|
|
---|
Night of the Demons
Best Actor 1991: Results
4. Nick Nolte in The Prince of Tides- Nolte has a few scenes where his is okay, they are his quiet confession scenes, but everything else he does either comes off as completely false or just weird. He always plays his character artificially and never really gets down to the heart of him.
3. Robert De Niro in Cape Fear. De Niro has some good scenes early on despite his terrible accent, but as the film goes on he simply hams it up way too much.
2. Robin Williams in The Fisher King- Robin Williams at first over plays the role, and cannot stay in character, but as he goes on he gets a bit better in the crazy scenes, and he actually is fairly effective in his quiet scenes.
1. Anthony Hopkins in The Silence of the Lambs- This ought to be a surprise to no one, but Hopkins by far gave the best lead actor performance nominated this year and he can even be argued as not a lead. Still Hopkins is brilliant in every minute of his relatively short performance. He creates a fascinating, memorable, and truly effective character from Hannibal Lecter. Every scene he handles with perfection, never going over the top, or even seeming calculated since all of his motions are brilliant.
Deserving Performances:
John Turturro in Barton Fink
Best Actor 1991: Anthony Hopkins in The Silence of the Lambs
The Silence of the Lambs is a very effective psychological thriller and certainly is far superior than the other films with nominees for best actor this year.
One question commonly asked about Hopkins' performance is whether it is lead or supporting. This performance is one that seems to defy these distinctions, because it is incredibly short in terms of screen time, and his character is not the focus of the film. He though is one of if not the most memorable part of the film, and still seems absolutely essential to the film, despite not even really being the villain of the film. His performance really is one that I am not sure which he is but due to the quality of the rest of the actor nominees I would most certainly put his performance in the lead category.
Hopkins performance is a short one for sure, and one that can actually easily be reviewed by each of his individual scenes. Hopkins' opening scene is actually one of incredible challenge, because of the huge build up to his appearance made as Clarice Starling (Jodie Foster) makes her way to him. Hopkins certainly utilizes this to great effect, since he makes a big impression as the camera pans over him oddly standing in the middle of his cell. Hopkins performance is fascinating because I am sure the way he stands and moves, the way he looks with his eyes, and his voice were all very calculated, yet in the film his performance never comes off this way. Some how it is never artificial despite the nature of the character. His first scene Hopkins brilliantly controls the film, with the way he tries to manipulate Starling. Hopkins instantly shows us a man psychotic, without showing him doing any violence, and a man with complete control of his surrounding despite the fact that he is a prisoner in a glass cell.
Foster and Hopkins simply create fascinating scenes together. They play off each other perfectly in all of their scenes, developing a bizarre yet strangely interesting relationship. They play an odd game of sorts for Hannibal's enjoyment and for Starling need for information about another killer Buffalo Bill. The game they play together could not have been done any better or more effective they simply brilliant together. Hopkins is always fascinating because of how carefully and perfectly he displays Hannibal's mile a minute mind. He reacts and attack Starling, and Hopkins does this perfectly with his manner of speaking with that brilliant voice he uses, who knew a combination of Truman Capote and Katherine would be so viscerally effective, and with his eyes which are always piercing through, like Hannibal sees everything at all times. He mixes his odd love for Starling but also his love for the game like competition of minds without fault.
Hopkins keeps Hannibal on the right note and tone in all of his brief scenes and always makes the most of his screen time. He never over acts even though it would be so easy too, he always knows exactly to play a scene and simply gives a truly great villainous performance. Every moment in his performance really is spot on. Especially the use of his face and eyes, and certainly makes the most of every close up he has. He always conveys the evilness, psychotics and genius of Hannibal in every scene. Hopkins properly never stops with him, every scene even when he is reacting you can always see he is looking for weakness, and his chances in every moment, simply a brilliant performance. Hopkins gives makes one of the most memorable characters all in a short amount of screen time. He never faults once in a performance that could have been full of them, and gives a truly unforgettable performance.
