played by Lynskey) is both alive and a drug addict. This has obviously taken its toll on the boy. He wants nothing to do with her and she seemingly wants nothing to do with her father. It’s no wonder Kyle enjoys being part of Mike’s family. Shaffer handles the role well. It is also well-written. Kyle and the other kids actually feel like genuine teenagers as opposed to an adult in an adolescent body as is the case in plenty of movies. Much of his communication to adults is eerily similar to that of many real teenaged boys including my own son, through shrugs and nods. It is a subtle, yet effective performance.

Less subtle is the work of Paul Giamatti. That he turns in an excellent portrayal should go without saying to anyone familiar with him. Admittedly, Mike is a character that’s right up his alley: a guy who is often exasperated, slightly sweaty and prone to loud verbal outbursts. Still, he makes Mike convincingly simple in motive yet complex in action. In another actor’s hands, the character may have come across as too dastardly. Giamatti makes him believable as a guy who, for the most part, is on the straight and narrow, but the desire to feed his family leads him to try slipping something past the world.

The two main characters combine to make <em>Win Win</em> a tricky proposition. Our empathy clearly lies with Kyle. How we feel about Mike is not such a sure thing. We’re not certain we like him but we want him to come out victorious in what becomes a custody battle over both Kyle and Leo. Whether or not he’s a great choice is debatable. What is not debatable is that he’s better than the alternative. Still, the alternative has at least as much right as he does.

<em>Win Win</em> navigates these complex issues without becoming complicated itself. Instead of pouring out every ounce of melodrama it can muster, it does most things in a matter-of-fact manner. Supporting players provide comedy and Mike’s family gives us cuteness while the story holds our interest. The key to it all is something I’ve already said: we feel for Kyle. We really care what happens to the kid.

<strong>MY SCORE: 8/10</strong>​

 

[dell71]

Footloose
<strong>Directed by Craig Brewer.</strong>
<em>2011. Rated PG-13, 113 minutes.
Cast:
Kenny Wormald
Julianne Hough
Dennis Quaid
Andie MacDowell
Miles Teller
Ser’Darius Blain
Ziah Colon
Patrick John Flueger
Ray McKinnon
Kim Dickens</em>​

On their way home from a party, Bobby and four of his friends are killed when his car has a head-on collision with a truck. It just so happens that his dad, Rev. Moore (Quaid) is not just the only preacher in town, he also holds lots of clout in the local politics of the small town of Bomont. In what has to be the mother of all overreactions, the good reverend successfully leads a charge to ban dancing by minors anywhere in town except at church functions. Now, wait a minute. I was actually paying attention to the beginning. Sure Bobby took his eyes off the road to give his girl a smooch, but it’s not like they danced out into the middle of the street and got run over. Besides, it’s apparent that no one has ever questioned the truck driver who, from the looks of the accident, is at least as much in the wrong as Bobby. <Sigh>, I digress.

Fast forward three years and Bobby’s little sister Ariel (Hough) is now a high school senior. Due to his never-ending grief, dad is still an unrelenting prick. Wait…what? Did I say that out loud? Anyhoo, he’s evidently blind and/or no one in town talks to him because he knows nothing about what his little girl is only kinda sorta hiding. Despite daddy’s iron-fist approach, or perhaps because of it, she’s hanging out with a sleazy racecar driver who looks to be at least 30. Okay, maybe 25 but having lived a hard life. That the rev knows nothing about this is however somewhat plausible given that the whole town is way too distracted by the shiny new object in their midst to pay much attention to Ariel. The incandescent bauble they focus on is Ren (Wormald), a kid from Boston who quickly gets a rep as a devil-worshipping troublemaker when he…gasp…plays his music too loud for the sensitive ears of Bomont’s finest. Just never you mind that this high quality audio is blaring from an iPod rigged to fit the stock stereo system of a rotting forty year old VW bug. He further cements his status as a rebel when we find out he’s not afraid to get his boogie on in public. Oooooh! Stick it to the man!

By the way, there is very good reason I’ve mentioned Ariel and Ren in the same paragraph despite my former English professors chomping at the bit to slam the cursor down behind the word “life” and hit enter twice. It’s my more-subtle-than-the-movie’s way of implying what it all boils down to: Boy meets Girl. If you don’t know what that means in regards to this cinematic endeavor, you are beyond my help.

If you’re younger than the racecar driver, you may not be aware that this is a remake of the eighties flick of the same name that made Kevin Bacon a star. I wonder if that whole six degrees of Kevin Bacon thing works with the kids in this movie. All right, I’ll explain it to the babies in attendance. No, that’s not condescending at all and this sentence isn’t sarcastic, either (the emoticon that winks goes here). Allegedly, just about any actor can be linked to Bacon within six other actors. As an example, let’s use Colin Farrell. He was in <em>SWAT</em> with LL Cool J who was in <em>The Last Holiday</em> with Queen Latifah who was in <Beauty Shop</em> with Bacon. Get it? There’s even a site that does the work for you: oracle of bacon.

Hey! Play with that on your own time. Let’s get back to the remake since that’s supposedly what you’re here for.

You know what? You might get back to that site sooner than you think. I don’t want to spend <em>too</em> much time on this. Suffice it to say that everything happens pretty much right on cue. After boy meets girl, he realizes she is already dating old racecar guy. He likes to drink beer and fight. Nope, not at all a redneck stereotype (yes, place another emoticon here). Boy also has two guy friends, one black and one white. How’d you know the black friend, along with all the other black kids in the movie, is a dancing whiz? I’ll bet you couldn’t guess the white friend can’t dance at all. No stereotypes here, either (you know what to do). Yup, this means there is a semi-comedic, drawn out, Rocky styled training montage for our double left-footed pal. Finally, our hero has to deal with that pesky ban on dancing.

