Friday, 27 February 2015

Friday Night Screening: A Nightmare on Elm Street 3: Dream Warriors 1987

A Nightmare on Elm Street 3: Dream Warriors
Freddy vs the supernatural Glee club

Finally the third installment in the series, Dream Warriors, acclaimed as ‘The perfect nightmare on elm street movie’. With a title as that, how can this movie possibly go wrong? Well, why not take a look at this 1987 meet-up of the dream demon Freddy Kreuger and the mighty Nancy dream Rangers…hold on, that’s not right.

A few years after the murders on Elm street, some teens seem to all share the same dream, and of course, parents, always doing what they do best, make things worse by committing them to a psychological asylum. 
And there they are find themselves like fishes in a barrel for our favorite dream murdering maniac, Freddy Kreuger. But it seems that an old friend has decided to make her comeback to finish what she started years ago, Nancy from the first movie. And after noticing one of the patients seems to have the power to control her dreams, she decide to form a team of dream warriors to finally destroy Freddy.
Warriors ranging from D&D wizards to an eighties idea of‘Bad’…ugh.

Sweet god does this one drive off the silly cliff with the quirkymobile. At first it seems to be all right until the whole ‘Dream ability’ thing comes into play, yeah, that’s a thing now. Apparently all the kids have special dream abilities, like one having super strength , the other being able to do backflips, and can someone call the kid who got the superpower to scream real loud like a girl to tell him he’s been screwed over? He can probably join Mati from Captain Planet and Aquaman to form a club.

But besides the silliness of the second half which let me remind you all, had a freaking wizard, how does the movie hold up? Well, for lack of a better term, it’s amazing.
I’m serious, the effects are incredible and the acting, although hammy at times, is pretty decent. And holy sh8t, is that Morpheus? This just keeps getting better.
The kids are likable for the most parts, and seeing Nancy again was a nice addition, but the real show stealer remains Robert Englund as Freddy Kreuger, who in this movie more than before, really shines. In the previous movie, especially in the second  one, Freddy just seemed like this uncharacteristic force, we knew he was evil, but beside that there was very little to add. But in this movie Freddy has much more of a personality (and a pretty, if not very dark, funny one) and we get to know a little of his backstory, and even though it’s contrived and cliché as all hell, it’s at least a step forward. But while on the subject, we learn about Freddy’s birth and the cruel and brutal circumstances of said event, but the movie blames those events for Freddy’s murderous existence as an adult. So instead of focusing on the big question this movie should be asking, is evil something you’re born with or is it something you come to learn trough traumatic events or taught by others, the movie just glances over it and forgets about it like if it was afraid of what it said. Which is something that really pisses me off with Nightmare on Elm Street 3.

But well, back on track, if you don’t have a problem with the silliness of the second act, this is probably the best movie in the saga so far. I still personally prefer the first one, but this one is a close second. The main antagonist, Freddy, is much more refined and funny in a dark and twisted way. The effects are amazing and a real treat to look at and its characters are varied and deaths are creative and original. Definitely worth a watch for any horror fan.

Things I’ve learned from Nightmare on Elm Street 3: Dream Warriors:
- "The Freddy Kreuger" is the new drug sensation sweeping the nation after 'The Charlie Sheen'
- Never thought that the idea of Freddy playing with his puppets could be so wicked
- Even in the eighties, “I’m beautiful…and bad” sounds

Personal Rating: 8.2/10

Critical rating: 8/10

 Freddy Kreuger

kill-count so far:
20 kills

Best kill in this movie:
Killer puppeteer

Best kill so far:
Killer pupeteer

Tuesday, 24 February 2015

Tuesday Night Screening: Hostel 2005

The highjack review

Well, seeing as that our dear Mel has some computer issues it would seem that you poor sods are stuck with me on this fine evening. But don't worry, I won´t talk about were-turkeys or flesh eating strippers this time, instead, we’ll be looking at everything that is wrong with modern horror movies in this little mess called Hostel, directed by one of my least favorite director and professional butcher of anything resembling cinema, Eli Roth.

This train wreck of a story follows a unlikable and underdeveloped characters and their quest that defines any Eli Roth’s character’s motivation: get drunk and screw around. This time this group of idiots tours through Europe and end up in the Czech Republic where they quickly find a hostel to spend the night with a few babes. Bad move on their part as it turns out that an elitist organization of ‘hunters’, led by a bunch of middle-aged rich white guys, have made it their home turf to kidnap, torture and kill tourists for the thrills and giggles. And the story pretty much goes exactly where you expect it to go, they all get kidnaped and tortured one by one in a cheap effort to gross the viewer out with effects so cheap and bland they’ll test your limits until you’ll do the sensible thing and turn this mess off.