Poultrygeist: Night of the Chicken Dead
One more time, folks: don't build on Native American burial grounds! Seriously, who still does this? Anyhoo, American Chicken Bunker makes the fatal mistake of opening a fried chicken franchise on the site of the Tromahawk tribe burial grounds. Pissed off chicken-zombies, bestiality, gore, boobs, vomit, and feces ensue. Oh yes, and occasional musical numbers.
Guess I was pushing my Troma luck with this one! One of the most disgusting movies I've ever seen; the musical numbers sucked; there were plenty of boobs; lots of purposefully offensive stereotypes; wildly inventive gore and copious bodily humor and bodily waste; and a role for Troma kingpin Lloyd Kaufman himself. I found it only mildly funny and really gross. If this sounds like your cup of tea, enjoy; otherwise give it a wide berth.
Club Dread
Don't Go To Sleep
Two of the most self engrossed parents (Dennis Weaver and Valerie Harper) and their bickering little brats move to a new house. They are happy for a change after the death of their daughter Jennifer. Grandma is also moving in, she's a pushy old battleaxe who likes to criticize everything. In other words, no one is very charming here. More information is revealed regarding the personalities of these people as we move forward. Dad is drinking way too much, in fact Dennis Weaver spends most of the film in a drunken stupor. He was wise, if I had to deal with those ungrateful kids I would probably do the same. He also has no say in matters of the house, this is quite apparent by the way his wife squashes his nuts anytime he tries to add his input. Like Mother Like daughter, which means she and her Mother do quite a bit of arguing as well.
The very first night in the new house their daughter Mary startles everyone awake with screams. They rush to her room only to find her bed engulfed in flames. She claims something that was under the bed did it. Upon investigation her father finds a lamp with a faulty wire and the mystery is explained. The following night while sharing a room with her brother Kevin, Mary hears her name being whispered and freaks out again. Soon after she discovers the voice is actually the ghost of her dead sister Jennifer. She tells Jennifer she will keep her presence secret and the two girls begin to concoct mischief. Before we know it people are dying all around them and the whole family becomes unraveled.
I didn't hate this film, it actually held my attention throughout. The mysterious relationship between the sisters was actually very suspenseful. I gave it two stars because the constant bickering between the nasty kids and the endless panic driven by the Mother just grated on my nerves. I felt like I was stuck at some dysfunctional family reunion and couldn't wait for it to be over.
Dorian Gray
These would be the "exotic" women.
I haven't read Oscar Wilde's book, The Picture of Dorian Gray, but my wife read it earlier this year and told me this film is actually a pretty faithful adaptation. The cast is fantastic to begin with. Colin Firth does well playing Henry, the debaucerous villain. Ben Chaplin's work as Basil, trying to steer Dorian away form iniquity shows a sadness and frustration that complement Dorian's character. And finally, Rebecca Hall (from The Town and Vicky Cristina Barcelona) doesn't hide her British accent here, and it's lovely.
So, from a literary perspective, it's a fine adaptation. From a horror persepective, it still delivers! The portrait and its control over Dorian is well done and serves as a source of suspense for the viewer that really kept me glued for its two-hour run time. And, not to spoil it, but when we see this portrait come to life, it is well worth the wait.
Beyond a number of Vincent Price's '60s and '70s horror films, the "Brit flick" is not particularly well known for its horror genre the way Japanese films are. Still, Dorian Gray shows that they may have potential.
l'automne
like it? then, by all means, click it!
embiggen in the dark
i went to paris, did a lot of exploring, and quite a lot of shooting, and, to protect my pictures, i saved them in both a netbook and an external disk. for my trip home, i put them in a cute little netbook bag, along with various cables and accessories, and our passports.
how's that for intelligence..?
so, when i arrived in athens airport and had collected our baggage, i promptly left the netbook in a chair and left.
i had just finished up with the weekly groceries when i realized it was gone.
and i panicked.
thankfully, mr.G kept his cool and called the airport... they connected him with airport police and -- oh, joy -- security had found the bag and collected it.
