After the original trilogy of Night, Dawn and Day, things seem to have a gone a bit pear-shaped. Maybe if he'd called it Afternoon of the Dead things would have been a darn sight better.
From my review of Day of the Dead you will have seen that I'm not overly keen on Bub. Romero took the zombies even further in this one: they can communicate, use tools and act as a cohesive group. How long will it be before they can quote Jean-Paul Sartre and discuss the finer points of cigar smoking? As the zombies become more human they become less like zombies. Obviously.
Some films have taken zombies down an almost vampire route so it's worth asking what makes a zombie scary or horrific. I think that it's weight of numbers. They can move slowly. It's not a problem to them. Eventually they will get you. They've got all the time in the world, just to wait for their opportunity. Zombies work on the inevitable dread factor. They don't need any fancy embellishments.
Anyway, back to the film. Humans have grouped together in camps to survive the apocalypse: some in shanty towns and some in posh high rise buildings. Amazingly enough zombies want in. This time they are organised and have a leader in Big Daddy. I'm making that sound a lot better than it is. It's not the Big Daddy off Saturday morning wrestling but a low quality impostor. He doesn't even wear a wrestling vest.
Simon Baker, as Riley, is a fairly bland lead after the previous films. But my main problem with Land is the inclusion of known actors. The previous films benefitted from an unknown cast and seemed more realistic (as realistic as a zombie film can get). Here we have Dennis Hopper and John Leguizamo acting around being actors and generally acting about spoiling things. They brought me out of the film on numerous occasions. The Tom Savini cameo also seems out of place in a Romero zombie film.
I saw this when it came out at the cinema and the only image that I could remember from it, before I watched it again, was a shot of the zombies walking underwater to cross the river. It was easily the best bit of the film. But it's not in the actual film. Is my memory mixing this with Pirates of the Caribbean to produce a hybrid of Land of the Pirates? (Sounds good to me.) The shot that is in the film looks more like they're wading across a shallow stream.
It all feels a little bit like a TV movie. But I'll give the next two entries the benefit of the doubt when I tackle their reviews. It shows how Land of the Dead killed the series for me as I haven't seen Diary or Survival yet. We'll see... 4/10 evlkeith (Average rating for the season so far = 6)
It's strange how I get to hear about films. I'd written a feature for our sister site into the valley of the obscureabout some quality acoustic numbers that I'd found for free on Last.fm. One of the songs included is by Sundae Sunday and very pleasant it is too. By some odd coincidence it turns out that the singer had co-drected a short horror film. And here it is...
The first thing that hit me is how professional it looks. It must have had a small budget and yet it looks good visually and the music adds greatly to the atmosphere. This would be a good start to a full feature. It was pretty obvious that she wasn't going to be as defenceless as we'd been led to believe but questions arise as to why she got a little bit eccentric and ate those naughty men. I like to think that the fellow on the motorbike had something to do with it. The fact that we don't see his face raises further questions: is he even human? I can imagine the story continuing with motorbike man as an anti-hero, causing all manner of mayhem. My only problem is the second death that left me feeling cheated. The first contains blood and, more importantly, guts. It all feels pretty savage. The second death meanwhile is relatively bloodless, consisting of close-ups and zooms, with no visible participation by our heroine. Where it should have topped what had come before, (maybe with a severe head twist?) it all seemed like a bit of a comedown. But I'm being picky. This is a well-made short that shows that the filmmakers should be let loose on a feature film. 7/10 (This rating is based on other short films I've seen - it would be a tad unfair to rate it against full feature films.) evlkeith
Excessive. And that's the way I like it. Hard Boiled is so excessive it could be done for retina and eardrum GBH. There are so many guns, so many bullets and, in the finale, so many explosions. This is what action films should be like. It is so action packed it feels more like a FPS than a film.
Hard boiled cop Tequila (Chow Yun-Fat) is on the trail of dome dodgy triad types. Tony (Tony Leung) works for Uncle Hoi, a triad boss. Their paths inevitably cross and the bullets fly. Enter Johnny Wong (the ubiquitous Anthony Wong - Heroic Trio, amongst many others), another triad boss. He mixes things up in this grimy underworld and the bullets fly again.
Hard Boiled shows a complete disregard for Health and Safety laws and indeed, human life. The stunt team are completely fearless. When the fights kick off, the stunts come thick and fast, most looking like they could cause paralysis at the very least. And when they're not hindering the stunt team's future mobility, they're giving them third degree burns from the shotgun blasts that explode at close range. They even involved a large group of babies in the mayhem. I dread to think how many people were hospitalised during the making of this.