So yes, if it wasn’t obvious, I’m really not a fan of Roth’s directing. Now as an actor, he’s alright, but as a director? It’s painful.
It’s not just that he is a racist, homophobic and juvenile farce of a guy, it’s also that nearly every single one of his movie manages to piss me off in some way. But the Hostel series, somehow is his crowning achievement in establishing his place as one of the worse horror movie director in my opinion. To deconstruct everything that is wrong with this movie would be like trying to explain why you shouldn’t watch Water Power while eating, there’s too much sh8t to make any sense of it.
But let’s start with the most obvious question one can ask when looking at any movie: what’s the point?
A few guys get kidnapped, tortured and killed and that’s about all the plot you’ll get. How can anyone enjoy this? who was the demographic for this, people who get off on it? Well, I’m pretty sure they’ll find it lackluster as the effects are pretty bad, even though most of them were practical. So I ask again, who was this movie supposed to please?
In a few interviews, Roth tries to talks about the impact of gore movies such as “blood sucking freaks” and even a few scenes in the very first “Alien” movie, and how it affected him. It’s pretty obvious that somehow, in his warped mind, he’s trying to make a movie that honors the gory days of such classics as Evil Dead, The Texas Chainsaw Massacre and Dead-Alive. Unfortunately, Roth doesn’t seem to understand exactly why people liked these movies, and now we have one of his many pathetic attempts to re-create the feeling we had when Ash found himself covered from tip to toe in blood while the walls were giving him one of the worse interpretation of a bukake I’ve ever seen.
It’s not because there’s blood and guts on the screen that we’ll turn into whimpering little girls, the gore has to accompany the horror, not the other way around. If you don’t have a story and just the gore and you play it like a serious thing, you just end up with this, Torture porn

So the gore is overdone and just seems like mindless violence just for the sake of gore, the story is pretty much non-existent and the characters are all twats, what else could go wrong? Try insulting an entire country.
Yes, it seems dear ol’ Eli somehow finally managed to piss off an entire country by insulting them of being a bunch of human-trafficking, torturing assh8les. You can begin to guess the response of the Czech officials after this movie was released and they saw how their people were depicted. And I’m not saying that The Czech Republic is perfect, I’ve been there multiple times for extended periods of time so I know it’s not all rainbows and sunshine, but this movie gives eastern Europe such a bad rep, that I actually know some people who actively refuse to go anywhere near it.

Quinten Tarantino, one of my favorite movie director of all times, was quoted saying that Eli Roth was the future of horror movies, and I’m afraid he might be right. With the advance of the Saw franchise and even movies like A Serbian film and The Human Centipede, it seems that there is an audience for pure shock and the grotesque. All I hope is that’s it just a curiosity that will soon leave our minds, but if not, then Eli Roth would indeed be the new face of this revolution with awful stories, hateful characters and cheap gore. But if my advice still counts for anything, avoid this movie like the plague, it’ll do nothing but pissing you off and waste your time.

Personal Rating: 2/10

Critical rating: 4,5/10

Things I’ve learned from Hostel:
- The creepy train guy from Euro Trip just got a whole lot more menacing.
- pasting the name of Tarantino on any movie is sure to give it some appeal, no matter how misplaced it can be.
- I was rather dissapointed by the lack of pancakes induced rampages in this movie.
- This movie is still somehow better than the sequels…be afraid people.
- Toilet revenge…just toilet revenge…

Friday, 20 February 2015

Friday Night Screening: Zombie Strippers! 2008

Zombie Strippers!
Because there are still people out there wanking to it

Well, time to take a break from nightmares on Elm street and take a look at...stipping zombies. But all is well, I have enough scotch to clear my memory after this and we have a familiar face to lead us through this slightly necrophiliac propaganding  journey, no other than Freddy himself, goddammit Robert Englund, of all the undead joint in all the grindhouse in all the world, he walks into mine.
Well, to be honest, the fact that Robert Englund plays in this movie is one of the two big reasons I picked up this little flick made in 2008, the other would be the name, because honestly, how could I pass on a movie about zombie strippers? Also Jenna Jameson plays in this... don't act like you don't know who she is you horny little devil.

And yes, before you even ask, this movie is exactly what you think it is.

In a not too distant future, one where stripping has become illegal, a small group of commando is send out to take care of a laboratory spill that caused the personnel to become brain-hungry zombies. Of course things get out of hand and one of the zombies finds itself in an illegal strip club owned by Freddy Kruger and bites the hell out of one of the strippers.
And then things get weird, I’m not sure how things will go down in the future, but I’m pretty sure necrophilia will still not be the norm, so why in the name of all that is holy, the crowd goes wild when the returned stripper dangles her rotting flesh all over the dance floor , is beyond me. But Freddy sees an opportunity in this and all goes to hell beyond that point. And yes, it gets even weirder.

Ok, let’s get this out of the way, this movie is funny as hell. Sure it can be classified as toilet humor, but what can I say? It works. On the other end of the spectrum however, when did people start to find dancing corpses hot? I mean all right, I wouldn’t be one to kick Jenna Jameson out of bed, but she’s not so hot that I’d pay to see her rotting pieces splatter all over the dance floor.
But for all the fun this movie is in its juvenile humor, I do get the idea that this movie tries to be much deeper than it actually is, or at least that would be the case if I knew anyone’s reasons to do anything in this movie. They try to tackle multiple questions on the duality of men here and there, but it falls flat when you realize they are just quoting Nietzsche every once in a while, and like a joke without a punchline, this just goes on and on until the end of the movie making you wonder if there was a point to all this, and to save you the trouble, no, there isn’t.
And it’s a shame, because I really don’t want to call a movie named ‘Zombie Strippers’ pretentious, but I can’t see the joke. I mean, why have the setup by having one character ask questions about the prosecution of weaker woman in this industry by pressurizing them with impossible standards, eventually wondering if men is born evil, just to never either answer those questions or have a joke that works. So yes, and I hate to be the one to say it, but Zombie Stripper is, maybe unwillingly, pretentious.

For a movie that hopelessly tries to show us the evil of standards and expectations, something you’d expect would interest more woman than men (not being sexist here, just saying) this movie is 75% striptease, something that, more often than not, does not interest the female demographic. So why have all that talk about the pressurizing of woman in the industry? For f8ck squabble diddle doo, and that’s why this movie falls horribly flat in that regard.

