Recent Posts
What can I say about Scream 4? I won tickets to see the QLD premier, but I wasn't really sure I wanted to go. The original Scream was released when I was the ripe ol' age of 9, and was one of the classics of my childhood.
To be fair though, Scream is an excellent movie in it's own right. It is a brilliant sendup of the slasher genre, without resorting to cheap gags (unlike Scary Movie, which is just stupid). Scream 2 was entertaining, but I think it's safe to say it lost it's way; it focused too much on being a serious slasher flick without ditching the satire entirely, much to the movie's detriment. Scream 3... I'd rather not talk about. It was a hopeless mess of a movie, and has left a sour taste in the mouth of many Craven fans (myself included) for the last 10 years.
And so, a decade later, I approached the latest installment of the Ghostface saga with a sense of trepidation. And I have to say... I was blown away. While maybe not quite as good as the first Scream movie, it is easily superior to the second and third movies and goes right back to the roots; horror parody with a healthy dose of brutality.
Plot: Seriously, it's the 4th installment and you need a review of the plot? Sheeh... Sidney Prescott, survivor extraordinairre, returns to her hometown of Woodsboro to promote her new book. Dewey and Gale have married with Dewey taking the role of sheriff, but Gale is struggling with the small-town life after giving up reporting. Of course once Sidney returns the killings begin anew, and it's up to Sidney and the gang to stop them! Will they survive a fourth bout with the ghostface killer?
Script: I'm happy to say it's the highlight of the movie.
The script was the reason that the first Scream was so great, and they have obviously put work into this one. Of course there are some corny-as-they-come moments (like the entire cinema yelling 'DON'T GET OUT OF THE CAR... just before the girl climbs out of the car), but they are just there to remind you it's a Scream movie, and don't detract from the experience. The dialouge is witty, and there are some truly funny scenes in between the splatter. Speaking of which...
Gore: pretty brutal. The second and third movies were released in the aftermath of the Columbine shootings, and so there is noticeably less gore in those two as part of a general toning-down of movie violence. Thankfully that phase has passed, and what we receive in S4 are plenty of close-up stabbings, disembowlings, and a particularly memorable knife through the forehead (awesome: yes. Plausible? less so). This is Scream as it should be, and it doesn't pull any punches.
Acting: Neve Campbell kind
of disappeared off the rader for the last few years, and I am very happy to see her back in the spotlight. She's still got it. Courtney Cox and David Arquette don't really pull their weight... they are decent enough, and watchablebut I just don't seem to relate to them like I did in the previous installments. The younger cannon-fodder victims cast members are photogenic and believable, especially the delectable Hayden Panetierre, to whom I would do terrible, unspeakable things.
Overall: Fans of the franchise are going to froth over this one, and for good reason, but it isn't just the die-hard fans that'll love it. It's a quality movie in it's own right, carefully treading that fine line between comedy and horror without degenerating into silliness (too often)... and it's great to see a classic franchise back in form.
Plot: A couple of bad-ass knights (Nicholas Cage and Ron Perlman) witness the slaugher of women and children during the crusades, and desert from the army. They return home to discover their homeland in the grips of the black plague, and are quickly discovered to be deserters and taken into custody. While in jail, they meet the girl accused of being the witch that caused the plague, and are told they must transport her to a distant abbey so that monks can perform a ritual to end the plague. They get together some cannon fodder companions, and set off for the abbey.
SotW is a movie that can't make it's mind up. It tries to be Lord of the Rings, The Exorcist, and maybe just a hint of Kingdom of Heaven, but just falls horribly flat on all accounts. As a fantasy epic, it's just too damn small. You've got the fantasy, but it's just not epic enough. They go 'round some mountains, over a rickety bridge (which OF COURSE falls into the chasm as soon as they get over) and through a forest, and there they are. Epic? Hardly. As a fantasy movie, it's too dark and maybe a bit too gory. The Harry Potter fan-club will not be frothing over this like they were with The Sorceror's Apprentice. That being said, as a horror it's not nearly dark or gory enough. As a psychological thriller (they lamely try and leave the guilt or innocence of the accused witch ambiguous for as long as possible), it just fails, since it's perfectly obvious from the very beginning.
