*** SPOILERS ***
So the last on our Nasties List. Taaaaaaaa Daaaaaaaaaaaaa.
Another Fulci offering. I've enjoyed his other offerings on the list and this is one of the hubbys favourite zombie movies, so I looked forward to watching this one. He even sat through one with me for a change!!
Our basic premis here is of a boat washing up in New York (Twin Towers footage is quite a sad sight). Onboard is a rather large, rather odd looking man who proceeds to attack and bite a coast guard who consequently dies.
The owner of this boat is a doctor who has gone to The Antilles to attempt to find a cure for what is being proclaimed as a 'Voodoo Curse' but he is convinced is an infection. His daughter Ann (played by Tia Farrow) wants to go to see if she can find him as his boat has returned without him and he has been gone some time. A reporter (Peter) she runs into while sneaking about on the boat (which is meant to be being guarded by police) teams up with her as he also feels there is a story to be had. He has also found a letter from Anns father proclaiming he is unlikely to return alive, this fuels her desire to go looking for him.
The couple team up with another couple (Brian & Susan) who are going on a holiday and agree to take them. Not much point to this couple, but for a bit of nudity from Susan who goes diving to take some underwater fishy photos wearing nothing more than a triangle of cloth with what looks like rather uncomfortable cheese wire up her butt. This leads us into one of the better parts of the movie where she encounters an underwater zombie (Darren found that reference rather funny... but thats what he was... I didn't know zombies didn't have to breathe.. ok, so they're dead, but I thought they needed to breathe oxygen. anyways I deviate) who gets between our lovely nudey lady and a shark!!!! Now I am not a big shark fan... mainly because they scare me shitless, but this guy WRESTLES with a live shark, ripping bits off!! It makes for some stunning footage, but you can tell all's not well with the shark. Having read that the shark was drugged just makes me feel really sorry for the animal. Ok, so it makes for some great footage, but not good guys!!! The make-up on the zombie is very good, so I was quite impressed by that.
So we eventually find the island and coincidentally the boat has been damaged by the shark so Brian and Susan can't sail off into the distance and are forced to come onto the island too. Here we find out, Anns dad is dead and his friend and colleague Dr Menard was forced to shoot him in the head to stop him turning into a zombie. After being initially doubtful of this story of course our intrepid 4 travellers meet the zombies for themselves. I forgot to say, we had been cutting back to the island and Dr Menard throughout the movie, so we know about the disease affecting the villagers and the mounting bodies wrapped and bound in sheets and shot in the head.
We also witness the infamous Fulci Eyeball moment at the expense of Dr Menards wife. That was a bit crap I have to admit, so I was disappointed by it, but I suppose you can't have 'em all. The effects when the 4 come across her body later being comsumed by a group of zombies was much more impressive.. I couldn't help but think it would have been much more creepy had she been semi conscious and alive rather than stone cold.
The last section of the movie is outstanding. The effects, the music, the zombies!! I hadn't seen zombie make-up like this before. Why on earth did other movies not follow the zombie look in this movie??? I mean the worms in the mouths of the rising corpses?? The little clay-head man... (anyone who know the movie will know who I mean).
In the midst of all the zombieness, Ann & Peter try to get it on and are attacked by a zombie. Brian hears screaming and runs to their aid, at the expense of Susan who gets her throat ripped out. They manage to kill the zombie and escape and barricade themselves in the hospital. All hell ensues.. much shooting, zombie attacks, re-animations, fire bombs...
The upshot is Dr Menard and the staff die, Bryan is bitten by Susan who is now a zombie. Peter, Ann and Bryan escape onto the boat and set sail, but it is clear Bryan is infected so they lock him in a room on the boat. They hear a report on the radio that there are zombies in New York. We don't see them again so are sort of left to wonder what happened.
The final scene is a hoarde of shuffling zombies heading towards New York over the Brooklyn Bridge. Very powerful stuff.
In short I really enjoyed this movie, but I would have liked to have seen more action throughout the movie, rather than the last 20 minutes are so being 'Oh my GAWD!' and the rest of the movie being quite slow. It definately is one of the better zombie movies though and one where I will deffo watch the ending again at least.
I am pleased to be sticking a 'Recommends' tag on my last review on the list!
Please use the comments bellow only to comment on this post - to write your own review, please comment on the main post for this movie.
9 Dec 2012
8 Dec 2012
Zombie Flesh Eaters - Will's Review
What to say about our last movie?
Well, its a Fulci, with all that entails; multiple plot threads, hyper-realism, gore and an eyeball getting graphically damaged.
It also contains what is probably Fulci's most famous scene - the underwater fight between a shark (2 sharks actually, but probably bot 'played' by the same shark) and a Zombie!
While I'm not sure I approve of drugging a shark, just to wrestle it for a movie, the result is something to behold (bonus marks for creating waterproof zombie makup!)
The eyeball scene is excellent, not just for the effect, but also for the build up; this being a Fulci move, we know the eyeball is getting stabbed as soon as the possibility arises, but without such knowledge the woman's struggle as the Zombies arm pulls her closer and closer to the shard of wood that used to form part of her door would be brilliantly suspenseful.
It's a good job though,. That the eyeball sequence, zombie make-up, shark fights and effect pieces are so good, because in-between, it can be a bit of a drag.
The film opens and closes in New York; scenes which were added after the success of Dawn of the Dead (in Italy Dawn was called "Zombie" and this movie "Zombie 2") and for me, the films final NY set scene makes the movie (SPOILERS FOLLOW), While our hero's have been out in the tropics, dealing with a seemingly contained Zombie outbreak, a corpse that turns up in the opening scene has started an outbreak that has overrun the city. It provides a brilliant 'oh fuck' moment and turns what we have been watching into a single sub-plot in a much bigger movie; its a really neat idea.
Please use the comments bellow only to comment on this post - to write your own review, please comment on the main post for this movie.
Well, its a Fulci, with all that entails; multiple plot threads, hyper-realism, gore and an eyeball getting graphically damaged.
It also contains what is probably Fulci's most famous scene - the underwater fight between a shark (2 sharks actually, but probably bot 'played' by the same shark) and a Zombie!
While I'm not sure I approve of drugging a shark, just to wrestle it for a movie, the result is something to behold (bonus marks for creating waterproof zombie makup!)
The eyeball scene is excellent, not just for the effect, but also for the build up; this being a Fulci move, we know the eyeball is getting stabbed as soon as the possibility arises, but without such knowledge the woman's struggle as the Zombies arm pulls her closer and closer to the shard of wood that used to form part of her door would be brilliantly suspenseful.
It's a good job though,. That the eyeball sequence, zombie make-up, shark fights and effect pieces are so good, because in-between, it can be a bit of a drag.
The film opens and closes in New York; scenes which were added after the success of Dawn of the Dead (in Italy Dawn was called "Zombie" and this movie "Zombie 2") and for me, the films final NY set scene makes the movie (SPOILERS FOLLOW), While our hero's have been out in the tropics, dealing with a seemingly contained Zombie outbreak, a corpse that turns up in the opening scene has started an outbreak that has overrun the city. It provides a brilliant 'oh fuck' moment and turns what we have been watching into a single sub-plot in a much bigger movie; its a really neat idea.
Please use the comments bellow only to comment on this post - to write your own review, please comment on the main post for this movie.
2 Dec 2012
Week 81: Zombie Flesh Eaters
Alternate Titles : Zombie, Zombie 2: The Dead are Among Us, Zombi, Zombi 2, Island of the Living Dead
Year: 1979
Reviews / Author Comments due: 08/12/2012
DPP Status: Successfully prosecuted
BBFC Status: Passed uncut in 2005
IMDB: LINK
Wikipedia: LINK
DVD: LINK
Feel free to use the comments section of this post to add your own reviews and thoughts about this movie.