Might want to rethink that lapdance...

But back to the point, the effects are unfortunately really poor, and I mean both they look cheap and they are uninteresting. More often than not computer generated blood spatter and wounds that would make the later Violent shit movies proud. The small amount of practical effects are slightly better and the props and sets do their jobs nicely. The acting isn't even worth mentioning, seeing as the lead previous acting jobs were such unforgettable classics such as ‘Buttman at Nudes a Poppin' 7’ and ‘Breast Obsessed 3’. Robert Englund, and no matter how much I like him as an actor, didn’t bring his A-game either, he often seemed like he was lost on the set or really waiting for his paycheck, but even then, he did get a few chuckles out of me here and there.

So, final verdict? This movie is a blast, it’s perhaps poorly acted and has more strip scenes than gay undertones in Brokeback Mountain, but it’s funny as hell and will have you laughing all the way with its ridiculous plot.
However, I am speaking as a proud dong-owner here, and I feel that some of the ladies probably won’t be able to sit through so much of Jenna’s exposed…uhum…acting. And thus would find the movie pretty lacking and/or hard to sit through. I might ask Melanie or another female reviewer to check it out in the future to get a second opinion. However if you don’t mind, the humor is still side-aching and it has more memorable quotes and scenes than I could mention.

Things I learned from ‘Zombie Strippers!’:
- Nietzsche does indeed make more sense after you die
- This future might be a bit short of stupid, but at least it’s not ‘Teenage Caveman
- I’ll never look at a billiard ball the same way
- Rhino in a thong might be the worst logo for anything since the RE6 title card
- Foaming Chewbacca…seriously internet?
- And I though the teabag from killer pussy was bad…

Personal Rating: 7/10

Critical Rating: 5.5/10

Tuesday, 17 February 2015

DOUBLE REVIEW: The Human Centipede (2009) / The Human Centipede II (2011)

The Human Centipede

IMDB rate: 4,5
Genre: Mad Scientist
Starring: Dieter Laser, Ashley C. Williams, Ashlynn Yennie

It was time to watch The Human Centipede again, the very shocking movie from The Netherlands; the country where I come from! You see, this might be the only Dutch movie that I like, mainly because there are no Dutch actors in it. I live in this country but when I watch a movie from my own country (spoken in Dutch) I can't understand a thing of what they say, so weird. Anyway, that's why this is the only Dutch movie that I like. It's super brutal and very sick. But I liked it. Why? Because it's a very original (but ridiculous) idea.
I get that some people get disgusted by this movie, but it's just not a movie for everybody.

Two pretty but ditsy American girls are on a road trip through Europe. In Germany, they end up alone at night with a broken car in the woods. They search for help and find an isolated villa. The next day, they awaken to find themselves trapped in a terrifying makeshift basement hospital along with a Japanese man. An older German man identifies himself as a retired surgeon specialized in separating Siamese twins. However, his three "patients" are not about to be separated but joined together in a horrific operation. He plans to be the first person to connect people via their gastric systems. By doing so, he plans to bring to life his sick lifetime fantasy, the human centipede.

First of all, the acting. I think it's an excellent choice to cast Dieter Laser as Dr. Heiter. He is one scary dude and even looking at him gives me goosebumps. He has the ultimate mad scientist look which is of course very useful for this role. His acting was simply brilliant.
Then the two girls. I did not like them. Their acting was horrible the first part of the movie (the part where they still were able to talk). Also they were so dumb. I can't stand movies where someone has the opportunity to escape (and get help) and instead they go back to save someone. Why do they not understand that getting help is much more useful!
There's not much to say about the Japanese guy, since he's only talking Japanese. All I know is that I find his character very annoying with the Japanese screaming the entire time. I do not get why Dr. Heiter puts him in front of the 'centipede', since he's not able to speak one word English. Quite annoying.
I kinda have respect for these actors because this might be one of the most uncomfortable acting jobs ever.

Of course there are many things in this movie that can't be right, for example surviving longer than a few days in that 'centipede' condition. Or that Dr. Heiter finds 3 matching flesh types where he only needed to kill one guy for. It's just too impossible. 
Also, it's very unlikely that the cops react this way. Especially when the cop found the anesthetic that Dr. Heiter brought with him, it's very unbelievable that the cop wouldn't pull his gun or anything. He might be an even worse cop than Dewey (from Scream). 
Even though there are many inaccurate things in this movie I did not find it very bothering. After all, there are not many horror movies that are 100% medically accurate.

I have not seen the sequel yet but I'm planning on watching it very soon. An even longer human centipede must be incredibly disgusting; therefore, more interesting. 

Personally, I enjoyed watching this movie a lot. It's an absolute ridiculous idea, but I liked it. It's very original and very fucked up. The acting of the 'villain' is absolutely brilliant. 
Unfortunately some of the actors are not that great, this made the movie less enjoyable for me. Also, some parts are just too unbelievable and annoying.
The Human Centipede is definitely not a movie for everyone. You need a very strong stomach and at least a bit of a sense of humor. 

My personal rate: 6,5/10


The Human Centipede II

IMDB rate: 3,9
Genre: Mad Scientist, Torture
Starring: Laurence R. Harvey, Ashlynn Yennie, Maddi Black

If you've read my review about the first Human Centipede, you know that I liked it. It's perhaps the only movie coming from The Netherlands that I truly enjoyed. It's a weird movie, it's disgusting, but it's also original and quite good. As you can imagine I was curious about the sequel, the centipede would be longer so in my opinion that would become even more awesome. But I can only say that I was incredibly wrong. 