Honestly, you can stop reading and go back to playing with the Bacon site. I’m merely amusing myself at this point, sating my inner pontificator, and have nothing more of value to say. I know it’s debatable that I’ve said anything of value at all. If you want to know how this compares to the original, I’ve no idea. That one is one of those movies I’ve seen in small bits and pieces of over the years on basic cable as I’ve flipped channels. I’ve got the gist of it and have probably seen it all but I’ve never actually sat down and watched it from start to finish. I’m in no rush.

How is this one on its own merit? I’ll not even dignify my own rhetorical question with a typically lengthy reply (isn’t this review too long, already?). I’ll put it like this: the story is better than any of the <em>Step Up</em> sequels I’ve seen (having not seen part 4, just yet), but the dancing isn’t as good. Decide accordingly.

<strong>MY SCORE: 4.5/10</strong>​

 

[dell71]

Friends with Benefits
<strong>Directed by Will Gluck.</strong>
<em>2011. Rated R, 109 minutes.
Cast:
Mila Kunis
Justin Timberlake
Patricia Clarkson
Woody Harrelson
Jenna Elfman
Bryan Greenberg
Richard Jenkins
Shaun White
Adam Samberg</em>​

Boy meets girl. Again. This time, both have just been dumped by other people. Boy is hotshot art director Dylan Harper (Timberlake). He’s just been hired to fulfill that role for GQ magazine. He got the job because he was recruited away from his own highly successful blog by Girl, Jamie Rellis (Kunis). Boy moves from LA to NY for his new gig and becomes platonic besties with Girl. The two confide in each other that they miss sex, but not relationships. Of course, they do the only rational thing and hop into bed together after laying a few ground rules. Pardon the pun. As you might expect, feelings neither wanted ensues.

Surprisingly to me, the first half of <em>Friends with Benefits</em> is a joy to watch. This is due, in large part, to the fact it looks like our two leads are having so much fun they can barely contain themselves. After all, they’re two attractive people who get to do a lot of rolling around naked together. It also helps that this portion of the picture is dedicated to ridiculing all we know romantic comedies to be. Our two lovebirds in denial say all the things we say about such movies. This gives it a wonderfully self-aware vibe.

The second half undermines the first by becoming precisely what the earlier parts rail against. It tries to maintain its edge by blatantly acknowledging that it has devolved into the same grandiose moments of romantic gesture as just about every other flick in the genre. Despite it embracing of its own descent into mediocrity, it still feels like a letdown since up to about the midway point it seems like a well done spoof that’s going to introduce a twist on the norm. Instead, the overall effect is that the movie says “Other movies do ‘this’ so we will, too.”

As rom-coms go, this is a little above average. The expected story arcs are fully intact. Before any of it actually happens, we know where jealousy, misunderstanding, break up and make up are all going to come in. For good measure, there’s Richard Jenkins in the ‘wise crazy person who let his true love get away’ role to impart sage advice at the pivotal moment. He has some interesting moments and is typically excellent but pales in comparison to the hysterical performance by Woody Harrelson as Tommy, Dylan’s too openly gay buddy. You’ll just have to see it to understand what I mean by “too openly”. Even though the only real reason for his character’s existence is that he owns a boat, many of the movie’s funniest moments are his. He, and the thing we come to realize as the film progresses elevates it above its contemporaries: at least this one knows it’s lame.

<strong>MY SCORE: 6.5/10</strong>​

 

[dell71]

The Grey
<strong>Directed by Joe Carnahan.</strong>
<em>2011. Rated R, 117 minutes.
Cast:
Liam Neeson
Dermot Mulroney
Frank Grillo
Dallas Roberts
Joe Anderson
James Badge Dale
Bren Bray
Anne Openshaw</em>​

Liam Neeson, I mean, Ottway and a bunch of other tough guys who work at an Alaskan outpost all board a plane heading south to Anchorage. Since it looks like it’s more fit for dusting crops in Alabama than carrying commuters through severe arctic weather, the plane shakes, rattles, rolls, and eventually crashes in the middle of an extremely cold nowhere. The survivors, Neeson included (screw it), in case you were somehow wondering, try to stay alive long enough to be rescued. Realizing the prospects of that are dim, our ragtag bunch starts walking in hopes of reaching some form of civilization. In addition to the cold, shortage of food and water, there is one other wee little problem: a pack of unbelievably large and hungry wolves is hunting them down and picking them off…dun dun dun…one by one.

I’ve told you everything you need to know. This is both the best and worst part of <em>The Grey</em>. It’s the best because you will get what you came for if you saw that the trailer and thought “cool!” On the other hand, despite all the dime store philosophizing done by the characters, this is a highly repetitive experience. The guys bicker about what course of action to take before settling on whatever Liam Neeson says. When they get to a stopping point they exchange stories that ineffectively try to get us to care about the various cardboard cutouts with which we are spending time. This is interspersed with Neeson’s atmospheric flashbacks and him telling us how smart the wolves are. Indeed, they seem to have studied “The Art of War”. Shortly thereafter, someone gets eaten. Rinse, repeat.

Predictability aside, <em>The Grey</em> can be fun to watch in a morbid way. The excitement lies purely in guessing who’s next to die and seeing how they perish. Even this wears thin after a while. Tone may be to blame, here. It strikes a pretty joyless one, having no sense of humor whatsoever. It behaves as if it’s not only made us care about a roster full of bland archetypes but made some great revelation about the spirit of man when it has done neither. Instead of being the dissertation on man’s resourcefulness in the face of extreme adversity it wants to be, it’s an overly serious slasher flick with gigantic Twilight-esque wolves collectively playing the Jason role and Neeson that of the final girl.