Chow Yun-Fat is a total hero. If anyone wants a definition of the word cool just show them Chow Yun-Fat in this film. In one scene, he swings into a meeting of all of the local triads and takes them on. By himself. It's just him against an army. The choreography is excellent as he spins, twirls and dives (all in the trademark John Woo slow-motion) obviously firing many guns as he does so. When the end of the world comes I'm going to track him down to be in my Armageddon team, along with Ray Mears and Mary Berry. All the bases covered: super-cool violence, survival and salad dressings.
Despite being made in the nineties Hard Boiled has a very eighties feel. It looks like there's some definite Tony Scott involvement. The atmosphere is very smoky and the lighting is perfectly eighties. The vibe is finished off by the cheesy eighties soundtrack.
The story is standard issue with all of the things you'd expect from John Woo: friendship, romance and betrayals. No great shakes but it's just enough to give your senses a break from all of the killing. If you're coming to Hard Boiled looking for an involving deep storyline that uncovers a great human truth, then you'll be sadly disappointed. Whereas, if you're after an incredibly high body count...
One of the Frequently Asked Questions on IMDb is, "How can Tequila fire so many bullets without reloading?" Who cares? Keep the bullets flying. 7/10 evlkeith
If you like this you could also try: The Killer, Police Story 1-3.
Like Doccortex, I get all of my historical knowledge from films and books (see his review of Marie Antoinette for more details). School taught me virtually nothing about history apart from the three field crop rotation, canals and a pork butcher named Richard Arkwright - all thrilling stuff that I've since forgotten. And yet, when a historical story is told well, I'm hooked.
I was aware of the Nuremberg trials but that was it, an awareness. After World War II was over, and the military war criminals had been brought to justice, attention turned to the German judges who had allowed some of the atrocities. It's all pretty complicated, very political and best explained by the film.
Spencer Tracy plays Chief Judge Dan Haywood, the judge in charge of the trials. As usual, he seems to be just playing himself. But it works and the judge comes across as a fair and sympathetic character. What impressed me most was Burt Lancaster's performance as Dr. Ernst Janning, one of the German judges on trial. For the majority of the film he is silent and still, even when seen in reflections. But despite this stillness, there is a great sense of emotion and thought buried just below the surface. When he finally talks, it is very hard not to listen to him. He has a long speech but it never fails to fully engage. Great stuff.
The film has its powerful moments, and probably the most affecting is when Judge Haywood is walking through the location where the Nuremberg rallies were held. No-one else is in sight but he hears Hitler speaking from the podium and the noise of the crowd in attendance. A really clever use of sound.
One of the odd things about Judgement at Nuremberg is the camera work. Things generally go quite smoothly. The camera tracks around the people who are speaking in the courtroom showing the reactions of the other participants. All very well and good. Then suddenly - wham! - crash zoom action. I'd expect a multitude of crash zooms in a Jess Franco sleaze fest but in a black and white historical drama, I just wasn't ready for it. (I think Jess Franco is on my mind due to the sad news of his death last week.)
This is a long film, clocking in at 186 minutes, double my preferred running time. But it is worth it. I didn't manage it in one sitting but I'll give it another go when I'm not quite as tired. Worthy of your attention, especially if you're as useless at History as me. (You may even notice in the screenshots the appearance of a certain Mr Shatner...) 7/10 evlkeith
If you like this you could also try: Inherit the Wind, Anatomy of a Murder, 12 Angry Men.
Should we get the tree rape out of the way, straight from the off? Okay, let's. TheEvil Dead was banned, mainly because of this scene. Even now, it still gets an 18 rating. Compare it with Silent Hill. This has a razor-wire rape scene. Admittedly it doesn't go on as long, but let's not forget... it's razor-wire. Then the lady in question gets ripped in half. What rating does it get? 15, no problems. What did the banning of video nasties actually achieve? Pokemon for horror films.