The Human Centipede II is a real awful movie. The first movie at least tried to make a believable story, with good effects and reasonable acting. This movie is just shit. It's purely made to shock people, it has absolutely no logic in it at all. 

Martin is a mentally disturbed loner who lives with his mother in a bleak housing project. He works the night shift as a security guard in an equally grim and foreboding underground parking complex. To escape his dreary existence, Martin loses himself in the fantasy world of the cult horror film The Human Centipede, fetishizing the meticulous surgical skills of the gifted Dr. Heiter, whose knowledge of the human gastrointestinal system inspires Martin to attempt the unthinkable. 

The biggest part of this movie is replaying the first movie. This Martin dude is obsessed with it and watches it over and over again, which means, the viewer of the sequel watches it over and over again as well. It's not very refreshing for a movie if it's mostly replaying the first part. 

I'm by the way not too sure what to think of this Martin dude, or the guy who played him. Sure, he was good at acting as a creepy little dude who did some pretty nasty stuff. And he did made me feel incredibly uncomfortable, so I guess for a horror movie that's a good thing. But man, this dude was nasty as hell. His acting might be reasonable, but well, acting is made a lot easier when you don't have to say a word. Really, not one word the entire movie. And I don't think he was a mute, since people complained about 'him talking about the centipede stuff', meaning he talked. 

The script was really crap. Martin didn't talk for the entire movie, and the ones who did talk were incredibly unbelievable. The dialogues are unrealistic, random and mostly weird. This was especially when his mother was involved. A weird scene, involving his mother, was when she starts stabbing his bed where she thought he was laying, a second later she's cutting her wrists and another second later she's acting as if it doesn't hurt her but she does get upset because of a weird book under his bed. It really was one of the most random scenes I've ever seen. 

The movie is incredibly slow. I already mentioned that most of it consists of replaying the first part. The other half consists of a not talking nasty main character who is really fucked up. I literally waited for a hour for something to happen, there were only 32 minutes left when finally something slightly interesting happened. 
This guy is bashing everyone's heads in and still expects them to be alive, at least one of them should have gained a head trauma which caused them to faint every few minutes I think. It's like they didn't even try to be slightly realistic. 

The Human Centipede II is really just made to shock people. The first part actually had a story and wasn't necessarily made for it's gore and violent, while this movie just loves it that much that it forgets to make a decent story. There are very visual images of teeth being bashed in, poop being 'shat at the camera' and rape with barbed wire. At one point I think Tom Six forgot that he was making a sequel to The Human Centipede and just continued in making something like A Serbian Film or something. A Serbian Film at least had some sort of story in it, even though it was sick as fuck. 

It's a shame that this movie is like it is, I think it could've been a reasonable movie. I'm really terrified for the third part after watching this piece of shit. What I liked about the first movie was that almost every scene was filmed in nicely lighted rooms, giving a real twisted vibe because it showed something sick. This movie is filmed entirely in black and white which should make it feel more scary according to Tom Six, but really it just seems amateurish and lame. It was quite bothering really. 

There's absolutely nothing to like about this movie. It's gross and just bad. The first half tells about the mad life of this creepy dude whose gathering people, the other half is just a terrible imitation of A Serbian Film. I'm not even sure if I will ever watch the third movie, it can only become more terrible than this movie. Don't waste your time on this.

My personal rate: 1/10

Friday, 13 February 2015

Friday Night Screening: A Nightmare on Elm Street 2: Freddy’s Revenge 1985

A Nightmare on Elm Street 2: Freddy’s Revenge
Letdown sequel and Freddy’s strange obsession to get inside teenage boys

And we’re back with the second entry to the 'Nightmare on Elm Street' saga. And with no other than, according to most, the lowest point in the series, Nightmare on Elm street 2: Freddy’s revenge.
Produced only one year after the original nightmare came out, this is the movie that has fans and critics slamming down their fists in union. But is it as bad as most say? Well, let’s take a look at the plot.

Confused teenager Jesse and his family move to a new house, and it would only be logical that the house would be the same house where Nancy ‘banished’ the dream demon, Freddy Kreuger, and she sure did a lousy job of it, because guess who comes knocking down the walls of Jesse’s dreams? And he wants nothing more than his body for him to play with while they together perform a rendition of the shower scene from 'American History X' with Jesse’s gym teacher and some whips…wait did we just stumbled into a different kind of movie?

