Stop watching, rating and reviewing horror films unless you are a fan of the genre! As a general rule, I always assume a horror film is good if it gets at least a five on IMDb. That's because you can assume most of the people rating it don't like horror, so the low ratings from the anti-horror raters are balanced out by the higher ratings from those of us who appreciate it. This is a wonderful turn on the psycho-killer sub-genre. Alyce is an attractive, somewhat withdrawn young woman who pretty much leads her life as an extension of her best friend with whom she obviously has more than a "friendly" attraction. After an evening of partying and drug use, she accidentally pushes her best friend off of a roof prompting her descent into depravity. She is obviously unbalanced from the first scene, so it is extremely believable that she is pushed over the edge herself after losing her best friend at her own hand. The rest is grisly, morbid fun. Jade Dornfeld is excellent, sexy, and extremely plausible as the crazy girl who is suddenly a drug addict, prostitute, necrophiliac, and killer all at once while developing a new sense of self-confidence. Definitely a 7 out of 10 - a must for horror fans.
Reviews
9 Reviews
Dead Awake
(2010)
Very Good Thriller/Fantasy
2 September 2011
After seeing the low scores on this film, I was encouraged to write a review as this film is worthy of a Seven, not the Four or lower most viewers have given it. The film has an excellent cast including Nick Stahl (Of Terminator Fame), Rose McGowan, and Amy Smart (both extremely under-rated actresses who can do comedy, drama, horror, thrillers, you name it and extremely attractive without being model gorgeous at the same time) as well as two lesser known actors playing the Irish "parent substitutes" for Nick Stahl's character, Dylan.
The film is basically a thriller that leaves you guessing as to Dylan's fate. Is he alive or dead? Is he talking to ghosts? This has been compared by other reviewers to "Sixth Sense" and I would agree. In essence, Dylan still hasn't come to terms with the death of his parents and assisting a crack addict, Charlie (Rose McGowan) finds redemption as does she. Meanwhile, with Charlies guidance, he rediscovers his old high school sweetheart, Natalie (Amy Smart), and is able to rekindle a romance that should never have ended.
So what does this film offer? It keeps you guessing as an excellent thriller should; the presence of the ?undead? and the fact Dylan works in a funeral home lend an element of fantasy, mystery, and eeriness; the rekindled relationship and flashbacks with Natalie provide romance; and most of all, all of the three main characters achieve some form of redemption. Seven Stars, would recommend to anyone and would watch again.
The film is basically a thriller that leaves you guessing as to Dylan's fate. Is he alive or dead? Is he talking to ghosts? This has been compared by other reviewers to "Sixth Sense" and I would agree. In essence, Dylan still hasn't come to terms with the death of his parents and assisting a crack addict, Charlie (Rose McGowan) finds redemption as does she. Meanwhile, with Charlies guidance, he rediscovers his old high school sweetheart, Natalie (Amy Smart), and is able to rekindle a romance that should never have ended.
So what does this film offer? It keeps you guessing as an excellent thriller should; the presence of the ?undead? and the fact Dylan works in a funeral home lend an element of fantasy, mystery, and eeriness; the rekindled relationship and flashbacks with Natalie provide romance; and most of all, all of the three main characters achieve some form of redemption. Seven Stars, would recommend to anyone and would watch again.
Seed
(2006)
GREAT Horror Film, Not For The Squeamish
22 February 2011
If there is one thing I cannot take, it is anyone who gives an opinion, review, etc. of something that involves "insulting" those of a different opinion. Take Author: zarakian_58 from United Kingdom's Review: "badly directed garbage. a mediocre nihilist sadistic gorefest ... if you are the sort of person who likes that ... see a shrink". So, I LOVED this movie, hence perhaps I should skip the shrink and move into the asylum. Stay off the review pages unless you can review objectively AND subjectively without insulting those of a different ilk.
Back to the movie. While this is a horror movie, without a doubt, it is also a crime thriller involving the search for the serial killer, "Seed", the search led by the detective Matt Bishop played by the under-rated Michael Pare'. He is caught early in the movie, but after surviving two attempts in the electric chair, he is buried alive to avoid a third attempt that if survived would give him his freedom. He escapes the grave, begins a new killing rampage, exacts revenge on the prison employees who oversaw his "death" and burial, and the investigation for the "copycat killer" begins.
This film is brutal, but Seed himself is no worse than a Jeffrey Dahmer, who ate his victims. Seed tortures and kills his victims over and over. These scenes are some of the goriest and most shocking I have ever seen.