Zombie Creeping Flesh - Will's Review
Whenever I find a film borderline incomprehensible, I tend to have a quick read around to make sure that what little I did understand is correct, before coming here and making an ass of myself by describing totally the wrong film.
This week, while it turned out i was right about the plot, it seems there are some bloody good reasons for my confusion.
It seems that, having already been fleashed out by one writer from another writers treatment, the director then decided it needed further changes; but rather than having them written, he just haphazardly filmed stuff that he thought might be useful, then tried to turn it into a cohesive movie in editing, THEN had a second unit film some more sequences (mostly gore shots) and edit them in, AND threw in some documentary footage from a previously released mondo to boot.
SPOILERS FOLLOW
This checkered history probably goes some way to explaining the go-nowhere terrorist sub-plot; following a chemical plant leek at the begging of the movie, a terrorist group pops up demanding the closure of the so-called "Hope-centers" (the chemical plants), only to be massacred 2 minutes later by a team of military types and never mentioned again.
The aforementioned chemical leak is responsible for a horde of oddly colored zombies; Mostly purple and brown, although they settle down to a consistent pale blue after about half way through the movie.
Come to think of it; odd skin hues are a bit of a theme; this guy is still alive and well (not even infected):
So, With the Zombie origin explained, We meet due of documentary film makers in the Jungle who, before long, form an uneasy alliance with the military types who took out the terrorists.
Wait a minute... Documentary film makers... Jungle... This is starting to sound like a cannibal movie!
Yup, almost the entire center third of the film has the look and feel of a standard cannibal flick; right down to the mixed moral messages - being preachy about sensationalism one minute, and using prolonged gross-out scenes and exploitative documentary footage the next, we see a tribal funeral. The female journalist at this point demonstrates the only reason (or rather, the only two reasons) shes in the film, as she strips down and dons body paint to gain the trust of one of the tribes.
Thanks to the "borrowed" nature of the footage, the look of the tribe switches from shot to shot, so we get everything from lip-disks, to intricate make-up, to Frank Sidebottom, all in a single 60 second stretch, supposedly featuring the same tribe.
The whole point of the (real) tribal funeral, is to tell us that the tribe doesn't bury or burn its dead; which handily brings us back to zombie movie territory, just in time for our heroes to reach a (formally) populated area.
More attempts at social commentary are made, as we drop in on a UN meating which has been called to address the Zombie problem currently affecting Africa's tribal populations, and the African delegates are virtually the only attendees.
The whole thing is, as I have mentioned, a confused mess; on top of that the acting is so over the top that I'm not 100% certain that they wern't going for parody!
The film's one saving grace was the stolen Goblin soundtrack, which lifts tracks from Contaminated and Dawn of the Dead (the latter being literally stolen - the rights were never cleared, and Goblin almost sued)
Please use the comments bellow only to comment on this post - to write your own review, please comment on the main post for this movie.
This week, while it turned out i was right about the plot, it seems there are some bloody good reasons for my confusion.
It seems that, having already been fleashed out by one writer from another writers treatment, the director then decided it needed further changes; but rather than having them written, he just haphazardly filmed stuff that he thought might be useful, then tried to turn it into a cohesive movie in editing, THEN had a second unit film some more sequences (mostly gore shots) and edit them in, AND threw in some documentary footage from a previously released mondo to boot.
SPOILERS FOLLOW
This checkered history probably goes some way to explaining the go-nowhere terrorist sub-plot; following a chemical plant leek at the begging of the movie, a terrorist group pops up demanding the closure of the so-called "Hope-centers" (the chemical plants), only to be massacred 2 minutes later by a team of military types and never mentioned again.
The aforementioned chemical leak is responsible for a horde of oddly colored zombies; Mostly purple and brown, although they settle down to a consistent pale blue after about half way through the movie.
Come to think of it; odd skin hues are a bit of a theme; this guy is still alive and well (not even infected):
So, With the Zombie origin explained, We meet due of documentary film makers in the Jungle who, before long, form an uneasy alliance with the military types who took out the terrorists.
Wait a minute... Documentary film makers... Jungle... This is starting to sound like a cannibal movie!
Yup, almost the entire center third of the film has the look and feel of a standard cannibal flick; right down to the mixed moral messages - being preachy about sensationalism one minute, and using prolonged gross-out scenes and exploitative documentary footage the next, we see a tribal funeral. The female journalist at this point demonstrates the only reason (or rather, the only two reasons) shes in the film, as she strips down and dons body paint to gain the trust of one of the tribes.
Thanks to the "borrowed" nature of the footage, the look of the tribe switches from shot to shot, so we get everything from lip-disks, to intricate make-up, to Frank Sidebottom, all in a single 60 second stretch, supposedly featuring the same tribe.
The whole point of the (real) tribal funeral, is to tell us that the tribe doesn't bury or burn its dead; which handily brings us back to zombie movie territory, just in time for our heroes to reach a (formally) populated area.
More attempts at social commentary are made, as we drop in on a UN meating which has been called to address the Zombie problem currently affecting Africa's tribal populations, and the African delegates are virtually the only attendees.
The whole thing is, as I have mentioned, a confused mess; on top of that the acting is so over the top that I'm not 100% certain that they wern't going for parody!
You know you have problems when your
zombie extras cant keep a straight face...
The film's one saving grace was the stolen Goblin soundtrack, which lifts tracks from Contaminated and Dawn of the Dead (the latter being literally stolen - the rights were never cleared, and Goblin almost sued)
Please use the comments bellow only to comment on this post - to write your own review, please comment on the main post for this movie.
1 Dec 2012
Zombie Creeping Flesh - Lisa's Review
*** SPOILERS ***
So where to start this week? I'm not at all sure. When I started watching this movie, I realised I have actually watched it before when Darren delighted myself, Kelly and Dave by making us watch it on one of our get-togethers and its no better now than it was then.
This is an extremely disjointed movie which flits from location to location with not much of an explanation. We have a leak in a chemical plant which turns all the workers in a research facility into zombies. In a parallel story we have a team of men sent into a building where some protesters have taken hostages as they want these research plants to be done away with. The government and media are denying all knowledge these places even exist. The swat team do away with the bad guys. Mission Complete. What I fail to understand is why we suddenly end up in Papua New Guinea amongst tribes people?
It is here that our 4 neanderthals (that is the only way to describe them, trust me) meet our eye candy of the moment, a journalist called Lia, who is there with her camera man to investigate the sudden deaths of people from attacks in the village.
So there we go, an introduction to our zombies. The movie makes no sense. It is full of documentary footage of various different tribes people. There is even what looks to be some real UN footage used. None of this ties together and does nothing to add to the story. All of a sudden, Lia decides to 'blend in' with the tribes and make them more comfortable by getting naked... hmmm. Obviously all the men keep their clothes on which doesn't cause a problem. We see the need for the journalist anyway.
There is hideous over acting, it is one of those which gives quite a few laughs in its absurdity if watched with friends, but when watching alone, it loses any of its small amount of appeal. It was a waste of an hour and a half the first time and I have to say even more of a waste of time this time around. The actors seem intent on standing watching zombies open mouthed rather than running away. They stand back of hand to forehead with an "Oh my god" stance while the rather crap zombie shuffles towards them and has a go at eating them.
The 4 guys, Lia and the cameraman finally make their way off the island and to the chemical plant where they find out about the chemical leak and the reasons for it. It seems in the crap attempt at a serious message that the purpose of this chemical that leaked was to control the size of the population in third world countries. Kind of lost in the mess that is the rest of the movie to be honest. It wasn't really the kind of movie that should be attempting any kind of serious point.
They all die anyway when the zombies at the plant get them. *YAWN*
We end the movie back in the US with a young woman being attacked by a group of zombies showing that it has spread out of the 'third world'. No explanation.. nothing!