Yeah…it’s gonna get weird, but the gist of it is that dear ol’ Fred wants to take over this whiny little bratty kid’s body to…murder around I guess? Ok, fist question here, why does Freddy want to be mortal again? He does know that the last time he was mortal he got burned harder than Taylor Swift at the VMA’s a few years back, there’s the obvious fact that he’ll walk around like a guy that has stuck pancakes to his face, and this time, people will actually be able to waste his scorched ass. I mean, it’s never explained why he was able to haunt kid’s dreams and become practically a god within his own realm, but it sounds like a hell of an upgrade from kiddyfidler groundskeeper to all powerful dream demon that murders all who sleep.
Just seems like a cheap trick have a possession story, but well, beside that gaping plothole, what else can there be said about this movie? Well, ok, disregarding the fact that Fred’s got a death wish, why does he want Jesse in particular? He even says at the beginning that he’s special or something, how is he special? Was he born under the star of plot convenience when all the BS planets were aligned? It’s never explained, Jesse’s got a younger sister, why didn’t Fred go after her? Guessing with his past he’d probably think ’the younger the better’, and kids are much more easily fooled, why didn’t he just show up in her dream as a giant fluffy bunny or goddamn Justin Bieber or whatever.
But no, he wants Jesse, not any other kid in the neighborhood, just him and his awkward teenage romance with the girl next door.
Ah yes, the girlfriend Lisa, played by Kim Myers. She practically carries the movie in the third act, and why isn’t she the main character of the movie? She has a much more interesting personality and she is probably the best girlfriend any one could ever wish for. You start telling about how you have dreams in which you brutally murder left and right? She accepts it and actually tries to help. You think you might have a spiritual connection with a child murderer that has been dead for the better part of the past decade? She believes you and search for a way to sever the connection. I mean really, faithful, helpful, cheery, nice and cute as a button? Do girls like that even exists?
So yeah, the story and the protagonist aren’t exactly the strong points of this movie, so what is?
Well, the effects are nice. Sure, they ain’t as good as the first one, shocker there, but at times they were creative, well, except for when the movie decide to pull a Hitchcock and redo a scene from “Birds” with an extra kamikaze ending. Seriously, exploding birds, what the hell where they thinking?
But for the rest, I guess credit is due where it is, and some of the effects where interesting. One of my favorite being at the very beginning where a school bus is being driven of the road as the landscape changes into a hellish abyss. Pretty neat scenery, but the whole movie does feel a little cheap. But all that good is being ruined by the fact that the first movie did everything a tenfold better, and the things they try to do just seems strange. For example, the entire movie, Freddy doesn’t have his glove, weird right? The knives just come out of the fingertips. I first thought it might be because the glove actually plays in the movie as an object of both rejection and temptation for Jesse, and is actually a physical object in the real world. But then the vodka started to slowly dissolve from my brain and I remembered that the glove was also a physical object in the first movie, where Freddy did have a glove at all times. It might be a small mistake here and there, but piled up, they do tend to piss off viewers.
But did this movie do anything right? In my opinion it did, I really liked the Freddy in this movie, it seemed like he had more of a personality, and even though he wasn’t in the spotlight much, he does get his times worth in the third act, which gives us a nice rest from our other obnoxious main character

But now we come to the big question, the one that had everyone’s jimmies rusted when they saw this flick:

Are the homo-erotic undertones of Nightmare on Elm street 2 there by accident or was this really meant to tackle the subject of homosexual feeling during the coming of age of adolescence?

Well, there’s no question that some of those undertones were blatant, if I can say so. Sure I joked about it earlier with my summary of the plot. But to be fair, this movie deals a lot with sexuality, a lot more than in the first movie, ironic seeing as that no one actually had sexual intercourse in this movie, while in the first movie, the act was very much there early on in the movie to set the stamps on the characters of “the whore” and “the jock”, an almost ritualistic scene in every slasher movie, and above all, Wes Craven movie, who would never pass on the chance to have a cliché to then shine an ironic light on it.
But the fact that this movie deals more openly on the theme of adolescence and sexuality is all well and good, but why are the homo-erotic undertones so blatant? But a better question is, are they really there?
I believe that the homophobia of the modern age might have clouded our mind a bit on that subject, we have been crying wolf for so long that we tend to see them everywhere. I’ll admit that there are some scenes that are very much ‘gay’, there is no disputing about that. Like when half awake, Jesse stumbles into a leather bar and runs into his Gym teacher, who obviously has a ‘Dom’ complex, who makes Jesse exercise in the middle of the night only to lure him to the showers, where he gets his own misfortunate encounter with Freddy. There is no question that this scene was very much ‘gay’, yes. But maybe, and I’m just speculating here, this scene was meant more as a way for Jesse to overcome his father issues and fear of school. The strong, masculine, dominating Gym teacher could almost be a textbook description of how most teenagers saw their own father figures. And the fact that Freddy , through Jesse, actually serves what he deems a ‘just reward’ only proves Jesse’s own obsession with his revolting nature against his own father who is actually a very strict masculine figure.
There are many more questionable scenes, such as Jesse’s disgust toward the prospect of a sexual act with Lisa, but what most seem to miss is why he is revolted. In the scene Jesse and Lisa are getting it on in a private room at a party, when suddenly Jesse’s tongue turns into a misshaped mess of flesh as he was about to use it on her bosoms, which forces our wimpy protagonist to run away in fear to seek comfort at his bro’s house. This was seen by many as very proving of the undertones of the movie. But lost in translation is actually a much deeper scene than that. The fact that Jesse is disgusted in himself, and not Lisa, seems to actually show us that Jesse suffers from a ‘Hedgehog dilemma complex’ rather than homosexual urges. He is not disgusted by the female body, but is actually afraid of hurting Lisa if he ever get this close to her.
So is this movie as Avant-guard in homosexual movement for the slasher genre as everyone is saying?
No, I’m not saying that the gay undertones aren't there, because they are. But I think it comes more from the lack of direction from the director’s part rather than actual intent.

So with all this said and done, is this movie any good? Well, it makes for an interesting tale about coming to terms with adolescence by having a demon literally taking over your body, but it makes for an horrible sequel to Nightmare on Elm Street. But I still don’t think it’s deserving of all the hate it’s getting.