This is everything a horror film should be: Horrifying, shocking, scary, terrible antagonist, sympathetic protagonist, and with great special effects thrown in. Solid acting and plot for a low budget effort (Don't forget-classics like Halloween and Night of the Living Dead were also extremely low budget). Eight Stars-One of the best torture horror films I have seen in a while.
Back to Michael Pare': I have always thought that Michael Pare' has never gotten the respect he deserved. Watch "Eddie and the Cruisers", "The Philadelphia Experiment" or even "Streets of Fire" (Not a good film, but great performances by a young Willem Dafoe and Diane Lane). While earlier in his career, he shows emotion, drama ability, can handle action scenes, and just has overall screen presence. Somehow he has gotten stuck in smaller supporting roles and in B movies. Another example of his B movie prowess, Pare is excellent as the detective hunting for the serial killer in this film.
One last note: I recommend skipping the first few minutes of this film which show real footage of animal torture taken from PETA. While this footage helps the Director, Boll, to get his point on "human nature" across along with the rest of the film, I find it unbearable to watch.
Back to the movie. While this is a horror movie, without a doubt, it is also a crime thriller involving the search for the serial killer, "Seed", the search led by the detective Matt Bishop played by the under-rated Michael Pare'. He is caught early in the movie, but after surviving two attempts in the electric chair, he is buried alive to avoid a third attempt that if survived would give him his freedom. He escapes the grave, begins a new killing rampage, exacts revenge on the prison employees who oversaw his "death" and burial, and the investigation for the "copycat killer" begins.
This film is brutal, but Seed himself is no worse than a Jeffrey Dahmer, who ate his victims. Seed tortures and kills his victims over and over. These scenes are some of the goriest and most shocking I have ever seen.
This is everything a horror film should be: Horrifying, shocking, scary, terrible antagonist, sympathetic protagonist, and with great special effects thrown in. Solid acting and plot for a low budget effort (Don't forget-classics like Halloween and Night of the Living Dead were also extremely low budget). Eight Stars-One of the best torture horror films I have seen in a while.
Back to Michael Pare': I have always thought that Michael Pare' has never gotten the respect he deserved. Watch "Eddie and the Cruisers", "The Philadelphia Experiment" or even "Streets of Fire" (Not a good film, but great performances by a young Willem Dafoe and Diane Lane). While earlier in his career, he shows emotion, drama ability, can handle action scenes, and just has overall screen presence. Somehow he has gotten stuck in smaller supporting roles and in B movies. Another example of his B movie prowess, Pare is excellent as the detective hunting for the serial killer in this film.
One last note: I recommend skipping the first few minutes of this film which show real footage of animal torture taken from PETA. While this footage helps the Director, Boll, to get his point on "human nature" across along with the rest of the film, I find it unbearable to watch.
Five Easy Pieces
(1970)
Typical Over-rated '70s "Character" Study
21 February 2011
Maybe it is just me, but I consider the 1970's to be a lost decade for the arts, whether it be music, film, etc. Anybody out there still listening to disco? Anybody out there buying shag carpeting and paneling for their homes? Anybody out their wife-swapping? This is typical 70's fare: Free, casual sex, irresponsible individuality, "social issues" (anti-pollution and anti-establishment in this one), and the lack of a plot or enough character development to understand the lead character's motivations, or to a least sympathize with their actions.
This film does have its positives. Jack Nicholson as usual gives his typical "Jack" performance, which are always enjoyable (Jack is great at being Jack; don't get me wrong, I think he is a good actor playing Jack, just not great. I will watch anything with him, in fact, One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest is my favorite film. I just feel that to be a great actor, you have to be able to play characters other than yourself). The Script, most of all the dialogue, is very good. All of the actors give good performances.
Unfortunately, there is no true plot. Jack's character, Bobby, is a skilled musician from an upscale musical family who turns his back on all of this to work on an oil rig. He is an unlikable character: he will sleep with anyone regardless of their relationship to him and in spite of his live-in girlfriend and shows no respect to his family, girlfriend, superiors, even friends.
The film never explains his decisions. The film leaves you totally blind at the end as to where Jack will go or do next. In fact the film's end conclusively determines that Bobby is not a likable person, let alone understandable.
As stated before, this is a typical 70's movie. Lots of dialogue, little plot, not entertaining (with the exception of the cafe scene, which I will not remark on due to its popularity in film lore), and no conclusion. For 70's fare, stick to Biopics (Patton), Action (Bullitt, The Getaway), Thrillers (Godfather's), and Horror (Exorcist, Omen). Avoid the "meaningful" social dramas such as this, Network, Last Tango In Paris, etc. While these are well scripted and acted, the plots tend to be non-existent.