...............................................................
more paris
©2010 helen sotiriadis
Zombieland
(2009) ****
The Blair Witch Project
(1999) *****
From the moment the "Haxan Films" logo comes onto the screen, I'm hooked—I'm plunged back into an utterly unique cinematic mood; a blend of mundanity and dread, of ugly visual noise and fleeting, nearly transcendental beauty that can only mean one movie: The Blair Witch Project (1999). The "haxan" logo gets me because it manages to express the central theme of this excellent movie so immediately and viscerally: the minimal, archaic-looking black-and-white graphic for a tiny production company you've never heard of, blown up to the enormous dimensions of a 35mm movie-theater print of a major Hollywood release. A small and delicate thing has been retrieved and made huge: the essence of the "Project."
And what does the title mean, anyway? Is the titular "project" meant to refer to Heather Donohoe's doomed attempt to make a documentary film in 1994? Or does it refer to the work done by whatever nameless (fictional) archivists saw fit to spend what must have been months of intense, grueling effort re-assembling the "footage" "found" (according to a title card) near Burkittsville, Maryland a year after Heather's disappearance (along with the two technicians who accompanied her)? Who made that title card? Whose movie is this, anyway? The clever meta-fictional envelope around the horror story isn't just a device for suspense and exposition (as is the case with Quarantine, Cloverfield and other 'found footage" movies); it's much more interesting. You can't spend too much time thinking about the surrounding circumstances of Quarantine or Cloverfield -- in each case, you're just watching a tape from the camera that recorded the horror story. But Heather and her crew had two cameras (only one of which captures sound) operated by two people, and a separate audio track associated with a third; simply creating a straightforward narrative out of all the resulting footage would be a daunting task in and of itself, notwithstanding the additional overlay of paranormal irrationality and mystery. In the first five minutes of the movie, Heather and Josh circle each other in the driveway, pointing their cameras at each other as we cut back and forth between them, and you get the point immediately (whether you realize it consciously or not): somebody had to work very hard to put this together -- to find the videotape of Josh that matched the 16mm film of Heather and actually sync them up with each other -- and, for me, those nameless people and the work they did is as much the "Project" as is Heather's documentary. The Haxan people, whoever they are, finished her film for her...and, in so doing, accomplished a artistic miracle of alchemy, wherein a incomprehensible tangle of retrieved film cartridges, DAT tapes and Hi8 videocassettes is woven into a shimmering, horrifying Greek Tragedy in the woods; a spellbinding, dream-like excursion into fear. (We all know how this was accomplished -- how the actors were actually given the cameras and surprised by the surrounding events that they hadn't been told about -- but the method worked so well that its difficult to find anything wrong with it.) I can't emphasize this point enough: from the Haxan logo through the silent title cards to the first white-balance-adjusting fade-in on Heather's face against a blank wall, the viewer is keenly aware of being shown something -- of being privy to a post-facto awareness of the tragedy of the filmmakers' disappearance and the need to understand what happened in the woods -- that surpasses the work of all subsequent "found footage" movies (or at least the ones I've seen). The title card at the beginning of Cloverfield is really scary, but it doesn't convey that same unsettling sense of thwarted investigation, of pieces having been carefully put together by somebody who was keenly interested in penetrating into the darkness and finding the truth.
A truth that's never found, by the way. That's an element of this movie that so many people dislike, but which I think is a great strength, putting The Blair Witch Project in the same category as 2001: A Space Odyssey: we can point our cameras at the infinite, but we'll only be dazzled by the light. Heather tried to get to the bottom of what had been going on in Maryland (decades of disappearances and other, stranger elements of local legend which are masterfully unspooled in the movie's first twenty minutes), and she failed, as do the nameless editors and archivists who try to complete her task. What's out there in the woods, anyway? What do Heather, Josh and Mike do wrong, if anything, or are they simply traveling across forbidden terrain, a zone of disorder (where the compasses don't work)? As the filmmakers enter the woods for the first time and their empty car disappears slowly behind them in a long, lingering shot, I'm reminded of Disney's animated clouds forming a hand the covers the moon in their Sleepy Hollow movie (Ichabod and Mr. Toad). They never see the car again, and while they don't know this, the post-facto editors certainly do, and you can feel their fingers on your spinal column as they choose to show the entire long languid shot of the car disappearing forever.