<strong>MY SCORE: 5.5/10</strong>​

 

[Loco]

I fucking hated the Grey, the thing that actually pissed me off the most was the trailer had a few scenes cleverly edited to look like Liam Neeson bare knuckle fights a wolf. I sat through the entire movie thinking "Can't wait for Liam Neeson to punch the fuck out of some wolves." Shit never happens...

 

[dell71]

^^^^

 

It happens. You just don't get to see it.

 

[dell71]

The Sitter
<strong>Directed by David Gordon Green.</strong>
<em>2011. Rated R, 87 minutes (unrated version).
Cast:
Jonah Hill
Sam Rockwell
Max Records
Landry Bender
Kevin Hernandez
Ari Graynor
J.B. Smoove
Method Man
Kylie Bunbury</em>​

Noah (Hill) is a college dropout who doesn’t have nor want a job. He’s sorta in a relationship with Marisa (Graynor). To say it’s a one-sided affair is far beyond putting it lightly. It consists of her persuading him to perform oral sex on her after which she finds some excuse to rush him out the door. He slinks home to his video games. It should go without saying that he lives with his mom. She’s divorced but going on a double date with a neighborhood couple, the Pedullas, who are setting her up with one of their friends. When the couple’s normal sitter can’t make it, Noah’s mom asks him to step in. He agrees, but only because he wants to see her have a good time. As expected, the three children he is to watch are merely different levels of nightmare. This is only the beginning of his problems. The catalyst for his other issues is a phone call from Marisa during which she promises they really will “go all the way” if he does her a huge favor: go see her dealer, Karl (Rockwell), score some heroin and bring it to the party she’s attending. Since Noah is way past desperate, he agrees. No, things don’t go smoothly at all. Hijinks and shenanigans involving children and drug pushers ensue.

<em>The Sitter</em> simply wants to be a raunchy comedy featuring Jonah Hill as a slightly older version of characters he’s played in the past. This would be fine if it weren’t all so utterly unfunny, predictable, and arguably offensive in its depiction of minorities. Most of the jokes are both unoriginal and telegraphed from a mile away. Likewise for any and all plot twists. Yes, you will know in advance when he (or one of the other kids in one case) will teach the children valuable life lessons and exactly what they will be. Unsurprisingly, all of the various storylines are tidied up in an overly simple manner.

Within the plot and jokes we already know are a gathering of stereotypes. Noah’s mom and the parents of the kids he’s sitting are cardboard cutouts of the parents from every other similarly themed movie. Marisa is the hot, but not so good for you girl. There’s also Roxanne (Bunbury), the friendly girly who’s been there all along. Rodrigo (Hernandez), the Hispanic kid the Pedullas adopted is a heavy accented pyromaniac. Our hero inevitably winds up in a bar where all the patrons are black thugs. Finally, there’s Karl, the super macho but possibly homosexual drug dealer played by Sam Rockwell. His lair looks like a gay porn set for those with a muscle fetish. Incidentally, the way this character is portrayed clashes pretty badly with one of those life lessons.

Thankfully, <em>The Sitter</em> clocks in under 90 minutes. It still manages to drag since it’s so predictable and just labors through cliché after cliché and bad joke after bad joke, never doing its own thing. The very few laughs to be had are spread pretty far apart. They drown in an ocean of uninspired writing that sends waves of flat punch lines crashing into us.

<strong>MY SCORE: 3/10</strong>​

 

[dell71]

A Good Old Fashioned Orgy
<strong>Directed by Alex Gregory and Peter Huyck.</strong>
<em>2011. Rated R, 95 minutes.
Cast:
Jason Sudeikis
Tyler Labine
Leslie Bibb
Lake Bell
Michelle Borth
Nik Kroll
Angela Sarafyan
Don Johnson
Lindsay Sloane
Martin Starr
Rhys Coiro
Will Forte
David Koechner
Dee Dee Rescher</em>​

Eric (Sudeikis) is the de facto leader of a group of guys and girls who live together, during the summer at least, at a house his father owns. They hve been close friends since high school. Occasionally, they throw hugely popular theme parties. In fact, we meet them during the “White Trash Bash.” The next day, daddy (a cameo by Don Johnson) shows up with his way younger girlfriend and informs wis very grown boy that he’s putting the house on the market. His realtors are pushing hard to have the house sold very shortly, making the upcoming Labor Day the gang’s last chance to have a party like no other.

Thankfully, this isn’t a dance flick or a kiddie movie. Therefore, there is no mad dash by our heroes to raise enough money to save the place. Instead, they’re resigned to their fate and merely want to come up with a theme for the final blowout. Eventually, Eric and his sidekick Mike (Labine) decide it best to not invite any outsiders to their last shindig but still go out with a bang, quite literally. They want to have an orgy with their housemates. As you might imagine, this is a hard sell to people who’ve never engaged in such activities. Even if they agree to it, going through with it is something else entirely.

Despite a good deal of raunchy dialogue and situations, <em>A Good Old Fashioned Orgy</em> is only funny in a few spots. Only the no holds barred scene inside real life mattress store Fred’s Beds stands out as true comic gold. That’s in the unrated version, of course. I don’t know how much of what I saw made it into the theatrical version. Most of the rest of the humor is of ho-hum caliber. Still, it’s got an odd sweetness to it. I know it’s hard to imagine a movie about group sex having such a quality, but it is there. It’s not that we’re enthralled by any of the characters, but we do sorta like these folks. The director helps out by handling things about as delicately as possible while trying to live up to the title.