This film does have its positives. Jack Nicholson as usual gives his typical "Jack" performance, which are always enjoyable (Jack is great at being Jack; don't get me wrong, I think he is a good actor playing Jack, just not great. I will watch anything with him, in fact, One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest is my favorite film. I just feel that to be a great actor, you have to be able to play characters other than yourself). The Script, most of all the dialogue, is very good. All of the actors give good performances.
Unfortunately, there is no true plot. Jack's character, Bobby, is a skilled musician from an upscale musical family who turns his back on all of this to work on an oil rig. He is an unlikable character: he will sleep with anyone regardless of their relationship to him and in spite of his live-in girlfriend and shows no respect to his family, girlfriend, superiors, even friends.
The film never explains his decisions. The film leaves you totally blind at the end as to where Jack will go or do next. In fact the film's end conclusively determines that Bobby is not a likable person, let alone understandable.
As stated before, this is a typical 70's movie. Lots of dialogue, little plot, not entertaining (with the exception of the cafe scene, which I will not remark on due to its popularity in film lore), and no conclusion. For 70's fare, stick to Biopics (Patton), Action (Bullitt, The Getaway), Thrillers (Godfather's), and Horror (Exorcist, Omen). Avoid the "meaningful" social dramas such as this, Network, Last Tango In Paris, etc. While these are well scripted and acted, the plots tend to be non-existent.
Magnolia
(1999)
Typical Overlong Overrated Hollywood Drama
24 April 2010
How this movie is rated in the top 250 on IMDb is beyond me. I will try to be fair and state the good things about this movie first. The cast is excellent with solid performances from the main characters (of which there are several as this is an ensemble piece). The plot is intriguing and original, but lets down after a solid narrative start.
Unfortunately, these are the only good qualities found in the movie; the boring, mundane, and depressing aspects of this film far outweigh any interesting aspects. The Negative: (1) Overlong, clocking in at three hours (2) Unrealistic climax (3) The narrative at the beginning of the film seems to set up "coincidence" as the binding factor, yet the somewhat interrelated stories never merge. (4) Tom Cruise got an Academy Award nomination for this film? He turns in his typical cocky, arrogant performance. Anyone besides me notice he normally only stars in action films? His wooden performances in films like "Collateral" explain why he never headlines comedies or drams. (5) One of the most depressing films I have seen. The ending tries in some ways to wrap some of the story lines up in a more amiable fashion, but after 2 1/2 hours of grinding remorse, fails. In typical Hollywood fashion this film merited Academy nominations for the typical reasons: well-known ensemble cast; 3 hours long; and inter-woven story-lines.
Better examples of inter-woven ensemble dramas not in the top 250? BIG CHILL, TRAFFIC, LOVE ACTUALLY, and BABEL.
Unfortunately, these are the only good qualities found in the movie; the boring, mundane, and depressing aspects of this film far outweigh any interesting aspects. The Negative: (1) Overlong, clocking in at three hours (2) Unrealistic climax (3) The narrative at the beginning of the film seems to set up "coincidence" as the binding factor, yet the somewhat interrelated stories never merge. (4) Tom Cruise got an Academy Award nomination for this film? He turns in his typical cocky, arrogant performance. Anyone besides me notice he normally only stars in action films? His wooden performances in films like "Collateral" explain why he never headlines comedies or drams. (5) One of the most depressing films I have seen. The ending tries in some ways to wrap some of the story lines up in a more amiable fashion, but after 2 1/2 hours of grinding remorse, fails. In typical Hollywood fashion this film merited Academy nominations for the typical reasons: well-known ensemble cast; 3 hours long; and inter-woven story-lines.
Better examples of inter-woven ensemble dramas not in the top 250? BIG CHILL, TRAFFIC, LOVE ACTUALLY, and BABEL.
Blood
(2000)
Extremely Well Done Low Budget Thriller, Not Horror
27 January 2009
When I saw that the average rating for this film was only a 4, I felt compelled to write about this captivating low budget endeavor. Blood is listed on IMDb as a horror film, when actually it should be categorized as a thriller. Does it have a vampire? Well, yes and no, as Lix, the Antagonist(?) of the story must survive on human blood. The crux is that Lix's blood is a narcotic for normal humans, and is highly addictive. This of course leads to all sorts of erotic sexuality involving blood between her and the doctor who genetically created her, who quickly becomes an addict. As with all romance and sex involving human blood, things cannot end well. The film has an excellent plot, moves along well, and the acting is very good. The actress who plays Lix is erotic and innocent at the same time, and Adrian Rawlins is superb as the doctor/geneticist who gives up everything for his addiction. Will keep you on the edge of your seat.