Why does Heather keep insisting she knows the way? Why does Michael throw away the map? What makes Josh's voice so strange in the movie's final twenty minutes? (Michael Williams screaming "Tell us where you are, Josh!" over the DVD menus is so terrifying you're almost afraid to press the "Play" button.) The framework and the concept are powerfully inventive, as I've described, but the actors provide the rest of what makes this movie a classic, and, as I said above, the too-clever-by-half methodology of the (actual) filmmakers is forgivable because the results are so striking. The dialogue, the mood swings, the camerawork (which the actors did themselves, unlike the far-more-conventionally-made Cloverfield), the odd touches and, of course, the portrayal of fear are all explosively effective because the method (as in "Method") of the acting is so powerful, tapping into veins of emotion and expressiveness that few actors get anywhere near. (The fact that these three actors have gone nowhere in the decade since this hit suggests that the filmmaking "method" was the sole reason for their triumph here.)
Watching again, a decade later, I'm struck by how old-fashioned all of this looks when viewed in today's iPhone/Facebook/Twitter world. (The lack of cell phones is, of course, the reason the movie was set five years before it was made, which, in turn, is the reason for the incredible analog video footage, complete with ghosting.) (Pun intended.) But it's not just advances in technology and communication that "date" this movie; it's the movie itself. Cinematically and culturally, we're living in a post-Blair Witch world, and I would argue that even big unrelated Hollywood productions like J. J. Abrams' Star Trek show the influence of this movie. There are some obvious shortcomings, but I have no trouble disregarding them. The images shake a lot, but it's worth putting up with the dizziness (and it's not nearly the same on home video, although I would love to see this in a theater again). And you don't really penetrate the mystery and find out what's in the woods, but based on what we do see, I'm perfectly happy not to know. As Heather and her friends learned too late, you exlpore the darkness at your own risk.
Saw VI
Best Actor 1991: Robin Williams in The Fisher King
The Fisher King is better than Bugsy, and The Prince of Tides, since it does not fail completely and it attempts at something a little more original, but it does not succeed enough for me to say it was really a very good film.
Robin Williams plays Parry who actually does not show up too quickly in the film. It focuses largely on Jeff Bridges who plays a Howard Stern esque shock jock Jack Lucas. Parry shows up to save Jack after he is attacked by two hoodlums. When Williams first showed up I really was very annoyed. When he initially shows up, he goes for pure Williams Shtick. He does some voices that are suppose to be funny, and does a Williams seen to its most annoying. He does not create a character in these first scenes but instead tries just for comedy through his usual type of routine.
Williams though after these initial scenes does change his method of portraying the character a little bit differently. I felt he started to tone down the Williamsisms and tries harder to be a real character. He does not fully succeed at this but I am glad that he tries to create a person with Parry rather than just a routine. He is suppose to be a man who becomes mentally unstable after seeing the brutal murder of his wife, and he is suppose to be almost blocking those memories by creating another personality. At times his crazy acts seem forced crazy, and really do not hold any truth to them, a few times Williams pulls them off but most of the time he does not find the proper authenticity for Parry's madness.
Williams' best scenes are though when he tones it down and acts much more quiet. He actually is pretty good in the scene where he tells of the Fisher King. He suggests more about Parry with his brief quiet scenes than his over the top loud scenes. He has a few scenes like this besides that one where he is effective, he also is effective do to that reason with his romantic interest played by Amanda Plummer. He is never perfect in the role but when he is quiet he fines a subtler strand of the character that works well. Unfortunately he really does not have enough scenes that really on this better technique. Most of the time he does the obvious crazy that just never is that well done. Overall an okay performance, that is weakened especially by the beginning where he does not really stay in character.