I wouldn't go so far as to say 'Avoid' as some people may enjoy the silly factors in this movie, but it certainly didn't float my boat.
Please use the comments bellow only to comment on this post - to write your own review, please comment on the main post for this movie.
So where to start this week? I'm not at all sure. When I started watching this movie, I realised I have actually watched it before when Darren delighted myself, Kelly and Dave by making us watch it on one of our get-togethers and its no better now than it was then.
This is an extremely disjointed movie which flits from location to location with not much of an explanation. We have a leak in a chemical plant which turns all the workers in a research facility into zombies. In a parallel story we have a team of men sent into a building where some protesters have taken hostages as they want these research plants to be done away with. The government and media are denying all knowledge these places even exist. The swat team do away with the bad guys. Mission Complete. What I fail to understand is why we suddenly end up in Papua New Guinea amongst tribes people?
It is here that our 4 neanderthals (that is the only way to describe them, trust me) meet our eye candy of the moment, a journalist called Lia, who is there with her camera man to investigate the sudden deaths of people from attacks in the village.
So there we go, an introduction to our zombies. The movie makes no sense. It is full of documentary footage of various different tribes people. There is even what looks to be some real UN footage used. None of this ties together and does nothing to add to the story. All of a sudden, Lia decides to 'blend in' with the tribes and make them more comfortable by getting naked... hmmm. Obviously all the men keep their clothes on which doesn't cause a problem. We see the need for the journalist anyway.
There is hideous over acting, it is one of those which gives quite a few laughs in its absurdity if watched with friends, but when watching alone, it loses any of its small amount of appeal. It was a waste of an hour and a half the first time and I have to say even more of a waste of time this time around. The actors seem intent on standing watching zombies open mouthed rather than running away. They stand back of hand to forehead with an "Oh my god" stance while the rather crap zombie shuffles towards them and has a go at eating them.
The 4 guys, Lia and the cameraman finally make their way off the island and to the chemical plant where they find out about the chemical leak and the reasons for it. It seems in the crap attempt at a serious message that the purpose of this chemical that leaked was to control the size of the population in third world countries. Kind of lost in the mess that is the rest of the movie to be honest. It wasn't really the kind of movie that should be attempting any kind of serious point.
They all die anyway when the zombies at the plant get them. *YAWN*
We end the movie back in the US with a young woman being attacked by a group of zombies showing that it has spread out of the 'third world'. No explanation.. nothing!
I wouldn't go so far as to say 'Avoid' as some people may enjoy the silly factors in this movie, but it certainly didn't float my boat.
Please use the comments bellow only to comment on this post - to write your own review, please comment on the main post for this movie.
25 Nov 2012
WEEK 80: Zombie Creeping Flesh
Alternate Titles : Night of the Zombies, Virus, Inferno dei Morti Viventi, Apocalypsis Canibal, Hell of the Living Dead, Cannibal Virus, Hell of the Living Dead, Zombi 4, Zombi 5: Ultimate Nightmare, Zombie Inferno, Zombie of the Savanna
Year: 1980
Reviews / Author Comments due: 1/12/2012
DPP Status: Successfully prosecuted in 1983 THEN Removed from list in July 1985
BBFC Status: Passed uncut in 2002
IMDB: LINK
Wikipedia: LINK
Feel free to use the comments section of this post to add your own reviews and thoughts about this movie.
24 Nov 2012
Women Behind Bars - Will's Review.
Three guys steal a case of diamonds from a boat, one of the thieves double-crosses (and shoots) the other two, then takes the box home, where it turns out to be empty; his girlfriend then shoots him and goes to Jail, where the inmates may sleep with the warden in exchange for perks.
Someone working for "The International Insurance Company" (yes, that the actual name of the company in the movie) tracks her explains through jail hoping to find out where the jewels are; the warden also suspects that she knows.
Bare boobs, Genital torture and embarrassingly bad lesbian sex ensue.
There is literally no reason to see this movie.
If you want to watch a heist movie with a twist ending, go see Oceans Eleven.
If you want to see a movie that deserved to be banned, check out any of these.
If you want to see boobs, or lesbian sex, there's plenty of actual porn that show you more or better.
If you want to see boobs, or lesbian sex, but pretend that you aren't watching porn, there are plenty of mainstream movies with better examples of both.
If you want to see a prison sexploitation movie, just about any of the others we've reviewed so far should float that particular boat better than this one.
There isn't even an enforced shower scene or any rape; these are not things that I personally look for in a movie... in fact I think most movies are better for NOT featuring them, but this is a "Women in Prison" movie, and if you choose to watch one of those you're probably looking for at last some rape!!! (or else just watching all 72 Video Nasties, presumably because you hate yourself).
Even the movies strange trips into the land of prose (The narrator tells us that "The Warden lives an a comfortable mansion, separated from the main complex by a long and gloomy tunnel") cant make this bad enough (or at least bad in the right way) to be interesting!
Body Count: 6
Boob Count: 4 pairs
Most Memorable Death: Strangled in bed (sleeping - how dull)
Please use the comments bellow only to comment on this post - to write your own review, please comment on the main post for this movie.
Someone working for "The International Insurance Company" (yes, that the actual name of the company in the movie) tracks her explains through jail hoping to find out where the jewels are; the warden also suspects that she knows.
Bare boobs, Genital torture and embarrassingly bad lesbian sex ensue.
There is literally no reason to see this movie.
If you want to watch a heist movie with a twist ending, go see Oceans Eleven.
If you want to see a movie that deserved to be banned, check out any of these.
If you want to see boobs, or lesbian sex, there's plenty of actual porn that show you more or better.
If you want to see boobs, or lesbian sex, but pretend that you aren't watching porn, there are plenty of mainstream movies with better examples of both.
If you want to see a prison sexploitation movie, just about any of the others we've reviewed so far should float that particular boat better than this one.
There isn't even an enforced shower scene or any rape; these are not things that I personally look for in a movie... in fact I think most movies are better for NOT featuring them, but this is a "Women in Prison" movie, and if you choose to watch one of those you're probably looking for at last some rape!!! (or else just watching all 72 Video Nasties, presumably because you hate yourself).
Even the movies strange trips into the land of prose (The narrator tells us that "The Warden lives an a comfortable mansion, separated from the main complex by a long and gloomy tunnel") cant make this bad enough (or at least bad in the right way) to be interesting!
Body Count: 6
Boob Count: 4 pairs
Most Memorable Death: Strangled in bed (sleeping - how dull)
Please use the comments bellow only to comment on this post - to write your own review, please comment on the main post for this movie.
Women Behind Bars - Lisa's Review
Not a lot to say this week. We've been here before, both with the subject matter (you only need to look at the title really) and the director. If you have any desire to watch a prison sexploitation movie, this has been done much better elsewhere.
Here we start the movie with a robbery of some diamonds by 3 masked men. One of the robbers, dispatches with the other 2, keeping the haul for himself. Sadly his girlfriend Shirley meanwhile learns he has been unfaithful and kills him in a fit of jealousy. She contacts the police and confesses.
So here we are in prison. What follows is an excuse for as much nudity as possible of (for the most part) quite unattractive female bodies. So we all have cellulite, but doesn't mean I want to see oodles of it onscreen. Also whats's with the vast amounts of hair these women have?? Haven't you ever heard of a Bic? So we have nudity, lesbian scenes (I still haven't worked out what they were doing), camera angles where no camera should be, lingering shots of genitals, up bums, nipples... you get the picture. There is also some torturing by means of whipping, beating and electrodes being attached to aforementioned over-insulated private parts.... perfect excuse for much jiggling of bosoms when shocks are applied... Hmmmmm.