Things I’ve learned from ‘A Nightmare on Elm Street 2, Freddy’s Revenge’
- The ‘Revenge’ part is pretty played down, although the kill count is pretty damn high.
- Jesse’s performance in his bedroom of ‘Touch me’ was still better than Miley Cyrus at the VMA’s.
- Exploding birds invading other movies than ‘Birdemic
- When a dude breaks into your room in the middle of the night, jumps on you while you’re in bed and put his hand over your mouth while saying that there is something trying to get inside his body so he want to sleep next to you, your reaction shouldn't be calmly giving him relationship advise, no matter the bro-mance

Personal rating: 5/10

Critical rating: 4/10

Freddy Krueger

Kill-count so far:
14 kills

Best Kill in this movie:
Exploding birds

Best kill so far:
Blood geyser 

Tuesday, 10 February 2015

DOUBLE REVIEW: The Purge (2013) / The Purge: Anarchy (2014)

The Purge
Originally written on 12 December 2013 on personal blog.
IMDB rate: 5,5
Genre: Serial-Killer
Starring: Lena Headey, Ethan Hawke, Rhys Wakefield

The Purge, not the most appreciated movie around. Personally, I loved it. I think the Purge has a great concept of which I wouldn't be too surprised if this would become an actual thing in the future. A sequel was released as well, scroll further if you'd like to read the review of The Purge: Anarchy as well. Now all we have to do is wait for The Purge 3!

In an America wracked by crime and overcrowded prisons, the government has sanctioned an annual 12-hour period in which any and all criminal activity -including murder- becomes legal. The police can't be called. Hospitals suspend help. It's one night when the citizenry regulates itself without thought of punishment. On this night plagued by violence and an epidemic of crime, one family wrestles with the decision of who they will become when a stranger comes knocking. When an intruder breaks into James Sandin's gated community during the yearly lockdown, he begins a sequence of events that threatens to tear a family apart. Now, it is up to James, his wife, Mary, and their kids to make it through the night without turning into the monsters from whom they hide.

What I loved most about The Purge was the concept. First of all, it was set in the future, which makes the happenings a lot more believable. Second, the whole concept of a 'killing day' was amazing. Well, of course not for the people who are being killed... but it's a cool idea to minimize crime overall. To be honest, I wouldn't be too surprised if America ever gained this Purge-day. It would be kinda fucked up, but I'm just saying that it wouldn't surprise me a whole lot.

The acting in this movie is very good. Ethan Hawke is an amazing actor. While I wasn't too much of a fan of Sinister, I liked the acting in it, especially from Ethan Hawke. And again, he did an amazing job. Lena Headey is of course the best known for Game of Thrones where she plays Cersei Lannister. A very different role from this one, and it was actually quite funny to see her play in a role like this one. I must admit that I expected an arrogant Cersei look or quote during the movie, just because I was so used to seeing her in that role, but of course that didn't happen. Other than that, Lena Headey is a brilliant actress.
The children weren't too great, the guy was okay but the girl was rather annoying. In my opinion she over-acted a bit, and her character was also quite annoying.

The scares weren't very surprising, actually, they were rather predictable. But besides that I didn't thought it was a bad movie. I've read many negative reviews, but seriously, it's a decent movie with an excellent concept. Perhaps the performance of this concept wasn't too well, a bit predictable and such but really, it wasn't bad.

The so called 'freaks' of this movie were actually rather scary with their masks on. They reminded me a lot of the ones in The Strangers, and I'm personally a big fan of The Strangers. I think that masks overall make a movie more interesting and more scary. The attacker is unknown that way which makes it much more a mystery.
The scenes with the girls were the most scary to me, their giggling the entire time was very unsettling.

The Purge is a very decent movie in my opinion. It's a lot less overhyped compared to The Conjuring and personally I liked The Purge a lot more. I don't exactly know why I keep comparing these two movies, perhaps because they came out around the same time, but anyway, The Conjuring was a lot less original compared with this one.
Great acting and an interesting concept. Perhaps not the most impressing scares or storytelling, but overall it was very good.

My personal rate: 7/10


The Purge: Anarchy
Originally written on 17 November 2013

IMDB rate: 6,5
Genre: Survival
Starring: Kiele Sanchez, Frank Grillo, Zach Gilford

I might be the only person around who actually liked the first Purge movie. I thought it was a great idea for a movie, to have one day where people could do whatever they wanted to do. Sure, the first movie lacked a lot, but it was still entertaining and it contained very good acting. The second movie is good as well, in my opinion it was even better than the first movie. 

The second Purge however is a lot more like what people actually expected from The Purge. In the first movie you'd follow one rich family who would try to survive to night, this all is set in their big and fairly safe home. The problem with this approach is that you have no idea how bad The Purge actually is, since you're mostly watching a family hide from the intruders and defend themselves. In the second movie you can watch how stuff is going down in the big city, in the streets. So no safe home this time, which gave an interesting perspective. 

Here's what it's about:
A couple are driving home when their car breaks down just as the Purge commences. Meanwhile, a police sergeant goes out into the streets to get revenge on the man who killed his son, and a mother and daughter  run from their home after assailants destroy it. The five people meet up as they attempt to survive the night in Los Angeles. 

There was an interesting addition to this movie, this being that rich people hired other people to kidnap poor people. This is because they wanted to kill random people, without them risking the danger of going into the streets to search for people to kill themselves. Also, some poor people sell themselves to be killed for shitloads of money so that their families have some money for the future. I thought it was a great addition to the storyline since it seems pretty likely that this could actually happen if the Purge was real. 

With these innocent people on the streets you get a great insight in how the Purge actually works. Some people are on the streets because they want to kill one specific person, while others are on the streets to just randomly slaughter people. The innocent group of five we follow is trying to seek shelter until the Purge is over, and while doing this we see people who have set traps, people who actually chase them around town and people who kidnapped them to drop them with rich people. It's brilliant to see how crazy a city can get when they have the ability to murder everyone they encounter. 