Don’t get me wrong, there are plenty of flaws. These people we sorta like really are just types rather than rounded characters. This includes Tyler Labine doing his best Jack Black impersonation. The sidebar of a love story between Mike and Kelly (Bibb), the younger realtor, feels extraneous in its execution and rushed in its resolution. Ditto for the plotline involving the house itself. With all the pros and cons balancing it out, <em>AGOFO</em> manages to tread water. Occasionally, it musters enough strength to do a little better than that.

<strong>MY SCORE: 6/10</strong>​

 

[nflman2033]

dell two things. #1 you seriously need to watch some Bergman. #2 why haven't you seen The Skin I Live In yet?

 

[dell71]

dell two things. #1 you seriously need to watch some Bergman. #2 why haven't you seen The Skin I Live In yet?

#1 Agreed. #2 It's getting near the top of my queue.


And it's Halloween week. That means horror flicks...

 

[dell71]

The Woman in Black
<strong>Directed by James Watkins.</strong>
<em>2012. Rated PG-13, 94 minutes.
Cast:
Daniel Radcliffe
Sophie Stuckey
Ciarán Hinds
Jessica Raine
Roger Allam
Shaun Dooley
Mary Stockley</em>​

After one of his clients dies, it’s up to Harry Potter, um, I mean Arthur Kipps (Radcliffe) to make sure her affairs are in order. To do so he has to spend some time in her house. Of course, this is a dark secluded mansion no one town wants to go anywhere near. Rumor has it there’s a ghost, or ghosts, hanging around the place. It doesn’t help that the local children suffer violent, fatal and mysterious accidents at an alarming rate. Kinda kills the area tourism industry, you know? Anyhoo, this is all leading to our hero spending a night alone in the spooky abode. Yup, he sees stuff. You’re probably wondering where that title comes from. It seems whenever one of the local rugrats manages to get dead someone sees a woman in a black dress close by.

Our saga unfolds in the most uninteresting way possible. Things clunk along as Arthur receives ominous warnings and then is blamed for stirring things up as the kids keep dying. His one ally is Daily (Hinds), the one guy native to the town who is skeptical of the existence of ghosts. He provides the movie’s liveliest moments. Everyone else just trudges through the picture trying to look scared and/or scary, often failing on both fronts. Our leading man, Mr. Radcliffe, isn’t compelling enough to sufficiently draw us in, at least not here.

The alleged scares are pretty standard ghost story fare. Arthur sees things, gets spooked, takes off running, sees more things, runs some more until he “unexpectedly” runs into a real person. The apparitions he sees come off as innocuous because we know right from the get-go they’re only going after children. Therefore, our hero never seems to be in any real danger. Besides, any tension these scenes might generation is killed by the film’s leisurely pacing. A tale taking its time can be a good thing. That’s not the case here. This is like being stuck behind grandma doing 45 on the highway and no way for you to get around her. It makes the hour-and-a-half runtime feel more like a day and a half.

Thankfully, two scenes manage to drag the movie out of its self-imposed stagnation. Both are rather late in the proceedings, perking us up a bit if we’re still paying attention. One involves a mud pit our guy has to climb into and the other is the final scene. These keep <em>The Woman in Black</em> from becoming a complete travesty. They don’t save the film, but they’re at least interesting.

When it is all said and done, we’ve sat through a sub-standard ghost story with hardly any twists or turns in its narrative. Its visuals aren’t frightening enough to overcome its flaws. For the most part, we aren’t even afforded the cheap thrill of jump scares. Judging by the generally positive response this movie has gotten, I’m probably jaded. I just don’t get it. For me, <em>TWiB</em> is yet another PG-13 horror-less flick.

<strong>MY SCORE: 4/10</strong>​

 

[dell71]

Happy Birthday to Me
<strong>Directed by J. Lee Thompson.</strong>
<em>1981. Rated R, 110 minutes.
Cast:
Melissa Sue Anderson
Glenn Ford
Tracy E. Bregman
Sharon Acker
Lawrence Dane
Frances Hyland
Lisa Langlois</em>​

Slasher flicks are a not so private passion of mine, a guilty pleasure, if you will. I mean, what could be better than watching some psycho chop up teenagers? No, I don’t really want to murder teenagers even though I have one. Sigh. I’m just living vicariously through celluloid madmen. Hey! Hey kid! Get off my lawn! Ahem…sorry (looking for a heavy blunt object). Anyhoo, I’m going back to a hack ‘em up I first saw when I myself was a teen, the cult classic Happy Birthday to Me. Lol, I said Saw.

Like any good slasher flick, the plot is pretty simple. There’s a group of rich kids at Crawford University that all hang together and call themselves The Crawford Top Ten. Right as the movie begins someone starts killing them off…pause for dramatic effect…ONE BY ONE…muwahahahaha! Oh, ahem, moving on. Our task, and theirs, is to figure out who’s trying to get extra credit for homicide class. Homicide class, ha! That’s a good one. I slay me. Get it? I thought I told that kid to…”Think you’re tough? I used to eat punks like you for breakfast!”

“I got your breakfast right here, old man!”

That does it. Where’s …oh, almost forgot, the movie. We spend much of our time focusing on Virginia Wainwright AKA Ginny played by Melissa Sue Anderson. If you’re an old fart, like me, you’ll know she played Mary Ingalls on “Little House on the Prairie.” Obviously, Ginny is emotionally damaged by a painful past. What we can’t figure out is if she’s the “Final Girl” or the killer. On our way to that little revelation we get humor, both intentionally and not, some now iconic death scenes, some bad acting, an homage to one of the best scenes in Alfred Hitchcock’s Psycho that doesn’t involve a shower and finally one of the greatest WTF twists in the history of the genre. Damn, this sledgehammer’s a little too heavy. “Do yourself a favor, sonny and don’t be on my lawn when I get there! It’s gonna get ugly!”