There isn't much more I can say really. There is a plot which runs underneath the excuse to show lots of nudity. The warden and a private investigator from an insurance company who have had to foot the bill for the missing diamonds, believe Shirley knows where the diamonds are which have mysteriously gone missing. They are shown questioning her on a few occasions.
We end with Shirley getting the better of the randy warden (but not before we were 'treated' to some more nudity when she gets jiggy with him) and demanding he walk her outside where she escapes.
What follows are 3 bizarre twists which start being a bit far fetched and end up with the ridiculous. I won't give them away in case any reader (hello???) wants to actually watch this movie and I spoilt it (yea riiiiight).
This was a big fat waste of time as far as I'm concerned, so I place an 'avoid' on this movie.
On a plus point, next week - ZOMBIES!!!!
Please use the comments bellow only to comment on this post - to write your own review, please comment on the main post for this movie.
Here we start the movie with a robbery of some diamonds by 3 masked men. One of the robbers, dispatches with the other 2, keeping the haul for himself. Sadly his girlfriend Shirley meanwhile learns he has been unfaithful and kills him in a fit of jealousy. She contacts the police and confesses.
So here we are in prison. What follows is an excuse for as much nudity as possible of (for the most part) quite unattractive female bodies. So we all have cellulite, but doesn't mean I want to see oodles of it onscreen. Also whats's with the vast amounts of hair these women have?? Haven't you ever heard of a Bic? So we have nudity, lesbian scenes (I still haven't worked out what they were doing), camera angles where no camera should be, lingering shots of genitals, up bums, nipples... you get the picture. There is also some torturing by means of whipping, beating and electrodes being attached to aforementioned over-insulated private parts.... perfect excuse for much jiggling of bosoms when shocks are applied... Hmmmmm.
There isn't much more I can say really. There is a plot which runs underneath the excuse to show lots of nudity. The warden and a private investigator from an insurance company who have had to foot the bill for the missing diamonds, believe Shirley knows where the diamonds are which have mysteriously gone missing. They are shown questioning her on a few occasions.
We end with Shirley getting the better of the randy warden (but not before we were 'treated' to some more nudity when she gets jiggy with him) and demanding he walk her outside where she escapes.
What follows are 3 bizarre twists which start being a bit far fetched and end up with the ridiculous. I won't give them away in case any reader (hello???) wants to actually watch this movie and I spoilt it (yea riiiiight).
This was a big fat waste of time as far as I'm concerned, so I place an 'avoid' on this movie.
On a plus point, next week - ZOMBIES!!!!
Please use the comments bellow only to comment on this post - to write your own review, please comment on the main post for this movie.
18 Nov 2012
Week 79: Women Behind Bars
Feel free to use the comments section of this post to add your own reviews and thoughts about this movie.
17 Nov 2012
The Witch Who Came From The Sea - Will's Review
Wow, that was an odd one - and a tough one to review, as I can't decide which aspects of the plot are spoilers, as everything is slowly drip fed thorough the movie.
Part exploitation movie, part artful insight into a woman's crumbling sanity, The Which Who Came from The Sea is nothing like the title (or box art) would have you believe - it almost sits as a companion piece to Nightmare in a Damaged Brain; sharing much of that films dreamlike quality, and slow reveal of a childhood trauma.
At its heart is a clearly troubled woman, Molly, who lives with her sister, and her sisters 2 boys.
Molly works at a local bar, has a steady relationship with her (married) boss, and idolizes men, particularly stereo-typically masculine men, TV stars and, most especially, her Father, a sailor who she says was lost at sea (her sister claims he is dead, and in the local cemetery); however as much as she idolizes men, she also has a deep seated hatred of them - in an early scene, she watches 3 muscle bound hunks working out on the beach, clearly admiring the budges in their trunks, while also imagining them slain; their bodies strewn around the exercise equipment.
Part exploitation movie, part artful insight into a woman's crumbling sanity, The Which Who Came from The Sea is nothing like the title (or box art) would have you believe - it almost sits as a companion piece to Nightmare in a Damaged Brain; sharing much of that films dreamlike quality, and slow reveal of a childhood trauma.
At its heart is a clearly troubled woman, Molly, who lives with her sister, and her sisters 2 boys.
Molly works at a local bar, has a steady relationship with her (married) boss, and idolizes men, particularly stereo-typically masculine men, TV stars and, most especially, her Father, a sailor who she says was lost at sea (her sister claims he is dead, and in the local cemetery); however as much as she idolizes men, she also has a deep seated hatred of them - in an early scene, she watches 3 muscle bound hunks working out on the beach, clearly admiring the budges in their trunks, while also imagining them slain; their bodies strewn around the exercise equipment.
The whole film is also interesting from a gender reversal point of view - here we have a central character, driven (possibly) to do bad things (possibly) due to an event in their past... that's the setup for just about every slasher / serial killer movie (although this is neither) from Psycho onward, but here, for once, the character is a woman! We also have sexual exploitation shots, where the camera lingers on the (admittedly, clothed) sexual organs of one sex, while the other sex's nudity is framed much more casually - only here we get passing shots of topless ladies, and extended shots of penis-filled swimwear. For some reason though, and weather its the gender reversal I don't know, here the movie is much more sympathetic to our lead; While Norman Bates may be the result of a mother's abuse, he is still painted as the "Psycho", whereas Molly is very defiantly a victim; whether or not she is also a killer. (Side Note: "Psycho" gets a shout out at one point, as we are reminded "We all go a little cray sometimes")
It's a very schizophrenic piece, deals with child sexual abuse, but never lingering on, or sensationalizing it, one second, and having a Malabo pool-party (complete with the promise of casual sex with a movie star) the next, but this duality works entirely in it's favor.
Not a horror movie, thriller, drama or even exploitation flick in any traditional sense of the word, if you're mad for only one genre, I'd have to tell you to stay away. If however you consider yourself a general 'film fan' I really do think you should check this one out.
Body Count: 3
Boob Count: 3 pairs
Gratuitous Crotch Shots: 3
Most Memorable Death: Of all the times to have a heart attack...
Please use the comments bellow only to comment on this post - to write your own review, please comment on the main post for this movie.
Boob Count: 3 pairs
Gratuitous Crotch Shots: 3
Most Memorable Death: Of all the times to have a heart attack...
Please use the comments bellow only to comment on this post - to write your own review, please comment on the main post for this movie.
The Witch Who Came From The Sea - Lisa's Review
A very different movie this week and an odd one to find itself on the Video Nasty list.
This is a completely different kind of disturbing, but disturbing none-the-less. I struggle with my viewpoint on this movie.
*****SPOILERS*****
The story involves a young woman called Molly who was abused repeatedly by her father when she was a child. The movie follows the mental and emotional problems she now has as an adult following this abuse and her rather odd way of dealing with this.
She is shown in the movie as a doting auntie to her young nephews. She regales the boys regularly with tales of their wonderful, perfect grandfather (her father) and how he was lost at sea as he was too perfect for this world. She even oddly comments during a conversation with them about tattoos that he never had tattoos as he was too perfect and his body was as god had intended.
Why she holds a notion in her mind as to her fathers perfection and pushes his abuse to the back of her conscious mind is an odd one. She seems to struggle with the concept of 'perfect' men. Gazing adoringly at them on the television... the perfect symbol of masculinity, yet at the same time dispising men and that masculinity. She struggles with this throughout the movie and her abuse as a child is only shown in flashbacks, where the movie adopts a wierd 'spaced-out' style.
Due to her repressed memories and her inability to deal with what has happened and her feelings towards men in general (more-so perfect models of masculinity.. sportsmen, actors) she takes to seducing these men and when she gets them in a vunerable position in the bedroom, she slowly tortures them and kills them, generally culminating in her castrating them... the ultimate demsculinizing.