The Puppet Masters
(1994)
Poor Directing, Weak Script & Dialogue Spoil Sci-Fi Thriller
26 August 2007
It really makes no sense how this film could not have worked. Working off a script based on a Robert A. Heinlein novel, with the venerable Donald Sutherland in one of the lead roles, and with alien invasion the subject matter, this should have been at least a seven star Science Fiction film. As Sci-Fi goes, the superior ones focus more on futuristic and/or scientific concepts, with action and/or special effects adding to the spectacle. That is why films like the Star Wars saga really aren't Sci-Fi, but action/adventure first (and in the case of Star Wars, fantasy) and science fiction second at best. This film does delve into the biology and culture of the aliens, but just barely. Mostly it focuses on hokey special effects and a few watered-down action scenes to fill up screen time. The aliens themselves are quite realistic and original, a plus for the film. The chemistry between Donald Sutherland as the leader of a secret government agency and his son, played by Eric Thal (an unknown at the time) is actually quite good. In addition, Julie Warner actually does well as the scientist working for Sutherland and of course plays the romantic interest for Sutherland's son. While not a superior actress, she performs adequately, although her talents are more suited to television, as it appears this movie was. While most will think, as I did, while reading the plot synopsis of the film that it is a rip-off of "Invasion of the Body Snatchers" (Sutherland starred in the remake of this film in 1978), the actual book was published in 1951, prior to the original film as well as the novel written by Jack Finney. Bottom line: not a bad movie to watch when you know you will be distracted as it requires very little of your attention and there are enough action scenes to move the pace along, but science fiction and Heinlein fans will be disappointed.
The Puppet Masters
(1994)
Poor Directing, Weak Script & Dialogue Spoil Sci-Fi Thriller
26 August 2007
It really makes no sense how this film could not have worked. Working
off a script based on a Robert A. Heinlein novel, with the venerable
Donald Sutherland in one of the lead roles, and with alien invasion the
subject matter, this should have been at least a seven star Science
Fiction film. As Sci-Fi goes, the superior ones focus more on
futuristic and/or scientific concepts, with action and/or special
effects adding to the spectacle. That is why films like the Star Wars
saga really aren't Sci-Fi, but action/adventure first (and in the case
of Star Wars, fantasy) and science fiction second at best. This film
does delve into the biology and culture of the aliens, but just barely.
Mostly it focuses on hokey special effects and a few watered-down
action scenes to fill up screen time. The aliens themselves are quite
realistic and original, a plus for the film. The chemistry between
Donald Sutherland as the leader of a secret government agency and his
son, played by Eric Thal (an unknown at the time) is actually quite
good. In addition, Julie Warner actually does well as the scientist
working for Sutherland and of course plays the romantic interest for
Sutherland's son. While not a superior actress, she performs
adequately, although her talents are more suited to television, as it
appears this movie was. While most will think, as I did, while reading
the plot synopsis of the film that it is a rip-off of "Invasion of the
Body Snatchers" (Sutherland starred in the remake of this film in
1978), the actual book was published in 1951, prior to the original
film as well as the novel written by Jack Finney. Bottom line: not a
bad movie to watch when you know you will be distracted as it requires
very little of your attention and there are enough action scenes to
move the pace along, but science fiction and Heinlein fans will be
disappointed.
Speed of Life
(1999)
Realistic, Moving Drama
19 August 2007
Speed of Life is a drama about a young man who's mother has died and who now has the unenviable task of caring for his father, a once brilliant professor who is now crippled by the onset of Alzheimers Disease and cannot perform any functions such as bathing, eating, or using the restroom on his own. They live in a loft in a drug-ridden borough of NYC. The film follows his attempts to care for his father, earn money, and go to school while meeting a young artist who also happens to be a drug addict.
Excellent film, from writing, acting, script, sets, camera work, etc. Realistic, moving. Scott Caan shows he has range beyond playing the stereotypical criminal and Mia Kirschner in a small but pivotal role excels as usual. The actor portraying the invalid father was phenomenal. A drama that is both depressing and uplifting, worth seeing for avid film watchers.
Excellent film, from writing, acting, script, sets, camera work, etc. Realistic, moving. Scott Caan shows he has range beyond playing the stereotypical criminal and Mia Kirschner in a small but pivotal role excels as usual. The actor portraying the invalid father was phenomenal. A drama that is both depressing and uplifting, worth seeing for avid film watchers.
Tell Your Friends