“Screw you!”

“Did he just say…?” He’s gonna get it, now! Just wait ‘til I find…oh, you’re still here? If you’re a fan of slasher flicks, put this at the very top of your must-see list. Even by 1981 standards it isn’t the goriest movie, but the kills are creative and like I said iconic. The whodunit element keeps you on your toes and the last 15 minutes is absolutely bonkers. Don’t forget I said there are also lots of laughable elements, too. You know what this means. It’s so bad, it’s awesome! Oh happy day, I just found my chainsaw. Catch you guys later.

<strong>MY SCORE: -10/10</strong>​

 

[dell71]

Tucker & Dale vs. Evil
<strong>Directed by Eli Craig.</strong>
<em>2010. Rated R, 88 minutes.
Cast:
Tyler Labine
Alan Tudyk
Katrina Bowden
Jesse Moss
Chelan Simmons
Philip Granger
Brandon Jay McLaren
Christie Laing
Travis Nelson
Alex Arsenault</em>​

A group of college kids is doing what groups of college kids do in some of our favorite slasher flicks. They’re going on a camping trip deep in a secluded wooded area. These kids have seen a few of these movies themselves. Maybe they’ve seen too many. They’re even aware of the slaughter of another group of co-eds that happened twenty years ago in the very spot where they decide to roast marshmallows. Our bunch is made up of the usual cast of would-be victims: the obnoxious preppy guy, two blondes we can differentiate by cup size, a generic but not stereotypically urban black guy with matching girl, and a couple other “just dudes”. Somehow an Asian is missing, but I digress. All you really need to know is that they’re hyper-sensitive to the idea that the local yokels are homicidal maniacs itching for fresh meat.

Enter the local yokels. They’re named Tucker (Tudyk) and Dale (Labine) and are pretty obviously inspired by George and Lennie from Steinbeck’s classic “Of Mice and Men.” They are far from maniacal. Slow witted? Yes. Killers? No. They spend most of their time fishing and drinking beer. As luck would have it, they’re going into the same woods as the co-eds to fix up the old cabin Tucker has just purchased and intends to use as a vacation home. We get the idea they have not seen many slasher flicks. Through a massive misunderstanding the kids think they’ve stumbled into a real life version of The Texas Chainsaw Massacre. Because of a series of unfortunate events, Tucker and Dale think the co-eds have some sort of weird suicide pact. Believe it or not, comedy ensues.

Yes, I said comedy. The dialogue is insanely funny and makes clear that everyone on both sides just wants out of the situation yet, no one can figure out how to make that happen. There is one exception: the obnoxious preppy guy. He’s anxious to rescue the not-as-busty blonde. It seems to him and the others that Tucker and Dale have her bound, gagged and are torturing her. More misunderstandings, of course.

On display is some seriously clever writing to keep this ruse going as long as it does. It also keeps us laughing in the process. That is, you’ll be laughing if you’re a slasher fan and/or can take a joke about our beloved genre. Oh, it helps to have a twisted sense of humor. I suppose a kid accidentally impaling himself on a spear isn’t funny to everyone. Meh…(shrugs shoulders)…I laughed and did so heartily. The wood chipper scene is even more hilarious. What can I say? Occasionally, I’m only physically an adult. No matter how mature you are, you’ll probably laugh even as you cringe. That’s because it’s all about tone. <em>Tucker & Dale vs. Evil</em> strikes the perfect one.

<strong>MY SCORE: 8.5/10</strong>​

 

[dell71]

Paranormal Activity 3
<strong>Directed by Henry Joost and Ariel Schulman.</strong>
<em>2011. Rated R, 84 minutes.
Cast:
Chris Smith
Lauren Bittner
Chloe Csengery
Jessica Tyler Brown
Hallie Foote
Dustin Ingram
Johanna Braddy
Brian Boland
Katie Featherston
Sprague Grayden</em>​

As we’ve been warned, the events of Paranormal Activity and its sequel are only part of a lifetime dealing with things that go bump in the night. So it’s no surprise that the third installment in this haunted house franchise is a prequel. We journey back to 1988, in the midst of the troubled childhoods of Katie (Csengery) and Kristi (Brown). The two sisters share a room upstairs in a pretty open house; their room doesn’t have a full wall and looks out over the lower level of the house. As little girls are wont to do, Kristi has an imaginary friend named Toby. Well, at least everyone else in the house thinks he’s imaginary. After about 10 minutes of movie time, Katie and mom Julie (Bittner) still think so, but stepdad Dennis (Smith) isn’t so sure. See, like apparently every man that has ever come into contact with the girls, he’s set up cameras all over the house. Now, when the things in the night go bumping, he can watch it on video the next day.

Like with the first two movies in the series, the aim is to draw you in, piling up little scares along the way until you’re wholly unsettled then bombard you with a furious and creepy finish. The technique is actually solid and the climax is indeed fun in a twisted way. I suspect it may be enough for people to consider it a really good horror flick. After all, the franchise is known for and built upon its finales. They are what keeps us coming back for the next Paranormal Activity.

Unfortunately, each installment works best if you haven’t seen either of the others. Without automatically recalling the two films just like it, the one you’re watching can be more effective on you. This is because if you’re familiar with the franchise then the setup and execution are both overly familiar to you. During the day, people argue about whether or not they have ghosts as house guests. After everyone goes to bed, there are all sorts of strange noises, inanimate objects moving by themselves and odd behavior by one of the characters who, of course, is unaware of what they’re doing. It is an effective formula seen once, less so on the second go-round and a little less than that this time around. It’s simply a victim of the law of diminishing returns. This is why horror franchise often give up trying to scare us and become parodies of themselves. Being repeatedly manipulated in the same exact manner cannot continue to be scary. To its credit, Paranormal Activity 3 refuses to go down that road. However admirable sticking to its haunted guns might be, it fails to up the fright factor.