As the movie progresses, her boyfriend and sister finally have to start admitting what she is doing. They don't know how to cope with what she is going through and its effects much as they care for her.
As I said, this movie is uncomfortable and hard to watch in places. I struggle with my viewpoint here. I can see it has its redeeming features as it has a lot going on and works on several levels. It is full of imagery which is there if you care to look for it. I did find it very depressing to watch though. Maybe aspects of this one felt too real with stories floating around in the media at the moment. The whole abuse of children thing has always turned my stomach, so it sort of made the killings almost incidental to me.
I leave this one kind of confused. Most definately not one for horror fans or anyone expecting gore or shocks, but an interesting study of the human condition and its demise.
Please use the comments bellow only to comment on this post - to write your own review, please comment on the main post for this movie.
This is a completely different kind of disturbing, but disturbing none-the-less. I struggle with my viewpoint on this movie.
*****SPOILERS*****
The story involves a young woman called Molly who was abused repeatedly by her father when she was a child. The movie follows the mental and emotional problems she now has as an adult following this abuse and her rather odd way of dealing with this.
She is shown in the movie as a doting auntie to her young nephews. She regales the boys regularly with tales of their wonderful, perfect grandfather (her father) and how he was lost at sea as he was too perfect for this world. She even oddly comments during a conversation with them about tattoos that he never had tattoos as he was too perfect and his body was as god had intended.
Why she holds a notion in her mind as to her fathers perfection and pushes his abuse to the back of her conscious mind is an odd one. She seems to struggle with the concept of 'perfect' men. Gazing adoringly at them on the television... the perfect symbol of masculinity, yet at the same time dispising men and that masculinity. She struggles with this throughout the movie and her abuse as a child is only shown in flashbacks, where the movie adopts a wierd 'spaced-out' style.
Due to her repressed memories and her inability to deal with what has happened and her feelings towards men in general (more-so perfect models of masculinity.. sportsmen, actors) she takes to seducing these men and when she gets them in a vunerable position in the bedroom, she slowly tortures them and kills them, generally culminating in her castrating them... the ultimate demsculinizing.
As the movie progresses, her boyfriend and sister finally have to start admitting what she is doing. They don't know how to cope with what she is going through and its effects much as they care for her.
As I said, this movie is uncomfortable and hard to watch in places. I struggle with my viewpoint here. I can see it has its redeeming features as it has a lot going on and works on several levels. It is full of imagery which is there if you care to look for it. I did find it very depressing to watch though. Maybe aspects of this one felt too real with stories floating around in the media at the moment. The whole abuse of children thing has always turned my stomach, so it sort of made the killings almost incidental to me.
I leave this one kind of confused. Most definately not one for horror fans or anyone expecting gore or shocks, but an interesting study of the human condition and its demise.
Please use the comments bellow only to comment on this post - to write your own review, please comment on the main post for this movie.
16 Nov 2012
The Werewolf and the Yeti - Lisa's Review
I'll start by saying, this is one crazy assed movie. I could probably do with a second watch to make much sense of it, but my abject lack of enjoyment of any aspect of it, prevents me from doing so. One thing I have learnt from this 'Nasties' experience is that I'm not a fan of the 'so bad its good' movies.
So, lets try and make some 'kind' of sense of the movie. We have a failed expedition to find the infamous yeti. A second expedition with Professor Lacombe and an Anthropologist Waldemar heads out to find out what happened with the first. A snowstorm sets in and they are stranded. A guide that can only be described as a druggie decides he knows a way through the mountains, so Waldemar goes with him. Inevitably they get lost and are parted. Waldemar wanders lost in the elements and eventually finds and seeks refuse in a cave in the mountains and it starts to get some wierd shit from here.... We have 2 cannibalistic, witch, vampire sisters who spend their time trying to help Waldemar recover by performing various sexual acts on him. Where is this cave I hear gentlemen ask? Not too hasty chaps... these ladies eat their lovers and we are treated to the sight of them chowing down on some dismembered limbs.
Waldemar manages to do away with them but is bitten by one before he manages to escape... et Voila! we have our werewolf.
From here the plot just went batshit crazy for me. There were bandits who take the professor back at the hotel (sensible man) prisoner. His daughter (who just so happens to be very foxy.. funny that) manages to escape. We basically have a story which is at heart a love story where werewolf rescues pretty lady, much peril ensues, inevitable yeti/werewolf battle takes place and pretty lady saves wereman for them to wander off into the sunset together.
Lots of shit happens in between. A woman is flayed. Some kind of weird sorceress woman tries to come onto Waldemar, lots of scantilly clad women run about, we find out how to beat the werewolf curse.. blah blah blah.
I found it pretty hard going and certainly wouldn't recommend it for a fun evenings viewing. Its style has been compared to 'Hammer' in style, but I missed the similarity, some cheesiness aside.
For me, everything about this movie made me wonder if it was some kind of piss-take and it was actually meant to be funny. Finding out it wasn't was sobering indeed.
I would say 'Avoid' but from what I've read it seems this little movie does have its fair share of followers. I just wasn't one of them.
Please use the comments bellow only to comment on this post - to write your own review, please comment on the main post for this movie.
WEEK 78 - The Witch Who Came from the Sea
Alternate Titles : NA
Year: 1976
Reviews / Author Comments due: 17/11/2012
Feel free to use the comments section of this post to add your own reviews and thoughts about this movie.
HALLOWEEN SPECIAL: Evil Dead : The Musical - Lisa's Review
So the last one on our Shocktober list is a musical!! Yes, you heard me right. Evil Dead - The Musical to be precise. Now I am not a fan of musicals and even moreso when they are not in the medium they need to be in (sat in front of a stage), but hey you got to give it a go.
I wouldn't say I sat down and enjoyed this movie/screener of the musical as its not meant to be watched like this, but I can say this did make me want to go see it. It looks like it would be an awesome night out with friends. It is a must see for horror fans, even moreso for Evil Dead fans.
I like the movie, but am not a die-hard fan, so I would probably miss a lot of the humour (and this musical is very much coming from a funny place) and 'In' jokes, so I'm sure big fans would enjoy it more than me, but I would like to see it none the less.
They have also created a 'Splatter Zone' in the first few rows where audience members are spattered with blood periodically throughout the show. I can imagine these seats sell out pretty fast!
One thing I've never been a fan of is the mixing of horror and humour (apart from a few exceptions, most notably Shaun of the Dead), but this seems to work. I certainly will be off to see it if it ever ventures near me. Sadly I doubt it will.
The makers of the musical do seem to be genuine fans of the movie and it is done almost like a 'homage' to the original material, ensuring a thumbs up from the legions of fans this movie has.
So, definately a different one this week and although it didn't feel like watching a movie as such, it looks like a fun experience.
Please use the comments bellow only to comment on this post - to write your own review, please comment on the main post for this movie.
14 Nov 2012
The Werewolf and The Yeti - Will's Review
This one is a gap in the run for many who have tried to attempt the DPP72, as it has never been re-released in the UK or the US... I'm therefore forgiving myself the late review, instead being great full that there's a review at all, however untimely. I'll give a full (as I can manage) plot summery at the end of the review, because this is a tough one to get hold of, and you may want to read about it, given that its a tough one to get to see.
Apologies for that by the way - I made the mistake of mixing with the revelers at the recent Whitby Gothic weekend, and therefore caught the near-legendary lurgy that is currently running rampant through the UKs darkling community; I did try watching this movie regardless, but it seemed incomprehensible to my virus-riddled brain (you'll probably understand why when I get to the plot). In-Fact, I was ready to write a review criticizing the impenetrable story, when i read some other reviews that seemed to be of a different movie, and figured I'd missed something and had better leave this one well alone until my immune system had gone back onto standby, and stopped using all of the energy that usually goes to the part of my brain that follows movies...