Many years ago, I can remember going home at dinnertime from school. First on the menu was beans on toast (six slices of bread and a tin of beans - I was a growing lad) accompanied by a viewing of Rainbow. Then there was a video review programme; I can't recall its name. One day they showed a review of the 1978 Invasion of the Bodysnatchers and (finally he gets to it) TheEvil Dead. I can vividly remember the shot of the swing seat banging against the side of the shack. And then stopping. At the time, this looked like it could be the scariest film ever. There was some mild pants spatter. (Amusingly, years later I watched Invasion of the Body Snatchers and I was waiting for a scene where someone's leg goes all veiny through the power of stop motion animation. The scene never came. Pesky mixed-up memory.)
Watching it now, it's not scary in the slightest. It's very low budget, but jam packed full of creativity (something lacking in Raimi's later works - the dire Spiderman 3 springs to mind). All manner of camera jiggery pokery was employed: tying the camera to a big plank and running round a forest with it as a makeshift steadicam, for instance. There are also some interesting compositions, that you wouldn't necessarily expect from a low budget effort; a shot of a pipe dripping sticks in my mind.
The Evil Dead feels like a dry run for Evil Dead 2 (more a remake than a true sequel). It's a blatant comedy and the main pleasure to be had is watching the legendary Bruce Campbell being lamped and generally beaten up. One of the funniest moments is watching him trying to extricate himself from under the flimsiest shelving unit. Top stuff. The censors obviously didn't get the joke. (They finally developed a slight sense of humour for Peter Jackson's Braindead luckily.)
The gore is really just for fun. It is definitely cartoon gore (as seen in such cartoons as Peppa Pig. Possibly). There is one wince inducing pencil in ankle scene though, which is a tad harsh. But the final battle is so giddily excessive, rendered in stop motion, that again, I'm amazed anybody ever took it seriously.
The Evil Dead is still fun now; I prefer the second film though. Even more of Bruce Campbell being hit. If you've never seen it, give it a try and you probably won't know what all the fuss was about either. As for the new remake, well, we'll see soon... 6/10 evlkeith (Average rating for the season so far = 6.1)
When I recently rewatched Re-Animator, I was a little disappointed by it. My memory of the film, on its first release, was so much better. Whereas I saw From Beyond on video in the eighties and I could hardly remember a thing about it. Strange how watching it now, it's actually a pretty good film.
Based on a short story by H.P. Lovecraft this is Stuart Gordon's second foray into Lovecraft territory (but not his last) after the aforementioned Re-Animator. I say it is based on a short story but in reality the nine page story forms the prologue to the film where we meet Crawford Tillinghast (the always excellent Jeffrey Combs) and Dr Edward Petorius (Ted Sorel) both larking around with a strange electrical machine that can stimulate the pineal gland in the human brain, allowing them to gain a sixth sense and 'see' the world around them as it really is. Funnily enough, this involves floating fish and creatures that rip your head off. The Beyond was never going to be filled with marshmallows, cushions and My Little Ponies, was it? Getting the prologue out of the way so quickly allows the director space to slightly embellish on the facts of the original story. And embellish he does...
Barbara Crampton. Leather gear. Not in the original story. But should have been.
Yep. Barbara Crampton appears again in a Stuart Gordon film but this time her role is reversed with that of Jeffrey Combs. She plays an ambitious psychologist, willing to go to any lengths to get what she wants. Her desires gradually drag her from fulfilling her job professionally into total insanity. Combs, meanwhile, is along for the ride (a ride which includes developing a filthy little head proboscis and an appetite for sucking human eyeballs out of their sockets - another embellishment).
Another horror icon appears in the form of Ken Foree. He plays an everyman kind of guy who even gets to prance around in just his undercrackers. A much lighter role than his one in Dawn of the Dead then.
The cinematography and effects look stunning even now (well, most of them). Inspired by The Thing, the main creature is a mass of pulsating, morphing flesh. The creature's head, suspended on its spindly neck, is so convincing that it was a while before I actually considered how they'd accomplished the effect. It's fairly simple, but really effective. The stop-motion animation doesn't fare as well under not-co-close scrutiny. But as with films like The Gate and Hardcover it all adds to the atmosphere and appeal.
The recent Blu-ray from Second Sight is a joy to behold. The image quality and colours are a showcase for the Blu-ray format and the extras complete a very comprehensive package. (There's even an interview with Barbara Crampton looking back at the film, and she's still as gorgeous as ever. Maybe her involvement in these films has led her to become privvy to a Lovecraftian youth potion?)
So, From Beyond is far better than I remember and goes to prove that it's sometimes worth going back and seeing initially forgettable films again. (Can't see that I'll bother with Ong-Bak 2though.) 7/10 evlkeith