Evil Dead II: Dead By Dawn
Coffin Joe: Awakening of the Beast
Oh Coffin Joe, you've really done it this time. What a journey I've just been on my friends. This is Coffin Joe's idea of an LSD propaganda film and it's quite a piece of work. The first half of the film attempts to show us the severely different and all outrageous effects the drug can have on people. We first witness a group of men all tripped out, staring at pictures of large bare breasts in magazines. Then we witness two men leading a school girl up to a room full of weird musicians scattered about singing songs.
The girl gets up on a table as they circle around and she willingly allows them to take turns looking up her skirt. Eventually they get around to violating her with a large rod until she is pleasured to death.
Not all the drug reactions are sexual some are just strange and some are violent. This whole abomination of a beginning almost lost me. I tell you, if it weren't for Horrorthon there's a good chance I would have bailed on the film. Oh I am glad I didn't.
We then go into a segment involving four volunteers who agree to a controlled environment LSD test given by a doctor. This test specifically focuses on the effect of LSD when accompanied by visions of Coffin Joe. The films suddenly goes from black and white to color and things get wild.
It was all pure entertainment. Flames, blood, lady head spiders, trippy music and Coffin Joe. Totally awesome, and then this happened.
Laughing asses! Some were even smoking. I tell you I laughed so hard I nearly choked. These pictures do no justice. Zeke is home this weekend, he had just sat down with his dinner right before the asses showed up. He laughed so hard he almost puked. After we got our laughing under control he looked at me all serious and said, “Mom, how can you watch this fucked up shit?” Truthfully, I have no answer for that. I just do.
The third Coffin Joe flick is not available on Netflix. Have no fear, I am bound and determined to own the entire collection before next Horrorthon. I'm convinced, the man is a genius.
Best Actor 1991: Nick Nolte in The Prince of Tides
The Prince of Tides as a movie is.... wait I erased it from my memory, I'll watch one more time, I'll be right back.......................the horror, the horror.
Anyways Nick Nolte is an actor I will admit, is not a favorite of mine. I just not seen a performance of his that really is all that amazing. It is strange to me that he was a leading man, because he seems to especially have problems with these, and seems like an actor who seems like he would be better as a character actor than a lead actor.
Nolte plays Tom Wingo one of the three children of a very troubled family. He has all sorts of repressed memories from his childhood that leads to troubles in with his own immediate family. Nolte's early indications of the character are just odd, and seem very unnatural. He tries to show Tom as a guy who seems a little off kilter, and has repression, but Nolte failed to do either of these things very well. His mannerisms to show his off kilter problems are weird smiles and such which do not really seem to be correct, and he really he let the movie explain around him that he had repression issues, opposed to Nolte actually showing them in his acting.
Nolte shares many scenes with Barbra Streisand who plays his suicidal sister's and eventually his psychiatrist called Lowenstein. He shares many scenes with Streisand, they are either the dramatic scenes or the romantic scenes together. In the dramatic scenes Nolte offers a very mixed bag of emotions. Many of his scenes where he yells all the time do not really work that well I mean he certainly yells a lot but he does not do all much more than yelling, he plainly adds no substance to his yelling. It just never adds up to emotionally effective scenes, because Nolte simply never seems that distressed about what he is yelling which includes frustrations of his own childhood, and his sisters attempted suicide. He never seems to be that honestly troubled, keeping Wingo as only really a character as only really emotionally troubled on the surface, and seems fairly artificial.