I'm glad I did, because I actually enjoyed this one; despite the fact that the Yeti was almost indistinguishable from the Werewolf, and even though it somehow managed to be slow at times despite a ridiculously over-crowded narrative.
It somehow merges the feel of a hammer movie with a near perfect 'exploitation' plot line... if it had only had Nazis in the mix somewhere (and if the Turkish bandits had been oriental and lead by Fu Manchu, rather than a Khan) it wold have been the quintessential grind-house story.
So yeah, Plenty of cheese, and good 70's drive-in vibe, lousy dubbing and the worst screams you've ever heard; its sexually charged in places, but again, in much the same way the Hammer movies of the period were. There's little here to get worked up over (save an unconvincing skinning that I suspect was responsible for its appearance on the DPP list).
I'm stunned that no one has picked this up and re-submitted it, Because, really, I think it would pas uncut rated 15 no problem and play great to a revival crowd.
If you can track it down without paying a fortune, and IF you enjoy bad 70's werewolf movies, you should try to check thins one out at some point.
Interesting side note: This is the 8th film in which Paul Naschy plays the wolf-man Waldemar Daninsky, although from what I can tell there is no continuity between the films; certainly he does not carry the curse at the start of this one, and there is no mention that he has ever carried it before...
Interesting side note 2: There is a character in this film named "Larry Talbot". If you don't get that little in joke, it's back to horror-fan school for you!
The Plot (Spoilers ahoy!)
An expedition to find proof of the Yeti's existence is killed (by a Yeti - is that a success?), so a 2nd expedition (to find the first) is launched. This 2nd expedition includes Waldemar Daninsky (Known to Spanish Horror fans as 'The Spanish Wolf-Man, but human here - for now).
Upon arrival at base camp, the weather turns sour, and the planned route is declared impossible. Our heroes soon learn of a guide who is willing to take an alternate route, said to be plagued by "the demons of the blood moon", but only Waldemar is brave / foolhardy enough to go with him, so the 2 set out alone.
Before too long, howling is heard, the guide runs off (and vanishes into thin air - his tracks just stop) leaving Waldemar to take shelter in a cave guarded buy two buxom sisters.
The sisters turn out to be vampires / cannibals and drink from Waldemar, who kills them and escapes.
Meanwhile the guides who were supposed to he helping the rescue expedition have a sudden change of heart, and lead the expedition after all... right into the path of some Turkish bandits.
Waldemar (now a werewolf - presumably due to the vampire attack) shows up in time to kill some of the bandits and save one of the expeditions two female members (Sylvia, daughter of the expedition leader, Prof. Lacombe) from rape at the hands of 3 of the bandits, who he quickly dispatches, but the rest of the expedition are taken by the bandits.
One of the men is tortured, but left alive in order to play exposition keeper to the (human again - the moon is down now) Waldemar, before begging for death, the good professor and the other female member of the group are kept alive because (wait for it) Sekkar Khan (the bandit's leader) has a skin complain, which is currently under treatment from a sorceress by the name of Wandesa.
Apologies for that by the way - I made the mistake of mixing with the revelers at the recent Whitby Gothic weekend, and therefore caught the near-legendary lurgy that is currently running rampant through the UKs darkling community; I did try watching this movie regardless, but it seemed incomprehensible to my virus-riddled brain (you'll probably understand why when I get to the plot). In-Fact, I was ready to write a review criticizing the impenetrable story, when i read some other reviews that seemed to be of a different movie, and figured I'd missed something and had better leave this one well alone until my immune system had gone back onto standby, and stopped using all of the energy that usually goes to the part of my brain that follows movies...
I'm glad I did, because I actually enjoyed this one; despite the fact that the Yeti was almost indistinguishable from the Werewolf, and even though it somehow managed to be slow at times despite a ridiculously over-crowded narrative.
It somehow merges the feel of a hammer movie with a near perfect 'exploitation' plot line... if it had only had Nazis in the mix somewhere (and if the Turkish bandits had been oriental and lead by Fu Manchu, rather than a Khan) it wold have been the quintessential grind-house story.
So yeah, Plenty of cheese, and good 70's drive-in vibe, lousy dubbing and the worst screams you've ever heard; its sexually charged in places, but again, in much the same way the Hammer movies of the period were. There's little here to get worked up over (save an unconvincing skinning that I suspect was responsible for its appearance on the DPP list).
I'm stunned that no one has picked this up and re-submitted it, Because, really, I think it would pas uncut rated 15 no problem and play great to a revival crowd.
If you can track it down without paying a fortune, and IF you enjoy bad 70's werewolf movies, you should try to check thins one out at some point.
Interesting side note: This is the 8th film in which Paul Naschy plays the wolf-man Waldemar Daninsky, although from what I can tell there is no continuity between the films; certainly he does not carry the curse at the start of this one, and there is no mention that he has ever carried it before...
Interesting side note 2: There is a character in this film named "Larry Talbot". If you don't get that little in joke, it's back to horror-fan school for you!
The Plot (Spoilers ahoy!)
An expedition to find proof of the Yeti's existence is killed (by a Yeti - is that a success?), so a 2nd expedition (to find the first) is launched. This 2nd expedition includes Waldemar Daninsky (Known to Spanish Horror fans as 'The Spanish Wolf-Man, but human here - for now).
Upon arrival at base camp, the weather turns sour, and the planned route is declared impossible. Our heroes soon learn of a guide who is willing to take an alternate route, said to be plagued by "the demons of the blood moon", but only Waldemar is brave / foolhardy enough to go with him, so the 2 set out alone.
Before too long, howling is heard, the guide runs off (and vanishes into thin air - his tracks just stop) leaving Waldemar to take shelter in a cave guarded buy two buxom sisters.
The sisters turn out to be vampires / cannibals and drink from Waldemar, who kills them and escapes.
Meanwhile the guides who were supposed to he helping the rescue expedition have a sudden change of heart, and lead the expedition after all... right into the path of some Turkish bandits.
Waldemar (now a werewolf - presumably due to the vampire attack) shows up in time to kill some of the bandits and save one of the expeditions two female members (Sylvia, daughter of the expedition leader, Prof. Lacombe) from rape at the hands of 3 of the bandits, who he quickly dispatches, but the rest of the expedition are taken by the bandits.
One of the men is tortured, but left alive in order to play exposition keeper to the (human again - the moon is down now) Waldemar, before begging for death, the good professor and the other female member of the group are kept alive because (wait for it) Sekkar Khan (the bandit's leader) has a skin complain, which is currently under treatment from a sorceress by the name of Wandesa.
The Khan wants the professor kept alive in case his knowledge comes in handy for curing the sores on his back, meanwhile Wandesa is treating them by covering them in the skin removed from female prisoners backs.
While all this is going on, Waldemar and Sylvia find a temple where they learn of a cure for were-wolf-ism (Which involves a certain pl;ant and the blood of a woman) and Sylvia is given a special dagger with which to preform the ritual. They are then promptly captured by the bandits.
Sylvia is thrown in with the other female prisoners - those being Princesa Ulka and her handmaidens, for storage until needed to treat Sekkar Khan's dermatological condition. Upon seeing the ceremonial dagger (Which Sylvia still has with her) The princess steals it and organizes a prison-break, killing most of the bandits in the process, before returning the dagger to Sylvia.
Fleeing the Bandits lair, Waldemar and Sylvia are attacked by the Yeti... thankfully the moon rises, giving us the promised fight between the 2 titicular monsters, while Sylvia spots the plant needed for the cure.
The Yeti is killed, but WaldemarWolf is fatally inured - luckily all that the ritual requires is that Sylvia bleed on some petals, and wipe them on WaldemarWolf's teeth, and he is cured and healed!
Now that I come to write all of that down, it's even more insane than I Had released.