I thought the acting was less good compared to the previous part. Lena Headey, Ethan Hawke and Rhys Wakefield did an amazing job in the first Purge movie. I must admit though that I disliked the acting of the children greatly in that movie. In this movie I was especially annoyed by Kiele Sanchez and Zach Gilford, they didn't act well and their entire character was just annoying. Frank Grillo, Carmen Ejogo and Zoë Soul all did great jobs though, great characters as well with some good chemistry. 

I thought The Purge: Anarchy was a great follow-up for the first The Purge movie. It was great to both see a home invasion and the street terror of The Purge. It's a solid sequel which actually gives new insights in the concept of 'purging', instead of just continuing the concept of home invasions. I liked it a lot.

My rate: 7/10

Friday, 6 February 2015

Friday Night Screening: Two Evil Eyes 1990

Two Evil Eyes
Two heads, one movie, half the effort,  and a sh*tton of apologies to poor ‘ol Eddie Poe

Ah yes, Edgar Allen Poe, once a tragic writer ahead of its time, now but a mere throwaway joke whenever a movie director can’t come up with some original idea.
Yes it seems there are more Poe based movies around than high-schools in anime, well I don’t care if the idea’s been dryer than Conrad Hilton’s tit after a Night In Paris, believe it or not, I was actually looking forward to watch this little mess that we call Two Evil Eyes.
Why? Four words: George A f*king Romero. Now what heresy is this, you might ask, a campy movie reviewer who’s repertoire seems to exists solely on Evil dead 2 jokes, admiring the zombie master himself known as George A Romero? Most unorthodox...wait not really, it actually goes as well hand in hand as a creepy dog owner and peanut butter.
Yes of course I adore anything with the man’s name on it, hell, I’ve even given The Crazies remake a free pass for having his name in the credits (and because it’s actually a pretty good movie). So when I heard he made a movie that flew under everyone’s radar I went nuts and watched the damn thing, and I must say, after having seeing it, I start to see why everyone disregarded it like road kill.
Because there is another half to this otherwise awesome coin, Dario Argento.
Most people seem to actually like the guy, hell, he’s even seen as one of the better horror movie directors out there, personally though? I really don’t like him. Sure I haven’t seen every single one of his movies, but the ones I saw didn’t really catch my eyes or anything, and the guy himself is a complete creep. Now I know he’s probably Italy’s number 1 horror director, but I still need to see more of his work, but after watching this mess of a movie, I’m not sure I really want to, even though I heard that his movie Suspiria should change my mind, but that’s for another time in the future.
But despite my less than favorable view on the man, I’m just one guy and obviously not someone who was asked if it was a good idea to put these two directors in the same room with an Edgar Allan Poe novel.
So two movies for the price of one, what could go wrong?

The first story, directed by Romero, is a recreation of “The facts in the case of Mr. Valdemar”, a story an unlikable wife who cheats of her unlikable dying husband Valdemar with an unlikable doctor. Gees, talk about screwing you’re affair on your husband’s dying bed.
Well, it might come as no surprise that the characters aren’t the main driving point here seeing as they could easily been rewritten with top hats and monocles  and make a guest appearance in Captain Planet trying to drown baby seals in oil or whatever the hell happened on that show. What really gets this story going is that the unlikable wife has to keep her husband alive long enough to get the green the old geezer is sleeping on , unfortunately said task prove to be difficult as he trades his wardrobe for a red shirt and bites the dust faster than you can say ‘gold digger’. Fortunately the doctor had Valdemar under hypnosis at the time of dead, and it seems to have created a mortal loophole leaving the old man in-between worlds. It’s only when the spirits from the other side get tired of this cast of assh*les and decide to take control of the dead body and go on a rampage that the story really picks up its pace.

The second story, by Dario Argento, is none other than “The Black Cat”, a great story and a really sick and twisted look into the human creativity.
The movie however? Weird as hell, we follow Harvey Keitel playing a freelance photographer who’s girlfriend’s cat is driving insane. That’s about it without going into spoiler territory, however, if you read the story, you know it doesn’t end well for anyone.

All right, my thought on the first movie, The facts in the case of Mr Valdemar? All right at best.
One of the many problems is the fact that the story is amazingly slow, and the good part doesn’t come till the last five minutes or so, and of course Romero found a way to work some zombies in there somewhere. But yeah, as a standalone movie, it’s good, the characters are unlikable, sure, but their motives are clear and the situation they find themselves in is enjoyable to watch. And the ending is actually rewarding.

However, then we come to the point where I find myself obligated to talk about the Argento part.
The only way I can describe it, is as a putrid aftertaste to an already bland cake with some little chocolate bits here and there.
I’m really not a fan of it, it might be the confusing plot, the cruel and strange tone, or the throwaway characters.
The vibe is very weird, I guess that the story of a man going slowly insane should feel uneasy and weird, but I’m getting an overall feel of “Overtrying artsy-ness”.
The plot is all over the place, and a medieval dream sequence didn’t help my confusion, and you have to sink pretty low to make Hervey Keitel act like he’s got astick up his ass (Watch the movie, you’ll get the joke).
But yeah, this part has some pretty big names, mainly Harvey Keitel who’s an amazing actor, and even…wait, is that Darla, Julie Benz? And he gave her the role of an extra? Damn you Argento, and you wonder why we can’t get along?
But even with the best actor, this part just seems to fall flat. And here’s another thing, I once said that the theme of the slow decent into madness is one of my favorite subject, seeing as my all-time favorite movie focuses heavily on this aspect, the decadence of the soul is something I am very well accustom to, and it never seems to amaze me nonetheless. So this should be a feast for my eyes, but I the story is just too confusing, letting you hope for a higher meaning, a touch of symbolism, but the movie just never delivers and never goes the extra mile to draw you in and keep you invested in either the characters or the setting. Cruel, confusing and never deeper than the bottom of my shoe, that’s it in a nutshell if you can take my word for it.
So if you decide to watch this movie, take your time with the first one, the effects and story are rewarding in the end, but go ahead and skip the second one.