Script: Bad. The premise is interesting, and with a bit of work could have been a great setup for the movie. Unfortunately the writers obviously realized that they could churn out standard fantasy fare with minimal effort and get away with it, so decided to go with that. The dialogue is sub-par, and in some parts really, really cheesy, and the 'twist' (you knew there would be one) is just stupid.
************************Epic Spoiler Alert************************
I'm ruining the ending here, so if you want to see the movie and want to experience the stupidity for yourself, skip to the next paragraph. The ending twist is that the girl isn't a witch at all, and is actually a demon. This demon wanted to be transported to the abbey so that it could get it's hands on a holy book containing all the exorcism rites and rituals, which the monks were planning on copying out and disseminating worldwide. Bear in mind, the whole abbey had already been killed by the plague. So, instead of taking a leisurely stroll to the abbey, the demon decided it would be a better idea to be transported there by some knights and priests, who obviously would oppose and try to kill it. Forgive me if I'm a little underwhelmed by it's devilish cunning.
Acting: Nicholas Cage can infuriate me like pretty much no one else can.
It's not that the man can't act: he most definitely can. And it's not like he's a good actor that just takes some godawful roles in between the good ones (like Michael Cane). The man can act, but only sometimes. He has done some truly great movies (Kick-Ass, Lord of War, Adaptation., to name a few), but in between them he has made some absolute abominations (Ghost Rider, the Bad Liutenant remake, or my personal favourite, The Wicker Man). I like the guy, I really do, but the lack of consistancy is enough to make me want to glass him. Granted, this is not one of his good movies, but it's no Wicker Man. What we get is a Keanu Reeves-esque wooden performance, enough to get through the movie but nothing to write home about. Ron Perlman is as Ron Perlman does, I like his style so I can't really fault him. The rest of the cast were decent, in particular Claire Foy as the Girl, but nothing really noteworthy.
Effects: Lame CGI. The effects are where blockbusters tend to shine, since
they have money flying out their ears, but I was disappointed by SotW. Not that they looked bad, really, but for a high-budget movie I was expecting top-knotch computer wizardry. Some of the landscape shots were good, but in all the effects were pretty tame. One of the standout features was the costume design.
come here and gimme a kiss
Granted, it's pretty hard to mess up when you're dealing with robes and cloaks, but to me it all seemed pretty authentic. In particular the plague victimes looks suitably boil-and-pus-ey.
Overall, this one's a definite disappointment. An interesting premise and a huge budget spoiled by poor scripting and average acting. Not worth seeing at the movie, but watchable over beer and popcorn if you're renting.
Plot: A young horror buff by the name of Charlie Brewster (William Ragsdale) becomes convinced that his next-door neighbour, Jerry Dandrige (Chris Sarandon) is a vampire, and must enlist the help of his friends and his hero (Roddy McDowall) to stop his murderous rampage!
Having seen Sarandon in Bordello of Blood, I was inspired to revisit this old classic. The movie follows young horror-nut Brewster as he desperately tries to enlist his friends, and later washed-up horror presenter Peter Vincent (Roddy McDowall) to help him combat Vamp-next-door Dandrige. I hadn't seen this one in years, but I've been having a good run with revisiting childhood classics, and so thought I would give this one a fresh reviewing. And, again, this one has failed to disappoint; I can still say with refreshed clarity that this is one of my favourite vampire movies of all time.
Acting: Probably the stongest part of this movie. Simply put, everyone is fantastic. However, there are 4 performances in particular that stand out above the rest. First mention in the best supporting actor category goes to
Stephen Geoffreys as 'Evil' Ed Thompson. His performance as the quirky if slightly unhinged best friend is top-notch, particularly after be becomes one of the undead. The fact that he went on to star in hardcore gay porn... don't hold that against him (or do, if you're into that kind of stuff!). His high-pitched, maniacal cackle still creeps me out to this very day. However, it is the three leads who steal the spotlight, and what a contest it is to pick a favourite from the trio; Brewster, Vincent and Dandrige. Ragsdale offers a fine performance as Brewster, even if at first it is a bit hard to empathize with his character (I mean... who turns down a long-awaited sexual encounter to stare at a coffin!?). However this is a scripting thing, and doesn't at all detract from Ragsdale's portrayal. However, in my mind his performance is overshadowed by that of Roddy McDowall as Peter Vincent, recently-fired host of Fright Night, and closet coward.