<strong>MY SCORE: 5/10</strong>​

 

[dell71]

Shaun of the Dead
<strong>Directed by Edgar Wright.</strong>
<em>2004. Rated R, 99 minutes.
Cast:
Simon Pegg
Nick Frost
Kate Ashfield
Lucy Davis
Dylan Moran
Bill Nighy
Penelope Wilton
Jessica Stevenson
Peter Serafinowicz
Rafe Spall
Martin Freeman</em>​

When we first meet Shaun (Pegg), he’s getting dumped by Liz (Ashfield), the love of his life. Shortly, we find out he’s stuck in a dead-end job and is enabling super-slacker Ed (Frost), his best friend whom everyone agrees is holding him back. He seems to have at least some inkling of the same but doesn’t want to get rid of his closest chum. Like most blokes who’ve lost the girl they think they can’t live without, he wants to win her back. Things are never so simple. When Shaun wakes up the next morning he discovers what everyone else, aside from Ed, has already learned: something has triggered a zombie outbreak. Pretty soon, the streets are crawling with London’s undead. They are only interested in one thing: chowing down on the regular folks and turning them into zombies, too. Shaun instantly realizes he has to save Liz, as well as his mom. He and Ed set off on a daring rescue mission. Oh, if you’re unfamiliar with Shaun of the Dead, this is a comedy so lots of laughs ensue.

More accurately, SotD can be described as a spoof. It takes the beloved sub-genre of zombie flicks and asks of it how would us simpletons react if we suddenly found these creatures in our midst. That Shaun is an unremarkable sort is a huge part of the movie’s charm. He’s one of us, as smart or stupid as the masses. He doesn’t come up with the greatest plan for survival. It is not particularly well thought out and he’s way too open to suggestion. Still it’s the one he’s going with. After all, this is a grown man with step-daddy issues who spends way too many nights binge drinking. He’s just a guy. From all of these things much humor is drawn.

Even more comedy is derived from the hordes of zombie movies that came before SotD, particularly those of George A. Romero. From the genre’s grand master, the look and movements of the zombies are faithfully replicated. The difference is that here, they are just zombies. In Romero’s work they are often the (undead) personification of his social commentary, metaphors for society’s ills. In SotD what they represent is irrelevant. Our reactions to them are anything but. We laugh not because of the zombies but because of the ineptness of the regular people on the screen.

However, our laughter may indeed hide a slight bit of fear, also. Perhaps we realize we may not fare any better. To foster this underlying dread, SotD never forgets that it is a zombie movie first and provides a palpable sense of danger even through the snickers it causes. People are dying off and becoming monsters in bloody fashion. Tough decisions have to be made and survival seems impossible. All of these are elements of great horror. The creatures here are no less ferocious or relentless than in more serious fare. Normally, the two contrasting styles running side-by-side are a recipe for disaster. Here, levity and tension complement one another. It’s as masterful a balancing act of humor and horror as has ever been achieved.

<strong>MY SCORE: 10/10</strong>​

 

[dell71]

Not done yet...

 

[dell71]

Troll Hunter
<strong>Directed by André Øvredal.</strong>
<em>2010. Rated PG-13, 103 minutes.
Cast:
Otto Jespersen
Glenn Erland Tosterud
Johanna Mǿrck
Tomas Alf Larsen
Urmila Berg-Domaas
Hans Morten-Hansen
Robert Stoltenberg</em>​

We’re told immediately that we’re watching a film that was made by selecting the scenes to follow from 283 hours of video. Not only that, but the people who pored over it also spent over a year trying to figure if this was genuine or all part of some elaborate hoax. They have determined it to be authentic. Yay, more found footage horror. Sarcasm.

The folks that left behind this particular footage are a small group of Norwegian college students filming a documentary about the havoc that bears are wreaking in the counry’s forest and mountain areas and the people who hunt them. We learn the government only licenses a select few to target bears and, as you might imagine, they are a tight knit group. They’re also pretty pissed that bears are being gunned down with none of them behind the trigger. A mysterious guy who lives in a smelly camper and only goes out at night is the main suspect. They all believe he’s a poacher. Of course, the college kids start hounding him for an interview and following him after dark. Pretty soon they find out it isn’t bears that are causing all the trouble or that the bearded man is hunting. It’s trolls.

Hans (Jespersen) is the bearded man’s name and he quickly tells us that these trolls aren’t like the ones we’ve read about in fairy tales. These are huge, snarling, not very intelligent beasts that eat whatever they can get their hands on. They’ve been quarantined to certain sections around the country. Hans’ task is to find out why so many are leaving these areas and to kill any wayward trolls. He’s been doing this job for a really long time and doesn’t like it much these days. He invites the kids to tag along, so long as none of them are Christians. This part of the fairy tale is true: trolls can smell the blood of Christian men and it sends them into a frenzy. They assure him they aren’t and away we go.

The trolls themselves are what makes this different from most movies in the found-footage sub-genre. There is really no attempt to hide them and build suspense from the wait. Instead, we see them pretty clearly throughout the picture. The key is that there are a number of different types. That way, we’re consistently seeing something new as the movie progresses. Additionally, they’re also mindlessly aggressive toward whatever is in their path. Often enough, it’s our cast in harm’s way creating a palpable sense of danger. With all of the troll action taking place at night, the special fx work beautifully, adding to the idea that we’re really seeing gigantic monsters rampaging in the woods, or in caves.