He does have a few scenes that are better when he quiets down a little bit. I will give him a little credit, his quiet confessions are fairly well done, even if not amazing. His final big confession Nolte does do a fine job with it, but it certainly is wasted since in this movie a person instantly gets over their emotional troubles from talking about them only once, therefore any authenticity from Nolte's confession is automatically wasted. This confession leads to the terrible romantic moments with Streisand. These moments are strange, and absolutely false. Their chemistry is bizarre, and makes little sense, since the relationship makes so little sense. They do not do anything with it and their scenes together are rather cringeworthy at times. He also shares a few scenes with Streisand's real son who plays Lowenstein's son, these scenes are unbearably cheesy, but go along well with the terrible film, and I guess Nolte needed terrible scenes with two generations of Striesands. His overall performance has a few scenes with something to it, but overall he lacks conviction and has some extra bad scenes to make things even worse.
Prince of Darkness
In one of John Carpenter’s more divisive films, a priest (Donald Pleasance) summons a team of scientists, experts and grad students to a church to examine a canister of swirling bright green ooze that dwells in the basement. This is no ordinary green slime, mind you. As the team conducts their various tests on the matter, an aura of evil and creepy music fills the air. The physics data and ancient translations lead the team to the conclusion that the cylinder contains none other than Satan himself! But wait – there’s more! A group of silent homeless people led by Alice Cooper surround the church and gruesomely swarm anyone who attempts to leave. And that's not all! The green stuff that escapes turns humans into infectious, green liquid puking zombies! Aaaaahhhh...
While much slower building than Halloween or A Nightmare on Elm Street, there are several impressive shocks and gross outs to reward the patient viewer. Critics panned it for a number of legitimate reasons. It offers intriguing ideas that are never explored. Its epic ambition isn never realized. The characters lack depth. The supernatural scenes aren't very scary. Carpenter fans are split 50/50. Some hail it as an underrated masterpiece and others can't seem to hate it enough. Personally I thought it was just great. Satan + zombies + bugs = Johnny Sweatpants will almost certainly sing its praises.
Not that I didn't have my issues... Bright green liquid isn't scary. Heavy metal music isn't scary. Donald Pleasance never smiles. I don't have time for an atheist rant but the idea of non overlapping magisteria (that science and religion answer different questions and don't interfere with each other) always makes my blood boil. I do love me my Satan stories on a fantastical level but when the importance of science is such a prominent theme then it should be dealt with in a scientific way. I'm not asking for complicated mathematical equations in my horror movies but don't insult your audience by throwing out a few phrases about antimatter and atomic theory and expect them to accept your movie as intellectually stimulating.
I'm nitpicking. Bottom line: great unique flick. I'm disappointed in myself that I'd never seen it before.
TreT - PARKOUR DOG FROM UKRAINE
VOTD: FDA - ASSWARP
FDA - ASSWARP
Killdozer
(1974) TVM **
During the opening credits of Killdozer we are shown an errant asteroid plunging towards Earth and crashing into a Pacific Island where a construction team is busy paving a runway. This is the early 40s and presumably the runway will be as asset for our allied forces in WWII. None of this matters, of course, what matters is that while examining the asteroid the men unwittingly unleash an alien presence that immediately takes refuge in a huge-ass bulldozer.
Why is every asteroid that hits the Earth evil?
Pretty soon the bulldozer comes to “life” operating under the auspices of the alien menace. For a reason never explained the alien develops a chip on its shoulder and begins menacing the work crew, first knocking out their communications and then stalking them one at a time. What ensues is a series of hilarious sequences where the men attempt to evade the glacially paced bulldozer (picture that scene in Monty Python and the Holy Grail where the soldier is charging towards the castle but takes forever to get there and you get the idea).
Get away from me you slow-as-molasses beast!
The scenes of the Killdozer “stalking” the men are hilarious and are reminiscent of this scene from Family Guy,
Killdozer is a terrible movie that is not without its charms. This is one of those films were it would be so easy to evade the Killdozer (heck, just run into a pond) yet the men make all the wrong decisions, such as taking the Killdozer on like this,
Clash of the titans
If you’re at work and you’re bored and you have access to You Tube, watch Killdozer, otherwise skip it.