Body Count: 24
Boob Count: 1 pair (plus plenty of side-boob)
Animal Body Count: 1 (if a Yeti Counts)
Most Memorable Death: Death by Skinning.
Please use the comments bellow only to comment on this post - to write your own review, please comment on the main post for this movie.
Please use the comments bellow only to comment on this post - to write your own review, please comment on the main post for this movie.
4 Nov 2012
WEEK 77: The Werewolf and The Yeti
Feel free to use the comments section of this post to add your own reviews and thoughts about this movie.
3 Nov 2012
HALLOWEEN SPECIAL: Evil Dead : The Musical - Will's Review
PLEASE NOTE: This review is based on a screener copy made at the "Just for Laughs" festival a few years ago. This has never been released to the public, and the only legitimate way to see this musical is to go see it live.
So, some genius said
"Lets do a live show of 'Evil Dead'.
"We can use the plot of Evil Dead 2, but insert the group of kids from ED1 to the beginning (rather than just Ash and his Girlfriend) - We could set 99% of the show inside the cabin, and make do with a curtain and some trees for the rest of the 'sets'.
"With the right type of roll-up mask we could have people possessed and unpossessed quickly - and with the right puppet, we could even do the goofy 'talking moose head' bit.
"We could hide various tubes strategically around the set, and have blood spray from them at the right moments to simulate the gore effects; in fact we could make the first 3 rows the 'splatter zone'! Like the 'spash zone' at sea life shows... only with blood
"and we could make it as a musical"
I have visions of this being pitched to someone who would be quite impressed, who would nod in agreement, who would think things like 'mmmm, i can see how that would work', someone who might be tempted to day
"hang on! what was that last bit???"
Yeah, a musical!
And it's done with such a sense of respect (love even) for the source material... sure it prods gentle fun as some aspects (then, the movies did that to themselves too) but at no point does it descend into parody. Which is probably how it got its blessing from Sam Raimi Himself - Oh yeah, this bitch is official!
It's also riotously good fun. Not a great show in itself; the songs are for the most part catchy but generic (although "What The Fuck Was That" got a genuine laugh, and "Housewares Employee" is silly but very well written) but there's no denying that everyone; cast and audience, are having a blast. Ash fighting his own hand is a joy to behold!
Sadly, it doesn't really work on film (which is probably one reason it hasn't been officially filmed), but lets be honest, neither does Rocky Horror (compared to the stage show anyway).
If you can get hold of a copy of the screener AND if the show is never likely to come near you (check); by all means give it a look. (make sure you get the one with the 'Just for laughs' logo in the corner - there are also some audience shoots kicking around, and even a couple of an unofficial - and entirely different, show of the same name)
But if it does come near you (or you go near it) - go check it out in person, wear white, and sit near the front!
Please use the comments bellow only to comment on this post - to write your own review, please comment on the main post for this movie.
So, some genius said
"Lets do a live show of 'Evil Dead'.
"We can use the plot of Evil Dead 2, but insert the group of kids from ED1 to the beginning (rather than just Ash and his Girlfriend) - We could set 99% of the show inside the cabin, and make do with a curtain and some trees for the rest of the 'sets'.
"With the right type of roll-up mask we could have people possessed and unpossessed quickly - and with the right puppet, we could even do the goofy 'talking moose head' bit.
"We could hide various tubes strategically around the set, and have blood spray from them at the right moments to simulate the gore effects; in fact we could make the first 3 rows the 'splatter zone'! Like the 'spash zone' at sea life shows... only with blood
"and we could make it as a musical"
I have visions of this being pitched to someone who would be quite impressed, who would nod in agreement, who would think things like 'mmmm, i can see how that would work', someone who might be tempted to day
"hang on! what was that last bit???"
Yeah, a musical!
And it's done with such a sense of respect (love even) for the source material... sure it prods gentle fun as some aspects (then, the movies did that to themselves too) but at no point does it descend into parody. Which is probably how it got its blessing from Sam Raimi Himself - Oh yeah, this bitch is official!
It's also riotously good fun. Not a great show in itself; the songs are for the most part catchy but generic (although "What The Fuck Was That" got a genuine laugh, and "Housewares Employee" is silly but very well written) but there's no denying that everyone; cast and audience, are having a blast. Ash fighting his own hand is a joy to behold!
Sadly, it doesn't really work on film (which is probably one reason it hasn't been officially filmed), but lets be honest, neither does Rocky Horror (compared to the stage show anyway).
If you can get hold of a copy of the screener AND if the show is never likely to come near you (check); by all means give it a look. (make sure you get the one with the 'Just for laughs' logo in the corner - there are also some audience shoots kicking around, and even a couple of an unofficial - and entirely different, show of the same name)
But if it does come near you (or you go near it) - go check it out in person, wear white, and sit near the front!
Please use the comments bellow only to comment on this post - to write your own review, please comment on the main post for this movie.
28 Oct 2012
WEEK 76 - HALLOWEEN SPECIAL: Evil Dead: The Musical
NOTE: In honour of Halloween, We're taking a break from the DPP list through October, to take look at Remakes of some of the original nasties.
For Halloween Week, We're doing something a little bit special...
For Halloween Week, We're doing something a little bit special...
Alternate Titles : Evil Dead 1&2: The Musical
Reviews / Author Comments due: 04/11/12
Feel free to use the comments section of this post to add your own reviews and thoughts about this movie.
27 Oct 2012
SHOCKTOBER SPECIAL: I Spit on Your Grave (2010) - Will's Review
Reviewed (spoiler free) in full over on my solo blog, as per last week this article will focus on the differences between the 1978 and 2010 version, and therefore contain spoilers for both (although I'll try and keep the 2010 spoilers to a minimum).
Characters:
Jennifer is less well-rounded as a character this time, simply because we spend less time with her.
Mathew, the retarded 'gang' member, is a lot more believable that in the original; between being much better acted and losing the 'trailer park boys' glasses he is much less of a cartoon character.
With the exception of the new attacker (this time we are given the 5 that the original's tag-line promised, rather than the 4 it delivered) the rest of the gang are, in contrast to Matthew more caricatured this time out; from the moment we meet them they are obviously bad news.
Characters:
Jennifer is less well-rounded as a character this time, simply because we spend less time with her.
Mathew, the retarded 'gang' member, is a lot more believable that in the original; between being much better acted and losing the 'trailer park boys' glasses he is much less of a cartoon character.
With the exception of the new attacker (this time we are given the 5 that the original's tag-line promised, rather than the 4 it delivered) the rest of the gang are, in contrast to Matthew more caricatured this time out; from the moment we meet them they are obviously bad news.
2 of the attackers have families this time, although one of the families actually has a role i the movie this time.
The attack:
The attack is much shorter this time: Jennifer passes out and the camera fades to black part way through; but of the attack we do see there is a lot more psychological abuse this time and a fair but less physical violence, the sexual assaults seem as bad as they ever did - we just don't see as much of it.
Whether this is a good thing is debatable; it does rob the film of some of its predecessors 'power' but it also means we don't have to watch a woman getting raped for as long; which certainly helps the film be a little easier to watch (again, whether 'easier to watch' is a good thing, is open to debate).
Matthew is even less willing to take part (at least initially), requiring a threat on Jennifer's life at the hands of on of the other guys before he's willing to have sex with her
This time the plan isn't quite so stupid; the attackers do not rely on Matthew to go back and kill her.
Please use the comments bellow only to comment on this post - to write your own review, please comment on the main post for this movie.
The attack:
The attack is much shorter this time: Jennifer passes out and the camera fades to black part way through; but of the attack we do see there is a lot more psychological abuse this time and a fair but less physical violence, the sexual assaults seem as bad as they ever did - we just don't see as much of it.