Another big plus is our troll hunter. Otto Jespersen plays Hans perfectly straight. He exudes the weariness he professes. We really feel like he’s a guy that’s been doing a thankless job forever and is desperately searching for a way out. It’s a subtle, yet effective performance. The rest of the cast is adequate, but not enthralling. Mǿrck who plays Johanna is a possible exception as she is a shade better than the others.

As found footage flicks go, <em>Troll Hunter</em> is a solid adventure. A few very tense scenes help it live up to the horror label. Truthfully though, it’s more fun than it is scary. That in itself isn’t really a problem. The problem is by now we’ve seen more than a few of these types of movies. The ending feels pre-ordained within a few moments of the start. This makes it hard for us to generate the empathy necessary to really get us vested in these people. We already know how they end up. Thankfully, watching them get there is a good time.

<strong>MY SCORE: 7/10</strong>​

 

[dell71]

Fright Night
<strong>Directed by Tom Holland.</strong>
<em>1985. Rated R, 106 minutes.
Cast:
Chris Sarandon
William Ragsdale
Amanda Bearse
Stephen Geoffreys
Roddy McDowall
Jonathan Stark
Dorothy Fielding
Art J. Evans</em>​

Charlie (Ragsdale) is a fairly average high school kid. He’s been dating Amy (Bearse) for about a year, but hasn’t quite managed to get in her pants despite his near constant efforts. His best pal is Eddie, aka Evil (Geoffreys), is more awkward. We’re never told why he’s called Evil, but it probably has something to do with the fact that after most sentences he cackles maniacally like an old school Disney villain. The three of them share a love for a weekly TV horror series called “Fright Night.” It is hosted by Peter Vincent (McDowall) who claims to be the world’s foremost vampire killer. Jerry Dandridge (Sarandon) is Charlie’s new neighbor. Pretty quickly, Charlie surmises that Jerry is a real live vampire and is responsible for the string of murders that have been taking place around town.

Back in 1985, Fright Night became a surprise hit at a time when vampire flicks had gone out of vogue. As Peter Vincent so eloquently put it, all we wanted was “demented men in ski masks hacking up young virgins.” Still, there were good reasons FN was able to succeed. They start with Jerry Dandridge. With a sweater and pleated khakis in place of a tuxedo and a trench coat substituting for a cape, he’s a much more contemporary vampire than we were used to seeing. He helped reestablish this particular monster as a seductive villain. His murderous side is usually smooth. We’re drawn to him. For this reason, Fright Night isn’t really frightening. I remember going to the theater to see this on its opening weekend. Even then it wasn’t scary. However, the coolness of it all still sucked us in.

The cool factor has diminished a bit with the passing of time. Other aspects hold up better. By being pretty self-aware, it serves a precursor to all those films to follow in which the characters know all about the movies and suspect they are actually involved in one. Evil plays the role of the guy who informs everyone else of genre protocol.

We’re also treated to a wonderful performance by Roddy McDowall. His Peter Vincent is a man who totally defines himself by his public persona. That persona is fading in both popularity and profitability. In fact, he only agrees to meet Jerry because will pay him fifty bucks to do so and convince Charlie that Jerry couldn’t possibly be a vampire. Purely by accident, Peter realizes he’s in the midst of the real thing and is immediately petrified. He doesn’t seem able or willing to save the day. As such, McDowall strikes the perfect balance to give us both reluctant participant and comic relief.

Fright Night is not without flaws. Predictably, some of the special fx and makeup jobs haven’t aged so well. The same goes for the score, too synthesized to be menacing. It sounds more like the prelude to an 80s R & B ballad than what should be playing when The Prince of Darkness is lurking about. More troubling is the inconsistency in Peter Vincent’s faith. Since it is mentioned quite a bit and is integral to the plot, it should be handled more cleanly.

Despite it being a little long in the fangs, FN is still an entertaining romp. It’s also more important than given credit for being. Along with The Lost Boys, which came out two years later, it helped bring the vampire out of the Victorian era with the fresh out of Transylvania accent and drop him into modern times. It understands that the idea of such a creature terrorizing suburbia is silly without making a mockery of the genre, remaining faithful to much of the monster’s traditional lore. For this, FN is one of my favorite vampire flicks of all time.

<strong>MY SCORE: 8/10</strong>​

 

[dell71]

Fright Night
<strong>Directed by Craig Gillespie.</strong>
<em>2011. Rated R, 106 minutes.
Cast:
Anton Yelchin
Colin Farrell
Christopher Mintz-Plasse
David Tennant
Imogen Poots
Toni Collette
Dave Franco
Reid Ewing
Sandra Vergara
Will Denton
Lisa Loeb
Chris Sarandon</em>​

In a small Las Vegas suburb things are going pretty well for Charlie (Yelchin). He has a good relationship with his single mom. Not only has he recently become one of the cool kids at his school, he’s also dating Amy (Poots), one of its hottest girls. There are some minor irritations in his otherwise perfect life. His neighbor Jerry Dandridge (Farrell) has been moved in for a while but still hasn’t had the dumpster removed from his front lawn. How dare he? Apparently, Jerry doesn’t realize how much of an eyesore this thing is. Charlie’s bigger issue is Ed (Mintz-Plasse). The two were once bestest buddies but Charlie has moved on. Ed hasn’t. He basically throws very public temper tantrums because Charlie won’t play with him anymore and blackmails him into doing so. It’s complicated.