Things I’ve learned from Two Evil Eyes:
- The ‘Ripley’ hairdo made you irresistible in the 80s.
- This movie has the worse opening theme ever.
- Zombies don’t need lip sinc
- When the door open and a bunch of elves call you out to follow them, it’s probably best to lay off the liquor for a while.
- Nearly murdering an entire room of cops by acting like a dumbass to get some good pictures of half a naked chick is shrugged off by the officers like a minor inconvenience.
- In hindsight, going out with a guy who takes daily pictures of mutilated corpses wasn’t such a fresh idea to start with.

Personal rating: 5

Critical rating: 5.5

Tuesday, 3 February 2015

Tusk (2014)


IMDB rate: 5,6
Genre: Comedic, Monster, Mad Scientist
Starring: Justin Long, Michael Parks, Johnny Depp, Haley Joel Smith
My rate: 3,5/10

Kevin Smith, also known as Silent Bob, just made a step further into the horror genre. I am a huge fan of his movies Clerks and Dogma. I even thought Red State was a fairly good movie, although it's not comedic in any way, which isn't much like Kevin Smith's usual work. With the Tusk trailer being released I must say that I was somewhat excited to see it, mainly because it seemed pretty ridiculous and kinda fun as well, plus it was made by Kevin Smith. I must say that it was a pretty ridiculous movie indeed, but unfortunately it was not funny at any point. There are movies that are 'so bad, it's good', I expected Tusk to be one of them but unfortunately this wasn't the case at all. I don't necessarily think every Kevin Smith movie is good, some I didn't enjoy very much such as as Chasing Amy. But with Tusk I must say that it definitely Kevin Smith's worst movie. The worst part? It's being made into a trilogy. 

Unfortunately the movie is not funny at any point. Okay, maybe once or twice I had a little chuckle, but really that's about it. It's filled with Canadian jokes, which weren't very original or funny at any moment. The big attraction to this movie is of course big star Johnny Depp who plays a weird Canadian detective, his character is pretty much constructed from every Canadian-stereotype you can think of, which is pretty tiresome after awhile. I must admit that in the first few minutes of Guy Lapointe's appearance I didn't recognize Johnny Depp, but after awhile his usual acting habits appeared and it became pretty obvious that the guy was Johnny Depp. 

I must say that for a long while I claimed that my favorite actor of all time was Johnny Depp, but the last few years his movies have been rubbish. The last fun movie I've seen of him are the 'Pirates of the Caribbean' ones and that's already quite some time ago (I don't count the fourth one, didn't like that one very much). I do like his older work a lot though, movies as Edward Scissorhands, Chocolat, Finding Neverland and Sleepy Hollow. The reason why I think I don't like him a whole lot anymore is because of the characters he plays. He always plays the weird ones, which was fun for awhile but now it's just becoming normal. Johnny Depp in another weird character, whoop'difuckingdoo.

The Tusk cast is pretty nice, the crazy Walrus man is being played by Michael Parks (Kill Bill, Red State, Django Unchained), not a bad actor at all and he has a magnificent voice. The problem with his voice however is that Kevin Smith seems to enjoy it as well, meaning that the dialogues spoken by Michael Parks are pretty much never-ending, which was also the case with Red State. Other roles are played by Justin Long (Accepted, Jeepers Creepers) who plays the ultimate douchebag, I don't hate him as an actor though. A surprising face to see was Haley Joel Osment, the cute little kid from Sixth Sense. However, he's not very cute anymore, still a good actor though.

Kevin Smith was always a writer that added a lot of dialogue into his movies, but the last few movies have contained more of a background story as well. I think he's trying to reach Quentin Tarantino's level with this kind of movie-making. The problem is that Kevin Smith just does not seem to be very good in creating the background story. Tusk almost seems like a parody to the Human Centipede, which isn't necessarily a bad concept, but it just didn't work out at all. When the transformation is complete is looks somewhat unsettling, but is in no way as disturbing as the Human Centipede.

I already mentioned this but Tusk will be followed by two sequels, which will be part of the 'True North' collection. The next installment is 'Yoga Hosers' with the main characters being played by Depp's and Smith's daughters. These two were also briefly in Tusk, and as far I could tell they weren't good actresses at all. They seemed very awkward and I just can't imagine the two being main characters. The third installment is 'Moose Jaws', which doesn't sound very promising either.

I heard rumors that this trilogy is only being made because Kevin Smith needed some money to be able to make Clerks 3, and I truly hope that this is the case. I am a big fan of Clerks and a third movie would be awesome. Even though I'm looking forward to Clerks 3, Tusk was definitely not a success for Kevin Smith and I doubt the next two part will be better. The movie has a good cast which solid acting skills, the dialogue is perhaps a bit long but not bad or anything. Unfortunately the whole concept of Tusk is horrible, the walrus is weird looking, the movie isn't funny and the characters are highly irritating.