McDowall does something really special with his character, and gives us one of those performances that almost seem written just for that person. Apparently David Tennant (of Dr. Who fame) is set to take McDowall's place in the upcoming remake... not quite sure how I feel about this yet!
I have, of course, saved the best for last. The highlight of the movie, the king among princes, is Chris Sarandon, and his wicked portrayal as the vampire Jerry Dandrige.
I don't think I can emphasize enough how well Sarandon portrays the character, ranging from a ruthless killer to a charismatic seductor with ease. In vampire mode he is, of course, helped out by some impressive prosthetics, but even when he's just plain ol' Jerry, he still manages to convey an air of menace. Sarandon has played some great roles over the years, but to me he will always be Jerry Dandrige.
Script: While I have read some criticisms of the script, I really didn't have any problems with it. Sure, if you look at it too closely you will find some plot holes, and some parts don't make that much sense, but in comparisson to most of the junk around at the moment it's a very solid script. It delves into campiness without becoming cheesy, and manages to achieve that perfect blend of gore, tension and black comedy that is so hard to achieve.
Effects: Excellent. The vampires are
Come here and gimme a kiss!
horrendous looking, and there are several graphic death scenes that were particularly impressive death scenes (Evil Ed, Billy Cole and Dandrige, to be precise). The CGI, while looking dated, is thankfully kept to a minimum (as it should be!), so the movie has aged well.
Overall, this movie is a wickedly fun romp, with some excellent performances and great effects. If you haven't seen it, you're doing yourself an injustice... and if you have, you know it's time to take it out, blow the dust off, and treat yourself to another viewing. I know I will be.
Plot: An overzealous reverend (Chris Sarandon) obtains a mystical artifact that allows him to control the vampire queen, Lilith (Angie Everhart). He uses her to create a bordello full of vampires, with the intention of using them to wipe out all of the towns sinners. Meanwhile, a down-on-his-luck detective, Rafe Guttman (Dennis Miller) is hired by reverend's assistant Katherine Verdoux (Erika Eleniak) to find her missing brother, Caleb (Corey Feldman). Guttman uncovers the secret behind the bordello, and tries to prove it to the rest of the town before the vampires turn him into lunch
[ Click here to read more ]
Premise: An infection originally from bats spreads through humanity, turning the majority of humanity into vampires. These vampires then enslave most of the remaining human populace, using them as living blood farms. However, there is not nearly enough blood to go around, and without fresh blood the vampires devolve into mindless mutant bat-people, the wicked looking Subsiders
[ Click here to read more ]
Well, it seems the 'Best of 2009' posts are a dime-a-dozen these days, so with that in mind I present to you the Evil Pleasures God-Awful Craptacular '09!
In order to make it on to this prestigous and exclusive list, a movie must be so terrible, so despicable, so ... awful, that it makes your eyes hurt and your nose bleed, and just watching it is enough to drain both your intelligence and your will to live
[ Click here to read more ]
Premise: A group of friends are watching a car race, when one has a vision of a freak accident that results in several cars crashing, destroying part of the stadium and killing a fair chunk of the audience. He leads his group and a few others to safety, avoiding their deaths. However, Death isn't finished with them just yet, and they will have to find a way to save themselves before Death catches up with them
[ Click here to read more ]
Murphy's law is, basically, the bane of my existance.
Right after I got back into full reviewing mode, BAM, my computer has a hissy fit and dies. Couple that with a new job, and EvilPleasures has taken a backseat
[ Click here to read more ]
Ah, the calls of real life. How they distract you from what's truly important... like reviewing B-grade horror movies. However, I am now determined to find the time to keep this site regularly updated, so expect the flow to resume.
So don't you worry, my children. Daddy's home.
|
|
|
Comments (1)
Add Comments
Read More
Comment by Someone
on Marijuana Laws in Australia
Evil Pleasures
Random Musings on Life, Love and Everything
Let's Get Down To Business
What she means is, in certain states you are allowed to have a certain amount for personal use legally, but once you have passed this amount you are classified as a dealer and it is illegal. However, I would not use the "Morgan said it was legal so I just went with it" as a defence in a court of law, do your own research or ask a lawyer if you are interested in the technicalities of your states' laws.