Whether this is a good thing is debatable; it does rob the film of some of its predecessors 'power' but it also means we don't have to watch a woman getting raped for as long; which certainly helps the film be a little easier to watch (again, whether 'easier to watch' is a good thing, is open to debate).
Matthew is even less willing to take part (at least initially), requiring a threat on Jennifer's life at the hands of on of the other guys before he's willing to have sex with her
This time the plan isn't quite so stupid; the attackers do not rely on Matthew to go back and kill her.
The Aftermath:
Again, we see less (in fact none) of Jennifer's effort to piece herself back together, although we do learn some of it through the things she says in the final act; arguably the experience in the 2010 version has left her even more damaged than her 1978 counterpart.
The Revenge:
Is where the movie deviates most - this time none of the men die of stupidity (1978 movie; I still haven't forgiven you for the guy who grabbed the propeller of the motor boat) and Jennifer takes her time to make sure that each man gets a death they deserve - even using a little poetic justice to customize each kill; the specific tortures she devices for each man mirror or reference their part in the attack - a man who held her face underwater is suspended over a bath, a man who analy rapes her wakes up with a shotgun up... you get the idea.
Tone / Overall:
The poetic nature of the kills, as well as the semi-elaborate setups of them, provide plenty of "punch the air" type moments.
You may recall that I criticised the Last House Remake for having just one of these at the end - but here it works; mainly because it isn't just one, that stands out as being inconsistent with the tone, but becomes the point of the movie.
Although the rape is still horrific, and not-for-kicks, it is shorter, and therefore easier to bear.
Between the shorter attack sequence and the more crowd-pleasing deaths (not to mention that the ordering of the kills is much improved - the most vile offender last this time) this movie is much easier to watch than the original; rape sequence notwithstanding this one is even a 'fun' movie in its own way. This I think is both its strength and its weakness; It fails as an important film, but makes a much better movie than the original.
I had fun watching it, and it did not eroricise rape, So I'm going to go ahead and recommend it. I'm going to guess Lisa has not (I didn't check yet), but we shall see...
Counts:
Body Count: 6
Boob Count: 1 pair
Animal Body count: 6 (3 Birds, 2 fish and a rat - none killed on screen)
Most memorable Death: Eye Eye!
Please use the comments bellow only to comment on this post - to write your own review, please comment on the main post for this movie.
SHOCKTOBER SPECIAL: I Spit on Your Grave (2010) - Lisa's Review
*** SPOILERS ***
So another remake for our Shocktober special and a break from our 'Nasties' list. I was wary about watching this for a host of reasons. I didn't have much desire to watch the original (reviewed by us both HERE), due to its subject matter and my abject hatred for watching graphic rape scenes, but having managed to stomach that movie, I was left with nothing but admiration for its directors, writers and actors with what a fantastic job they did with such a difficult premis.
So did I feel the same about this one? Sadly not!
The story here is the same. I won't go into detail again (click the above link to read the above reviews if you haven't seen the original). Everything that was strong and poignant about the original is removed. The most disturbing aspect of the original, was that that the guys responsible for the heinous acts are portrayed as very 'normal' men. In the remake, it is made very clear from the offset, that these guys are nasty, certainly not normal members of society. It feels very 'Hollywood' and not as gritty as the original. Worst of all, the avenue we go down when Jennifer exacts her revenge turns this into a completely different movie!!
Now I surprised myself here and I'm going to sound all hypocritical-like, but in my original review (which I re-read before I wrote this), I was crying out for more brutal revenge from Jennifer. This movie delivers this BIG time. However, it feels all wrong. The brutality of the 'kills' Jennifer perpetrates is not in keeping AT ALL with her character and it changes what this movie is all about. It takes the focus away from the psychological horror and concentration on bigger questions and turns it into another SAW movie. Yet again, that must sound hypocritical, as I'm a big SAW fan, but turning 'I Spit on your grave' into 'SAW' is like watching a remake of your favourite kids show waiting to feel all sentimental and warm inside and being subjected to a tirade of swearing.
Don't get me wrong, the acting is very strong all the way through. The make-up and effects are good. There is even an addition in this movie of an evil Sheriff who wasn't in the original (excellently played incidentally). The gore is cringeworthy and would curl the toes of most die-hard horror fans, but its all wrong when used in this context and in this movie.
My original desire to see exactly what I have just watched, shows me how wrong I was. Jennifer should not have exacted revenge in a series of 'traps' designed to maximise the shock factor and ramp up the gore in this movie. It somehow 'cheapened' it for me.
I don't doubt a lot of people will like this movie and think it's an excellent remake, as, like I said, there wasn't an awful lot you could find wrong with the acting, script, effects etc, but it just didn't 'feel' right after the power of the first movie.
Had the 'kills' been in another movie, SAW 8 for example, I would have enjoyed these scenes when watching in a completely different context, but they just didn't belong here.
I wont' say this is a bad movie persay, but it didn't work for me.
Please use the comments bellow only to comment on this post - to write your own review, please comment on the main post for this movie.
So another remake for our Shocktober special and a break from our 'Nasties' list. I was wary about watching this for a host of reasons. I didn't have much desire to watch the original (reviewed by us both HERE), due to its subject matter and my abject hatred for watching graphic rape scenes, but having managed to stomach that movie, I was left with nothing but admiration for its directors, writers and actors with what a fantastic job they did with such a difficult premis.
So did I feel the same about this one? Sadly not!
The story here is the same. I won't go into detail again (click the above link to read the above reviews if you haven't seen the original). Everything that was strong and poignant about the original is removed. The most disturbing aspect of the original, was that that the guys responsible for the heinous acts are portrayed as very 'normal' men. In the remake, it is made very clear from the offset, that these guys are nasty, certainly not normal members of society. It feels very 'Hollywood' and not as gritty as the original. Worst of all, the avenue we go down when Jennifer exacts her revenge turns this into a completely different movie!!
Now I surprised myself here and I'm going to sound all hypocritical-like, but in my original review (which I re-read before I wrote this), I was crying out for more brutal revenge from Jennifer. This movie delivers this BIG time. However, it feels all wrong. The brutality of the 'kills' Jennifer perpetrates is not in keeping AT ALL with her character and it changes what this movie is all about. It takes the focus away from the psychological horror and concentration on bigger questions and turns it into another SAW movie. Yet again, that must sound hypocritical, as I'm a big SAW fan, but turning 'I Spit on your grave' into 'SAW' is like watching a remake of your favourite kids show waiting to feel all sentimental and warm inside and being subjected to a tirade of swearing.
Don't get me wrong, the acting is very strong all the way through. The make-up and effects are good. There is even an addition in this movie of an evil Sheriff who wasn't in the original (excellently played incidentally). The gore is cringeworthy and would curl the toes of most die-hard horror fans, but its all wrong when used in this context and in this movie.
My original desire to see exactly what I have just watched, shows me how wrong I was. Jennifer should not have exacted revenge in a series of 'traps' designed to maximise the shock factor and ramp up the gore in this movie. It somehow 'cheapened' it for me.
I don't doubt a lot of people will like this movie and think it's an excellent remake, as, like I said, there wasn't an awful lot you could find wrong with the acting, script, effects etc, but it just didn't 'feel' right after the power of the first movie.
Had the 'kills' been in another movie, SAW 8 for example, I would have enjoyed these scenes when watching in a completely different context, but they just didn't belong here.
I wont' say this is a bad movie persay, but it didn't work for me.
Please use the comments bellow only to comment on this post - to write your own review, please comment on the main post for this movie.
21 Oct 2012
Week 75: SHOCKTOBER SPECIAL: I Spit on Your Grave (2010)
NOTE: In honour of Halloween, We're taking a break from the DPP list through October, to take look at Remakes of some of the original nasties...
Feel free to use the comments section of this post to add your own reviews and thoughts about this movie.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)