Neighbor Jerry further complicates things. Aside from taking his sweet time getting rid of the dumpster, he flirts with Charlie’s mom. Even worse, Charlie soon discovers Jerry is a real live vampire. He’s not the type that Peter Vincent (Tennant) slays in his Las Vegas show, but an actual, homicidal bloodsucker. Jerry is also fond of apples and beer, but it’s the blood that’s most troublesome.

Troublesome also describes the way our tale is constructed. In case you didn’t know, this is a remake of the 1985 hit. That movie begins with Jerry moving in next door to Charlie. Everyone in the movie becomes aware of him as we do. Here, he’s been around for a while. It may not sound like much, but this little change to our entry point is enough to set the entire movie off-kilter.

Our view of those involved is off-kilter, as well. We don’t like any of them. In the original, Jerry is a debonair devil. We know he’s a killer, but he’s awfully charming. This version is more the sweaty, creepy type. He just happens to be as handsome as Colin Farrell. Farrell does a good job with the role, but it is what it is. Our new Ed is a jerk. We start actively rooting against him within thirty seconds of meeting him. Amy is just kinda there most of the time. Her subplot from the first film is not used. Peter Vincent is no longer a once-great facing the end of his career. This time around he’s at the height of his popularity. Instead of being insecure and incredulous of the events surrounding him, he’s a self-centered jackass we’d rather punch in the face than go vampire hunting with. He also seems like he was written for Russell Brand or David Tennant is just doing his darndest impression, but that’s beside the point. Charlie is pretty bland in both movies. However, when surrounded by unlikeable characters he also becomes hard to really care for. At best, we’re not aching for him to be brutally murdered.

The vocation of screenplay writing has been brutally murdered. Well, probably not. It has been severely injured, at least. The various strands are haphazardly slapped together. The comic relief isn’t funny and the horror isn’t horrifying. That nice bit of self-awareness the original had is almost completely gone. The make up for these lapses in execution we get the trusted method of multiplying the body count. Yawn. Since most of the killings are of the loud noise, look of fear, camera cuts away variety, double yawn.

I did a lot of double yawning while watching the Fright Night remake. Strangely enough, going into this it was the rare case where I didn’t mind something from my youth being remade. The original is pretty good, but there is room for improvement and the basic premise welcomes updating. Unfortunately, this movie did none of the things that would’ve made it better.

<strong>MY SCORE: 5/10</strong>​

 

[dell71]

Blacula
<strong>Directed by William Crain.</strong>
<em>1972. Rated PG, 93 minutes.
Cast:
William Marshall
Vonetta McGee
Thalmus Rasulala
Denise Nicholas
Gordon Pinsent
Charles Macaulay
Emily Yancy
Lance Taylor Sr.</em>​

This particular chunk of 70s goodness actually starts in the 18th century. African Prince Mamuwalde (Marshall) and his lovely wife Luva (McGee) are in the land of Transylvania. Where else would a vampire flick start? They are visiting the castle of Count Dracula (Macaulay), duh. For some reason, the prince asks the Count to help put a stop to the slave trade. Wait…what does Dracula have to do with…never mind. Drac laughs him off and drops a few racial epithets on Mamuwalde and his lady. Understandably, the prince gets indignant and announces that he and his wife are leaving this instant. We cut away to the door 1) to see a bunch of Drac’s minions strolling into the room and 2) to give the Count a moment to put in his fangs. Long story short, Count Dracula and company overcome the prince and his wife. Luva gets killed, but death isn’t punishment enough for Mamuwalde. The Count bites him, re-names him Blacula and locks him in a coffin. Roll opening credits.

Fast forward to “the present” in 1972 Los Angeles. A couple guys swindle some dude out of Count Dracula’s ancient artifacts for a low low price. Too bad for them, there was no ebay back then. Even worse, Blacula’s coffin is included in their catch. By the way, if you think anyone in the movie ever calls him Blacula you’d be sadly mistaken. Anyhoo, these two fools pop open the coffin, wind up as vampires and let loose Mamuwalde on an unsuspecting public.

Shortly after breathing some 20th century smog for the first time, our new favorite vampire runs into Tina who happens to look exactly like his wife. How did you know she’s played by the same person? Of course, he just has to have her, but he tells her he can’t take her by force. While waiting on her to make a decision, he nibbles on the local population.

Surprisingly, but refreshingly, this movie dispenses with the idea of getting the ancient vampire used to his new surroundings and any forced comedy that might have come from that. He never even asks anyone the date or looks at a newspaper to figure it out like most other flicks would’ve. Come to think of it, no one ever bothers to ask this dude why he walks around wearing a cape. Then again, we are talking about the 70s. So it’s no surprise that one guy does ask if he can borrow it.

I’ve said too much. Just know that <em>Blacula</em> is a fun, campy ride that is far better than its title gives it any right to be. There are a few strong performances in the bunch, most notably from our main two adversaries: William Marshall as Blacula and Thalmus Rasulala as Dr. Gordon Thomas. These two along with Denise Nicholas as the doc’s wife balance out a bunch of flat ones. The dialogue is hammy but these three pull it off well. Admittedly, the vampire makeup ranges from “meh” to “Is that supposed to be a vampire or a zombie?” to “Where’s your makeup?” Even out of that mix, there is one genuine scare, for me at least. The crazed vampire woman running down a hallway in the morgue is a sight that can’t be unseen (pic above). I saw this movie several time, probably thirty years ago, if not more. That’s one of only two scenes I really remembered. The other is the unexpectedly touching conclusion. It all adds up to a surprisingly entertaining vampire flick. It’s far from a masterpiece, but it’s no blight on the genre either. <em>Blacula</em> sticks pretty close to traditional vampire lore and gives us a solid, if occasionally unintentionally humorous effort.

<strong>MY SCORE: 7/10</strong>​